handloader1

I break-in all my firearms, and I do see a difference. Good luck.

diyj98

There's been plenty of "tests" performed and lots of opinions from "experts". I've tried it but don't see any real benifits. I do see the potential to damage your bore if you aren't using your rod properly. Even with bore guides, I try to do as little rod work as possible to my rifles.

1mile50

It is, if you sell barrels! C-link to see what Gale McMillan had to say on the subject. Barrel Break-In

bigcountry

I bet ol Gale never had to deal with crappy rough barrels like us po folks. I would say for my custom barrels like Dan Lilja, and Krieger, brake in would be a waste of time. I just did the brake in procedure until I found little or no copper between shots. Which was like 4 for my good barrels. And for my remingtons, sometimes never, sometimes 30 or 40 for screamer rounds.

1mile50

Actually, a barrel break in is used by many who shoot with the "good barrels" you mentioned, among others, like Hart. It just wears out your barrel faster. No doubt about it, barrels do break in. They get easier to clean after a few rounds, than when new. All you have to do is shoot from them and clean them.
This is one of those controversies that are up there with, "Should I scrub the hell out of my barrel with an abrasive paste?"(NO!), "Is ammonia ruining my barrel?"(No), and even ".45 vs 9mm, which is best for self defense."(Whichever has the best shot placement) Everyone has their opinion about these fads. Everyone is entitled to them.
I remember the fad "Should I coat my bullets with abrasive and fire them down my barrel? My brother-in-law does too. He was all fired up about fire lapping. Now his Browning Composite Stalker, which shot just fine before, has a throat that is too long to get any where near his rifling, no matter what his O.A.L.

bigcountry

They break in too. As I said in my post, just don't take near as many rounds. Alot of us don't like waiting 100 rounds for velocities to settle to a 15fps spread. As far as wearing a barrel faster. Some say that was a myth. I believe so too. I bet break in would only lower barrel life 50 to 100 rounds. I mean who really cares about that. 95% of hunters would never wear out a barrel. Its not even worth the print or web page ads on barrel break in to even recoup the money on replacing barrels. I never thought Gale was the upmost authority on barrels anyway. Alot others I trust alot more. He does it his way, I do it mine, outcome is the same.

1mile50

Let's get back to the original question.
Nothing there asked what 95% of hunters do.
There is more than 1 method (besides yours) for barrel break in. These methods can take several visits to the range and involve complete cleanings and scrubbings with bore paste between each round, up to 40 rounds.
I've got one rifle, a Savage MDL 10 FLP. Second load I tried placed a 5 shot group at 100 yards just over 1/3". Didn't shoot a 100 rounds to do it. Rifle shoots like a house a fire, always has. Cost $420. Never broke it in.
Got another rifle. Shot 5 groups last time out, at 685 yards. Largest 3 shot group, 4.25". Smallest, a 4 shot group, 2 7/8"

Bottom line:
No, it's not really important to break in a barrel.

P.S. Gale McMillan passed away sometime ago.

bigcountry

Well, I already answered the guys question in my first post and was discussing a new point with you since you brought up the whole silly Gale post.

If you read my post, you will see I said some guns don't need much others alot. I suggest trying it out for yourself like Brian Pearce did in a recent article with a 45-70. Using a hawkeye borescope.

I don't think anyone is contridicting you about saying different types of break in. Mine varies greatly from JB's, to just good ol cleaning.

What I was talking about in my post saying 95% of hunters and all, is the whole selling barrels thing and all is an outrageous claim and silly to anyone with logic.

1mile50

The whole point of Gale's post was that the breakin procedure was started by a friend/aquaintance of his involved in B.R. barrel manufacturing. It caught on from there. The entire inception of that procedure was started in B.R. circles, and caught on from there. It was not thought of to improve the results of 95% of hunters.
I'm saying that no rifle needs a break in. If you have a crappy barrel, then it's a crappy barrel. Get a new one or get another rifle. I've got more than two rifles, and none have been "broke in"

There is really no point in beating this horse any further. It died when you started being dismissive, i.e. "silly this" and "silly that". That means you ran out of anything meaningful to contribute to this discussion.

bigcountry

I am not saying you are silly. So don't take offense. You seem to be rather knowlegable in reloading and shooting. There's alot of people in the industry, that thinks he might have been streching the truth a tad with that post on firing line. And I mean alot of people. I remember when he put it down and everybody was like , what?. It was kind alike the Al Gore internet claim some believe.

All I can say is, if you never tried it, how do you know? Every gun is different and should be handled as such. I have tried it with a borescope, and sometimes I can see a difference, and others I couldn't. With a particular Krieger, I didn't need too at all. And thats with a 3400fps RUM round.