Re-barreling question: Why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmoore

It's not fair to compare the Springfields and Garands to the axis powers' rifles, nor the Soviet turnbolts. Mostly because they weren't used after their respective wars to any great degree. SMLEs are generally rebuilt and very often rebarreled much like their US counterparts. No.4 rifles as well, but to a somewhat lesser degree.

---

I use the comparison simply to get to an answer which you guys are giving. It's not metal quality or the primers themselves so much, just that they were used much more extensively over their lifespan. That makes perfect sense. I'm not familiar with the British rebarreling situation. I have three and they all appear to have original barrels but I wouldn't know what to look for to be sure. My 1917 Eddystone has been rebarreled but my 03A3 has not. I don't own a Garand but almost every one I've seen has been rebarreled as have most of the Springfields and 1917's I've run across.

In the early days of the corrosive primer, the actual cause of rust was not well understood. Many nostrums were created to correct the problem and some, containng water worked. British "SaftiPast" come to mind. Excessive cleaning may have been a cause, since the shooter was directed to clean the rifle diligently for three days after firing. Cleaned with the ineffective nostrums and well oiled, the rifle would appear to be clean and a coating of oil would be applied. The rust would form under the oil. It was not until 1922 that the Huff report provided the real answer and solution. The problem was that the rifle could be cleaned in a dry spell (less than 50% humidity) and would appear to have been cleaned sucessfully. It was then put in storage and a high humidity day would occur and the rifle would rust. Having fired many rounds of corrosive ammo I can tell you that, even with dilligent cleaning, the rifles would develop a "pepery" bore. I always carried a container of water and cleqned my barrels at the end of each day. Many shooters were nor comfortable in using water on firarms though it was quite common in htye black powder days. It was felt by many teams that cleaning the bore caused a change in zero for the first shot. Many teams did not clean their rifles during a multiday match which was fired with "no sighters". Again, I believe that US forces used their rifles mor often than did many of the foreign countries.
With the periodic inspections the barrels would be replaced.
JMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aragorn243

I use the comparison simply to get to an answer which you guys are giving. It's not metal quality or the primers themselves so much, just that they were used much more extensively over their lifespan. That makes perfect sense. I'm not familiar with the British rebarreling situation. I have three and they all appear to have original barrels but I wouldn't know what to look for to be sure. My 1917 Eddystone has been rebarreled but my 03A3 has not. I don't own a Garand but almost every one I've seen has been rebarreled as have most of the Springfields and 1917's I've run across.

---

Extensively would be the clue. The US, the commonwealth, and Italy all continued to use the same rifles from WWI until the 1930s. The Italians completely reconfigured many of their rifles to shorter patterns. The US had need of reedily available WWI vintage bolt rifles until there were enough Garands to go around in WWII. Same for the SMLE and No.4. Post WWII the M1 coninued in use until the 1960s.

Conversely, German rifles largely did not continue in service Post WWI except for a very smll number as allowed by the Versailles Treaty. Japanese and German rifles post WWII saw no further use by their home countries to any extent. So no need for massive rebuild programs.

There are a few other points to consider also.

British rifles used Enfield rifling: 5 grooves, lands and grooves equal width, grooves comparatively deep. It lasted very well under most conditions and the barrels had an unusually long service life. A test reported in the TEXT BOOK OF SMALL ARMS - 1909 details a trial with an Enfield barrel using Mark VI ammunition loaded with Cordite Mark I; this was identical to the Mark II ammunition which burned the barrels out of the Lee-Metfords in short order. They got 12,000 rounds through the rifle before they decided that the barrel was 'done'. The solution to their 'problem' was to develop and adopt Cordite MD-T 5-2 which was FAR less erosive. So how long would a Lee-Enfield barrel actually last?

Certainly it would last more than the 3,000 rounds which Hatcher stated was the course for a barrel in a Springfield. Springfield barrels (and later M-1 barrels) were rifled with 4 grooves with very wide grooves and very narrow lands, much as in Mauser practice, but they were not rifled as deeply as an Enfield barrel. And the Americans persisted in using their horridly-corrosive FA-70 primer until 1954, which was about 20 years after the commercial makers had switched over to noncorrosive caps. Add Ammonia Dope to this and you are staring Trouble right n the eye.

Canada began switching over to noncorrosive primers during the Second World War. Dominion Arsenals (the Government plant) kept making their big Berdan primers to the British specifications, but ammunition loaded by the Dominion Cartridge Company was 100% noncorrosive and non-mercuric. When the big Defence Industries plant was set up it was centred on supervisory staff from the DC Co.... and all of the DI ammunition used NCNM primers.

Germany had it the easiest, their primers coming from RWS and being the standard ROSTFREI type: noncorrosive, exactly as they had been during the previous War.

Japan rifled their barrels by the Metford system but with FOUR grooves only: from the muzzle, the bore looks like a rounded square. It was deep and the bullet was not of great diameter, so the bullet spun whether it wanted to or not.

Italy still was using the Carcano with its gain-twist rifling (except for the Model 41) and its WIDE lands and DEEP grooves.

Japan and Italy both used the lowest-pressure ammunition of the Second War, followed up the scale by the British, then the Germans and finally the Americans, right at the top. And along with the PRESSURE went the HEAT.

I think that if it is looked at carefully, one will find something pretty close to a correlation between HEAT and PRESSURE as limiting factors on the life of a barrel. Throw shallow grooves and narrow lands into the pot, and you have a recipe for American barrels lasting 3,000 rounds while everybody else's lasted much longer.

I'm heading down into the basement now while you guys are picking up your rocks to throw.

.

What you say makes sense. I noticed the shallower rifling in my 1917 with a 2 groove barrel. Bore passes the bullet test with ease but it simply looks worn when it probably is not, just when compared to the deeper rifling of other nations.

So Germany in WWII was using non-corrosive primers?

Japan also chromed a lot of their bores so that would lessen the impact of the corrosive primers.

It would seem on the low side for a barrel to only last 3000 rounds, that's probably my biggest question to your explanation.

I'm just using General Hatcher's figure for that 3000 rounds. Springfields are a bit scarce up here and I have never been able to afford one.

Last nice one I saw had 4 figures asking on its tag.

So I use books.

Also, two other things. (1) Standards differ. A barrel which looks fine to me might be 'done' for you. Hatcher himself was a serious competitive shooter and that crowd demands perfection. I shot with guys, many years ago, who scrapped barrels that I would have called 'new'. (2) When you consider velocity, heat of combustion, nickelling, Ammonia Dope and corrosive primers all at the same time, I really pity the poor old Springfield!
.

BTW, original rifling on the Model 1917 was Enfield pattern. I have 3 of them, one sportered and the others original; all have original barrels and shoot well.

This newfangled '5R' rifling is supposed to be the cat's meow; basically it's just right-hand Enfield. It is accurate and one of its claims to fame is that it really lasts well.

Hope this helps.
.