I don't own firearms merely to provide sustinance for my family. I shoot and handload because I enjoy it. Therefore, I will continue to waste my time segregating my brass by weight, sorting brass by case wall and neck wall thickness, uniforming primer pockets, deburring flash holes, spend countless hours playing with my dies to eliminate runout, continue using neck turners, in-line bullet seaters and arbor presses for my varmint and target rifles, and anything else I can think of that might help diminish group size, even if only barely measureable.

Some shooters are just luckier than others. They might own an off the shelf factory rifle and shoot only factory ammo, and still shoot itty bitty groups. I've never been that lucky. All my rifles are custom and I expect itty bitty groups. They won't do it by themselves. Those rifles only shoot well when I do my part and feed them the best diet I can. Even then, if I'm having a bad day doping the wind, it may be all for naught. That won't keep me from wasting my time doing all those little things that I believe can add up to small decreases in group size by eliminating variables.

I've heard countless shooters brag about the tiny groups their rifle shoots. What I mostly hear about is the best group only. I rarely hear about the groups that had a "flier". I don't get to see a composite of their last 20 5-shot groups with that rifle under any and all conditions. It all counts, so I do my best to keep consistency a major part of reloading. Like I said, I really enjoy handloading, so I really don't mind wasting my time.


There! Now I feel a lot better.

Very good post, SST. And I agree with your concept entirely. And I admire your presentation of the fact that it was YOUR way of doing things and it pleased YOU thus YOU were going to continue to do it that way. A much better post than Bob338s where he implied that if you don't do it like he does you lack his level of skill and ability and probably came from the shallow end of the gene pool. Most of us are too guilty of that.

When I started reloading, one of my mentors told me that there are reloaders that reload to shoot and some that shoot to reload. And there was room for us all. I agree with him.

I do have one serious question: After you do these exacting preps, you do "test fire" the ammo don't you? I mean, you don't prep a bunch of brass and then go to a shooting match with ammo that has never been fired do you? Even if you do all of this work, don't you still have a number of fliers the first time you shoot the ammo? My point is when I get a new sack of brass, I pretty much eye ball it and then load it and shoot it. This first firing is to fire form the brass, weed out any hidden flaws and to get rid of some of the 1/4lb cans of powder I've got sitting around. It also gets rid of those flash hole trap doors that are said to be so prevalent in domestic brass but I've really never seen. After the first firing, I trim the case to length, de-burr the mouth and turn the neck (unless its hunting ammo). Now I load it with a precise charge and a good bullet and fire the ammo. Any unexplained fliers are tossed into the brass bucket. We are now, pretty much, at the same point. I've just gotten to do a lot more shooting than you.

I tried for years to get a 1" group, that I kept reading about on the internet, but seldom if ever saw anyone get one at the Seattle area ranges.

Then I started getting 1" groups.
I posted here asking what I did right, and listed 16 new things I had done for accuracy, and 12 things I had also done before.
http://www.accuratereloading.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB6&Number=288866

I didn't and don't have enough time to figure out what was causing all the good results.

Now I read this thread and realize I had done 17 new things for accuracy and forgot the weighing of brass.

Since then I have been getting 1/2" groups without weighing, so I gave that up.


Now upon reading the above threads, I am amazed at how poor a job I do of using science and logic to get accuracy, and I am not the only one.
And the certainty of some of the statements is laughable.

--
A society that teaches evolution as fact will breed a generation of atheists that will destroy the society. It is Darwinian.

FWIW, I recently started sorting cases by neck wall thickness variation. Those that vary less than .001� are for groups and load testing, those over .001� are for off hand, practice, sighters, etc.

I have found that this one step cut groups in an out of the box M700 .300 Win. Mag. almost in half. What was a 1 �� inch shooter became a 7/8� shooter. In an extremely accurate Pac-Nor barreled .270 and two other accurate Pac-Nor barreled .30-06's it really seems to have eliminated the unexplained flyers, but I haven�t done any side by side comparison tests (sorted vs. unsorted) to determine this � just an observation based on targets fired with the same loads from a while ago and recently after neck sorting.

Like another poster said, if you want to do something just because you want to, no problem.

Just tossing in my two cents, but I have found that neck sorting has paid the single biggest benefit for me in relation to the time spent. BTW, I use a Sinclair case neck concentricity gauge and it is both fast and accurate.

Milanuk:
I think we are using the word hold differently. I mean keep your shots with in two minutes as a result. I believe you are meaning holding the aiming point. And you are correct in that normal shot dispersion requires a tighter hold on aiming/firing to produce the results.
And again your are right to point out that most highpower shooters,even those at the marksman level,have equipment that is very capable. In fact more capable than most of the shooters.
That is my point. All but the most proficent shooters would be much better off putting more time behind the trigger rather than at the scales.

Your allusion to the Palma teams I feel is not relevant to the average shooter. As you know team members are selected from the best long range shooters each country can find. Furthermore they fire from 800 900 and 1000 yds. Firing from the prone position with iron sighted rifles that are very finely tuned. and shooting ammo not developed for each specific rifle. (Milanuk I included the above so those not familiar with Plama competitions could follow.)

<[{ my soap box }]Whow they shoot ammo that's not custom taylored for each gun and can hit anything at all? Especially at those distances. How did they do that?>

I truly feel the weighting of rounds had more psycological effect than any thing else. The result of good scores is very difficult to prove as the result one or the other though.

The bottom line for me is the average shooter, someone who must ask if weighting cases is needed to shoot well, should be spending time practicing their shooting techniques.
muck

It may only make a minute difference in some situations, but I know that with my 338/378 there's two case variants that differ from eachother by about 70 grains. Everything within the two variants are within a few grains of eachother but the difference between the variants themselves is huge.

Well, overall, I think we more or less agree. I do believe that if someone wants to do it, then have at it. Let them decide if it is worth the time by what they see on the target. I guess the blanket statements about being a waste of time just got me a little too riled

As far as the weighing of loaded rounds... I admit I don't understand fully how that would be more productive than sorting individual components (if it was available to them, which it isn't), but I believe (not 100% sure) that it has been tested w/ chronographs and I think it gave lower ES and/or SD. Considering the caliber and distance, every little bit helps out, it seems. But again, this is at International level competition, not the average Joe tuning his varmint rifle, or even the average HP shooter trying to climb the ranks.

Monte

with my 338/378 there's two case variants that differ from each other by about 70 grains
WHOAAA!! Are they the same mfr?

I've seen some pretty big (25 grains or so) variations between R-P and Norma 300 W'by brass, but, wowzer, 70 grains!!

R-WEST

R-West, you're correct. They're not the same mfg. Everyone generally assumes that Norma makes all of Weatherby's cases, atleast the big ones anyway, but I don't believe that's 100% true. I can tell which of the two categories the brass fits in by looking at the headstamp, there are two different lettering styles, so it's never really a problem. Also, you can tell by the color of the cases that the composition of the brass is different as well. I think the heavy group weighs in at just under 400 grains per case, and the others are around 320-330. My numbers may be off, but the difference isn't.

When it's all said and done, most of the case prep work we do makes only incremental differences in group size, if at all. Doing only one of the many known steps may or may not show any appreciable difference. These minute differences are more likely to show up on a very accurate rifle than an off-the-shelf production factory rifle, and only when a good load has already been found, and environmental elements, like the wind, are not part of the equation. It's quite common to notice a small reduction in group size when several of the common case prep steps are taken, not even knowing which ones "did the trick", or maybe it took all of them to make a noticeable difference.

As I stated earlier, I do everything I possibly can to enhance consistency in my loads. Who knows? Maybe some of the steps I take do absolutely nothing to enhance accuracy. But, then again, I don't consider my brass prep work to be tedious. I don't even consider it work. I enjoy doing it. If I'm home in the evening and nothing is on the boob tube that interests me, I'll adjourn to my reloading room to engage in one of my favorite hobbies, handloading. None of the time I spend at my reloading bench keeps me from spending time at the range. Nobody gets to spend more time shooting than me because of the time I spend playing around in my reloading room. That's one of the defining qualities that makes me a true gun nut, and I'm proud of that.

I reload for target shooting, so I try to make every round, or group of rounds, and consistant as possible. I think weighing the brass is beneficial to this process, and I weigh all my brass. I find it quick and easy with an electronic scale (possibly the best use for electronic scales ever made), and therapeutic as well. I doubt it has any benefit at all for hunting loads, but if it's good enough for Fred Sinclair and David Tubbs, it's good enough for me too.
One experience stands out for me, where weighing the cases would have probably affected the outcome: I was loading some .17 Remington ammunition for testing. I had a lot of new, unfired brass, and about 40 or so cases from some store-bought ammunition. I sized the once-fired "store" cases and loaded them, with a powder charge somewhere near the "maximum" data in the book I was using. I didn't weigh those cases, figuring they'd be about the same as my new brass, and forgot all about it.
At the range, all went well until I got over to the last 20 rounds. I fired one round, and the noise was terrific! The bolt was very hard to unstick. "What the hell??" I tried another one, same thing! This time, the primer ruptured and the firing pin was stuck in the bolt! End of session!
When I took the remaining rounds apart, I found the brass in these rounds weighed significantly more than the new, bulk brass I purchased. I got out the electronic scale, located all the "heavy" brass, and scrapped it!
Regards, George.