Vapor Trails-Yeah, I'm impressed

[Dave Way]

So today I decided I would start sorting 2,000 103 gr. 6mm Vapor Trails by bullet base to ogive. I'm using a Hollands bullet comparator for this task. I just finished up the first box of 250 and was really impressed so I thought I'd share the results.

2- bullets into the -.001" pile
197- bullets into the zero pile
51- bullets into the +.001 pile

Longest to shortest was a little under .002" actually so had I centered the dial differently there would have only been two piles.

Although I don't plan on sorting by weight, I did check 20 and found a variance of only 0.06 gr.

Thanks Tom for such a good bullet. I can't wait to shoot these and I probably don't even need to be sorting them but there isn't much else to do here this time of the year! Dave.



Edit-If you have sorted these bullets before, have you found similar results? Dave.

 

[Joe Salt]

Just take them out of the box and shoot them you will be impressed! I've got some on the way and if the measure the same as the batch I got last year and the year before I'm good to go.

joe Salt

 

[KenOath]

So today I decided I would start sorting 2,000 103 gr. 6mm Vapor Trails by bullet base to ogive. I'm using a Hollands bullet comparator for this task. I just finished up the first box of 250 and was really impressed so I thought I'd share the results.

2- bullets into the -.001" pile
197- bullets into the zero pile
51- bullets into the +.001 pile

Longest to shortest was a little under .002" actually so had I centered the dial differently there would have only been two piles.

Although I don't plan on sorting by weight, I did check 20 and found a variance of only 0.06 gr.

Thanks Tom for such a good bullet. I can't wait to shoot these and I probably don't even need to be sorting them but there isn't much else to do here this time of the year! Dave.

View attachment 1087811

Edit-If you have sorted these bullets before, have you found similar results? Dave.

Thanks for the write up...this would mean I would only have one pile as I sort mine +or- .001” for same batch..which going by your results = no sorting required..

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Custom bullets are a thing of beauty

 

[Dave Way]

Finished the first 1,000 bullets this afternoon and the initial numbers held up well. I really like this Holland's Comparator.

15 bullets in the - .001" pile 1.5%
807 bullets in the zero pile 80.7%
177 bullets in the +.001" pile 17.7%
1 bullet in the +.002" pile 0.1%

 

[ngb1787]

I dont even sort his bullets anymore, great product!

 

[1shot]

With all the money we spend on our shooting discipline of choice, I find no logical reason to scrimp on one of the most important pieces of the puzzle. If I need to weight/B2O sort bullets, then either I have that time to devote to that task, (which I don't) or I need to find a better bullet.

Lloyd

 

[Mulligan]

Finished the first 1,000 bullets this afternoon and the initial numbers held up well. I really like this Holland's Comparator.

15 bullets in the - .001" pile 1.5%
807 bullets in the zero pile 80.7%
177 bullets in the +.001" pile 17.7%
1 bullet in the +.002" pile 0.1%

View attachment 1087935

That is really quite amazing.
I doubt I shoot well enough to see a difference at 1000.
I need more trigger time.
CW

 

[mikeeg02]

Now that you've sorted them that way, I'd be interested to see if there is any variance in bearing surface.

 

[Jefferson]

Finished the first 1,000 bullets this afternoon and the initial numbers held up well. I really like this Holland's Comparator.

15 bullets in the - .001" pile 1.5%
807 bullets in the zero pile 80.7%
177 bullets in the +.001" pile 17.7%
1 bullet in the +.002" pile 0.1%

View attachment 1087935

and sorry I seemed to miss it

WHEN ARE YOU SHIPPING ME THOSE BULLETS

Jef

 

[Dave Way]

Now that you've sorted them that way, I'd be interested to see if there is any variance in bearing surface.

Mike, I went ahead and borrowed a bearing surface gauge and did what you asked. I only checked 10 bullets from each group, the zero group, the -001" group and the +.001" group. Within each group the bearing surface varied by less than .001", probably more like .0005".

In addition there is a direct correlation between bearing surface length and base to ogive length. In other words, setting the bearing surface gauge on zero, all bullets were pretty much exactly on the mark for the zero base to ogive group. Bullets from the +.001" group were .001" longer and the -.001" group were .001" shorter with this tool. This would indicate that all base to ogive variance is a result of the variance in bearing surface which again, was minute for this lot of bullets.

Dave.

 

[gunnermhr]

WHEN ARE YOU SHIPPING ME THOSE BULLETS

It'll probably be in the same box as the scale

 

[Zero333]

You must of been very bored because I wouldn't of wasted my time sorting bullets of that quality.

Nevertheless thanks for reporting your findings.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Finished the first 1,000 bullets this afternoon and the initial numbers held up well. I really like this Holland's Comparator.

15 bullets in the - .001" pile 1.5%
807 bullets in the zero pile 80.7%
177 bullets in the +.001" pile 17.7%
1 bullet in the +.002" pile 0.1%

View attachment 1087935

I havent sorted Berger bullets in quite a while, but that's basically the same results I used to get with the 6.5mm 140gr VLDs before they changed them into "Hunting VLDs" and added the new Target VLD line.

I would get a little over 80% matched up with a little less than 20% at +/- .001" from that mark. And maybe 1 or 2 culls. Weight was very consistent as well.