Cryogenics for a rifle barrel

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • E.Shell

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 5, 2007
    10,244
    Mid-Merlind
    'zactly. Cryo is more of a snake oil sale for the shooting community. Normalizing I can see have more of an effect.
    Another poster talked of the mental side. I believe he's right.
    Yep. Just like weighing powder charges to 1/100th of a grain - if you THINK it helps, it does.
    The M1A that I bought from a very good friend, had been cryo'd before I got it.

    Kreiger Hvy Match barrel.

    More 'stuff' done to this gorgeous rifle than I could tell you.

    FWIW, clean-up is a LOT faster, quicker, easier on this barrel, than any other that I've ever owned.

    Accuracy????
    Think what you want, but, this rifle will hold 1" groups at 200 yards, as long as you can hold 'er steady.

    Snake oil????? :shrug: I don't know.

    Am I convinced it works?????? It works on THIS rifle!

    These are the people that cryo'd the M1A that I have.

    https://www.300below.com/
    "It" works? What works? Cryogenic barrel treatment? Or, maybe the other "stuff" done to the rifle?

    Even if we could blame only the barrel, "Krieger" is actually the story there...not the aftermarket cryo that managed not to damage an already excellent barrel. The performance you are seeing is to be routinely expected from a standard, un-cryo'ed Krieger barrel.

    I currently have two untreated Kriegers and both clean up easily and both shoot great. I can tell they shoot great because both are mounted on stable, shooter-friendly platforms and I am using NightForce 22x scopes, so I can see to drive them.

    Marc357 here has a .300WinMag that had a Krieger barrel that went 4,000 rounds and was just over 1 MOA when he scrapped it. It shot sub-MOA well into the 3,000 round region. Untreated.

    If every untreated Krieger shot like hell and every treated Krieger barrel shot great, THEN we would have something beyond anecdotal information. If your rifle could be used somehow to actually prove cryogenic treatment has tangible, repeatable, provable results, I'd buy into it and obviously Krieger would NOT let one leave the factory without it. Otherwise...no proof exists and I'm a hard sell without actual facts.

    As a sidebar, if I had an M1A that truly shot a reliable and repeatable 1/2 MOA at 200 yards, day in-day out, I'd sit up all night and look at it...
    I would just buy a Kreiger AR10 with a M110 Profile. That bad boy will shoot.
    Yep. Good advice for sure.

    Cryogenic treatment of metals has been used in industry, with purported benefits within the very narrow scope of requirements. Trouble I have with it is that, EXACTLY like moly coated bullets, every source of info on cryogenic treatment of rifle barrels is by the people selling the process, like this:https://www.thefabricator.com/artic...nic-processingadispelling-the-myths-mysteries To determine if and how it works, they consulted four companies that sell the process. Duh...

    When it comes to rifle barrels, I'm inclined to side with speed3 on this. For as highly touted as it was 15-20 years ago, I don't see very many people/manufacturers using the process any more. If there was any merit to the claimed advantages, everybody that was anybody would use it. As competitive as barrel makers are, it should be obvious that if anyone could ever actually prove cryogenic treatment provides meaningful results in rifle barrels, they would ALL be using it. But they're not. Huh.

    I have seen the various testimonials, but the bottom line is that rifle barrels are such individualistic entities that it is almost impossible to gather meaningful test results. No two are alike, period. Testing without large numbers of identical samples, "statistically significant numbers", they call it, only means what you want it to mean. If you're selling the process, or justifying your latest obsession, then yes, of course, even ONE barrel showing improvement is all we really need for proof...right?

    If anyone here has REAL data, not just a barrel or two that went one way or the other, supporting this process, but statistically significant data, please, sell me.

    You would think that over the last 20 or more years, if there was really anything to it, there would be real data, not just testimonials from companies selling it or widely scattered individual's success stories. Instead, it remains as elusive as the latest trailer park UFO.

    While I remain skeptical, there is the concept pointed out above that "if you think it helps, it does". Other than the potential for mishandling, I am unaware of any actual damage done to a barrel during treatment, so if you're going to think back and wish you had done it, or wonder how much better a shot you would be, you might as well get it done. :evilgrin3
     
    Last edited:

    byf43

    SCSC Life/NRA Patron Life
    "It" works? What works? Cryogenic barrel treatment? Or, maybe the other "stuff" done to the rifle?

    Even if we could blame only the barrel, "Krieger" is actually the story there...not the aftermarket cryo that managed not to damage an already excellent barrel. The performance you are seeing is to be routinely expected from a standard, un-cryo'ed Krieger barrel.

    I currently have two untreated Kriegers and both clean up easily and both shoot great. I can tell they shoot great because both are mounted on stable, shooter-friendly platforms and I am using NightForce 22x scopes, so I can see to drive them.

    Marc357 here has a .300WinMag that had a Krieger barrel that went 4,000 rounds and was just over 1 MOA when he scrapped it. It shot sub-MOA well into the 3,000 round region. Untreated.

    If every untreated Krieger shot like hell and every treated Krieger barrel shot great, THEN we would have something beyond anecdotal information. If your rifle could be used somehow to actually prove cryogenic treatment has tangible, repeatable, provable results, I'd buy into it and obviously Krieger would NOT let one leave the factory without it. Otherwise...no proof exists and I'm a hard sell without actual facts.

    As a sidebar, if I had an M1A that truly shot a reliable and repeatable 1/2 MOA at 200 yards, day in-day out, I'd sit up all night and look at it...


    I've never owned any other rifle (or any other firearm) that has been cryo'd.

    My comment about, Is it 'snake oil'????? :shrug: I don't know. That's why I put that comment in my other post. "I" don't know.

    Never owned a firearm that was as expensive or as accurate as this M1A, either.


    Thanks for the insight. Honestly.



    Oh.............. I have sat up at night, and looked at it. :)


    :lol2:
     

    K-43

    West of Morning Side
    Oct 20, 2010
    1,881
    PG
    I'm late to the show here, but recently read that Shilen Barrels says they tested it and found no benefit. Shilen neither offers cryo treatment nor recommends it for barrels.

    http://www.shilen.com/faq.html#question1

    "Should I "cryo" my barrel?
    If you have heard that the cryogenic treatment stress relieves steel, this is false. We have measured the residual stress in 4140 and 416 steel with a process called x-ray diffraction. After much R&D, we have not been able to measure any changes in molecular stress after cryo treatment. For this reason we do not endorse the cryogenic process, but we can safely say that it is not detrimental to the barrel either. "
     

    Doco Overboard

    Ultimate Member
    I have (older) text that describes only modest improvement with a factory rifle and premium assembled factory ammo that the user applied to his own test parameters. He describes no substantial improvement with lesser components or other types of ammo outside of what would normally be associated with a well made factory Ruger barrel. The writer indicated that because the barrel was obviously well made and straight it didn't need a substantial amount of stress relieved to begin with.
    The good ammo was known to shoot better from another common rifle than the involved barrel so there was slight improvement with the treatment from Pacific Cryo but could however do nothing with the other lessor types of ammo for improvement being moot regarding group size.

    The text was published early to mid 90's by Sweeney with Blackstar as another source for the treatment and the writer did not seem to be entirely sold with the information apparently edited focusing on other aspects for accuracy improvements and component selection before final print.
     

    SWO Daddy

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 18, 2011
    2,468
    Funny, I was going to ask if cryo was still a thing. And then I just saw of video by Iraqveteran888 on the Valkryie with a cryo'd barrel on Youtube.

    They were claiming 80 ft/sec faster.

    I had barrels cryo'd back in the late 80's or early 90's. The gunsmiths claimed that stainless barrels machined easier and lasted longer. I never had one cryo'd and one not to do an A - B comparison. I don't know if they really lasted longer or not.

    I wouldn't put much weight in a review from a YouTube channel that has pricelists for "reviews."
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,927
    Messages
    7,259,357
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom