What weight variance is acceptable?

[Jerry Lester]

I understand that this is a relative question depending on the degree of accuracy that is expected from a given gun/bullet/combo. Even with plinking loads though, I tend to be obsessive in trying for the absolute best accuracy my guns will provide.

I'm still playing around with my little custom Ruger Single Six 32 magnum conversion. This thing is absolutely the most accurate revolver(literally minute of squirrel head at 40-50 yards with XTP-HP's) I've ever seen in my life, so naturally, being as much a perfectionist as I am, I'm still trying to find out "just how accurately" I can get it to shoot with my home made WW boolits.

Currently I'm holding my weights within + or - .2g on these bullets. The average weight is 97.9g cast from plain WW. I'm keeping all that weigh from 97.7g to 98.1g, and accuracy is averaging around 1" or so at 25 yards when loaded to about 750 fps with Trail Boss powder, and CCI standard primers. I've been lubing with LEE liquid Alox(a pain!:( ), but pretty soon I should be sizing/lubing on a Saeco lube sizer. This mould is the Saeco 95g SWC 2 cavity mould.

Would it benifit my accuracy to hold my weight variations even closer. I'm already culling probably 30% or more of my bullets to stay within + or - .2g, but if it meant better accuracy I don't mind culling even more. Also, can I expect better accuracy when I change over to the Saeco lube sizer, and start using a better lube?

Thanks, and any input at all on all this would be greatly appreciated!:)

[Lloyd Smale]

Im no expert with rifle bullets so ill let someone else address that. But for handguns i quit even weighting them. If a bullet has no visable flaws its shot. Ive never seen where it made a differnce in accuracy in handgun bullets to weight and sort them. I used to do it and my buddy who is a better shooter then me or anyone else i know came over one day while i was doing it and about flipped over backwards. He told me hed take all my culls even the ugly ones. He said hed tested some pretty ugly bullets that shot just fine. Well that started me testing and low and behold he was right. Even bullets missing part of the noses didnt open groups up at 25 yards enough to consern me. Now when i cull i look for visable flaws like cold mold poor fillouts and especially bases that arent filled out right and voids in bases but thats it. A bullet that looks good will shoot good and thats even at long range. Most of the commercial bullet casters i know shoot there own rejects as most people that buy bullet dont believe this and a few of them are pretty impessive shots with there culls!!!!!!!!!!

[joeb33050]

I understand that this is a relative question depending on the degree of accuracy that is expected from a given gun/bullet/combo. Would it benifit my accuracy to hold my weight variations even closer. I'm already culling probably 30% or more of my bullets to stay within + or - .2g, but if it meant better accuracy I don't mind culling even more. Also, can I expect better accuracy when I change over to the Saeco lube sizer, and start using a better lube?

Thanks, and any input at all on all this would be greatly appreciated!:)

I have records on 14,401 bullets cast and weighed and from the data believe that it is easy to hold bullet weight to +/-.3 grains-the standard deviation of weights is .151 gr. to date.
Extensive testing in several rifles leads me to conclude that there is no effect on accuracy with bullets weighing +/- .4 grains compared to those weighing the same. It is easy to "save" a set of ?50 bullets with the same weight, EX 199.5 grains, from a lot of bullets weighing EX 199.2 gr. to 199.8 gr. I do this, label them "Match", but cannot see better accuracy. I wish I could.

If you can average 1" at 25 yards then you're getting great accuracy. My Ruger MK II from the Miraclerest, (almost as good as a Ransom rest), is averaging just under 2" at 50 yards for 10 shot groups with selected ammunition.

I don't know what will happen with the Saeco sizer.
Please keep us informed.
joe b.

[Bass Ackward]

Depends on a lot of variables like how stable the bullet design is, how fast of a twist rate you are using and this list can go on and on. The biggest factor to answering your question is what kind of accuracy you are trying to hold.

Bottom line is that within reason, bullet "WEIGHT" seems to matter little. But bullet balance can be critical .... or not .... dependent on load. Especially in a shorter barrel where pressure is going to be higher where it can disturb the bullet release from the crown.

So regardless of what we tell you, you are going to simply have to load a few and fling'em and judge for yourself. Then do that with several guns or the same gun and different loads / designs and then you will understand how difficult it is to answer this question.

[buck1]

This may not help but a 3/10gr spread in my rifle boolits is the border line for my loads.
As far as handguns go, IMHO you have found your "sweet spot" , if it aint broke dont fix it.

[pdawg_shooter]

On rifle bullets, I allow 1% of average bullet weight. Any thing greater than that goes back into the pot. Thank Gid for electronic scales !!!

[Boomer Mikey]

I agree with Lloyd,

I used to inspect every bullet three times, weigh and sort them into groups of .1 grain and measure each bullet's diameter, then sort to weight & diameter combinations before sizing.

When I started shooting Cowboy action events I couldn't keep up with the volume I needed and shot them all with no noticeable difference in accuracy.

I started buying bulk boxes of Bear Creek Bullets and was upset with the quality of the bullets so I sorted them into groups of bullets with visible flaws and no visible flaws. I decided to see if there was a difference and loaded up the flawed bullets, some of these had visible voids and badly dented bases, wrinkles on the sides... pretty ugly. I was amazed at the results as I couldn't see any noticeable change in accuracy at 50 yards with my revolvers or lever guns. Further testing with these bullets at 100 yards when sorted into groups of the same weight and no flaws and un-weighed bullets with flaws revealed that I could see a difference in group size on the bench but less than 1 moa difference @ 1200 fps. Increasing velocity increased the spread and decreasing velocity decreased the spread.

For anything @ 100 yard or less without a bench rest, I can't hold the guns well enough to see a difference.

I still sort bullets into groups of bullets with and without flaws using flawed bullets in my CAS revolvers as the targets are big and close. I don't weigh bullets for 100 yard matches or less and I use my old weigh, measure, and sort routine for 500 meter and 200 meter work.


Boomer :Fire:

[monadnock#5]

From my limited boolit testing experience, I've found that boolit design has far more effect on accuracy than segregating boolits by weight. If you don't like the accuracy you're getting, try another mould (different profile and weight), then another and another. At some point, you will find something that you really like.

Ken

[sundog]

Maybe Sailman will comment on this. He's done alot of testing at a hunert with what he calls 'prunes', you know, the wrinkled boolits we all normally cull. He says they shoot like the good'uns for the most part, and actually has shot some better groups with them. He shoots 20-round groups also.

I'll stick to my method for all match rifle boolits. Weigh and cull the light weights. Since I weigh them, I can decide whatever spread I want for the keepers, 1 grain, 0.5 grain, whatever, or simply put the keepers regardless of weight into one batch. Object is to get the light weights out of the mix. It has reduced flyers to zero. That's good for a match. This is what BA was talking about being the difference between weight and balance, the latter being more critical.

It's not worth it to me to do any others, pistol or rifle, except .22s. The .22s are hardest to cast anyway, so whatever edge I can get on them, I'll take. I have a Dillon electronic scale, and it only takes a few minutes to run them across it. All of the rest of the boolits - if they look good, they get loaded and launched.

[NVcurmudgeon]

Sundog is right on about "reduced flyers to zero." First my disclaimer, I never weigh boolits that are going to be used for practice or plinking because it cuts no valuable range time. Without my PACT electronic scale, I wouldn't even weigh them for load development or competition. When weighing, all boolits are from one casting lot of 300-500. Most of the boolits will fall into one of four or five groups weghing, for example, 199.0 to 199.9, 200.0 to 200.9, 201.0 to 201.9, etc. assuming nominal boolit weight of 2000 gr. The relatively few boolits that are lighter or heavier that these most numerous groups go into the plinking box. The rest are saved for load development or competition, though if there isn't any of either going on at the time, I don't object to using them for high quality practice ammo. Over the last eight years of low level competition, this sorting procedure has resulted in no flyers.

[Jerry Lester]

Thanks fellows. I tend to be a little on the obsessive side when it comes to this kind of thing. I'm thrilled that I'm getting the accuracy I am already. I just thought maybe holding the variance tighter might tighten up my grouping at 50-100 yards.

I don't normally hunt with a revolver much past 50 yards(groundhogs only), but I regularly practice at ranges out to 100+ yards. I've found that if you get any where near good at hitting small targets at 100 yards offhand, the normal shots (within 35 yards) on squirrels, rabbits, and such are a lot easier.

I think I'll just keep on doing what I'm doing, and when I get it, I'll post a report on the difference, or not, that the Saeco lube-sizer makes.

[Uncle Grinch]

I agree with Lloyd also. I may weigh a couple when I'm loading them to verify my load, but to me the biggest thing I look for is no flaws and a good clean base with sharp edges.