Sort by rim thickness or weight? Which gives “you” best results. I’m new in the rimfire game so I’ve been tinkering with both ways and testing about every manufacturer I can. Curious as to what others have found
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Bullet sorting
- Thread starter TirednLost
- Start date
For me it's neither, as I've found no hard evidence that either works . . . only anecdotal evidence people have posted.
So, whenever I sort to get the best possible results, I'll sort by inspecting for dings on the bullet.
Might wish to say for what particular discipline as I'm sure you will get different answers based on that. IMO the more consistent answer will be individual lot testing in your gun.
~30 years ago I did see results sorting by both; bins of same rim thickness and weight by 0.1 grain differences for benchrest. I've shot multiple groups in the 0's (at 50 yards) with a 10/22 then but the ammo consistency is and was the real issue.
I'm sure many will say neither makes any difference, but I wasn't getting as good of results until I did (even with a Time Precision barrel tuner). Benchrest is a very different game than what most are doing now. So the effort may not be worth it for other disciplines.
~30 years ago I did see results sorting by both; bins of same rim thickness and weight by 0.1 grain differences for benchrest. I've shot multiple groups in the 0's (at 50 yards) with a 10/22 then but the ammo consistency is and was the real issue.
I'm sure many will say neither makes any difference, but I wasn't getting as good of results until I did (even with a Time Precision barrel tuner). Benchrest is a very different game than what most are doing now. So the effort may not be worth it for other disciplines.
If it makes you happy, give it a try.
I did, 3 different times.
Rim thickness, cartridge weight, overall length.
500 cartridges each time. I'm a glutton for punishment.
The targets and chronograph numbers showed no correlation
with any of those 3 variables. What did show improvement
was sorting by visible defects. Eliminate dented, dinged,
poor seating, badly crimped cartridges, and groups got better.
Or....you can just buy better rimfire ammo.
How does brass dimensions, cartridge weight or length affect
the primer amount, powder amount, crimp tension,
primer/powder chemistry, bullet symmetry, seating angle,
heel shape or brass hardness? They don't.
I did, 3 different times.
Rim thickness, cartridge weight, overall length.
500 cartridges each time. I'm a glutton for punishment.
The targets and chronograph numbers showed no correlation
with any of those 3 variables. What did show improvement
was sorting by visible defects. Eliminate dented, dinged,
poor seating, badly crimped cartridges, and groups got better.
Or....you can just buy better rimfire ammo.
How does brass dimensions, cartridge weight or length affect
the primer amount, powder amount, crimp tension,
primer/powder chemistry, bullet symmetry, seating angle,
heel shape or brass hardness? They don't.
Last edited:
I've spent hours sorting ammo...whether or not it is worth the effort is anecdotal.
My results; The cheaper the ammo, the better results you will see. If you have a brick of Remington Golden Bullet and you sort by rim thickness, the best you can hope for is to reduce flyers from "most of the time" to "some of the time". You are just organizing the cheap ammo into smaller batches of similar dimension cheap ammo, i.e. rim thickness. If you further sort it by weight...what are you weighing? The primer charge, the powder charge, the projectile weight, or the case weight? No way to know, unless you are completely insane and disassemble the ammo, and weigh it all separately....but at that point you need to re-evaluate your life.
If you are sorting expensive stuff, like Lapua Center-X, you will not see much of an improvement. Lapua, and other high end match ammo, is already incredibly consistent.
I sorted a case of Center-X once...took about an 2 hours. I use a rim thickness gauge, and then re-box the ammo accordingly. Will it help? Most likely not...it's in my head. I did do an unsorted vs sorted box test....results were negligible and could not be attributed to sorted vs unsorted. Was there a gust of wind...did I pull a shot, etc. Basically, 10x 5 shot groups @ 50 yards for each box, Bergara B14R. Average of sorted box (0.9425" rim thickness, btw) was 0.37". Average of unsorted was 0.40". But again, that result could just be pure coincidence.
Also, I would say it depends on the gun. If you are shooting a 10/22, don't waste your time. It's like putting racing fuel in a Kia Soul. If you have a nicer gun, like a CZ, Bergara, Anschutz, etc., then maybe give it a try. And only with better to best ammo...don't sort 5,000 rounds of golden bullet expecting a miracle. A rim thickness gauge is pretty inexpensive, your time is what's it worth to you.
My results; The cheaper the ammo, the better results you will see. If you have a brick of Remington Golden Bullet and you sort by rim thickness, the best you can hope for is to reduce flyers from "most of the time" to "some of the time". You are just organizing the cheap ammo into smaller batches of similar dimension cheap ammo, i.e. rim thickness. If you further sort it by weight...what are you weighing? The primer charge, the powder charge, the projectile weight, or the case weight? No way to know, unless you are completely insane and disassemble the ammo, and weigh it all separately....but at that point you need to re-evaluate your life.
If you are sorting expensive stuff, like Lapua Center-X, you will not see much of an improvement. Lapua, and other high end match ammo, is already incredibly consistent.
I sorted a case of Center-X once...took about an 2 hours. I use a rim thickness gauge, and then re-box the ammo accordingly. Will it help? Most likely not...it's in my head. I did do an unsorted vs sorted box test....results were negligible and could not be attributed to sorted vs unsorted. Was there a gust of wind...did I pull a shot, etc. Basically, 10x 5 shot groups @ 50 yards for each box, Bergara B14R. Average of sorted box (0.9425" rim thickness, btw) was 0.37". Average of unsorted was 0.40". But again, that result could just be pure coincidence.
Also, I would say it depends on the gun. If you are shooting a 10/22, don't waste your time. It's like putting racing fuel in a Kia Soul. If you have a nicer gun, like a CZ, Bergara, Anschutz, etc., then maybe give it a try. And only with better to best ammo...don't sort 5,000 rounds of golden bullet expecting a miracle. A rim thickness gauge is pretty inexpensive, your time is what's it worth to you.
Last edited:
I don't know if weight has a lot to do with it...too many factors could account for the weight difference. That's why I started with rim thickness...at least I can be sure the lands/grooves are engaging the bullet the same each time. I think the order of sorting that would yield the best results would be rim thickness, then by COAL, then by weight.
But instead of wasting a tremendous amount of time and energy, I'll just buy Lapua Center-X instead.
But instead of wasting a tremendous amount of time and energy, I'll just buy Lapua Center-X instead.
If sorting inexpensive ammo results in a little better accuracy for some of that inexpensive ammo, what's been achieved?
Consider a scenario in which by means of sorting you can get 50% of $3/box ammo that shoots like $6/box ammo. At that point you've got 25 rounds of "better" ammo and 25 of poor stuff.
To get 50 rounds of better shooting inexpensive ammo, you buy two boxes of $3 ammo. Now you have $6 worth -- 50 rounds -- of better shooting ammo. Except fot the 50 rounds left over from sorting that still shoots poorly, you're no further ahead, unless it's important to have a good supply of inaccurate ammo.
And the rub is that $6/box ammo is not usually found to be especially accurate anyway.
Save yourself the time. If you want better accuracy, buy better ammo.
Consider a scenario in which by means of sorting you can get 50% of $3/box ammo that shoots like $6/box ammo. At that point you've got 25 rounds of "better" ammo and 25 of poor stuff.
To get 50 rounds of better shooting inexpensive ammo, you buy two boxes of $3 ammo. Now you have $6 worth -- 50 rounds -- of better shooting ammo. Except fot the 50 rounds left over from sorting that still shoots poorly, you're no further ahead, unless it's important to have a good supply of inaccurate ammo.
And the rub is that $6/box ammo is not usually found to be especially accurate anyway.
Save yourself the time. If you want better accuracy, buy better ammo.
But, I have found ammo at roughly $6/box to be pretty darned good. i.e. Eley Target at $6.49/box, $599.00/case. I had to ask myself, for my needs, shooting steel to 300 yards from a rest, did I want more ammo or better accuracy by going to Center-X. Will an occasional flyer cost me money, food, reputation? Of course not. I opted for more ammo.
Shooting off hand at 80 yards at prairie dog silhouettes and 4 inch squares off a rail. Do I need Eley Target, or many more Agulia Standard Extra? The Aguila will hold about an inch at 80 yards so the misses off hand are on me. I opted for more ammo. When I bought the Aguila I could get it for just over 2 bucks a box. Federal Auto Match? Perfectly adequate for off hand work.
If I had opted to buy Center-X or Tenex, or even SK Biathalon whatever even at $82.00 a brick for the SK, would I be as free to go out and shoot a box off hand? Of course not. I'd be hoarding every precious round for the future, and my highly perishable skills would be deteriorating.
Yes, $6/bx is good unless in a serious match. But in G's example you also have a $6 box of C*** ammo, only good for tin cans. I'd rather have 2 boxes of 'better' @ $6.
I just don't have enough time! 90 bucks for a brick of decent ammo is better than spending $30 & 2 hours to end up with a 2/3 brick of consistent bulk ammo. And then what are ya gonna do with the rest that didn't meet spec?
Sorted 600 rnds this morning. I am retired, so I have time to sort. Will shoot 50 yards, 100 yards, and 222 yards, then make a decision if this sorting business is worth the effort. Eyeing a KYL target.
Great info guys, much appreciated! I am very much in favor of not sorting and I’ll get the better ammo when I can find it. I do have some ammo sorted to run and see for myself but knowing others results should keep me from doing a lot of unnecessary testing. Hoping I can find a couple that will shoot without having to do much. To me shooting makes me a better shooter, sorting makes me a better sorter.
Full disclosure of current situation.....my mother in law is here for an extended stay so I have ample garage time to tinker 
It suprises me that nobody is talking about a re-sizing die for the .22lr cartidges.
I think it’s an ease of mind to sort them in any way. If you didn’t do it, you might regret it.
Same as shooting in a barrel, you only got one chance to do it. I think it’s all for the mind.
I think it’s an ease of mind to sort them in any way. If you didn’t do it, you might regret it.
Same as shooting in a barrel, you only got one chance to do it. I think it’s all for the mind.
Full disclosure of current situation.....my mother in law is here for an extended stay so I have ample garage time to tinker
Well, there is that...
Sorting, by rim thickness, mid tier ammo, found that by eliminating the extreme detentions I got rid of most of the flyers. But, as stated here, by an other, not worth the time. I simply prefer not using top tier ammo for routine practice & recreation. I do like to be able to hit 1/2 minute of squirrel.
At what distance did you test? I follow your box at 200 etc. We think the same in that regards I also calculate the SD of groups as I'm interested in odds of hitting for points so 1 flier in a cute group isnt a big deal. 5 fliers well...If it makes you happy, give it a try.
I did, 3 different times.
Rim thickness, cartridge weight, overall length.
500 cartridges each time. I'm a glutton for punishment.
The targets and chronograph numbers showed no correlation
with any of those 3 variables. What did show improvement
was sorting by visible defects. Eliminate dented, dinged,
poor seating, badly crimped cartridges, and groups got better.
Or....you can just buy better rimfire ammo.
How does brass dimensions, cartridge weight or length affect
the primer amount, powder amount, crimp tension,
primer/powder chemistry, bullet symmetry, seating angle,
heel shape or brass hardness? They don't.
I wonder if BTO length correlates to what ammo will shoot well in a rifle? I have no ammo under 0.770" that shoots good and the for sure good is 0.775"+
I dont do much at 50 yards. Just enough to not be convinced I cant really see a difference. I do 10 shot groups at 50.
My main test distance is 210 yards 20 shot groups.
Eley Tenex, Match are short and dont group. Eley Force, Contact, action are all better and are long. Lapua CenterX my stuff is short doesnt shoot. Had a lot of SK long range that was longer shot awesome. Short lots of SK rifle match not so much the long lots not to bad but all the SK ammo seems to hover right around the breaking point of good to bad length.
I have a RimX so headspace is long and can not be made as tight as other brands. Calfee 4 chamber IBI 26" all ammo is engraving on rifling.
Weight sorting has shown beneficial at ELR 400+ yards by a fellow shooter up here. I have not tested. Yet...
You can have 3-4" groups at 200 and at 400 will be 24"
At that time I was shooting 50 yards only.
Still attempting to figure out why my results didn't match targets shown here and elsewhere.
Rimfire has a steep learning curve when figuring out precision shooting.
Cartridge defects and mv spread have turned out to be my biggest headaches.
Asymmetric bullets and component differences cause trajectory differences,
no matter how great the rifle or shooter, especially at extended range.
I tried weight sorting, it didn't help.
Found out why when I disassembled a box of SK Rifle Match.
You don't know where the weight differences come from.
Brasss, powder, primer, bullet, lubricant all differ...try it y'er self.
So when you weigh a cartridge, you don't know the weight percentage of each component varies.
No two cartridges are identical, neither are the components.
Still attempting to figure out why my results didn't match targets shown here and elsewhere.
Rimfire has a steep learning curve when figuring out precision shooting.
Cartridge defects and mv spread have turned out to be my biggest headaches.
Asymmetric bullets and component differences cause trajectory differences,
no matter how great the rifle or shooter, especially at extended range.
I tried weight sorting, it didn't help.
Found out why when I disassembled a box of SK Rifle Match.
You don't know where the weight differences come from.
Brasss, powder, primer, bullet, lubricant all differ...try it y'er self.
So when you weigh a cartridge, you don't know the weight percentage of each component varies.
No two cartridges are identical, neither are the components.
OK, I tried, and I call it HIT AND MISS. Went through 600 rounds sorting CCI SV. GOT 100 each of size xxx. Went out and took the KYL target for fun. Bergara B14-R Carbon in hand. Shot some old Winchester HP I had(went everywhere), shot CCI Green Tag that I have had for 15 years, or more. Crap, no more accurate than CCI SV. Shot Aguila Rifle Match, shoots like CCI SV, toss up.
The sorted CCI SV shot a 3/8" group at 50 yards, I got happy. Nothing even close after that, I gave up. I still have a second box of sorted CCI XXZ that I did not shoot from. Will go out again and report back on the XXZ, Eley Trainer, Fed GMM(bought years ago for $7.95), Norma Match 22, SK Standard, PM, and PMS.
The sorted CCI SV shot a 3/8" group at 50 yards, I got happy. Nothing even close after that, I gave up. I still have a second box of sorted CCI XXZ that I did not shoot from. Will go out again and report back on the XXZ, Eley Trainer, Fed GMM(bought years ago for $7.95), Norma Match 22, SK Standard, PM, and PMS.
There are similar discussion in Airgun Match Shooting forums. As your method of propelling lead gets more "iffy", it tends to be more selective about what it likes to fire accurately. The really high end (2500 dollar plus)match grade air rifles seem to produce solid results across a variation in weights and pressures/velocities. All of them use a pellet gauge to measure diameter, and precision scales to match weight. They have learned that diameter matters, as it affects the seal vs friction ratios for these lower powered lead pushers. They also note that a heavier pellet will not leave the barrel as fast as a lighter pellet.. and there IS a velocity sweet spot for each projectile.
But, because the mechanism are different between air rifles and powder rifles, many of these effects seen in air rifles, are diminished in powder rifles. They other day at the range, I had two rounds which mis-fed, and became significantly scuffed up and scarred. They were set to the side. At the end of my session the two bullets were left over, and not "good enough" to be used for any "for the money shots". I had a couple of novices who had been watching me shoot, and eyeballing the Creedmoor. I had both of them step up to the bench. I adjusted the scope for range/parallax, elevation, windage... all they needed to do was line up the crosshairs with the 250 yard gong and squeeze the trigger. To their delight, both rang the 8 inch gong with one shot. I will say that IF I had shot a pellet which was as damaged, through my top air rifle. It would have been a miss at half the distance.
Now, do I believe there is a difference? Yes, all things make a difference. The only question is how significant is the difference.
In case some of you are wondering if this is a real thing, click on the link to just one event. The big-bore class shoots out to 300 yards. The top prize earns a $5000 check. Some are consistently shooting 1/4 MOA during the competition at 100 yards.
http://www.extremebenchrest.com/
But, because the mechanism are different between air rifles and powder rifles, many of these effects seen in air rifles, are diminished in powder rifles. They other day at the range, I had two rounds which mis-fed, and became significantly scuffed up and scarred. They were set to the side. At the end of my session the two bullets were left over, and not "good enough" to be used for any "for the money shots". I had a couple of novices who had been watching me shoot, and eyeballing the Creedmoor. I had both of them step up to the bench. I adjusted the scope for range/parallax, elevation, windage... all they needed to do was line up the crosshairs with the 250 yard gong and squeeze the trigger. To their delight, both rang the 8 inch gong with one shot. I will say that IF I had shot a pellet which was as damaged, through my top air rifle. It would have been a miss at half the distance.
Now, do I believe there is a difference? Yes, all things make a difference. The only question is how significant is the difference.
In case some of you are wondering if this is a real thing, click on the link to just one event. The big-bore class shoots out to 300 yards. The top prize earns a $5000 check. Some are consistently shooting 1/4 MOA during the competition at 100 yards.
http://www.extremebenchrest.com/
Last edited:
I have disassembled enough to know what your saying is true.
My initial tests were done with cheap fed target ammo sorting within a 0.001 or 1.0 gr i didn't see a difference. But the anomalies being eliminated helped ES in velocity. At that time I was only testing at 50 and of course no accuracy difference. As I have learned more I now realize unless your doing 50yd bench 50 testing means very little more then getting a good Zero.
I agree visual inspection will tell you if the ammo will shoot or not all else being equal. Eley really has to improve the Tenex and Match every lot I have the nose is scuffed on one side. Not that I can prove it makes a difference lol.
I test with SK pistol match and better ammo so everything measures very consistent anyway.
To further prove your point. Eley Force and Contact shoot the best in my rifle at 200.
I have three lot# of contact they all shoot the same.
Eley Force and Contact
BTO length ES 0.019" weight ES 1.1gr
Eley Action is second
BTO length ES 0.020" weight ES 1.0 gr.
All of these average 0.776-0.780 BTO length
The next here dont shoot. 150% larger group SD
Eley Match
BTO length ES 0.008" weight ES 0.3 gr.
Eley Tenex Biathlon
BTO length ES 0.004" weight ES 0.2 gr.
Lapua Center X
BTO length ES 0.003" weight ES 0.5 gr.
All of these average 0.760-0.763 BTO length.
There is so much to learn and so much stuff out there that people say this or that. I always wonder did you test or hear it in the hunt shack after a couple pints?
I didnt worry about Rim thickness because many have shown it dont matter anymore and the little I've tested agrees with that. I did measure a sample from each lot to see if there is a difference in consistency. Its all the same. Will I include it when I plot out POI at 200 with my serial numbered ammo absolutely be retarded not to. Oh and it was -14⁰c and 10-15 mpr wind the afternoon I was measuring anyway lol.
Back from shooting sorted ammo, and different brands of ammo. All shooting at 50 yards. Action torqued to 20 inch lbs front and rear. First, sorting. Sorted CCI SV shot good, then fliers. Shit in, shit out. Shoot good, then group opens. Had one box of Eley Trainer I paid $3.00 for many years ago. Eley Trainer 0.293. I have also had a box of Fed Gold Metal Match with the dimpled case bottom. Shot 0.266. SK Pistol Match 0.265. SK PMS 0.386. SK Plus 0.452. I do believe I pulled the last shot. Last was Norma Match M22 0.423.
I am a believer in premium ammo. I have a couple boxes left. IF I could buy more I surely would do it. I did not take the LCX, next trip. I have a bit of CCI SV and will shoot it.
I am a believer in premium ammo. I have a couple boxes left. IF I could buy more I surely would do it. I did not take the LCX, next trip. I have a bit of CCI SV and will shoot it.
Last edited:
that could be either an incredibly boring video or a funny video to see someone loose there mind weighing 8lbs of powder grain by grain . a clear window into madness must sort every one must sort ....
At $150 or more for a brick of top tier ammo these days is legal insanity. I love the accuracy that I got from my rifle, but I would rather not coin up that kind of cash for the shooting I do. To have a couple boxes on hand is nice. Would love a few bricks of Norma M22, but not at the prices I see lately.
Well I went and shot the other day to log some data and find some things out for myself. I appreciate everyone’s input. Interesting to hear everyone’s ideas on the subject. I am shooting a Ruger precision in 22 lr, used front bipod and rear squeeze bag. I’m fortunate enough to have access to a 100 yd indoor so the only thing messing with me was the guy in the next booth burning down his AR10 with a break 
. I used a batch of SK rifle match. I did a round with rim sorted, a round weight sorted and a round not sorted. I shot two 5 round groups at 25 yds, two 5 round groups at 50 yds, and one 5 shot group at 100. With this particular ammo I don’t see a need to sort. I actually feel like the not sorted shot a hair better.
I also had a box of eley match that I shot non sorted. It seemed to shoot very well but as of now I don’t know if I can justify the cost. Maybe if I get more into competition and feel like it will help me gain some points. I am see that for the most part, there is some justification in buying the better ammo. I have some el cheapo ammo that I will probably run a similar test with. Gotta have something to occupy that time in the garage..... yes she is still here.
. I used a batch of SK rifle match. I did a round with rim sorted, a round weight sorted and a round not sorted. I shot two 5 round groups at 25 yds, two 5 round groups at 50 yds, and one 5 shot group at 100. With this particular ammo I don’t see a need to sort. I actually feel like the not sorted shot a hair better.I also had a box of eley match that I shot non sorted. It seemed to shoot very well but as of now I don’t know if I can justify the cost. Maybe if I get more into competition and feel like it will help me gain some points. I am see that for the most part, there is some justification in buying the better ammo. I have some el cheapo ammo that I will probably run a similar test with. Gotta have something to occupy that time in the garage..... yes she is still here.
Attachments
Great results but can't see how this data can be used without knowing what hardware and cleaning procedures were used.I have disassembled enough to know what your saying is true.
My initial tests were done with cheap fed target ammo sorting within a 0.001 or 1.0 gr i didn't see a difference. But the anomalies being eliminated helped ES in velocity. At that time I was only testing at 50 and of course no accuracy difference. As I have learned more I now realize unless your doing 50yd bench 50 testing means very little more then getting a good Zero.
I agree visual inspection will tell you if the ammo will shoot or not all else being equal. Eley really has to improve the Tenex and Match every lot I have the nose is scuffed on one side. Not that I can prove it makes a difference lol.
I test with SK pistol match and better ammo so everything measures very consistent anyway.
To further prove your point. Eley Force and Contact shoot the best in my rifle at 200.
I have three lot# of contact they all shoot the same.
Eley Force and Contact
BTO length ES 0.019" weight ES 1.1gr
Eley Action is second
BTO length ES 0.020" weight ES 1.0 gr.
All of these average 0.776-0.780 BTO length
The next here dont shoot. 150% larger group SD
Eley Match
BTO length ES 0.008" weight ES 0.3 gr.
Eley Tenex Biathlon
BTO length ES 0.004" weight ES 0.2 gr.
Lapua Center X
BTO length ES 0.003" weight ES 0.5 gr.
All of these average 0.760-0.763 BTO length.
There is so much to learn and so much stuff out there that people say this or that. I always wonder did you test or hear it in the hunt shack after a couple pints?
I didnt worry about Rim thickness because many have shown it dont matter anymore and the little I've tested agrees with that. I did measure a sample from each lot to see if there is a difference in consistency. Its all the same. Will I include it when I plot out POI at 200 with my serial numbered ammo absolutely be retarded not to. Oh and it was -14⁰c and 10-15 mpr wind the afternoon I was measuring anyway lol.
View attachment 7542868
Are you shooting a production class $200 Mark II Savage , a $400 RPR or are you using a $2K + custom rig with a match grade 20 in barrel, 10 oz trigger in a Custom chassis with a NF 40X scope.
How many rounds do you shoot before cleaning the chamber? Maintaining a clean barrel is critical to accuracy, in as little as 200 rounds the accuracy can fall off with any accumulation of carbon at the chamber leade.
The sorting data is outstanding and useful but is only part of the system, the environmental conditions and the hardware used need to be known to get the entire picture of bullet on bullet accuracy. You must be an engineer to compile the data into excel. Keep up the good work.
I have stock cheap rifles and custom actions. This holds true for all.
I dont clean barrels. I want minimum 1000 rounds through a barrel to settle them down. Velocity is morestable then for long range stuff also more consistent across conditions.
Different barrels could be different. I run IBI.
I have gotten the same results with CCI SV with a little sorting. Glad to see that others are having the same luck. I also found that if you get the used boxes of Center X and Eley Match out the range trash can and use them to hold your sorted CCI SV you will see that your 50 yds 3 rd groups are in the .20 to .30 inch range. After several hole on hole shots the guys shooting next to you will ask where did you get the bricks of Lapua & Eley and then takes picture of the lot numbers. I think it has something to do with an ACE and LRA MV3 green dot with the flaming red marking tape hanging off the target. I might be wrong but seeing the wind works for me. Send It on the green dot is the key to success and makes the NF shine.
Last edited:
Less time sorting equals more time shooting, which one of those do think will actually shrink your groups and improve upon your consistency?
