Weight sorting cast bullets?

[Snakeoil]

When I first started to look closley on what would cause impact points to change at 100 yds, I thought about the same things you are mentioning. Now I'm still a neophyte, so keep that in mind. But I have learned that most of my flyers are probably due to operator error. Light also plays a role at times, but my inconsistency is probably the biggest offender. Why? The residence time of the bullet in the barrel. If the rifle recoils differently because of you, it exits the muzzle at a different point. So, it will impact at a different point. Variables include how it move/slides on the front bag. How tight it was held against your shoulder. How tightly you pressed you cheek against the stock. How your other hand supported the rear of the stock, and more that probably haven't occured to me or been shared with me yet.

 

[Ian]

I've never done powder coating, just wondered if that could contribute to weight variation, unequal coating.

Not enough to matter in most cases. The polyester jacket is thin, lightweight, and if it looks even it probably is.

The shooter is probably the biggest variable, but is also the easiest to eliminate by practice with accurate jacketed loads in the cast bullet candidate rifle to set a bar for the whole "system".

 

[fiver]

bag technique is important but it's not so much the exact technique you use as it is that you use one and follow it.
it might vary some for each rifle, but it needs to be consistent.
I don't hardly is ever touch the rear bag with my off hand I have an odd technique where I use both hands on the grip like I'm shooting a pistol.
I have a buddy that rests his left hand on top of the scope, and another that nestles the bag with the crook of his elbow.

as far as weight sorting goes I don't get wrapped around .1gr groups except for my little 22 cal rifles.
for my 30 cal stuff I use a .3gr range, and generally have an entire run within 1gr.
less after I pick out the shiny ones from the slight cold edge, and find the ones I relaxed my grip on when pouring.
I can't make real long runs of the bullets I really care about,, the focus, timing, and attention just wears me out.

 

[Ian]

One of the big turning points for me when trying to get better groups with cast bullets was the realization that I could make ammunition with essentially perfect uniformity in every way and the rifle STILL would scatter the bullets everywhere if I didn't get a whole lot of other things correct.

 

[RBHarter]

I've taken to logging or at least making notes about what moulds throw . It started with a brand new 2C Mountain Molds 453-350 . 350 gr +-.2 for 50 pours . Then I got an NOE 3C 460-543 ANJ4 their version of the 458132 , 534.7-535.6 for 40 pours 96 keepers after recycling the obvious flaws . Several RCBS doubles , yep about 1-1.5 gr between cavities . The smallest offender is a 27-130 FN it drops 140.8 and 141.6 . Now the 2 Lee 358-200s , they drop 4 at 201 and 201.7 and 1 each 194&196 round numbers . The 452-255 drops 4 @ 265 , 1 @ 263 , 1@ 262 .? . The 401-175 runs 178 , 179 , 4@182 .
The Rapine 458-201 drops 249 & 252 .
The old Cramer #45 drops 149.9-150.1 I don't know if that's me or the mould .
The H&G 8C when it gets running drops 7@196 +- .1 and 1 @ 195 .4-6 .

I do have an NOE 5C 287-154 hunter that to date hasn't dropped 5 keepers in a single pour , 1&5 just won't run its one or the other ........ It does drop 154 gr +.2 -.1 .

I can't shoot well enough , consistently enough to know for sure when other than the blatant pull , but I'm also happy with 1.5" CTC .
I've tracked most of my aborations to other things like brass deviation and gas check departure .

 

[Bret4207]

I did the weight each bullet thing for a time. I tried a few different way so of doing it. What I came up with for an opinion was that if you cull visually and are pretty ruthless about it, if you size and GC (if applied) consistently and squarely, if you lube evenly and consistently, if you load with minimum run out/OAL variation and check for bullet distortion from the seating die, if your crimp/neck tension is consistent and not distorting the bullet, if your bullet fits the throat as much as possible and if you are as close to absolutely consistent in hold and technique for every shot then you will see the best that bullet can do in that gun with that load. If I was a world or nationally ranked shooter at Camp Perry or something, or shooting cast at extended ranges, then I might be weighing. As it is, there are so many other variations in the mix besides weight that I question the time factor vs results factor. Say you have a range of bullets that are .2 gr less than another group. Okay, why are they .2 less? As Ian pointed out, is it a matter of a band not filling entirely or inconsistent "squeeze" on the handles, is it a mould variation or is it an internal void? If it is a void, where is it? If the void is way back at the rear and pretty much centered then that's going to be a different animal than void near the outside surface well up the nose. And I would never, ever even begin to weigh sort bullets from a Lee 6 banger! Not unless I was segregating them by cavity. I love the Lee 6 cavs, but let's face it- the "precision" in Lee Precision meets a slightly different level than some might think. If you want ultimate accuracy you aren't going to be using a multi cavity mould, I don't care who makes it. You want that kind of consistency where you're quibbling over .2 gr in a 170gr bullet it's going to be from just one cavity of a mould, not 1 of 6!

These are just observations from a faceless guy off the internet. If you want more scientific data, look in the back issues of Handloader or the Fouling Shot or some of the long range black powder journals. There have been studies done that will give you more information, but the sum total comes out about the same as the opinions stated in this thread.

 

[Bret4207]

RBH, Cramer made about the nicest production moulds I ever used. I don't kow what it is they did, but I have several and they are all dead easy to cast well with.

 

[RBHarter]

Just casually sighting those that stood out to me .
The amazing thing about the Cramer and several others of that era is that they are hair splitting close , dead round , and cut on machines who's electronics amounted to an off on switch with maybe a power light and/or a work light .

For the record because I know the Lee 6Cs cast 3 different bullets I sort them for serious work or choose a different bullet . It's not a big deal inside 100 yards and certainly not for most of my pistol work .

As mentioned above visual sorting gets rid of a lot of variation , it is disappointing to cast 2-300 bullets and get 50% or less ....... I have moulds that do better than others and some that I've come to expect to have high reject rates .

 

[Bret4207]

I think what made the Cramers, Yankees and B+M's back in the day so nice was the guys making them knowing what they were doing. Different era, different standards. I'm told some of the custom moulds made now are like that.

 

[fiver]

IMO they were making molds back then and not just another part of meeting a production schedule.
it probably took a good half hour to properly turn and burnish a good Cramer or ideal cavity.
if it takes that long to knock out a 6 cavity mold's cavity's now, then someone's getting a butt chewing.

 

[KeithB]

At $60 to $120/hr shop charge how long do you think they can spend making a mold and stay in business?

 

[Brad]

About 3 moulds?

Back in those days that kind of work was possible but not today.

I am amazed that Tom can make moulds as fine as he does for as little as he charges.

 

[Rick]

I am amazed that Tom can make moulds as fine as he does for as little as he charges.

Set up with the correct tooling and the knowledge to use them.​

 

[KeithB]

Amazing things can be done with modern machine tools. Rick nailed it with "the knowledge to use them", 'cause you can also do some amazingly stupid things with modern machine tools. And spend a ton of $ in the process. The folks right now that are making really nice molds and staying in the black obviously have "the knowledge to use them".

 

[RBHarter]

That was in no way a slight of the modern age or digital tools .
Mountain Molds does nice work also very reasonable at least for what I received .

In 1992 my 8C H&G #130 booked for $234 shipped with handles . The MM 2 yr ago was $125 for a 2C aluminum . If memory serves me correctly the Cramer was about $17 . The MM was a days wages more or less . The Crammer in 1947 was about the same price as 100 gallons of gas , better part of a weeks wages for many people at that time . That H&G in 92' would have cost me a weeks wages , actually about 6 days after taxes . 100 gallons of gas is the best part of $300 today . 13 months ago that MM was 7hr after taxes about 14 now. Seems to me that really good moulds done well cost about 1/3 of what they cost in 1947 and half of what they did in 92' . It's possible that they priced themselves out of business and went broke ..........
Having been on both side of the counter , there is a fine line that is always a trade off for cost , profit , and production . Unfortunately you have to pick 2 and bean counters always take the Ps and quality almost always takes the hit to save the costs . Sometimes it's time spent on QC , fit ,and finish . Sometimes it's tooling and raw material . Lots of cuts also fall on skilled labor , either either by not wanting to pay for it or just not replacing it when it walks out the door .
That's why we have $18 and $35 Lee's and $79-130 NOEs and $130 2c full custom moulds . I don't know how Accurate and Mountain do it , NOE does it with long hours , extra days and family labor ...... We know how Lee does it . In all honesty Lyman and RCBS are cutting it pretty thin , what suffers ? On the other hand who's standing in line for $100 iron singles , I only bought the 458193 because it was on sale as a clearance at just $58 ...... probably not far over cost to the retailer maybe even at a loss .

 

[wquiles]

Well, given the large weight variation I had on the 6C Lee mold, I decided to compare to a 4C NOE mold that gives me a 124gr gc bullet (which I want to try on the 300bkl). I casted those like 4-5 months ago, but didn't PC until today. Again, I weighted everything on the final bullet after PC, sizing, etc., and again at 0.1 gr variation.

WOW, look at how much closer weight distribution I got on these from the NOE mold:

Clearly "I" still have lots of room for improvement, but this mold for me casts with less variation than the Lee mold!

 

[KeithB]

Almost a perfect "standard distribution" bell curve.

 

[fiver]

if you sort before the coating you can use visual clues to just about put them where they will go.
a little frosting in the middle versus just the nose, or a full body flat galvanized look.
you can then use that visual [after looking them over carefully to determine which one produces the better bullets] to look at them from the mold and adjust to keep them in that window.

 

[Bret4207]

Again, what Fiver said. Sort them visually and then weigh and see if they don't pretty much end up like you thought they would. Yeah, every now and then you get one out of 100 with a honking big void inside, but chances are that's an early in the session drop from before the mould was nice and hot. You get them nice and uniform looking your weights will tend to follow that uniformity.

 

[wquiles]

Cool! Thank you guys for the advice