22-250 barrel life?

Originally Posted By: DAAOriginally Posted By: Remage250AII cant see why these guys claim only 1500-2500 rounds through a 22-250 then the barrel is junk. Pure BS IMO !!

Okay, I admit it. What I said was pure BS. All that stuff I said, about having actually worn out a handful of ,22-250 barrels and keeping careful track of exactly how many rounds they lasted. I made that all up.

If I had been telling what really happened, I would have admitted to the fact that those barrels all lasted over 7,000 rounds and they were all still agging in the 3s. But I got bored with them and bought new ones. Those Hart's and Lilja's, having Greg Tannel chamber them, they were pretty expensive too. I should have just kept them, since they weren't ever really going to wear out.

It feels good to get that off my chest.

- DAA



thumbup.gif
thumbup.gif
thumbup.gif


As good an answer as any, Dave! You handled it well.
 
Originally Posted By: Remage250AI ER Shaw tubes are junk IMO. Guess thats why they're $100.

Oh man! A quite of few of us will disagree with you on that one! See that 704 yard dead prairie dog in my Avatar? That was with an ER Shaw barrel in .223 AI. I have four rifles with Shaw barrels and I cannot tell a bit of difference in accuracy with them than I can with my Krieger, Hart, X-Caliber, Shilen or Criterion barreled guns.

I know that many years ago Shaw barrels were only so-so but not anymore! Dollar for dollar I think they are a real bargain nowadays. I will buy them again you betcha.
 
Rustydust, I know the older Shaw tubes were so so. What makes them better now ? Like anything on the cheaper end of the scale you get what you pay for. Ive had a few Shaw tubes and havent had good luck with them. But thats my luck !!!
 
DAA, Not arguing that a good quality high priced tubes wont go bad as well as a cheaper tube. But then again, if your going to build a $2500 rifle why go buy a $300-$1k high end tube when you can buy a $100 Shaw barrel if your going to replace it in 1500 rounds anyway ? I sure as heck wont throw big money to a quilty smith just to have him use a cheap barrel. No body does that or atleast shouldn't.
 
I dont know why their barrels have gotten so much better other than they use more computer controlled equipment (like who doesn't?) than they used to. Beside that .223 AI I have a Shaw barrel on my .223 AR-15 varmint, my 10/22 and my CZ 527 in .221 Fireball that they installed. All of the centerfires will shoot 1/2" groups or better with the right loads. The .221 seems like it wants to shoot 1/2" no matter what the load is. 5 shot groups at that.

That .223 AI started off as a regular .223 barrel ($150 from Graf and Sons with barrel wrench and go/no-go gauges!) for my Savage. I had it rechambered before I installed it and it has accounted for more prairie dogs than any other rifle I think. Lots and lots of ground squirrels too.

I think that Shaw barrels in the past likely were pretty spotty but nowadays that seems to all be behind them. I sure am a fan I can tell you that.
 
I will LMFAO the day I see DAA paying greg tannel to screw on a ER shaw barrel, better yet, I will leave my house and immediately drive to his and say dude let me check your pulse.

these conversations always get interesting, especially ones that talk about .5 MOA AR 15's, of course when they do their part.
 
Originally Posted By: DAAOriginally Posted By: Remage250AII cant see why these guys claim only 1500-2500 rounds through a 22-250 then the barrel is junk. Pure BS IMO !!

Okay, I admit it. What I said was pure BS. All that stuff I said, about having actually worn out a handful of ,22-250 barrels and keeping careful track of exactly how many rounds they lasted. I made that all up.

If I had been telling what really happened, I would have admitted to the fact that those barrels all lasted over 7,000 rounds and they were all still agging in the 3s. But I got bored with them and bought new ones. Those Hart's and Lilja's, having Greg Tannel chamber them, they were pretty expensive too. I should have just kept them, since they weren't ever really going to wear out.

It feels good to get that off my chest.

- DAA

lol.gif
lol.gif
lol.gif
thumbup.gif
thumbup.gif
thumbup.gif
 
[color:#FFFF66][/color]Originally Posted By: steve garrettI will LMFAO the day I see DAA paying greg tannel to screw on a ER shaw barrel, better yet, I will leave my house and immediately drive to his and say dude let me check your pulse.

these conversations always get interesting, especially ones that talk about .5 MOA AR 15's, of course when they do their part.

You are welcome to make the trip to my place to view and shoot one of these unicorns
wink.gif
 
I wish I would have kept track of how many rounds I shot through mine. My Ruger has bit the dust, and I'm surprised. I only use it for coyote hunting, unfortunately not enough lately, and take reasonable care of it. I've had it about 20 years, but I would be surprised if it had as many as 2500 rounds through it.
 
Originally Posted By: Remage250AISteve, .5 moa from any gun isnt far fetched at all. I have a .204 AR and will shoot .500 all day long. From bi-pods or bags.

And my AR with it's 24" ER Shaw barrel will shoot 1/2" 5 shot groups as well. When I first bought it I fired 5 into a dime at 100 yards with it and then let my buddy shoot it (first time he ever shot it) and he duplicated what I did. Yes, it was not long before he bought his own.
 
If you can find enough prairie dogs to shoot that will wear out your barrell I say go for it. I can't see any worries if you take care not to abuse it and keep it from coppering up why you would wear it out before you were tired of it. Take more than one rifle if you go prairie dogging and be sure to also through in a 17 HMR too.
 
DAA said:
Originally Posted By: Remage250AII cant see why these guys claim only 1500-2500 rounds through a 22-250 then the barrel is junk. Pure BS IMO !!

Okay, I admit it. What I said was pure BS. All that stuff I said, about having actually worn out a handful of ,22-250 barrels and keeping careful track of exactly how many rounds they lasted. I made that all up.

If I had been telling what really happened, I would have admitted to the fact that those barrels all lasted over 7,000 rounds and they were all still agging in the 3s. But I got bored with them and bought new ones. Those Hart's and Lilja's, having Greg Tannel chamber them, they were pretty expensive too. I should have just kept them, since they weren't ever really going to wear out.

It feels good to get that off my chest.

- DAA
Click to expand...
Nice!!!!
 
I believe that Shaw retooled around 20 yrs ago.

I built my 6mm-204 barrel on a Shaw 6x47(Rem) barrel and it was very accurate.

The 222 Rem barrel that I won the PM Egg Shoot with is a Shaw barrel. I shot the same rifle in a couple of BR matches for 222s over the past two years with a total aggregate of .88 for 50 rounds, I'm 77 years old and the total cost of the rifle, stock(Boydes), barrel(Shaw 10 yrs old), action(Stevens), trigger(SSS) and scope(SightronS-tac) less than $900. I'm pretty happy with that Shaw barrel.
 
I had a Shaw once, about 20 years ago. It was junk. I just lost faith in them and never tried another. I thought too much of a gamble when you add up gunsmith cost not to just use a premium barrel.
 
Back
Top