Barrel break in

[doug]

Hey guys, newbie here. Just purchased my first 204. A savage M25 thumbhole lightweight varmiter. Need some opinions on barrel break in. I know you could probaly write a book on this subject. Right now im using what SAVAGE recomends on their websight. Lot of cleaning & shooting but at least im getting to know the rifle. Has any one used this procedure or am i wasting time & ammo? Had to quit the procedure because of scope failure!!!!!!! Well at least i got 10 shots down the barrel. Thanks

[cynergyguy]

I think what you will find is everyone has their own method, I shoot one shot and clean for the first 10 rounds and then shoot 3 and clean for the next 20 or so, I know some benchrest guys who shoot one and clean with j b paste for the first 20. I don't know if it helps but they think it does

[Rick in Oregon]

Doug: The previous poster, cynergyguy's method just about mirrors the procedure recommended by suppliers of aftermarket custom barrels, and is very close to the method I've used for years with very good results. You could do alot worse by using that method, just check the patches for signs of either carbon or copper fouling, and that will be your indication of when the barrel is broken-in properly, i.e. minimal signs of blue or green = no copper. No black crud = no carbon.

By the way, you mention "scope failure"....can you tell us about the scope, brand, model, etc.?

Good luck with the new rifle!

[doug]

Rick, The scope i was refering to was a CABALAS PINE RIDGE TACTICAL 6x18x40 with interchangable turrets. The scope didnt accually fail !!!!! I was just very dissapointed with the clarity. The side focus didnt seem to work rather at 100yds-200yds-or 300yds. I turned the focus ring but it didnt clear it up. I really like the princeble of this scope but was dissapointed with the quality. I have since heard that this scope is made by SIMMONS for CABALAS ??????? Now im not knockin any brand of scope for i have SIMMONS,TASCO,3 BUSHNELL 3200s ,1 4200 LUEPYS & others. I just ordered a BUSHNELL 3200 TACTACAL 5x15x40 from BRUNOS. Everyone else out there was out of stock on this scope. Maybe thats a good thing huh!!!!! I had thought about immeditely sending it back to BUSHNELL to have the retical changed to a duplex,but am going to take ur advice and shoot it for awhile. But dont have a clue how this MIL-DOT works! Trying to study up on it though. Went to WWW.MIL-DOT.COM ,But high school general math didnt get me that far.HA HA . There has to be a way of explaining it in lay-man terms. Is ther a book out there MIL-DOT FOR DUMMYS. LOL.

[Bergcrane2]

I always wondered about Cabelas scopes. I'd rather give my money to a company that cares about their customers. I've heard too many horror stories about Cabelas customer service. I'm pretty much done with them. As for tactical scopes, you may want to take a look at Mueller. They have a very nice scope for the money. www.muelleroptics.com

[BillC]

To address the original question:

I have a new CZ 527 and had decided to follow Speedy Gonzales' recommendation.
After starting the break-in (shoot 1 and clean, shoot 3 and clean, etc.) I have not yet had any jacket fouling and the powder fouling has been a 'non issue' (Reloader 10X).

At this point, I have elected to forego further break-in and just shoot the thing. It has a hammer forged barrel, which means no reamer or cutter marks. With no jacket fouling in evidence, I cannot convince myself that there is anything to be gained by continuing to shoot scrub shoot scrub. The next batch of loads will be with WS2 coated bullets.

I went to Cabelas and looked at their store brand scopes. I compared them to a few others, including a Nikon Buckmark, a Nikon Monarch, Simmons, and various Lupys. I bought a 6-18 X 40 Buckmark with a target dot reticle. You can take that for what it is worth. I'm not saying that one is better than the other or that one is a better buy than the other, but I had the money to buy about anything that struck my fancy. I'm happy with my purchase.

Most informed posts on most shooting boards suggest that you go look for yourself, then buy what you want and can afford. That sounded like a pretty good idea to me and it still does. You only have to please yourself.

Bill.

[cynergyguy]

Hey Bill C, I have 3 of those nikon's I love'em great scope for the money. I have so many rifles I just can't afford to spend 800.00 on each one so I had to compromise, but to tell you the truth I like them better than my vxIII 6.5x20x50 3 for the price of one, makes it an easy choice when your on a budget, I think if more people did what you and I did they would buy one too.

[BillC]

Hey Bill C, I have 3 of those nikon's I love'em great scope for the money. I have so many rifles I just can't afford to spend 800.00 on each one so I had to compromise, but to tell you the truth I like them better than my vxIII 6.5x20x50 3 for the price of one, makes it an easy choice when your on a budget, I think if more people did what you and I did they would buy one too.

I am loath to tell anyone what brand of underwear, toothbrush, or scope to buy. My criteria included side focus, sunshade included, target turrets, fine reticle (no 'gismos'), and a sharp image. Please note that brightness was not on my list, as I don't care to hunt at night and most any scope will be more than bright enough in broad daylight. In more than 40 years of shooting, I have not scratched a scope tube, much less beat one up. For my purposes a scope needs to be sealed, repeatable, and able to withstand the recoil of the intended rifle. I do not require extreme impact resistance.

On my list of 'wants', a fine reticle and sharp image came first. The Nikon Buckmaster provided those. I have had other scopes and several with one trick reticle or another. In the end, I prefer simplicity and ease of use.

Playing with telescopes taught me a lesson or two about sharpness in optics. I look for sharpness in the very center of the field and discount everything else. A telescope (including a rifle scope) is intended to have the object of study centered in the field of view. It is possible to grind a lens for optimum sharpness in the center of the field, but the edges of the field will suffer. For a scope or binoculars to have a 'flat' field (uniformally sharp edge to edge), then the center must be softened and the edge sharpened. This gives the 'sharpness' a degree of uniformity at the expense of absolute sharpness in the center. Apchromats compensate for this optical phenomenon to a large degree, but I have never seen apchromatic lenses in any rifle scope and I couldn't afford one anyway (would probably be several thousand dollars).
Most scope manufacturers seem to flatten their field of view. This gives the illusion of a brighter image, as well as providing an advertising gimmick (sharp, edge to edge).
When I looked through the Buckmark, there seemed to be a barely noticable degredation of the image near the edge of the field of view. This is precisely what I was looking for and had a bearing on my decision to buy it. That degredation signaled that the lens designer optomized the curvature of the lens system to provide the best image in the center of the field of view.
Obviously, not everyone shares my preferences in image presentation. I made myself happy.

There can be a noticable difference in brightness among a particular group of rifle scopes. Some of that difference may be attributed to the lens configuration I mentioned above. It would take a carefully controlled laboratory test to determine the actual light transmission characteristics of that group of scopes and the results would only apply to those particular scopes, as light transmission can vary quite a bit from one piece of glass to another, even off the same assembly line.

I know just enough about optics to be dangerous. I am by no means an expert. For me, optics is akin to art. I wouldn't know good art from bad art, but I know what I like.

I highly recommend testing scopes side by side and buying the one that looks 'right' to you. If possible, buy that very scope, not one "just like it" in a box off the shelf. If one looks very good but isn't quite 'right', ask to see another off the shelf and see if the second one looks 'right'. You might be surprised at how much variation there is in a batch of the same model, regardless of cost. The higher priced scopes may be more uniform, unit to unit, but it is simply impossible to build several of anything that are exactly alike in a production environment.

Not everyone shares my want list. That is why there are several brands with innumerable features in a price range from less than $100 to several thousand.

I was an amateur astronomer for many years. I demand certain things of optics, but I do not demand everything of optics.
When I found a scope that met my expectations, I bought it. Simple as that.

Bill

[doug]

Back to the oridginable question::: A previous post said that i could do a lot worse by using SAVAGES methold of barrel break in. Does that mean it is not reccomended for a FACTORY BARREL ? Or is this barrel break in just a bunch of nonsense?????? Read both pros & cons for a factory barrel vs a custom barrel.

[cynergyguy]

I think what Rick and I are saying is if the custom barrel manufacturers are recommending barrel break, it certainly won't hurt a factory tube, There are alot of different thoughts on the subject, some think it is a waste of time others don't. Some think its just something custom barrel makers came up with so you would wear out your barrel faster so they could sell you a new one. I personally think shoot one shot and clean for the first ten is a good idea, provided you have the proper equipment and cleaners.