This looks awesome!
https://noveske.com/disruptive-deep-flute-ddf-barrel-contour/
https://noveske.com/product-category/ddf/
1 Like
I’d be interested in seeing independent reviews.
To say I’m highly skeptical would be an understatement. When they hit barrel life in the marketing gibberish, my BS alert started to go off. $620 for a 14.5? There’s not a barrel I’ve shot that would call for that price.
2 Likes
I’m also interested. Looking forward to reading some reviews.
I am always intrigued by new designs and this does look interesting. Any additional performance, though, would be lost on a rube like me.
1 Like
Surely a bunch of barrels could be thrown in an oven and then have the cooling times compared. I lack the resources to purchase barrels just to measure temps, but the thought interests me.
1 Like
I’m looking for barrel life and durability.
Do you think these stainless DDF barrels are better than CHF???
I don’t think there is any way they are more durable.
But, @docsherm could have a knowledgeable opinion.
The only barrel I noticed quicker cooling was the BCM ELW. But it also got hot a lot faster too,
I’m going to be nice and just go with, “I am not the target demographic for this product.”.
Could this have benefits? Probably, at some very micro analysis level. For my usage I can’t imagine I would notice a difference. Except for the reduced weight of my wallet. I look at this and I see guys chasing “nth degree” improvement that is so far in the weeds I’d be lost even trying to figure out what they are looking for.
If you happen to be one of those guys, knock yourself out. More power to you.
Funny how that works out. The ones that cool down faster also heat up faster. If someone has developed something different, that would be nice, but…
Bingo, not much way around it.
If you do a read through of the work of Al Harral, the basic premise falls into two things, at least in terms of this particular thread. .
First is the “Primary wave events” which are consisting of blast compression and expansion. No great secret that even steel is going to move with a detonation in a chamber, though I am happy to agree I am super simplifying this. Also, in no way am I attempting to go into the physics of the expansion and contraction of the chamber, barrel, or other aspects.
Secondly, are the “Secondary wave events”, which is barrel oscillation, or as most of us call it… barrel whip.
I don’t think that any of us are stunned with regards to either of these two events occurring. Yes, it takes extremely high speed photography to see real world examples, but anyone who has spent time at Picatinny can lay claim to seeing such events, and even non-mil videos are up on youtube showing occurences.
Speaking of which, the mad genius at American Rifle Company has done some incredible work showing scope and mount whip which occurs. Perhaps its more shocking that scope companies don’t put the info out for clients to see the specs they engineer to.
Lastly, I find it intriguing that Noveske has laid claim to having a “Combat Systems Development & Support program”. Its a lofty name lifted from others, but it lends itself to some incredible knowledge basis which I’m not sure where they would glean it from. Is it just a name, or is it an actual program with a genius like Johnny behind the scenes seeing things in CAD and programing as opposed to natural understanding of mechanical principles… Most companies would be putting a name to such a “program”, and while the info given hints at Harral being involved to decipher his works so as to be usable, his own website denies he is working with or being sponsored by anyone.
Interesting stuff regardless. Whats the take of those who have read through my above scribbles?
1 Like
As I mentioned above I find the physics involved in firearms development fascinating (barrel whip has always intrigued me) even though such minute improvements would be lost on me. I am sure the guys who can wring the extra performance out of the gun and/or .gov with bottomless tax money are their target customers.
Honestly, “programs” and the like have diluted marketing to the point claims seem irrelevant. Forget marketing claims, I want to see results so I can buy what works. I’d love to see more manufacturers demonstrate results that support their marketing similar to Preston Moore’s reviews.
I spent the last month retesting my current barrels with 4-6 types of ammo to establish which barrels get which optics and which barrels are getting fried during close range drills and being replaced this year. Across multiple manufacturers, price did not always equal highest average accuracy during 10-shot groups.
1 Like
I agree, however, at a certain point the ammunition used is not accurate enough to make a difference in a barrel that makes something .005% better. I think as opngrnd points out, it seems more like theory and marketing.
1 Like
If I’m thinking of the correct person, Preston needs to do all his testing with the same ammo each time. I won’t go so far as to say the barrel should be locked down in a sled, but that would certainly be the next step. The third piece of the puzzle for a trifecta would be three barrels with each sourced from a different lot number.
Probably not doable for the full meal deal, but using the same ammo should be mandatory. Locking the weapon down would be the next step to eliminate the human element with all its issues.
I haven’t watched any of his recent stuff, perhaps he is already doing some of it. If it were locked down in a machine, he wouldn’t even need to put a rail on it.
1 Like