sorting bullets

[bench]

So for a lack of something to do I sorted some 90gr vld berger bullets by weight
Question is I have three different lot numbers so after sorting by weight can I put all three lots together(by weight)
The next step would be to point then sort by base to ogive length
let me know what you think

 

[spife7980]

I wouldnt mix lots due to the possibility that external differences would be more important than the individual weights unless you have all of the tooling to properly measure and compare bearing surfaces etc.

Shooting a sample and seeing if there is any tangible difference in performance at range might make me feel a little more comfortable with the idea of mixing the different lots. BUt that could be a lot of work depending on how finely you are grouping weights.

 

[T-shooter]

You probably should keep the lots separate unless they all measure out the same. For instance, here are the measurements on 2 different lots of Hornady .308 Match bullets. I only spot checked a few and some may have been further off than this. Measured with a Hornady comparator.

 

[bench]

I was hoping you would have said mixing lots would be ok
But I knew the answer even before I ask it
Thanks for the conformation

 

[Shynloco]

Bench,
I wholeheartedly agree with the position that bullets lots should not be mixed. Different lots mean different measurements at vital points of the bullet. I've found that bullets within the same lot even have slightly a different Ojive which tells me the bullets most likely were run on different machine and mixed together at packaging. The real issue for you however (IMHO), is the purpose you are loading for. By that I mean are you chasing a five shot one hole groups; are you loading for competition or just plain fun shooting with decent grouping (5 shot groups in the 2's, 3's or 4's). I quit "sorting" as I do not compete, and found concentricity is more important (at least for me) than is sorting, I will note that I measure every cartridge I load/seat by Ojive. And I have found occasion variation in Ojive by as much as .002 - .003 which still produces some decent groups. Yet as long as Concentricity is consistent, poor grouping means I didn't do my part as a shooter, regardless of whether I sorted or not. Just my .02 worth.

Alex

 

[nmkid]

Bench,
I wholeheartedly agree with the position that bullets lots should not be mixed. Different lots mean different measurements at vital points of the bullet. I've found that bullets within the same lot even have slightly a different Ojive which tells me the bullets most likely were run on different machine and mixed together at packaging. The real issue for you however (IMHO), is the purpose you are loading for. By that I mean are you chasing a five shot one hole groups; are you loading for competition or just plain fun shooting with decent grouping (5 shot groups in the 2's, 3's or 4's). I quit "sorting" as I do not compete, and found concentricity is more important (at least for me) than is sorting, I will note that I measure every cartridge I load/seat by Ojive. And I have found occasion variation in Ojive by as much as .002 - .003 which still produces some decent groups. Yet as long as Concentricity is consistent, poor grouping means I didn't do my part as a shooter, regardless of whether I sorted or not. Just my .02 worth.

Alex

For my latest build I thought I would start measuring my bullets. Beforehand, I had the idea to HBN coat some bullets for the same rifle. So, I coated 300 bullets, different lots as I purchase my bullets whenever I find them on sale. Didn't care for the coating so I did my best to clean the stuff off. Then, I started to measure them and just threw my hands up. I thought, what am I doing, I shoot for fun. Now these 300 bullets are all in a larger box. I went to loading. Yesterday, I shot 15 rounds into one big ragged hole I could cover with a dime. No measuring bullets, different lots and I'm so happy I could jump in the air and click my heels. If I could get off the ground!!

 

[BenPerfected]

The new Berger Bullets are very consistent. Sorting by length in 500 count boxes is very close to a waste of time. What I do find, is a few random bullets that are .003-.004 short using a Bob Green Comparitor. About 90% are sorted into two containers that vary only .001.
Ben

 

[Mozella]

My current batch of Berger Hybrids are reasonably consistent when it comes to size; however, they vary quite a bit by weight. You gotta' figure out how deep you want/need to get into bullet and case sorting.

I shoot 600yd F-Class and 600yd BR so I'm sort of in the middle. Long range competitors obsess over tiny variations and guys shooting steel at one or two hundred yards for fun need not worry so much. No matter what you do, don't think you are going to be able to quantify the results on paper by testing 25 rounds or so. Differences, if there are any, will by so small that they're swallowed up in the data "noise".

But that doesn't mean tiny differences aren't important. They all add up so if you're real serious about precision you'll spend time doing things like sorting bullets and cases. I do, even though I can't prove it helps by actual test results. I draw the line at sorting primers.

I also try to sort in a reasonable way. For example, in F-Class shooting, we fire three strings of 20 shots each plus sighters. I sort both bullets and cases into "light", "medium", and "heavy". I load a batch of 20 as alike as possible.

Unlike some, I don't reject anything; however, if I find a component way out in left field, I'll designate it as my first sighter. If it's really bad, I'll save it to use as a warm up round next time I do load testing.

This seems good enough for the low-key matches I shoot. I suppose if I went to more prestigious matches, I would get more obsessive about sorting.

 

[T-shooter]

A 100 box of Berger 200.20x weighed from 200.04 grains to 200.32 grains. I didn't compare measurements.

 

[foxguy]

You probably should keep the lots separate unless they all measure out the same. For instance, here are the measurements on 2 different lots of Hornady .308 Match bullets. I only spot checked a few and some may have been further off than this. Measured with a Hornady comparator.
View attachment 1022764

WOW, I never would of expected that much difference. thanks for sharing.

 

[DRNewcomb]

Unfortunately, it's very difficult to non-destructively make one of the most important measurements affecting bullet accuracy: jacket concentrically. There are a few devices out there that attempt to measure this inductively but they are quite expensive and fairly touchy in setup and operation.

 

[CharlieNC]

What does the lot number define that is meaningful? I was told by someone who works for a major bullet manufacturer that their lot number only defines the day of mfg, so bullets from different machines and raw materials can be mixed within the lot. The potential is that there is as much variability within the lot as there is between lots. A premium mfg could segregate lots in a way to achieve maximum consistency, and provide their on-line measurements for each lot with a little effort. This is standard practice for many vendors and could set one apart from suppliers.

 

[DRNewcomb]

.....I was told by someone who works for a major bullet manufacturer that their lot number only defines the day of mfg, so bullets from different machines and raw materials can be mixed within the lot. .....

That applies to major manufacturers. Since large bullet presses can have several sets of dies working in parallel, even bullets from a single machine can have significant differences. Now, I understand that for some smaller manufacturers, the lot number can be traced to a specific day and set of dies.

 

[M-61]

I also sort by using a comparator. I have found that different lot numbers don't seem to be any worse nor better than mixed lots. In other words same lot or mixed will produce a difference that in my mind is worth sorting.

 

[BenPerfected]

A 100 box of Berger 200.20x weighed from 200.04 grains to 200.32 grains. I didn't compare measurements.

If my math is correct, that is a variance of 0.00140%. One average size kennel of Varget is about .012 gn

 

[T-shooter]

If my math is correct, that is a variance of 0.00140%. One average size kennel of Varget is about .012 gn

The % of variance is correct. An average kernel of Varget weighs a little more. I weighed trickling from 1 to 50 kernels of Varget on my FX300i and the total was 1.06 grains. That's an average of .0212 GN per kernel. Usually each kernel would register a .02 GN increase on the scale.

 

[seymour fish]

So for a lack of something to do I sorted some 90gr vld berger bullets by weight
Question is I have three different lot numbers so after sorting by weight can I put all three lots together(by weight)
The next step would be to point then sort by base to ogive length
let me know what you think

No

 

[memilanuk]

The new Berger Bullets are very consistent. Sorting by length in 500 count boxes is very close to a waste of time. What I do find, is a few random bullets that are .003-.004 short using a Bob Green Comparitor. About 90% are sorted into two containers that vary only .001.

Maybe by bearing surface... but by OAL, they vary considerably more than that. Closer to 15-20 thou.

 

[mikecr]

It's hard to credibly sort bullets without measuring ALL parameters and running the numbers through BC calculation.
The .308 Hornady bullet lot difference posted earlier looks bad on the surface, but the measure is missing ogive radius comparison and meplat diameters. Without ogive radius the ogive datum is unqualified, and meplat diameters could have the BCs higher, lower, or matching, regardless of all else (it's that big).

 

[BenPerfected]

It's hard to credibly sort bullets without measuring ALL parameters and running the numbers through BC calculation.
The .308 Hornady bullet lot difference posted earlier looks bad on the surface, but the measure is missing ogive radius comparison and meplat diameters. Without ogive radius the ogive datum is unqualified, and meplat diameters could have the BCs higher, lower, or matching, regardless of all else (it's that big).

Mike, how long does it take you to sort 100 bullets measuring all the parameters you mentioned? Also, on average how many sorts do have using all your parameters?
Ben