Sorting Bullets

[Cameron SS]

Does anybody weight sort their 22lr ammo?

If so, what measurements do you use that you've found to be relevant, and are there any special tools you need to do the measurements.

I've been bullet sorting for the centre fire for a while now, just getting into the rimfire and was wondering if anyone has applied the same idea here.

Cheers

 

[Gadget]

Hi,
The top gun at my club has tryed it all, measured, weighed, sorted, and if he could he would have had it X rayed, for (No benifit) his words were a lot harder than that, he now just uses Ealey match and puts up with the odd flyer.
I have seen him run all brands of ammo up to the $35.00 a box stuff, this guy is not short of a Quid, so could pay that sort of cash for ammo, but in his opinion, in his gun, Black Ealey Match streight out of the box dose it for him.
He dose have an arangment with the local gun shop that he takes one brick from a case tests it and if OK he byes the case.
Gadget

 

[Cameron SS]

Hmmm...

Now accepting donations....

 

[RichinKansas]

When I started in the benchrest game about 18 years ago I sorted some PMC Target and it did make a difference. However after switching to better ammo, Eley 10x and Lapua Midas I could see no difference. So I haven't tried it since, decided it doesn't help with the good stuff.

 

[RonAKA]

About three years ago I weight sorted a bunch of ammo. I then divided each type of ammo into two groups. One group had the weights matched to the tenth of a grain for each target shot (WM - Weight Matched), while the other group were paired to give the most extreme weight difference (MO - Matched Outliers). I then shot the groups of each and compared results.

Overall with all ammo types lumped together, group size went down 9% for the weight matched, compared to the matched outliers, and there was statistical evidence (TTEST) that there was a difference between the two groups.

However, if you look at the detail, and I've included the results below in a table, you will see that the ammo types which showed improvement (highlighted in green) were the ones which shot the poorest. There was one anomaly in the results, for Eley Practice (highlighted in yellow). It showed statistical significance of a difference, but the weight matched group shot poorer than the matched outliers.

In the best quality ammo it did very little if anything. This is not surprising. For example the Lapua Midas M all weighed the same +/- 0.05 grains. There essentially was no way to weight sort them because they were the same weight to start will.

My conclusion is that it may be of a minor help to poor quality ammo, but it is still going to shoot poorly even weight sorted. I think the bottom line is that good quality ammo will likely be very consistent in weight. However if you make poor quality ammo consistent in weight it does not turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. The issue is that each sub component needs to be the same, not just the total. That is what quality ammo is about; same brass weight, same primer weight, same powder weight, and same bullet weight, not just the total. I have not bothered to weigh ammo again.

Hope that helps some,

 

[Aussie_bob]

I also have been there done that have weighed but where is the difference the lead the Lube or the brass or even the powder or a combination of all three.
Have rim thicknessed and all sorts of things.
Better quality Ammo does shoot better now if you test ELEY you will find the speed on the end of the box. lets say 1080 Fps if you shoot them in a controlled situation over a chrograph you will find the average is 1080 Fps.
The trick is finding the batch that only varies 5 to 10 Fps either side of that figure and not 20 or more

 

[benzy2]

In the past I weighed a brick of Wolf hoping to squeeze a little more out of it. I left two boxes as they came from the factory and sorted the rest. In the end, I saw the unsorted boxes shoot the higher scores. I left it at that and haven't been back since. As others have stated, sorting by total weight can only remove the extreme odd ball. It doesn't tell you where the weight lies in the round. For the time it took to weigh most of a brick, I could have been at work and earned the money to buy better ammo that didn't need weighed and also shot better.

 

[Shynloco]

Does anybody weight sort their 22lr ammo?

If so, what measurements do you use that you've found to be relevant, and are there any special tools you need to do the measurements.

I've been bullet sorting for the centre fire for a while now, just getting into the rimfire and was wondering if anyone has applied the same idea here.

Cheers

Cameron SS,
As you see from the posts, there are several schools of thought on this issue. Now my friend Ron AKA has done some extensive testing in the past and makes a great argument for his position of not wasting your time. HOWEVER, in my limited experiences of maybe 9 months of shooting some competitions, I see guys still sorting by weight and rim thickness. I am one of those guys because I am convinced it is useful as I do it for three different .22 rifles. But I'd like to add there are also two things I have found very important. FIRST, gotta find what ammo works the best in YOUR PARTICULAR rifle. Two of my three rifles like different ammos for ultimate accuracy. SECOND, gotta find if your rifle also likes a particular rim thickness in whatever ammo your discover works the best. I've found most packages of ammo whether it's Eley, Wolf, Federal or whatever usually measure .38, .39. 40 & .41. My best groups (50 yds) have come using ammo with same the rim thickness. One such 5 shot group measured .120 just a few weeks ago. If that is coincidence, so be it. But I'll stick with it because I'm still chasing the 5 shot - one holer even in .22. And PM me if you are interested in pricing as I use various suppliers and am up on the best prices around. And forgot that $25 a box stuff. Even Lapua is available for alot less than that. SO far my babies aren't on a Lapua Diet thank goodness.

 

[Outrider27]

Probably for the reason stated in above posts (you don't know what component within an individual cartridge causes the weight deviation), my testing has not shown any consistant improvement in group size from weighing. We have, however, found that sorting by rim thickness does result in an improvement in group size.

Now we're theorizing a little, but an accomplished centerfire benchrest shooter once said to me that at those ranges (100 and 200 yards), that a variation of .1 grain in powder charge made less difference than primer consistancy, or, in other words, the variation of charge thrown by the powder measure was not as important as primer performance/consistancy. Our best guess is that sorting by rim thickness helps make rimfire primer consistancy less variable from shot to shot, resulting in a small improvement in group size. Our testing has also shown a tendency for the cartridge groups in the thicker range within each brick to shoot slightly smaller groups than the thinner ones, though the very thickest group doesn't usually shoot the best.

Just some more food for thought....

 

[Shynloco]

I can support what OutRider 27 says about the thicker rim thickness tend to shoot tighter groups. I've noticed that pattern over and over again shooting three different rifles ( 2- Savages and 1-Anschutz). But my tightest groups @ 50 yds have been with .39 & .40 rim thickness and that using different brands of ammo. That is why I sort by Rim Thickness.

 

[DOGCAPPER]

A recent article in Precision Shooter shows improved performance by Mikeing overall length and sorting accordingly.....I belong to a GOOD OLE BOY club that uses a variant of International scoreing....Shoot 7 count best 5...Helps the guy who cant afford 20$ ammo....2 classes of shooter...Factory and Unlimited...LT