Corrosion Resistance of Nitride vs Chrome Lined Barrels

This video should go some way to answer the pros/cons of chrome lined bores vs. nitride processes.


As I understand it, the main problem with corrosive priming has to do with the hygroscopic salts remaining on the bore's surface. To me, that sounds as if the standard salt spray test would serve as a valid gauge of the comparative performance of the two treatments. It is my understanding that, all else being equal, a proper nitride treatment can be expected to provide superior corrosion protection over hard chrome under salt spray testing. If I understand this correctly, the nitriding processes alter the physical and chemical properties of the steel surface while chrome forms a layer around it.
https://www.hefusa.net/salt_bath_ni...iquid-nitride-gas-nitride-plasma-nitride.html

In short, unless you are regularly exposing the bore to high temperatures from lengthy full auto strings, a properly applied nitride process by from a reputable company is supposed to be the better way to go today. However, either method will do the job.

Small bores and high velocities kill barrels. Just switching from 556 to 7.62x39 will give you dramatically longer barrel life.

One big advantage of nitride is corrosion resistance. Guy I know had shot his Sig Swiss rifle in 7.62x39 with corrosive ammo and didn't clean it before he loaned it to me a month later. The hard chromed gas piston was rusty with hard chrome flacking off, the stainless steel gas block was rusty, and the recoil spring was rusted almost through. The nitrided barrel was completely untouched inside and out.

BSW