Both 16", mid-length, hammer-forged .gov profile. Both $189.
I need a barrel to finish off a build and the price is right on these. Which should I bet on?
Do you know their gas port sizes?
I don’t see some key specifics on the FN barrel. In all likelihood, they are both excellent barrels. However, I would be looking for the barrel that is Mil-B-11595E 4150 CMV. Additionally, and as stated above, check for GP size. Neither ad specifies GP size. Although some of DD’s carbine gassed guns are way over gassed, Ive read anecdotal reports of of their 16" middies being in the neighborhood of .076-.078 (I’ve not checked any DD gas ports personally). If that is the case, that is right on, imo.
If it were me, I would try to verify precise barrel steel and GP size on both. Again, I’d want Mil-B-11595E and a GP somewhere around .076-.078 for a 16" middy.
when I inquired about gas port size in my FN barrel I was told they put 0.078 in all their barrels.
Since the subject is now a port size opinion discussion… Why would you give up the dependability of a larger port (with any ammunition) for the hardly noticeable change in the recoil impulse of a smaller port? I can see wanting a smaller port if I only shot suppressed but that’s about the only reason for me.
I’d rather have a bit too much gas (that I likely won’t even notice) than not enough (that can cause failures).
As far as the original question is concerned, flip a coin. The DD likely has more snob appeal, but they’ll both serve you well.
I have DD & FN CHF barrels and don’t notice a difference re: accuracy, FWIW.
I’d be happy with either
An overly-large gas port will be rougher on your components, have a larger recoil impulse, and deliver an unnecessarily large amount of gas to your face when shooting suppressed. I’d take an appropriately-tuned system over a ham-fisted approach any day of the week. A larger port can result in reliability issues, too.
So… I guess you are agreeing with me??
He is not.
The FN barrel does not appear to be 4150 CMV, but their proprietary “machine gun barrel” alloy that Noveske, Centurion Arms, etc., like to tote as being the barrel material, and is in theory more durable when it comes to high round counts. Also, I believe that the FN barrels have a slight swage, which can in theory improve accuracy and velocity, compared to the unswaged DD barrel.
How is FN’s cust svc? I have no experience with them, but my dealings with DD have been excellent. Just a consideration; I know each of those barrels is quite good.
A larger port isnt more dependable its less dependable. Overgassing causes both reliability and durability issues. Proper duty or mil-spec ammo that (I hope) you are using for duty/HD is not going to be underpowered. The only underpowered ammo is cheap practice ammo. Optimizing your gun for training ammo is never a good idea.
Is there an appreciable difference between these two barrels?
Yes $86. I would go with the FN and ignore all this gas port nonsense.