No wonder I can't hit anything!

[T-shooter]

I just went through a box of Hornady 168g Match bullets. The lightest I found was 167.40 GN and the heaviest 168.30 GN. That's quite a bit of difference. The lengths were from 1.214" to 1.220". A previous lot of the same part number almost all at 1.234". I think I'm going to have to buy in quanities of 500 at a time and sort them. Out of 100, I found 13 either 168.00 to 168.02 GN. 39 more between 167.90 to 168.10 and 14 more over 168.10.

It would be nice if the factory could sort them ahead of time by a machine and sell them based on weight. Maybe in 1/10 GN lots. I'm sure 9/10ths of grain has to show up to some degree downrange.

I want to try some Alco bullets later on this year. Pricey but may be worth it for some longer range shooting.

 

[bobm]

I just went through a box of Hornady 168g Match bullets. The lightest I found was 167.40 GN and the heaviest 168.30 GN. That's quite a bit of difference. The lengths were from 1.214" to 1.220". A previous lot of the same part number almost all at 1.234". I think I'm going to have to buy in quanities of 500 at a time and sort them. Out of 100, I found 13 either 168.00 to 168.02 GN. 39 more between 167.90 to 168.10 and 14 more over 168.10.

It would be nice if the factory could sort them ahead of time by a machine and sell them based on weight. Maybe in 1/10 GN lots. I'm sure 9/10ths of grain has to show up to some degree downrange.

I want to try some Alco bullets later on this year. Pricey but may be worth it for some longer range shooting.

I just opened a 500 pack of Sierra 7mm 168 gr. MK's to compare to your findings. I got bored after weighing 75 or so. All were nearly the same at 167.8 -168.0
Try some Sierras.

 

[Comrade Terry]

Try some Sierras.

Get 'em here: http://www.okweber.com/

 

[JohnKielly]

Isn't Hornady Match an oxymoron?

 

[500Stroker]

I just went through a box of Hornady 168g Match bullets. The lightest I found was 167.40 GN and the heaviest 168.30 GN. That's quite a bit of difference. The lengths were from 1.214" to 1.220". A previous lot of the same part number almost all at 1.234". I think I'm going to have to buy in quanities of 500 at a time and sort them. Out of 100, I found 13 either 168.00 to 168.02 GN. 39 more between 167.90 to 168.10 and 14 more over 168.10.

It would be nice if the factory could sort them ahead of time by a machine and sell them based on weight. Maybe in 1/10 GN lots. I'm sure 9/10ths of grain has to show up to some degree downrange.

I want to try some Alco bullets later on this year. Pricey but may be worth it for some longer range shooting.

Now you know why very few if any bench shooters fly Hornaday.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Try calculating those differences on a percentage basis. It will give you a much better idea of how small they actually are. Your largest weight variances are only in the 4th decimal place. If your velocity has a value of 4 decimal places, it's pretty easy to estimate the maximum theoretical effect weight variance would have using the formula for kinetic energy (1/2) mv^2...and frankly, it's not much. I think you'll find bullet weight variance in that range will rarely ever be the limiting source of error in terms of velocity or precision variance.

Length variance can be a different story in terms of precision; however, the figures you gave amount to a .006" variance in OAL, which is not bad at all. I length sort bullets into length groups of about .002" for the purpose of pointing. I typically find various different Lots of .223 and .308 Bergers to have between 12 and 15 thousandths OAL variance, if not a little more.

If you really think you can actually shoot those kind of differences, try an experiment: pick any variable you care to measure, then select 5-10 at each extreme (hi/lo), load them up, and see if you can detect any difference in velocity, precision, POI, etc. If "yes", then sorting into smaller variance groups will be of benefit. If no", sorting will serve no other useful purpose than perhaps giving you a false sense of security. It's always good to know where sorting may or may not help in terms of deciding where your time and effort are best spent.

 

[DR1586]

Isn't Hornady Match an oxymoron?

Got a couple P100s that would beg to differ. Hornady makes good bullets, as does Sierra, Berger, etc.

 

[T-shooter]

I just went through a box of Hornady 168g Match bullets. The lightest I found was 167.40 GN and the heaviest 168.30 GN. That's quite a bit of difference. The lengths were from 1.214" to 1.220". A previous lot of the same part number almost all at 1.234". I think I'm going to have to buy in quanities of 500 at a time and sort them. Out of 100, I found 13 either 168.00 to 168.02 GN. 39 more between 167.90 to 168.10 and 14 more over 168.10.

It would be nice if the factory could sort them ahead of time by a machine and sell them based on weight. Maybe in 1/10 GN lots. I'm sure 9/10ths of grain has to show up to some degree downrange.

I want to try some Alco bullets later on this year. Pricey but may be worth it for some longer range shooting.

I found one that I dropped that was the heaviest. 168.44 GN, so 1.04 grain variance out of the same box.

 

[MrMajestic]

You mind if I borrow that excuse?

 

[Ron Blain]

This paper is a good read on the subject: Comparing Measured Bullet Weight with Manufacturer Specifications. Among the problems with testing different bullets is that it is difficult to get a manufacturer to actually tell you what they feel is an acceptable tolerance. Not just for bullet weight but all the features of a bullet. Why Berger’s Are Better for example does bring out the tolerances Berger Bullets works within and they do point out that for the most part their bullets exceed their set specifications. The nice people over at Sierra have some published data we can review.

Sierra Bullets:

1. Weight Control of +/- 0.3 grain.
2. Jacket concentricity of .0000" to .0003" on target bullets and .0000" to .0006" on hunting bullets.
3. 100% final visual inspection for external defects.
4. Roving quality control inspectors perform other dimensional checks at the cupping, draw, trim and bullet assembly operations.

Not sure how many other manufacturers publish their data. Oddly Sierra does dot express their allowable error as a percent but rather as a number. The same +/- 0.3 grain would apply to a 53 grain HP Match as it would apply to a 175 grain HP Match bullet. Overall I have always done well using Sierra, Speer and of course Berger.

Ron

 

[T-shooter]

This paper is a good read on the subject: Comparing Measured Bullet Weight with Manufacturer Specifications. Among the problems with testing different bullets is that it is difficult to get a manufacturer to actually tell you what they feel is an acceptable tolerance. Not just for bullet weight but all the features of a bullet. Why Berger’s Are Better for example does bring out the tolerances Berger Bullets works within and they do point out that for the most part their bullets exceed their set specifications. The nice people over at Sierra have some published data we can review.



Not sure how many other manufacturers publish their data. Oddly Sierra does dot express their allowable error as a percent but rather as a number. The same +/- 0.3 grain would apply to a 53 grain HP Match as it would apply to a 175 grain HP Match bullet. Overall I have always done well using Sierra, Speer and of course Berger.

Ron

I only had (16) 168 GN Sierra .308 Match Kings left. The weights ran from 167.90 to 168.14 grains. The lengths varied by .008". Not a very big sample to test. I did check the diameters of the bearing surfaces and the Sierras were within .0001" of being round. The Hornadys were within .0002". That minor amount may not matter as the bullet will get reformed a little in the barrel. I did notice between two lots of the Hornady bullets, one measured .3082" to .3084" in diameter and the other .3079" to .3081" both being out of round by .0002". It probably depends where on the production run each was made. Dies wear out and there is bound to be a tolerance limit from a new die to one that is retired and replaced.

I've shot both side by side and usually have slightly tighter groups with the Hornady but they were dialed in and I just used the same settings and powder load for the Sierras. A difference in the exact diameter, the bearing surface, and the hardness of the copper could change the velocity some. I never checked. The Sierras should be less sensitive to jump.

 

[Hammer47]

Isn't Hornady Match an oxymoron?

Those 2 words, Hornady and Match generally do not collide in the same sentence.

 

[T-shooter]

Those 2 words, Hornady and Match generally do not collide in the same sentence.

They MATCH, but to what? They are ok if you sort them and get all of them from the same lot. Sierra doesn't seem to be much better. Out of 500, you may find 100 in the same size group. These are Hornady 168g Match from two different lots. Measured with a Hornady comparator from each end. Imagine being set up for one and buy a box of the other. They may shoot ok but different, and if you are trying to keep the jump distance all the same, you'll have to start over.

 

[Canadian bushman]

Thats actually pretty good from what ive seen from hornady. I used to have a little drill index drawer that i used when sorting hornady 168 bthp. They went in .1 gn increments from 167-169 and every drawer had some in it and the ones that were out of range were used as fouling shots.

When i switched to bergers i began putting screws in the index. All the bergers would go into two or three drawers.

 

[dkhunt14]

They MATCH, but to what? They are ok if you sort them and get all of them from the same lot. Sierra doesn't seem to be much better. Out of 500, you may find 100 in the same size group. These are Hornady 168g Match from two different lots. Measured with a Hornady comparator from each end. Imagine being set up for one and buy a box of the other. They may shoot ok but different, and if you are trying to keep the jump distance all the same, you'll have to start over.

A Hornady comparator is not the best way of measuring bearing surface. A lot of BR guys have tried the Hornady Match and none stuck with them. Matt

 

[Hengehold]

Try calculating those differences on a percentage basis. It will give you a much better idea of how small they actually are. Your largest weight variances are only in the 4th decimal place. If your velocity has a value of 4 decimal places, it's pretty easy to estimate the maximum theoretical effect weight variance would have using the formula for kinetic energy (1/2) mv^2...and frankly, it's not much. I think you'll find bullet weight variance in that range will rarely ever be the limiting source of error in terms of velocity or precision variance.

Length variance can be a different story in terms of precision; however, the figures you gave amount to a .006" variance in OAL, which is not bad at all. I length sort bullets into length groups of about .002" for the purpose of pointing. I typically find various different Lots of .223 and .308 Bergers to have between 12 and 15 thousandths OAL variance, if not a little more.

If you really think you can actually shoot those kind of differences, try an experiment: pick any variable you care to measure, then select 5-10 at each extreme (hi/lo), load them up, and see if you can detect any difference in velocity, precision, POI, etc. If "yes", then sorting into smaller variance groups will be of benefit. If no", sorting will serve no other useful purpose than perhaps giving you a false sense of security. It's always good to know where sorting may or may not help in terms of deciding where your time and effort are best spent.

I Concur 100%
-T

 

[T-shooter]

A Hornady comparator is not the best way of measuring bearing surface. A lot of BR guys have tried the Hornady Match and none stuck with them. Matt

Do you know of a better way? I'm willing to try. The Hornady would be better if the back surface were flat with no chamfer into the bore and the bore was .306" instead of .298" on mine.

 

[dkhunt14]

The granite stands with nose pieces made and a dial indicator is better. Mark King was a good one, but he no longer makes them. Maybe John Hoover at Accuracy One. Matt

 

[T-shooter]

The granite stands with nose pieces made and a dial indicator is better. Mark King was a good one, but he no longer makes them. Maybe John Hoover at Accuracy One. Matt

Kind of pricey, nearly $200 with one insert. The concept is the same as the Hornady only made to a lot higher standards. If someone made precision inserts for the Hornady, it would be fine, at least to the accuracy of the dial indicator.

 

[dkhunt14]

Kind of pricey, nearly $200 with one insert. The concept is the same as the Hornady only made to a lot higher standards. If someone made precision inserts for the Hornady, it would be fine, at least to the accuracy of the dial indicator.

I could never get same readings with Hornady nose pieces. I can hold .001 with the stand and sort a bunch in a few hours. I sorted with The Hornady and then resorted with Marks, which was actually the John Buhay. Marks put them in more accurate and a lot less piles. Matt