Like the title states, I’m curious what, besides obviously the profile, are the differences between the commonly available cold hammer forged barrels. From what I understand, there are only a handful of manufacturers that have the equipment to make them, FNH, Daniel Defense, Pacnor, and possibly Knights, although I’m not sure on that. I’m shopping for a medium profile 16" mid gas, and there seems to be at least three companies selling what appear to be the exact same profile CHF barrel, but for significantly different prices. The FNH from Brownells, the BCM BFH, and the Rainer Arms CHF all look very similar if not identical outside the markings. Any info on the known technical differences would be appreciated.
GREAT question about something Ive wondered about many times myself. Looking forward to the answers.
Due to set up costs of CHF equipment only major manufacturers would be able to realize a return on investment, FN, Daniel Defense, Remington, Ruger to name a few.
Custom barrel makers don’t sell enough volume to make in-house CHF, there contracted…
Id look at DD, Centurion And Noveske, I believe all three are offered with pinned gas blocks…
To the best of my knowledge, the only companies that commercially sell their barrels on the market are FN. DD obvious makes their in house. but I do not believe that they sell them to other companies to build weapons.
The differences in the barrels are much like anything else. The specs that are requested by the perspective company (HP/MPI, gas port sizing, contour, etc…
For barrels that you can actually buy, the differences besides profile? Short answer, not a lot except maybe gas port size.
I’m pretty sure the two main sources are only going to be Daniel Defense and FN. DD makes theirs in-house to their own specs and QC standards. FN makes hammer forged barrels to the specs and testing standards for a variety of firearms manufacturers/assemblers/parts dealers (BCM, Noveske, Centurion Arms, Rainier Arms, PSA, and more). I could be wrong but I believe that DD form the chamber of their barrels along with the bore in the hammer forging process, and FN barrels are cut with a reamer after forging. Again, not certain on that and not sure if it even makes much difference.
With the FN manufactured barrels supplied by various companies you are getting their respective requested specs, testing, and QC standards. Gas port size is a big deal and so are quality standards, lesser companies may sell every barrel sent to them by FN while better companies will likely reject a percentage of barrels that don’t meet their standards.
As far as I know, Pac-nor does NOT make and hammer forged barrels.
Doesn’t LWRC and Remington also make CHF barrels in-house? Does KAC?
Unknown on LWRC, but from what I understand KAC gets theirs from Diemaco.
Thanks for the info guys. I guess my question now is, what makes the Noveske CHF barrel worth the $150 premium over a $300 BCM barrel that for all practical purposes looks and probably specs identically? I feel like people are paying for the name at that point considering they are both very likely made by FNH.
There could be a lot of things that make up that price difference. Marketing, fixed costs, purchasing volume, specs, type of steel used and finish are just some of the possibilities.
I highly doubt FN makes their barrels the same way for everyone.
Worth the premium is a matter for the individual. Noveske does use the m249 steel, which may or may not be of any tangible value for a semi auto rifle. They also use extra thick chrome lining for longevity. My Centurion 11.5" barrel, while apples to oranges, always pulled slightly tighter groups than my BCM 14.5" BFH upper and the BCM had a SSA-E while the centurion upper had a SSA. To the point is was pointed out by the two guys beside me at a class.
Also like HKGuns said, a lot can go into that. If they require one more QC check or one more pass on a piece of equipment, they are getting charged for that. So it will be passed on to the consumers after they finalize how they are going to word it on their web page.
I’ve read a few times that Centurion specs a tapered bore on their barrels. Can anyone confirm this?
It seems like it would take FN more time and effort to make barrels differently for different customers than to make them all basically the same. Two kinds of steel (4150 CMV or 410 stainless), chrome lining on most or all of the CMV barrels and none of the stainless. I would wonder if the mandrels are different for different customers or all the same. But the machine(s) are the same, and getting a consistent product would come from running the same process for all.
The customer’s requirements for tolerances, other quality measures and gas port size may well vary, and hopefully the more expensive resellers have tighter requirements. But I don’t see how the input would vary much.
Never mind, it says so on the Centurion website. I know a few people that have had very good results with their barrels, plus I like the idea of supporting a smaller business.
Yes, Monty has also elaborated on his CHF barrels here as well. If you’re dead set on a CHF barrel Centurion or BCM are great choices, they run their gas ports a bit smaller than Noveske. I won’t bother with another Noveske product after the few issues I’ve had with their products and their totally disinterested customer service. BCM and Centurion will definitely take care of any issues you have, big or small. Rainier CHF barrels may also be good, but no personal experiences, and not sure how they size their ports.
Don’t get too hung up on having a CHF barrel, it’s not the end all be all. My next barrel will probably be a non HF chrome lined barrel, if BCM releases a 16" EMW profile.
I’m not dead set on a CHF barrel, but I’ve had excellent accuracy with my 18" FN, so the idea of another is appealing. I do like the idea of the BCM ELW barrels, but I’m not sold on light profile barrels, you can’t change the laws of physics, the groups will open up when it gets hot.
I was referring to the Extreme MEDIUM Weight, not the light weight, for the reasons you stated, heat and physics. BCM released a 14.5, but not a 16", just yet. The medium is a bit more meaty than the light weight.
Cool, I didn’t realize they had released an enhanced medium weight barrel. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I might wait for a 16" too. That sounds pretty ideal.
No problem, easy to miss the Medium vs. Light profile thing, I should have typed the whole name out. I had the same thought about it being just about ideal, on paper at least :D. Now if BCM would hurry up and release the 16" version.
Everything needs to be put into context. What are you doing with this weapon? Competition, duty use, paper zombies, Facebook pictures with friends? So having said that, yes the groups are going to open a little, but how much exactly? How much are you willing to allow in order to shed a few ounces?
I have exactly one lightweight barrel (SIONICS 16" LW melonite) and last October I used it at The Site Training Center in Illinois and when coupled with some Carl Gustav 62gr. SS109 ammo I was getting pretty respectable groups. Good enough that I as able to hit a 12" steel plate consistently at 600 yards.
Do I care if the groups were 5" or 8"? Not a bit because that is still an easy torso shot on person. And since I am no longer in the military and I am not law enforcement it would be virtually impossible for me to claim self defense at such a distance. Within the realm of reasonableness though, I have a carbine that will easily do it’s job at 0-100 yards which is well within the limitations. Had I been using match ammo I probably would have had about a 1 MOA group size (5 shots) based upon on our own testing.
It will likely see some 3-gun use, with some high round count stages with target distances out to 400 yards. So the ability to rapid fire a full mag or more, and then make hits at relatively long ranges is important to me. That is why I would shy away from a light profile barrel.