Just curious as to how many shooters sort their brass ! Im using Lapua 6br and 6.5x47 . Just wondering if anyone has seen a difference in POI with say a 1 grain spread ? 2 grain spread ?
Thx
Mark
Thx
Mark
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
F T/R Competition Sorting brass ??????
- Thread starter Savage Mark
- Start date
I sort out a new batch (200 or so) to find the outliers. Use them for dummy rounds.
While doing this I end up, by default, with a bunch of 'a little lighter' and a bunch of 'a little heavier'.
The bunches should be within a grain or two or you received a bad batch.
While doing this I end up, by default, with a bunch of 'a little lighter' and a bunch of 'a little heavier'.
The bunches should be within a grain or two or you received a bad batch.
Used to but never saw a difference at 600 with a Dasher or 1000 with a 284. Pay more attention to charge weight and neck tension. Sort trim and point bullets. Use Lapua brass for both.
I think you're talking about weighing empty brass and some of the replies look like weighing loaded brass?
I guess I never considered it because a lot can change the weight of brass (density of the alloy, dirt./debris, differences in flash holes, trim length. The weight isn't the factor, its all the other things that are (length, flash holes,) to name a few. If a case were longer (and therefore heavier) it would change the seating depth of the bullet which reduces internal volume which makes a bigger difference than the weight of the brass case alone.
Only reason I ask is some guys in F class sort their brass by weight . Guys at my range say they sort to .5 grain. I was just wondering if anyone saw point of impact change with say a 2 grain heavier or lighter case ? And forgive my ignorance , but I’m not sure I understand about a longer case changing seating depth .
if a case is longer then the bullet has to be seated further into the neck to achieve the same OAL as a shorter case. The opposite is also true. A case that is shorter would require the bullet to be seated less to achieve the same OAL. Ive noticed this when I load bullets with a cannelure. cases need to be consistent lengths to get consistent OAL in the case of using cannelures
Well, my reply was cases, not loaded brass.
Buy 200, 250, whatever, brand new brass.
If your total weight range of empty cases is one or two grains, you wasted time.
IF you run into one or two heavies, and one or two light cases. then those should probably be culled.
This also isn't necessarily a "buy quality" issue.
New cases from the same lot probably have the same (almost) density.
Weight sorting dirty brass is dumb.
Weigh the little bit you get out of a flash hole.
Weighing cases of different lengths probably won't give good results.
Try this: Measure length and weight one of your culled brand new cases.
Trim off ONE GRAIN from the neck.
How much did you take off?
Really. Give this a try. Tell us how much length you had to trim.
Oh, and what caliber/brand.
What brand has a weight distribution for a reasonable quantity (at least a hundred) of 2 grains or less?
IF you quickly sort through your brass to find just the outliers, the one or two that are really different than the majority, you pretty much have sorted all of them. Just put them into different stacks.
1 grain increments, heavy/light, quarter grain increments.
You weighed them, why not separate them? It's free.
Buy 200, 250, whatever, brand new brass.
If your total weight range of empty cases is one or two grains, you wasted time.
IF you run into one or two heavies, and one or two light cases. then those should probably be culled.
This also isn't necessarily a "buy quality" issue.
New cases from the same lot probably have the same (almost) density.
Weight sorting dirty brass is dumb.
Weigh the little bit you get out of a flash hole.
Weighing cases of different lengths probably won't give good results.
Try this: Measure length and weight one of your culled brand new cases.
Trim off ONE GRAIN from the neck.
How much did you take off?
Really. Give this a try. Tell us how much length you had to trim.
Oh, and what caliber/brand.
What brand has a weight distribution for a reasonable quantity (at least a hundred) of 2 grains or less?
IF you quickly sort through your brass to find just the outliers, the one or two that are really different than the majority, you pretty much have sorted all of them. Just put them into different stacks.
1 grain increments, heavy/light, quarter grain increments.
You weighed them, why not separate them? It's free.
Last edited:
and since this is in the F-Class section
Ignoring wind (I wish) 1/4 MOA off a center hold is right on the line of being an X or a 10 with a 1/2 MOA X ring.
An eighth of an MOA can easily mean a dropped point.
Ignoring wind (I wish) 1/4 MOA off a center hold is right on the line of being an X or a 10 with a 1/2 MOA X ring.
An eighth of an MOA can easily mean a dropped point.
With Lapua brass I trim to length and outside neck turn only as far as brass prep goes, then I weigh them. Any cases way out say for 308 FTR +/- .5 I use for warm ups on load develop. Lapua is very good brass I rarely toss any out due to weight, if I have a bad shot on target for no good reason I toss that piece of brass in the warm up box or trash.
Learning how to read the wind is key.
Learning how to read the wind is key.
I have weight sorted and noticed no differnce. I spend that time sorting bullets instead. I notice a differnce with that.
I use to weight sort by volume h2o. It's more reliable than weighing the actual brass. Once sorted the brass kept its place in the box for several firings, then id check them occatio ally to see where they were. I wasn't seeing much gain. Then one day I went to leave my mat and picked up my box by the handle and flipped the box over. I was so pissed. After that I stopped be so retentive.
Turning necks to get consistent neck tension. Weighing powder consistently were both more constructive of my time.
I do know the bench guys weigh everything to basically get 0's.
Xdeano
Turning necks to get consistent neck tension. Weighing powder consistently were both more constructive of my time.
I do know the bench guys weigh everything to basically get 0's.
Xdeano
quick question ! Instead of turning necks , couldnt u run a mandrel through neck after sizing it down with bushing die ?
Somewhere between being a GOOD F-Class shooter and a GOOD BR shooter are some prep methods that still should be useful.
The excuses about brass density, cleaning up flash holes, turning and trimming necks negating the benefits of weighing brass, are to me, just that. Excuses.
Weigh the brass from cleaning up 99 flash holes
Trim a whole grain from the neck of a case.
If the total weight range of your brand of brass is less than +/- 1% then sorting might not do anything to your groups. Total range 0.5%, don't waste your time.
BUT, if the weight range is 2 or 3% or MORE then don't expect anything close to BR groups.
Those that use Lapua brass, please ignore this post.
If you want to measure capacity with water be sure and add something to reduce surface tension.
I've seen pictures of the top of the water column that people think they have measured water capacity.
Shooters will pick prep steps that control how the bullet fits the case or how a primer fits a pocket, how precise they measure powder, weigh bullets, but really resist weight sorting cases because it's a BR thing and doesn't apply to their shooting style.
I ask the experts in manual shooting methods (where the shooter points the rifle ) what
weight percentages of various components matter?
45 grain charge to +/- 0.1% ?
155.5 grain bullet to +/- 0.2% ?
Primers to +/- 1% ?
Cases to +/- 2% ?
Then do whatever component/ingrediant prep you want with those tolerances.
Or not.
The excuses about brass density, cleaning up flash holes, turning and trimming necks negating the benefits of weighing brass, are to me, just that. Excuses.
Weigh the brass from cleaning up 99 flash holes
Trim a whole grain from the neck of a case.
If the total weight range of your brand of brass is less than +/- 1% then sorting might not do anything to your groups. Total range 0.5%, don't waste your time.
BUT, if the weight range is 2 or 3% or MORE then don't expect anything close to BR groups.
Those that use Lapua brass, please ignore this post.
If you want to measure capacity with water be sure and add something to reduce surface tension.
I've seen pictures of the top of the water column that people think they have measured water capacity.
Shooters will pick prep steps that control how the bullet fits the case or how a primer fits a pocket, how precise they measure powder, weigh bullets, but really resist weight sorting cases because it's a BR thing and doesn't apply to their shooting style.
I ask the experts in manual shooting methods (where the shooter points the rifle
) what weight percentages of various components matter?
45 grain charge to +/- 0.1% ?
155.5 grain bullet to +/- 0.2% ?
Primers to +/- 1% ?
Cases to +/- 2% ?
Then do whatever component/ingrediant prep you want with those tolerances.
Or not.
A mandrel pushes any imperfections from the inside of the neck to the outside.
If im going to go about opening the necks up and pushing things out then I have time to turn the crap off the outside of the neck. Clean it up and dont worry about it.
Xdeano
If im going to go about opening the necks up and pushing things out then I have time to turn the crap off the outside of the neck. Clean it up and dont worry about it.
Xdeano
Maybe cause I use Lapua brass I didnt see any differnce. If my chamber was a little tighter I'd neck turn. Just to even out neck tension. Next barrel will have a tighter neck so I can do that and then maybe I'll weight sort brass. I would do it with water if I was.
Last edited:
Turning necks isnt for factory guns, can you do it? Sure, but isn't kind of a waste of time, right along with sorting bullets and brass. The only reason I turn necks is to get consistency in my neck tension, get low run out or concentricity to a very minimum in my bullet/case.
Consistency is accuracy.
Accuracy is consistency.
Wind will do more damage to your hit percentages than all the sorting and case inconsistency though. But I get a kick out of taking out as many variables as I can, then its on me to make the shot.
Xdeano
Consistency is accuracy.
Accuracy is consistency.
Wind will do more damage to your hit percentages than all the sorting and case inconsistency though. But I get a kick out of taking out as many variables as I can, then its on me to make the shot.
Xdeano
I finished 5th in the FCNC last yr. Didn't sort anything, didn't turn anything. Would it maybe have gotten me another point somewhere in several days of shooting?...... maybe, but not shooting a 7 out the right followed by an 8 out the left in one match would have made a much bigger difference.
If you have time then by all means do all the things you read about on the interwebz... if you want to, but don't think you have to do all of that to shoot good scores. I can make my 308s shoot in the .3s for vertical without doing anything other than using good dies, annealing every time, and weighing my powder consistently. I consistenty shoot some of the highest X counts on the board.
My process is:
Anneal
FL size/decap with a bushing die (i only size about ½ of the neck)
run over a mandrel for uniform neck tension
toss in the Dillon tumbler with corncob to clean and get the lube off
prime
powder
seat bullets with a Wilson seater die and an arbor press
That's it.
All of that other stuff may be able to get take you from a .35 moa rig to a .25 moa rig, but it won't make much difference in your scores. If you look at an F class target and see what it gains you it's not much in the X-ring, and almost nothing on the 10-ring. If you miss a letup or a pickup it will just shoot pretty 8s.
If you are shooting Master scores at long range, and you are competing for podium spots where one point can sometimes make 3 or 4 places difference then maybe you need to think about taking some steps that will get you a point over 120 or 150 shots, but for the most part it's the last place you need to look for points once you get the equipment and learn to make good bullets. Concentraing on consistent shooting, holding good elevation, and good wind calls will get you a whole lot more, but it's a lot less interesting to write about on the WWW.
edit: If you are shooting mid range F-open and you shoot places where people typically put up scores where something in the range of 598 or 600 wins for the weekend, then you might need to consider doing a lot of things that the BR guys do because that’s an X count game and you need to get your vertical down around .25 MOA to not lose X count.
If you have time then by all means do all the things you read about on the interwebz... if you want to, but don't think you have to do all of that to shoot good scores. I can make my 308s shoot in the .3s for vertical without doing anything other than using good dies, annealing every time, and weighing my powder consistently. I consistenty shoot some of the highest X counts on the board.
My process is:
Anneal
FL size/decap with a bushing die (i only size about ½ of the neck)
run over a mandrel for uniform neck tension
toss in the Dillon tumbler with corncob to clean and get the lube off
prime
powder
seat bullets with a Wilson seater die and an arbor press
That's it.
All of that other stuff may be able to get take you from a .35 moa rig to a .25 moa rig, but it won't make much difference in your scores. If you look at an F class target and see what it gains you it's not much in the X-ring, and almost nothing on the 10-ring. If you miss a letup or a pickup it will just shoot pretty 8s.
If you are shooting Master scores at long range, and you are competing for podium spots where one point can sometimes make 3 or 4 places difference then maybe you need to think about taking some steps that will get you a point over 120 or 150 shots, but for the most part it's the last place you need to look for points once you get the equipment and learn to make good bullets. Concentraing on consistent shooting, holding good elevation, and good wind calls will get you a whole lot more, but it's a lot less interesting to write about on the WWW.
edit: If you are shooting mid range F-open and you shoot places where people typically put up scores where something in the range of 598 or 600 wins for the weekend, then you might need to consider doing a lot of things that the BR guys do because that’s an X count game and you need to get your vertical down around .25 MOA to not lose X count.
Last edited:
Yes , the top 3-4 spots are usually 400 (only 2 relays) , so yes , it’s an X game . My 2nd 300 yard match I came in 2nd place with a 400 and 34 Xs. 1st place had 35 Xs. Damn !
There are a lot of things that people do In the name of greater precision that seem to make sense but no one has ever proven what the gains are for those extra steps.
Sorting components, turning necks... I’ve never seen any conclusive tests to show what the quantitative values of improvements are. It seems intuitive that they would help, but how much, and is it worth it for your shooting discipline? PRS guys can get by with factory “match” ammo, but I doubt you want to try that for F class. BR winners measure groups to .001.
I have dabbled in service rifle on a couple of occasions. Once at the 600 yard line another shooter asked me if I was sorting my Lake City grass as he felt it might help my scores. ( I stunk) I didn’t bother to point out to him that I had been shooting lake city brass in my mid range FTR 223 for years without sorting and at 600 yards I could routinely clean an F class target with 50 to 75% X count. I don’t believe that sorting would make a difference on a target with an X ring that is the size of the 10 ring on an F class target. Bullets went where I pointed them.
Sorting components, turning necks... I’ve never seen any conclusive tests to show what the quantitative values of improvements are. It seems intuitive that they would help, but how much, and is it worth it for your shooting discipline? PRS guys can get by with factory “match” ammo, but I doubt you want to try that for F class. BR winners measure groups to .001.
I have dabbled in service rifle on a couple of occasions. Once at the 600 yard line another shooter asked me if I was sorting my Lake City grass as he felt it might help my scores. ( I stunk) I didn’t bother to point out to him that I had been shooting lake city brass in my mid range FTR 223 for years without sorting and at 600 yards I could routinely clean an F class target with 50 to 75% X count. I don’t believe that sorting would make a difference on a target with an X ring that is the size of the 10 ring on an F class target. Bullets went where I pointed them.
Last edited:
I just look for pieces way off. I didn’t see enough difference, especially with good brass. My last few batches of Peterson and ADG brass was all so close that it was a waste of my time.
I weighed a couple hundred cases and shot groups with the high and low extreme weights. There was no change in point of impact at 600yds.
I did the same thing with bullets and tested them at 1,000yds. I did not see a change in point of impact with bullet weight sorting either.
-TH
I would not weigh/sort Lapua brass in this application. I have weighed and sorted WIN brass for my Palma rifle, taking the most consistent 150 cases out of a lot of 500, and used the remaining 350 for my M40.
There is an argument for sorting loaded rounds and shooting them in weight order, to help minimize velocity ES based on minor variances in powder weight and brass weight. I used this method and was able to determine my electronic thrower was quite inaccurate, and doing this step saved me from blowing up a rifle.
Given your X ring in F-Class is 1/2 MOA, you might consider the sorting by weight in your ammo box and shooting in that order. ES and chasing elevation is something to try to keep as low as possible.
There is an argument for sorting loaded rounds and shooting them in weight order, to help minimize velocity ES based on minor variances in powder weight and brass weight. I used this method and was able to determine my electronic thrower was quite inaccurate, and doing this step saved me from blowing up a rifle.
Given your X ring in F-Class is 1/2 MOA, you might consider the sorting by weight in your ammo box and shooting in that order. ES and chasing elevation is something to try to keep as low as possible.
If you believe weight sorting is important, I have a bridge to sell you.
It does NOT decrease ES or SD, improve group size, flyers, or make your pee-pee or boobies bigger.
If you are OCD and have to measure something, measure internal volume on once fired cases. If you start logging data, show your results, I'll see if it mirrors what I've discovered.
It does NOT decrease ES or SD, improve group size, flyers, or make your pee-pee or boobies bigger.
If you are OCD and have to measure something, measure internal volume on once fired cases. If you start logging data, show your results, I'll see if it mirrors what I've discovered.
Was about to suggest this. I’m not an F class guy, but enjoy making as close to perfect ammo as possible. I don’t sort brass. But if I did/start to, I’d be looking at internal volume.
IMO, total weight doesn’t tell you anything worthwhile.
I can't find it any more, but several yrs ago there was a post on Accurate Shooter where someone had compared weight to volume variation. He did the comparison with 223 brass. It showed that there was a 70% correlation between the two. Whether or not that is worthwhile to you is for you to decide.
Variation in mass (weight) is more often than not flash hole size (and remaining burr) and the rim cut. A fresh cutter has a nice clean cut, and an old cutter tends to have micro burrs / imperfections.
After doing factory tours at both Starline and Bertram, they both say the same thing. Small sample size of 2, but it would make sense.
After doing factory tours at both Starline and Bertram, they both say the same thing. Small sample size of 2, but it would make sense.
I shoot 600 yard f class and 90% of our shooter weight their brass and the bullets and about half even weigh their primers. I admit that outside of benchrest or f class it is senseless to weigh any of those components but these sports revolve around suppressing variable factors and internal case volume is certainly one. I personally use a giraud cutter to trim debur and chamfer before I sort so I feel that weight is coorelative or at least indicative to internal case volume and refuse to believe there is .5 grains of variation on the debur at the flash hole.
it’s not that hard to show emperically, so you don’t have to believe. take some shavings from neck turning (no oil) and see how much it takes to make a grain (or .5, or whatever your number is).
i might have to run a demo here tonight now that i think about it...
Yes all three components are weighed independently. Do you actually compete in f class? I am suspecting you don’t because none of what I just said is unusual in this sport. And yes most people in f class have a way of measuring primer seating depth or pressure to mitigate variation.
I think we can conclusively eliminate flash hole variance or burrs as a significant source of case weight variation.
I'm willing to leave the door open that case rim thickness has enough material to significantly affect case weight without affecting volume.
Sincerely
Professor Actual Factual
I'm willing to leave the door open that case rim thickness has enough material to significantly affect case weight without affecting volume.
Sincerely
Professor Actual Factual
I agree that flash hole is certainly not the cause. I also agree that the neck alone could produce the difference and I don't know anything about brass manufacturing but I don't think there's a reason to suspect that the neck is always the part with a variation. I'm sure there is someone who has tested weight vs internal capacity of brass - I'll search accurate shooter some and see what they have.
There are plenty of pretty good sample-sized studies. Correlation is positive but not 1.0 by any means. If you're not willing to volume sort, weight sorting is the next best thing. Marking and culling cases that produce outliers on paper is probably an even better idea.
Wonder if doing a sample size for volume to get a base measurement and then using a combination of weight/volume would be the most time vs return outcome.
Basically come up with the acceptable volume via spot check.
Then weight sort out the outliers. Take those outliers and then check volume. Toss the good volume back and cull the others.
So, instead of doing volume on 100 cases, you check volume on say 10 that didn’t make the weight sorting.
Just spitballing. I think if you’re really chasing the best you can get, you’ll probably be willing to volume sort.
Thats actually the -problem- with a non perfect correlation, which defies initial common sense. Let me give an example:
You take 1 group, and weight sort it into 2, split right down the middle.
Since correlation between weight and volume is good, but not perfect, you now will have 2 groups that on average have much closer volumes.
However, because correlation in the initial group wasn't perfect (you have 1 case with high weight, but low volume), that case now ends up in the high weight group, but still has low volume. All the other cases now have also have higher weight (and volume in general), but this pesky high weight and low volume case remains in that group.
If you want to absolutely get rid of outliers in any distribution, you have no choice but to check every single sample looking for the outlier - because its an uncommon occurrence by definition. The OCD rabbit hole for the BR guys gets really deep, really fast, to be at the top of their game. Its not actually about improving the "average" like PRS shooters might be interested in since we're dealing with 500+ cases. They're often using same 50 or 100 cases 25 times, so it is more about removing outliers in the components that could ruin the "perfect group" (and yes, by definition that also improves the average).
Last edited:
A few years ago I took some cases that were outliers from the + or - .5 grain standard that I used for competition brass, and did ladder tests at 600 yards to see how much difference in vertical there was. These were tested against the competition brass; same neck tension and powder charges. There was virtually no difference in vertical. Did the same test with a different neck tension on the outliers,,,big difference. I do turn my lapua brass to at least 85% cleanup for both mid and LR matches, but gave up on weight sorting brass after the ladder tests. If you stick with quality brass with the same lot #, I don't see where it helps enough to change where you finish.
I research quite a bit and general consensus seems to be weight sorting no effect , consistent neck tension critical. I use Lapua brass and tonight loaded some right from the box . Primer , powder and bullet . Have shot some pretty good groups with new brass and no prep . 6br , 105 hybrid , 29.6 reloder 15 , jammed .01 . Will be shooting 500 tomorrow morning bipod off bench . I’ve got 2 heavy rests but love shooting off bipod . Most definitely takes more concentration and technique IMHO . Forgive my ignorance , but why turn necks if u have a no turn neck barrel ? Assuming that’s what u have .
I have quite a bit of OCD that would not allow that for competition brass...
All my competition rifles have tight neck chambers. Chambers are throated for a specific bullet (my own reamers), and necks need to be turned to give me the necessary gap for good bullet release. The 6 CM I just put together was a barreled action with about 700 rounds down a Krieger barrel with unknown throat and no-turn neck. I removed the ejector and found the lands using a 105 hybrid, so at least there is a starting point. I am using Alpha brass right now, and seems to be very consistent.500 yards will give you a better idea on what to expect for a mid-range match. I have seen too many people that have the "one hole" group at 100 yards find out it won't work when stretched out further. One suggestion may be to load a few on either side of the 29.6 load to check your vertical. You can control vertical through loading practices, the horizontal is reading wind/mirage witchcraft that we all struggle with. Good luck
Actually I have 5 each of 29 to 30.5 in .3 increments ready to go .I have quite a bit of OCD that would not allow that for competition brass...
500 yards will give you a better idea on what to expect for a mid-range match. I have seen too many people that have the "one hole" group at 100 yards find out it won't work when stretched out further. One suggestion may be to load a few on either side of the 29.6 load to check your vertical. You can control vertical through loading practices, the horizontal is reading wind/mirage witchcraft that we all struggle with. Good luck
I have quite a bit of OCD that would not allow that for competition brass...
500 yards will give you a better idea on what to expect for a mid-range match. I have seen too many people that have the "one hole" group at 100 yards find out it won't work when stretched out further. One suggestion may be to load a few on either side of the 29.6 load to check your vertical. You can control vertical through loading practices, the horizontal is reading wind/mirage witchcraft that we all struggle with. Good luck
Shot these 6 groups today at 300, 500 wasn’t available. I’ve been shooting 29.6 , looks like I might want to change that . So 29 or30.5 ?
I’m thinking 29 , tight group and easier on brass ! What’s your opinion ? Bipod off bench. Crosshairs were much more stabilized with bipod than with front rest . Don’t know what that’s all about . I must not have something right . But that’s ok because I like shooting with pod .
Attachments
Last edited:
Thank u sir !
If u had to pick a load for 500 based off these targets , which would u choose ? 29 ?
Similar threads
