Roadwild17
Member
I'm still thinking of that AR upper and I'm wondering if I should get the standard Chrome-moly 1:9 or the Chrome lined 1:9 barrel?
Is the difference really worth $40?
Is the difference really worth $40?
Is a Chrome Lined barrel on an AR really needed?
- Thread starter Roadwild17
- Start date
- Status
ocabj
Member
Assuming this is an all purpose gun, get the chrome lined. You'll appreciate it as the round count in the barrel goes up. Your barrel will last longer.
Of course, chrome lined is slightly less accurate than non-chrome lined bores. But I'm assuming since you're going with a 1 in 9" twist, this isn't a match gun, so it won't matter much.
Of course, chrome lined is slightly less accurate than non-chrome lined bores. But I'm assuming since you're going with a 1 in 9" twist, this isn't a match gun, so it won't matter much.
vanfunk
Member
IMO, yes, the chrome lining is highly advantageous. $40 will never be missed. What you get is, I'd say at least double the useful life of a non-chromed barrel and easier cleaning. Also, the innate "slickness" of the chrome in the chamber aids extraction. The only possible disadvantage with chrome lining is that it is impossible to apply the chrome in a completely uniform way, rendering chrome lined barrels generally less accurate than non-lined barrels. This is really only a problem if gilt-edged accuracy is a requirement.
HTH,
vanfunk
HTH,
vanfunk
The chrome lined barrel will last a bit longer, but it's pretty unlikely you would ever shoot an AR enough to wear out a barrel. It's nice to have a chrome lining if you are in a war zone like Viet Nam where the rifle won't get cleaned very often, but not particularly needed in our modern "urban jungle".
DMK
Member
Is chrome lining needed? No.
The Garand didn't have a chrome lined barrel and it worked just fine everywhere from the frozen lands of N. Korea and Bastone to the jungles of the S. Pacific and Vietnam. And that was shooting corrosive ammo which you most likely won't be doing with your AR.
Is chrome lining worth $40? Yes. Most definately. For all the reasons stated above.
The Garand didn't have a chrome lined barrel and it worked just fine everywhere from the frozen lands of N. Korea and Bastone to the jungles of the S. Pacific and Vietnam. And that was shooting corrosive ammo which you most likely won't be doing with your AR.
Is chrome lining worth $40? Yes. Most definately. For all the reasons stated above.
dfariswheel
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 6,656
Chrome has other advantages besides increased barrel life.
The bore is easier to clean due to bullet fouling not adhering to the "slick" chrome like it does to a standard bore.
Fouling doesn't build up as badly, so the bore will maintain accuracy longer during extended firing sessions.
Since the bore is plated, it won't corrode and pit like a carbon barrel will.
Not that it matters, but a chrome bore generates slightly higher velocities than a carbon steel bore.
Whether you believe in breaking in a new rifle barrel or not, chrome barrels not only don't need breaking in, breaking in is not possible due to the hard surface.
You just shoot the rifle from the get-go.
Unless you're buying a target rifle in which you're trying to squeeze the last tiny bit of accuracy, the chrome barrel is the way to go.
"Slightly" reduced accuracy is not an issue in a non-Match rifle, and the only disadvantage is the higher price, which over the life of the rifle, you'll never miss the money.
The bore is easier to clean due to bullet fouling not adhering to the "slick" chrome like it does to a standard bore.
Fouling doesn't build up as badly, so the bore will maintain accuracy longer during extended firing sessions.
Since the bore is plated, it won't corrode and pit like a carbon barrel will.
Not that it matters, but a chrome bore generates slightly higher velocities than a carbon steel bore.
Whether you believe in breaking in a new rifle barrel or not, chrome barrels not only don't need breaking in, breaking in is not possible due to the hard surface.
You just shoot the rifle from the get-go.
Unless you're buying a target rifle in which you're trying to squeeze the last tiny bit of accuracy, the chrome barrel is the way to go.
"Slightly" reduced accuracy is not an issue in a non-Match rifle, and the only disadvantage is the higher price, which over the life of the rifle, you'll never miss the money.
The difference in accuracy between chrome-lined and bare steel is lost on most...
Matter of fact, my pre-'94 Colt Competition HBAR has a chrome-lined 1-9" heavy barrel. It looks like a standard M16A1 barrel profile until one removes the handguards, then it goes nearly 1" in diameter back to the delta ring. Somebody spent a bit of time and effort making a target-grade chrome lined barrel in 1-9" twist, regardless of what's posted previously in this thread. To date, I've got many 100-yard cloverleaf and bughole groups with that rifle that would state the chrome isn't hurting accuracy. Could those tight groups be even tighter were it a straight chrome-moly bore sans plating? Sure, by maybe the kind of fractions that benchresters worry about, but certainly not folks in the NRA High Power game.
Get the chrome-lined/plated bore. Barrel cleaning will be easier and useful life will be longer, especially in the throat area. That alone will be worth the extra cost.
Matter of fact, my pre-'94 Colt Competition HBAR has a chrome-lined 1-9" heavy barrel. It looks like a standard M16A1 barrel profile until one removes the handguards, then it goes nearly 1" in diameter back to the delta ring. Somebody spent a bit of time and effort making a target-grade chrome lined barrel in 1-9" twist, regardless of what's posted previously in this thread. To date, I've got many 100-yard cloverleaf and bughole groups with that rifle that would state the chrome isn't hurting accuracy. Could those tight groups be even tighter were it a straight chrome-moly bore sans plating? Sure, by maybe the kind of fractions that benchresters worry about, but certainly not folks in the NRA High Power game.
Get the chrome-lined/plated bore. Barrel cleaning will be easier and useful life will be longer, especially in the throat area. That alone will be worth the extra cost.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
I am in a state of flux on this particular issue. I used to believe very strongly in the chromed bore; but now I am not so sure.
On the accuracy issue, I don't think it is even relevant to the discussion. The number of people who can appreciate the difference is few to begin with (and they generally don't have to ask this question) and even those people can only appreciate it from a good solid rest - so even for them it is a difference with limitations.
On the barrel life issue, I am not seeing it in my own chrome-lined barrels. I've yet to shoot out a whole lot of barrels so I am not particularly qualified to comment on the subject; but I got about 9k out of my chrome-lined barrel before I started to see misses on silhouettes at 500 and 600yds. It still shot great under 200yds; but not so great at longer distances.
On top of that the military is reporting a barrel life of about 10k rounds for the M4 barrel and a poster at AR15 shared what he claimed to be USMC data on the M16A2 establishing that they were beyond 7.2" groups at 100yds by 12k rounds. All of this tends to suggest that chrome-lining doesn't really extend barrel life that far beyond a nice stainless steel or chrome-moly barrel.
On reliability, a nice smooth polished chamber seems to make the biggest difference; but fouling does come off of chrome easier than chrome-moly or stainless steel. On corrosion, cleaning and maintenance - stainless steel barrels are no slouch in resisting corrosion; but chrome is pretty much the winner here assuming:
A) it stays in the barrel to begin with and doesn't flake off in the throat or at the edges of lands
B) the initial barrel that was chromed was worth a darn to begin with
This is just my opinion based on personal experience and talking to heavy users of both products. It is pretty much anecdotal more than scientific; but it reflects what I am seeing and reading on the subject. right now if I could get a better quality unlined barrel for $40 I would probably go with that option instead of the chrome-lining. However, I think the $40 is pretty cheap insurance and if done properly (see the flaking comment), it certainly won't hurt anything.
On the accuracy issue, I don't think it is even relevant to the discussion. The number of people who can appreciate the difference is few to begin with (and they generally don't have to ask this question) and even those people can only appreciate it from a good solid rest - so even for them it is a difference with limitations.
On the barrel life issue, I am not seeing it in my own chrome-lined barrels. I've yet to shoot out a whole lot of barrels so I am not particularly qualified to comment on the subject; but I got about 9k out of my chrome-lined barrel before I started to see misses on silhouettes at 500 and 600yds. It still shot great under 200yds; but not so great at longer distances.
On top of that the military is reporting a barrel life of about 10k rounds for the M4 barrel and a poster at AR15 shared what he claimed to be USMC data on the M16A2 establishing that they were beyond 7.2" groups at 100yds by 12k rounds. All of this tends to suggest that chrome-lining doesn't really extend barrel life that far beyond a nice stainless steel or chrome-moly barrel.
On reliability, a nice smooth polished chamber seems to make the biggest difference; but fouling does come off of chrome easier than chrome-moly or stainless steel. On corrosion, cleaning and maintenance - stainless steel barrels are no slouch in resisting corrosion; but chrome is pretty much the winner here assuming:
A) it stays in the barrel to begin with and doesn't flake off in the throat or at the edges of lands
B) the initial barrel that was chromed was worth a darn to begin with
This is just my opinion based on personal experience and talking to heavy users of both products. It is pretty much anecdotal more than scientific; but it reflects what I am seeing and reading on the subject. right now if I could get a better quality unlined barrel for $40 I would probably go with that option instead of the chrome-lining. However, I think the $40 is pretty cheap insurance and if done properly (see the flaking comment), it certainly won't hurt anything.
American By Blood
Member
You live in Louisiana. Get the chrome bore.
Humidity breeds rust.
That's the single reason why I don't own a Yugo SKS. I've been holding out for a Tula because of the chrome issue. Baltimore is almost as humid as Louisiana and owning guns here is a constant war against rust.
Humidity breeds rust.
That's the single reason why I don't own a Yugo SKS. I've been holding out for a Tula because of the chrome issue. Baltimore is almost as humid as Louisiana and owning guns here is a constant war against rust.
Texas Gunman
Member
Other than what has already been mention, I think chromed lined chamber make your AR more reliable.
TG
TG
Gary G23
Member
It's definitely worth the extra $40 to me.
DMK
Member
Good point. This would seem to indicate that chrome lining doesn't make a night/day difference in longevity. And I doubt that it does. You have to consider all the benefits of quality chrome lining cumulatively.
However, keep in mind that military assault rifles are used on full auto and rapid fire a lot (I also believe, those M4 reports were from SOCOM. They use their guns pretty hard). Getting a barrel very hot and continuing to dump magazines has proven to wear out barrels a lot quicker than if one was to let them cool every 20 or 30 rounds. I doubt the average well cared for semi-auto civilian rifle will see that kind of abuse, even considering the extreme of a carbine class taken annually.
TonyRumore
Member
For anything but a target/varmint rig, I would go with a chome barrel. If you are building a 1/4 MOA prairie dog rifle, then no dice on the chrome.
The biggest advantage of the chrome barrel is that it can digest more sand without scratching up the chamber. If you get some sand in a non-chrome barrel, it will only take about 3 mags before you start to have failures to extract, with the empty case being left in the chamber.
The biggest advantage of the chrome barrel is that it can digest more sand without scratching up the chamber. If you get some sand in a non-chrome barrel, it will only take about 3 mags before you start to have failures to extract, with the empty case being left in the chamber.
Most shooters don't shoot at long enough distances to see the accuracy difference between chome and non-chrome bores.
The real advantage chrome lined bores provide is evident in full auto weapons only.
A properly seasoned non-chrome lined barrel will clean as easily and sometimes better than a chrome lined barrel.
If corrosion due to weather related issues is your real concern then consider a stainless steel barrel.
My long range AR15 rifles all use non-chrome bore barrels, all my 'tactical AR15 rifles' are equipped with chrome lined barrels.
The real advantage chrome lined bores provide is evident in full auto weapons only.
A properly seasoned non-chrome lined barrel will clean as easily and sometimes better than a chrome lined barrel.
If corrosion due to weather related issues is your real concern then consider a stainless steel barrel.
My long range AR15 rifles all use non-chrome bore barrels, all my 'tactical AR15 rifles' are equipped with chrome lined barrels.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
DMK said:
Take a look at some of Zak Smith's old reports on 3-gun competitions - in one of those he did a course of fire with a minimum round count of 568rds in 45 minutes using a stainless barrel. From what I understand, that stainless barrel is still in service and still sub-MOA. I'm curious to see if it will continue to perform once it hits 10k; but if it does it really makes you question how much benefit chrome lining adds to longevity. I'm sure the military didn't specify it because they thought it looked cool but I question if longevity was the driving force. It would be interesting to see the data that made them spec that.
Onmilo said:
I'd definitely agree that a nice mirror polished match bore cleans easier than any chrome-lined bore I've seen. The difference I am seeing is in the chamber area. It is easier to remove baked on carbon from chrome than it is to remove it from even a match chamber. Carbon just doesn't stick to chrome the way it does to steel.
rangerruck
Member
I'd do it.
10-Ring
Member
I went through this when I was putting together my AR not too long ago. The chrome lined barrel's only advantage is in cleaning! It does not add in accuracy but it's easier to clean after a shooting session. For me, it wasn't worth the additional expense.
MisterPX
Member
It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it. Another thought, having your barrel CL'd down the road will run you a LOT more than $40. I run CL exclusively, as I find it makes my rifles more reliable under adverse conditions.
Needed for what?
For discharging a round down range? No, but you dont need most of the parts in an AR to accomplsh that task. Hell, you dont even "need" a barrel past the chamber at all if thats all your looking for. If you want an AR then you want a chrome lined barrel because thats what ARs have. Sure you could buy an AR without a chome-lined barrel you can buy one without a buttstock too.
For discharging a round down range? No, but you dont need most of the parts in an AR to accomplsh that task. Hell, you dont even "need" a barrel past the chamber at all if thats all your looking for. If you want an AR then you want a chrome lined barrel because thats what ARs have. Sure you could buy an AR without a chome-lined barrel you can buy one without a buttstock too.
mc223
Member
I have a chrome lined Bushy and a non-chrome lined White Oak. Not enough difference to quibble over $40. The White Oak is a stainless and is much better performer at longer ranges. As far as cleaning, both are really not a problem. I stay away from the heavily ammoniated bore cleaners like Sweets and Tetra Gun. I use TM Solution and a patch of Kroil for storage.
FNFiveSeven
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2003
- Messages
- 538
I have several chrome lined barrels (Bushmasters) and they all shoot like $%&! compared to my stainless match Krieger barrel. My Krieger shoots circles around crappy chrome lined barrels, can handle large volumes of fire without any permanent loss of accuracy (~200 rounds rapid fire), it's stainless so it doesn't rust, and the lapped finish cleans easier than my chrome barrels. Come to think of it, I can't think of ONE advantage of chrome lined over stainless (other than it's cheaper, but hey, quality costs). As far as the barrel life, i don't buy it. You would have to shoot way more than 10k rounds through a stainless match barrel before the performance would degrade to the level of the chrome lined barrel.
huh? So, does that mean if I add a scope to my AR, it isn't an "AR" anymore? What about a bipod, will it still be an AR then?
huh? So, does that mean if I add a scope to my AR, it isn't an "AR" anymore? What about a bipod, will it still be an AR then?
Thin Black Line
Member
Yes. At the very least you'll thank yourself for the time saved cleaning
and the longer barrel life. If you live in a humid area, it'll stop the rust.
Not exactly an apples to apples comparison. If Kreiger decided to chrome line that bore before sending it to you, it would still shoot circles around the others. It's the "match" not the chrome that made the difference. Comparing the same type barrel in the same rifle set up, one with and one without chrome would be a true comparison.
Different uses. As said before, if your shootin' varmits...get a match grade non-chrome barrel. If it's a general purpose gun, get whatever floats your boat. Chrome will clean easier and have better corrosion protection.
Well, duh! Of course a Krieger barrel shoots better!
Krieger cut-rifles their barrels to 1-10,000" tolerances. I know because I toured the plant prior to being given a job offer there, and I also own several Krieger barrels on some of my rifles. It's definitely an apples to oranges comparison, Blackrazor, and you know it. Why not compare an Obermeyer barrel to a USGI M16 barrel, while you're at it?
Krieger cut-rifles their barrels to 1-10,000" tolerances. I know because I toured the plant prior to being given a job offer there, and I also own several Krieger barrels on some of my rifles. It's definitely an apples to oranges comparison, Blackrazor, and you know it. Why not compare an Obermeyer barrel to a USGI M16 barrel, while you're at it?
Last edited:
- Status
