Welcome to AR10T.com, the world's first forum dedicated to AR-10™ rifles .  We invite you to JOIN our friendly firearms enthusiast forum.

To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

  • Posts: 305
  • Thank you received: 42

Replied by zfk55 on topic Re:To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

Thanks for the response. I disagree with very little of what you had to say. Almost nothing, and I'd like to stay in touch with you on this one.
I stand firmly against Moly coating as well. Mr. Wilson is following our tests very closely. He's well aware of hBN and after chronographing our hBN loads and comparing notes we find that both are producing a nominal 2550fps with 1/2moa being the best for us thus far, that being first time out of the gate. I'll be filling in the blanks on my original thread and I'll be in touch with my own meager credentials.
I've been primarily a bolt guy myself, but this Wilson AR10 has captured my interest with the unusual accuracy and consistency I've heretofore not seen in a semi-auto, not to mention his amazing successes with sniper teams.
I now surrender the field to the pro/com Moly discussion.

zfk55
Latigo

"When futile negotiating is done, when the corrupt politicians will not hear, when the voice of the citizens is ignored you will then face me under a different and final circumstance."

Col. Michael Hoare
14 years 7 months ago #1960

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 90
  • Thank you received: 2

Replied by weshowe on topic Re:To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

zfk55,

Thanks for the reply. I'd be interested to hear about your experience with hBN?
I know zilch about it. Time for another thread...

Wes
14 years 7 months ago #1961

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 1
  • Thank you received: 0

Replied by ArmaLite on topic Re:To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

I'm afraid we need to alter the data.

Since the first favorable impressions of MolyDisulphide coating on bullets, some good science has been created.

Kevin Thomas, then of Sierry Bullets, did a good test of Moly coated bullets and found no benefit.

Its use has dramatically decreased over the past few years.

We invite solid, scientifically reproducible data like Kevin generated, but until then we'll advise not to bother with moly.

Breaking a barrel in per our directions doesn't hurt anything. There's no scientific data to prove it actually does anything positive, but a lot of high level shooters swear by it.
14 years 7 months ago #1965

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 324
  • Thank you received: 12

Replied by crux on topic Re:To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

I'm trying to think about an informative design of experiments. Doubt it would be worth the money but probably informative. Some of this has been done but in limited amounts and without controls by design

I could see a few branches of interest:
1)Corrosion succeptibility in non Stainless barrels involving moly ammo use vs moly treatment subjected to various environments, regular FMJ barrel used as a control.

2)DPA of a few barrels pre/post "break in" with moly vs non moly (a few intermediate DPAs as well) to determine if there's any meaningful difference in barrel condition through break-in (probably the most expensive)

3)A controlled set of breakins with / without moly on same-lot barrels and same-lot ammo for study of POI variability.

4)Accelerated Life Testing on barrels between use of moly ammo and regular fmj.

Items 1, 3, and 4 might not be too cost prohibitive, but I'd expect 2 to be well above most company's threshold of interest cashwise. Not sure that answers to the question really change the market for anyone but those who produce moly products, and they don't seem to be in danger at the moment. Doesn't seem to be enough noticable difference to make a big shift either way.
14 years 7 months ago #1968

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 3
  • Thank you received: 0

Replied by hk9176251 on topic Re:To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

i think the aleged problems with moly are the reason winchester switched to lublox coating on som of the rounds thay produce!
14 years 7 months ago #1970

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 305
  • Thank you received: 42

Replied by zfk55 on topic Re:To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

For unstated reasons, Sierra tells us that there will be no more Moly projectiles offered by Sierra.

zfk55
Latigo

"When futile negotiating is done, when the corrupt politicians will not hear, when the voice of the citizens is ignored you will then face me under a different and final circumstance."

Col. Michael Hoare
14 years 7 months ago #1972

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 90
  • Thank you received: 2

Replied by weshowe on topic Re:To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

Gents,

Hadn't heard about Sierra cancelling production of moly bullets. Might just be that they are not selling enough of them, military production may be taking precedence, or moly may not be working as well as envisioned.

To me, that cancellation says a lot...

Wes
14 years 7 months ago #1973

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 305
  • Thank you received: 42

Replied by zfk55 on topic Re:To molly, or not to molly, always in question...

Wes, I thought you'd like to see a few sources on average barrel life. Your experiences are in a different world from my own and most others:

www.benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44666

answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090606214449AAWRAqY


newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec...008-08/msg00881.html


Barrel life's a relative thing as several posts have mentioned. Unclenick's reference to Sierra Bullet's tests pretty much duplicate what Sierra's former head ballistician, Martin Hull, told me back in the 1960's. He rebarreled their rail guns used to test bullets for accuracy at about 3000 rounds. There's a formula that predicts that I'll cover later. Top highpower match rifle shooters would rebarrel their. .308 Win.'s at about 3000 rounds, but didn't want to go to the Nationals with more than 1500 rounds through one. Their 30 caliber magnums (.30-.338, .300 Win. Mag., etc) barrels would last about 1200 rounds. I had a tack driving .264 Win. Mag. in the late 1960's that lasted 640 rounds before it went from 2/3rds to 2 MOA at 600 yards in three shots.

Regarding those "reference" bullets Unclenick mentioned Sierra uses to test their barrels with really are super accurate. Sierra used to call them "standards" and the best of their 30 caliber ones would shoot in the ones and sometimes the zeros; one 10-shot group after another. When located in California, Sierra used to sell these "standards" in plain brown boxes with 1000 bullets in each one. They still had the sizing lanolin on them and weren't polished bright and shiny; that's how they're tested. These were taken right out of the pointing machine as a hand full were grabbed and seated in pre-prepped charged cases for testing. As long as the test groups were under 2/10ths inch, a special barrel would catch them, then they'd be packaged and taken to big highpower rifle matches to sell to competitors. Accuracy wise, they shot 1/3rd better than the bullets sold in green boxes. These bullets were the ones used to win most of the highpower matches and set most of the records until they quit selling them when they moved their plant to Missouri. I've still got some of those 30 caliber 168, 180, 190 and 200 grain "standards."

A formula I've used for years to calculate barrel life is as follows: 1 grain of powder for each square millimeter of the bore's cross sectional area will result in about 3000 round of accurate life for that cartridge. I think "bore capacity" is also the same thing; a 30 caliber barrel has a bore capacity of about 45 grains. So, a .308 Win. with about 45 grains of powder will get 3000 rounds of accurate barrel life. Double the charge weight for a given bore diameter (twice bore capacity) and you'll get 1/4th the barrel life; a 30 caliber magnum burning 90 grains of powder will get only 750 rounds of most accurate barrel life. So far, this has worked well for competition. Double the number for hunting accuracy and quadruple it for service rifle combat accuracy.


Wes, a lot of this is relative, and I have no doubt I can take any of my rifles and go 15 to 20,000 rounds, but after something under 5 to 8,000 its not likely I'll be posting target results.

zfk55
Latigo

"When futile negotiating is done, when the corrupt politicians will not hear, when the voice of the citizens is ignored you will then face me under a different and final circumstance."

Col. Michael Hoare
14 years 7 months ago #2062

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Show 'em Off!

Add your rifle to the AR-10 Photo Thread!