Vertical Dispersion - Weighing Primers

[dmoran]

Personally do a box of 1000 at a time, which takes me around 3-hrs. I open all 10 sleeves and put all the primers in a dish, then weigh them on a MX123 100th scale, qualifying them into small plastic cups, and cue out any extremes. After which, from the lightest batches to the heaviest, I put them back into the sleeves and mark the weight range on the sleeve (see image below), and in sequence use them in an order.

 

[mikeeg02]

Personally do a box of 1000 at a time, which takes me around 3-hrs. I open all 10 sleeves and put all the primers in a dish, then weigh them on a MX123 100th scale, qualifying them into small plastic cups, and cue out any extremes. After which, from the lightest batches to the heaviest, I put them back into the sleeves and mark the weight range on the sleeve (see image below), subsequently use them in the same order.

View attachment 1162600

I am lazy, and have it in my head not to touch the primers any more than need be. Plus, I have a TON of old berger 6mm boxes, which make for convenient primer storage, with a piece of "wicking" paper in there. I really dont enjoy sorting primers, probably worse than ANY single other step, but I have seen the benefits, and so have my aggregates.

 

[Rocketvapor]

You guys getting around 3.65 for an average with the 450's?
The boxes look like a better idea than trying to put them back in the trays.

 

[granite1]

When I read threads like this I get thinking I am skipping a step but then I remember this. I’m not knocking your efforts but this load in my rifle does this all time. Admittedly it’s not at 1,000 but it’s pretty flat.

 

[mikeeg02]

You guys getting around 3.65 for an average with the 450's?
The boxes look like a better idea than trying to put them back in the trays.

I'll have to look tonight. If I had to bet, those in my picture are probably 205m's. But the only other thing they could be is 450s lol

 

[Jdne5b]

View attachment 1162608 When I read threads like this I get thinking I am skipping a step but then I remember this. I’m not knocking your efforts but this load in my rifle does this all time. Admittedly it’s not at 1,000 but it’s pretty flat.

maybe weighing primers would reduce horizontal dispersion for you?

 

[dmoran]

@Rocketvapor
With a good Lot of 450's, typically they will range like from say: 3.66 - 3.76 (not including extremes).
The worse Lot of 450's I ever had, ranged from 3.58 - 3.86 (7.3%) that delivered pesky "fly'ers".... until I qualified them.

PS... to put them back into the sleeves, I simply poor each batch on a primer tray, then spout them down the rows of the sleeves.
Easy peasy... and they don't take up any more room.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[quest450]

I switch my FX120 to grams for better resolution and sort primers by .001 gram......yeah I have issues, I know

 

[dmoran]

When I read threads like this I get thinking I am skipping a step but then I remember this. I’m not knocking your efforts but this load in my rifle does this all time. Admittedly it’s not at 1,000 but it’s pretty flat.

IME - fliers can go in any direction, and are not exclusive to vertical dispersion alone (as the OP entitled the thread).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[quest450]

So now that you have these sorted are you tuning around each set of different weight?

hell no
but it helps my mental game and removes another variable I can control

 

[quest450]

Thank Goodness

I'm nutz but I'm not crazy yet

 

[granite1]

maybe weighing primers would reduce horizontal dispersion for you?

Yeah I think being 20 years younger might be the answer.

 

[quest450]

And to take it step further here’s pretty good primer seater and a nice tool to measure primer pocket depth and primer seating depth.....yes I’m a control freak

 

[Ned Ludd]

I bet the GemPro 250 would sort primers just fine.
My GemPro has always been very accurate.

I sold my AND FX-120i because is was just an oversized scale that didnt offer any advantage over what my GemPro 250 had already been doing for me.

The GemPro250 has a readability of 0.001g. Note - that is readability, not precision, which is probably more like in the +/- 0.002g range (or worse). You're talking about using such a balance to sort primers by weight where the total weight variance for 100 primers might easily be less than 0.010g. A balance with 0.0001g readability would be a much better choice.

 

[MikeMcCasland]

It's kind of funny, this is the 4th or 5th thread I've seen on weighing primers, but the first in which we've got a decent number of people admitting to doing it, and detailing the methods. Makes me think there's probably 10-15 lurkers for every poster doing this kind of thing too.

 

[Rick300]

A medium to large pill container works great

 

[Rocketvapor]

OK, while I take a break from sorting some more
Was the horizontal E-Target some sort of calibration mode?
Seem to have seen that before

If you want to use grams, put a 1 (or 2, 3, 5) gram check weight on the scale.
Hopefully it will read 1.000. Put a primer on, weigh it 1point whatever grams.
Take the primer off, scale should read 1.000 again.
Rinse, repeat. Eliminates the half count (?) auto zero built into a lot of digital scales.
Full range scale error or linearity don't come into play.

My cheapo reads to 0.002 grams (counts by 2)
But reads to 0.005 carats (counts by 5), which is 0.001gram.
OK, back to sorting

 

[Ledd Slinger]

The GemPro250 has a readability of 0.001g. Note - that is readability, not precision, which is probably more like in the +/- 0.002g range (or worse). You're talking about using such a balance to sort primers by weight where the total weight variance for 100 primers might easily be less than 0.010g. A balance with 0.0001g readability would be a much better choice.

I dont weigh anything in grams so not sure exactly how fine a measurment that is off the top of my head. But the GemPro is the same resolution as the AND FX-120i that I had previously which is 0.02 grains. I use extruded powders like N570 and RL33 where a single kernel can weigh .04 to .06 of a grain so .02gr is a pretty fine resolution in my book.

The GemPro was checked against the FX120i many times for accuracy before I sold the FX and it always check out so I dont see why it wouldnt work.

I'll test it for myself and decide from there.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

And to take it step further here’s pretty good primer seater and a nice tool to measure primer pocket depth and primer seating depth.....yes I’m a control freak



View attachment 1162620

What is the ID opening measurement on that depth gauge and how much travel does the pin have?

That looks like it would also be perfect for measuring pin fall on Remington 700 style bolts if it can be set to travel far enough.

 

[Rocketvapor]

If you can find light and heavy primers, and repeat the measurement, you can sort out the outliers.
I've quit for the day. Filled up a tray with one weight. Now to label them
Using the check weight in the pan to check the scale and NOT let it go to zero shows you what is happening every time. While a GOOD check weight would be handy, all it NEEDS to be is the SAME/STABLE weight.

You really don't need to know grams, grains, carats. Just be able to find highs and lows.


The average APPEARS to be somewhere between
the 1.180 -01.185 group and the 1.190 - 1.195 group, and maybe just a tad closer to the 1.190 group. About 3.667 grains average??
With 7 outliers?? Gonna do any good on the range? Who knows