Talk:Fluting (firearms)

I think the CADCO Medusa-47 is the perfect example of fluting, plus it being a handgun it will be obvious unlike in these scaled down pictures of much larger weaponry.

Will supply good picture if someone explains how! Thanks! Paradeoxy (talk) 12:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you own one, do you want to consider creating an article for it? I can help you if you'd like. You mean this, right? Faceless Enemy (talk) 18:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't personally own one but the site you gave has adequate information to at least found the article. But I just suggest we include it's addition into this article as it is a better example of fluting. Paradeoxy (talk) 12:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go to "upload file" on the left and it should be pretty easy from there. Faceless Enemy (talk) 07:20, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fluting (firearms). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101030025212/http://fulton-armory.com/fluting.htm to http://www.fulton-armory.com/fluting.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just post this "original research" and personal experience here since there are no "citations" or "sources" that would meet Wikipedia "standards" if the "right" editors decided to get all self-righteous about "policy" on this little "thumbnail sketch" of an article that's pretty much all personal opinions of others anyway but somewhat "sourced" and "cited". Gun gurus much "smarter" than me can discuss my opinions and observations and determine their validity. The general gist of the current article is that fluting is both "common" and "accepted" by the "gun industry" in general and I strongly disagree. Especially where "mass-produced" factory guns are concerned. I can think of only one "mass-produced" rifle "family" made by a major manufacturer where fluting was "standard" and I suspect that if I didn't OWN one of those now "discontinued" rifles I wouldn't even be able to do that. The rifle "family" I'm thinking of is the "original" Browning A-Bolt "Stainless Stalker" rifles made prior to the introduction of the "A-Bolt II" rifles in the mid-1990s.

The bolts of "A-Bolt I" Stainless Stalkers are very "lightly" fluted with shallow flutes in a portion of the bolt body only and are/were fluted purely for "cosmetic" purposes only. The flutes were/are originally painted with a semi-gloss black paint in the "channels" of the flutes only and probably predictably heat, cold. impact and flexing forces from firing and gun cleaning chemicals tended to rapidly "strip" the paint out of the flutes. I don't think mine remained intact more than a few dozen rounds and a few good cleanings. Ultimately I "scraped" all of the remaining paint out of the flutes because invariably as it self-stripped during operation some of those little flakes could and would get places they weren't welcome like inside the receiver, magazine etc.

Both the increased rigidity and weight savings arguments for fluted rifle components are mainly subjective since there are always drawbacks that go with removing significant amounts of material from the primary pressure-containing and load-bearing parts of a gun. Increased cooling capacity and speed is also frequently cited as an advantage but the flutes create varying thicknesses of material, reduce overall material mass and a fluted barrel heats more unevenly and more rapidly than an unfluted barrel. The majority of fluting on "custom" guns and components is mainly decorative and fluting is a relatively new and inexpensive way to "customize" a gun while claiming significant benefits and with a relatively small increase in labor and machining time since the overwhelming majority of fluting is done using CNC machines.

The Stainless Stalkers were/are the ultimate "lightweight" hunting rifles and with their 3-lug bank vault lockup and factory glass-bedded and full-floated barrels and fully adjustable and excellent factory triggers are not only "tack-drivers" as are all Browning A-Bolt/X-Bolt rifles, with a "22 inch" barrel on long-action non-magnum cartridge rifles like my .30-06 and the graphite-fiberglass stocks and a super thin profile barrel and a "bare" weight of about 6 lbs. 12 oz., the really began the "full power" lightweight hunting rifle "movement".

The get considerably more powerful than .30-06 Springfield with .300 Win Mag and .338 Win Mag as well as possibly .375 H&H maybe being on the cartridge list but don't get much heavier since the "magnums" only have 4 more inches of "barrel length" (I put barrel length in quotes because typically an end-to-end rear chamber face to muzzle length measurement is 2-3 longer than the actual length of actual "barrel" and my 22" barrel is actually more like 20" in front of the chamber where it counts) than the long-action non-magnums. Nor do they get much lighter since the short-action rifles still have most of the same "meat" as the long-actions where the "meat" weighs and adds up to the most.

However, I'm sure the fluted bolts were a "last ditch effort" to get every last ounce or probably more like gram or grain of weight savings out of the rifles. And the black "pinstripes" along the bolt body in the flutes helped break up and "hide" what is one of only several "stainless steels" used in the rifle as a whole. At somewhere around $650 MSRP in the early 1990s when a "high-end" rifle from Remington or Winchester was south of $500 and being stamped with "Made in Japan" prominently on the barrel they A-Bolts needed all the help they could get and particularly with Mark V Weatherbys as direct competition in the 3-lug, full-floated 60-degree bolt throw "market. Weatherby claims 59 degrees for its bolt and thus is "1 degree better" than a 60-degree A-Bolt but I seriously doubt anybody can tell the difference and you're not stuck with the Weatherby "luxury tax" on rifle and ammo with the Browning.

So I'm sure that weight savings and drawing attention to every effort to achieve them were "worth it" when it came to that very "mild" fluting on Browning Stainless Stalker bolts. However, when the A-Bolt II introduced the "BOSS" system it also "retired" the fluted, painted bolts and the "black eye" of flaking black paint that went with the. Clearly fluting doesn't require paint but the difficulties OF "painting" or otherwise "finishing" fluted parts and the fact that like "stainless steel" and "lightweight" and "all-weather" hunting rifles are all "brand new" and pretty RARELY used outside of the "custom" gun industry and aren't used by the companies, manufacturers and gunmakers best-equipped (with CNC machines) to USE THEM are "evidence" if not outright "proof" that most fluting is for "form" rather than "function".

Fluting hasn't become "mainstream" for factory commercial or military guns and the general trend in "custom" guns and those guns and parts with sufficient material to make it possible are both "heavier" rather than "lighter". You can't "flute" any "light" profile barrel period and most fluted bolts are have to be made excessively thick and heavy for the cartridge they're "built" for in order to have the "meat" to flute them as well. Overwhelmingly its "high-end" receiver manufacturers and receivers/bolts that are "flute friendly" even when they're "Remington 700 clones" and the finished and fluted bolt, barrel and rifle end up as heavy or heavier than "standard" Remington 700 or 700 "clone" bolts, barrels and rifles. Much less a real factory "lightweight" like my sub-7 lb. A-Bolt Stainless Stalker. And it even has an internal, removable box magazine that clips to the hinged floorplate and is also a "pioneer" of THAT "movement". Its "BDL" in "form" when viewed from outside but not "function". Nor is it a "sniper special" with a removable box magazine hanging from "bottom metal" as so many supposed "lightweight" and fully-fluted "hunting rifles" today are.

Nor is any high-powered rifle that has enough "meat" in bolt and/or barrel to make fluting possible EVER going to be "lightweight" by today's standards. Most aren't even "lightweight" by "yesterday's" standards back when a Remington 700 .30-06 Carbine (only made the first few years of 700 production and yes I know about those for the same reason I know about A-Bolts - I am among the "few" lucky and proud owners) with its VERY A-Bolt Stainless Stalker-like dimensions and "light" ADL internal magazine configuration was the "ultimate" so-called "carbine" just made for mountain hunting/hiking and/or horseback handling at a svelte 7.5 lbs or so. My guess is that with a "typical" optic for an early 1960s hunting rifle like that and 4+1 rounds of .30-06 inside its probably a close contest for "lightest lightweight" between it and my Stainless Stalker with a "period correct" optic on it.

I don't have a small and accurate enough scale to do a real-deal comparison but I know neither will weigh much over 8.5 lbs if they're that heavy. And for .30-06 Springfield in a "full-size" albeit "short-barrel" rifle that's a "do-it-all" ultimate packing/hunting/horseback/hiking "carbine", that's as "light" as it gets even today. And if you've never shot a rifle that compact and light and short-barreled chambered for that much "power" and with "full-power" hunting ammo, I can tell you that you wouldn't want one any lighter if you want to shoot it more than a few times in "shirtsleeves" and "offhand".

I'm not remotely recoil-sensitive and I like a good "kick" or I wouldn't have lightweight .30-06s but my A-Bolt is a "hammer" in the recoil department and it'll make even a wannabe "super sniper" flinch in short order shooting in "shirtsleeves" and "offhand" with "full-power" hunting ammo. Go to something like Hornady Light Magnum ammo with 150-grain bullets at 3000+ fps and the "kick" gets downright "violent". In this day and age of new "shooters" who discuss and cuss the "recoil" of an AR15 like there is such a thing, the idea that "fluting" is "primarily for weight savings" gets even funnier. Especially since fluted "AR15" barrels are if anything the most "common" example of fluted parts on "sporting rifles".

And the FEW factory "mass-produced" factory rifles that have fluted "bull barrels" are "varmint rifles". Varmint "hunting" is actually "varmint shooting" if you're any kind of "marksman" and "hunter" and nobody is "packing" a fluted-barrel bolt-action "varmint rifle" almost always chambered for a "varmint cartridge" not even LEGAL for "large game" (I laugh at people who call "deer" large game when they're "medium-sized game" at their BIGGEST where the overwhelming majority of "deer hunting" on this planet gets done i.e. in the U.S.) any farther than from their vehicle to their "benchrest" or "shooting mat" much less around the Midwest or Rocky Mountains hunting deer or other game animals on foot. Most "hunting" PERIOD these days is from a "blind" or "stand" anyway and fewer and fewer "hunters" every year know what it is to actually "hunt" rather than "ambush" game animals with FUR. Bird hunting is a different story but bird hunters also have their "crutches" to minimize "tread time" and maximize "truck time".

And since "fluting" of the "standard" and straight variety is a relatively simple machining process and one done "partially" on things like 1911 pistol slides where "ball cuts" are done at the front of the slide and frame, if it were really such a big "benefit" or collection of "benefits", it wouldn't be "new". Or "rare". Or "noteworthy". Is there an article on barrel "profiling"? No? Since that's "standard" on all but "bull barrels" you'd expect to see one. Long before a little article about "fluting". Which coincidentally is almost impossible on any barrel that HAS been "profiled" and is NOT a "bull barrel". But lets continue with "lightweight" as the "primary goal" of fluting.

Even supposedly "lightweight" rifles such as "assault rifles" are typically VERY heavy relative to bolt-action and other repeating rifles chambered for the same or similar cartridges and rarely are truly "lightweight" items like "low-capacity" 5-10 round magazines, simple and single sight systems that weigh a few ounces rather than a few pounds and a bare minimum of accessories called "shooting aids" found in conjunction with supposedly "lightweight" fluted barrels and/or bolts.

Fluting at most removes ounces rather than pounds from barrels and grams rather than ounces from bolts. Helical fluting removes more material but the supposed advantages of straight flutes are lost. With both types of fluting the sharp edges that result at the bottom "corners" of the flutes create stress risers and potential fracture points and since the profile of all barrels and bolts is inconsistent due to the chamber, bore and rifling even if the outside diameter is constant, flutes cut to a consistent depth front to rear cause even more consistency and variability in expansion, contraction and stresses.

The lightweight argument also falls flat where sporting rifles for hunting are concerned and relatively few "hunting rifles" have any fluting while "benchrest" rifles and other rifles made primarily to be fired rather than carried are the most commonly fluted rifles. Its virtually unknown on true "lightweight" mass-production hunting rifles because such rifles typically are chambered for large, powerful and heavy cartridges and most hunting on foot where hiking and walking are significant portions of the hunt involves cool to cold climates and weather, relatively heavy outerwear, various other equipment like binoculars, calls, communications gear, at least a day's supply of water and food in addition to the rifle and ammunition and whatever accessories are mounted on it and the typical "lightweight" hunting rifle in the 6-8 lbs. range is often the lightest individual "system" the hunter carries.

Lightweight hunting barrels and rifles are already typically made with the thinnest and most aggressively "tapered" barrels possible and rarely do any barrels besides "bull" barrels grossly oversized for the cartridge and caliber they're chambered, bored and rifled for have the "excess" material to make fluting even possible and fluting is an "option" very few premium barrel and rifle makers and builders mention much less recommend or offer to their customers. The majority of fluting is done by "gunsmiths" who generally offer it as "eye candy" or a "weight-saving" measure because they purchase "barrel blanks" for their "low cost" and because "fluting" adds the "custom touch" and straight fluting is possible with "manual" machine tools while helical fluting as well as the barrel "profiling" that CNC makes "easy" are not on a "practical" and "profitable" basis. Many rookie "gunsmiths" as well as their "custom rifle" customers rarely do the math on the pile of "premium" components they select for a "build" and attempt to save time and money going with a "barrel blank" and end up with "hunting" or other "sporting rifles" NOT intended for "benchrest" shooting that weigh two or three times what a "lightweight" hunting rifle from a "mainstream" manufacturer weighs and "fluting" at least has a small weight reduction affect and whatever "placebo" affect goes with it for the "sport shooter" with what is still a ridiculously heavy "hunting rifle".

And the smaller the cartridge and caliber and the less material is machined out of the "barrel blank" during the boring, rifling and chambering process, the heavier the finished product is. Its easy to "build" a relatively "compact" rifle for a "small" short-action cartridge in the .224-.284" caliber "families" with "mild" energy and "power" and relatively "short" effective range against the varmints or game animals its built to "hunt" that is both longer and significantly heavier than long-action true "lightweight" hunting rifles chambered for .308-.33B" caliber cartridges up to and including most "magnum" cartridges. And with "custom" rifles vs. factory mass-produced "premium" rifles its similarly easy to end up with a proportionately lighter wallet after "building" the "smaller" rifle vs. buying the "larger" rifle.

The primary proof that fluting is overrated and has at least as many negatives as positive is in the fact that the companies and manufacturers most easily and quickly and "cheaply" able to incorporate it into the several to dozens of "models" and "versions" and "variants" of rifles they "mass-produce" are not doing so and even the major "custom" rifle "builders" who have been in business for decades rather than years, few though they are, are also not offering that "service" while relative newcomers looking and needing to make a name for themselves are the primary proponents and practioners of "fluting" and it is a service and only a service they offer and one performed on parts and components made by other "newcomers" to that particular "industry".

Or they apply it to "mainstream" manufacturers' parts and components that are "proven" to be strong enough to handle having significant portions of their material machined away for "decorative" purposes. Being a VERY new "service" and one practiced by so few "gunsmiths" and even fewer "manufacturers" of bolts and/or "custom" barrels made from "bull barrel blanks", it remains to be seen just how durable those parts and components will be over time if and when the "custom" rifles they're part of get shot long and hard enough while receiving proper maintenance, service and operation so they "wear out" before their barrels are "shot out".

That most high-powered rifles chambered for modern centerfire cartridges have "service lives" measured at best in thousands of rounds works to the advantage of the proponents and practitioners of fluting barrels since many "custom rifle" builders and customers for those "builds" attribute all issues with accuracy and precision in a "new build" to "barrel problems" and many barrels are "swapped out" LONG before they're "shot out". But BOLTS could very well be a different story and one that could easily have a bunch of unhappy endings given the tendency of fluted bolts to show up with other "questionable" building and/or manufacturing techniques such as "modified" chambers and throats, grossly excessive headspace post-chambering even in "new builds" due to the mistaken belief by many that bolts should have no "resistance" opening or closing on either empty or loaded chambers and various other practices most experienced riflemen whether shooter or "builder" consider to be symptoms of a "worn-out" and potentially dangerous action, receiver, rifle etc.

Any "new build" that starts that loose and "sloppy" can only worsen over time and there will be unseen effects that will cause later "builds" on the same receiver/bolt assembly to potentially include "work" to "repair" or "true" those effects that will ultimately only make a bad situation worse. If such a situation results in multiple "re-barrel" and possibly "re-chamber" jobs that put that loose and sloppy receiver/bolt behind bigger and/or more powerful cartridges down the road, the end result could be catastrophic. Particularly if a fluted bolt already significantly weakened by the fluting and then pounded on thousands of times by excessive headspace firing and then finally "built" into a more powerful rifle fails in its primary "job" which is to solidly and strongly and properly locate and support the "locking lugs" machined into it and the whole structure breaks into pieces under the tens of thousands of pounds per square inch the bolt assembly is subjected to during firing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.234.100.169 (talk) 15:06, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]