bullets culls

  • 3.1K Views
  • Last Post 08 February 2010
batman posted this 27 January 2010

I just casted my first batch of bullets for the 357 mag and they ran from 160 to 162

where should I cull + - .5 or should I cull more or less?

I have 160 bullets in the range of 160.6 gr to 161.6 gr and have culled 40 over

and under,I  am just shooting paper and dumb groundhogs.

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
CB posted this 27 January 2010

I'd shoot em all.

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 27 January 2010

I lay them out in rows by weight. You should end up with something resembling a bell curve. On the edges of the curve, you normally see a steep drop off: that's where I segregate the lot.

Attached Files

454PB posted this 27 January 2010

Years ago I fooled around with weight sorting cast bullets and found that it made no noticable difference in handgun shooting. Now maybe for benchrest competition.........

Attached Files

batman posted this 27 January 2010

Thank you .I guess I will just shoot them

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 27 January 2010

You could try 10 of the heavies and 10 of the lightest and shoot two groups. Measure the differences (group size, position) if detectable. Let us know.

Attached Files

sharktown posted this 06 February 2010

Years ago when I first started casting I did the same thing, I wanted all the bullets the exact same weight. It was foolish on my part as I was just shooting paper and long range silhouette with an 8” Dan Wesson supermag.

The 2gr-3gr of weight between GC bullets did not seem to make one bit of difference - the steel targets still fell and the groupings on paper were good enough for me. I just shoot paper now and I still like the results. Just my 0.2 cents.

Regards, Sharktown

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 06 February 2010

I have not EXTENSIVE testing, but the work I have done resulted in fewer flyers when I cull by weight. 

Attached Files

CB posted this 07 February 2010

Pat's advice is right on.

I have shot dozens of five shot groups comparing bullets of uniform weight against; light culls, heavy culls, mixtures of light and heavy culls, and unsorted bullets.

Although if I only look at two or three groups of each, I might get the idea that sorting does some good. But about half of the time the culls outshoot the “good” bullets. So I might get the idea that I should throw away the uniform weight bullets which is silly.

If you make a fair comparison,over many groups, I think you find like I have that sorting bullets by weight is a waste of time at least down to the accuracy level of about one inch at a 100 yards. (the rifle I was shooting when I did the comparisons would only average about 1 MOA).

It doesn't seem likely that much less accurate pistol shooting benefits from sorting by weight.

However, I would be very interested in the results of a well controlled test of a large number of groups that proved me wrong. I'm not to old to learn that I am wrong.

John

Attached Files

LWesthoff posted this 07 February 2010

Seems to me the value of culling (by weight) depends on what you are trying to accomplish. When I was an active, serious bullseye pistol competitor, I shot several thousand cast bullets per year through my '45 Colt's autos. I culled visually; never weight culled. (I got my little gold Distinguished Expert medal in '84.) The reason I didn't weight cull - I knew the pistol and ammo I loaded was capable of much greater accuracy than I could achieve standing up there holding the pistol with one hand - and I had plenty of Ransom Rest targets to prove it. I still tried to put every round - match or practice - in the ten ring, and occasionally succeeded.

Now that I'm shooting CBA bench rest competition (Issue Military Rifle and Production class), I weight cull and try to hold my cast bullets to plus or minus 0.2 gr. That's because shooters with a lot more experience than I have, have said (and shown composite targets to prove it) that weight culling pays off in increased accuracy. (Reference Frank Marshall, for one.) I'm still trying to shoot all tens - or all through the same hole. I am NOT trying to see how sloppy I can be with my casting and loading, and still get by.

If I were casting for plinking or hunting or some other perfectly good reasons, I'd probably be working to some other, different criteria.

Wes

Attached Files

CB posted this 08 February 2010

LWesthoff wrote:

That's because shooters with a lot more experience than I have, have said (and shown composite targets to prove it) that weight culling pays off in increased accuracy. (Reference Frank Marshall, for one.)

Wes,

I would appreciate any references you could give me of tests that show that culling by weight improves accuracy. I have been wrong lots of time before.

I have never been able to find evidence that culling by weight improves accuracy, but about all my tests involve only one caliber and a limited range of bullets. Maybe for other situations it matters.

However, evidence such as a pair of ten shot groups or a few pairs of five shot groups mean absolutely nothing. As I mentioned, I already have the examples of a day's test of a few groups with culls vs. a few groups of uniform weight bullets that seem to show that the"good” bullets were more accurate.

The trouble is that I have an equal number of days when the same test shows that the culls shoot better.

If there are well controlled tests INVOLVING LOTS OF GROUPS that show that culling by weight improves accuracy, we should try to get the author to write it up for the Fouling Shot.

In other discussions of this topic some very good shooters have said that they don't know if it really helps but it gives them confidence and I think this is a legitimate reason.

I don't think anybody is advocating sloppy casting or loading but there are always weight and other variations in everything and the question is how much is too much.

Attached Files

CB posted this 08 February 2010

Oops. My last message got automatically sent while I was still typing. I meant to put my name at the bottom. I didn't mean to try to be anonymous.

John

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 08 February 2010

John A. wrote: the question is how much is too much. Exactly. I know alot of you guys can consistently cast all your bullets, say + or - 1 grain. Therefore, you shoot them all, minus obvious visual defects. My last casting session, out of about 300 Saeco 315s, 20 had obvious visual defects and another 30 or so looked fine, but weighed 3-4 grains less than the average. My Lyman 311299s were worse, with only 220 weighing within + or - 1 grain. These are brand new molds and I'm still trying to find out what works best for them. When I can cast more consistantly, and I have gotten better over the last 25 years or so, then I'll stop weighing rifle bullets. For a long time, the only casting pot I had was a Lee 10#. Smelted all my WW, mixed alloys and cast bullets from it. Now, with a dedicated smeting pot, my alloy is alot more consistant.

I agree with Pat in that Batman's pistol bullets are just fine. I'd shoot them all. I don't weigh  pistol bullets often. I only cast for .41, 44 and 45 and only weigh them if I change something: alloy, casting temp, casting technique, new mold, etc. 

One other thing about weighing bullets. Up until 2 years ago, I used a balance beam scale, which is very tedious. A digital scale speeded up the process so much, I can weigh 300 or so an hour. That's an hour well spent, to me.

Attached Files

fc60 posted this 08 February 2010

Greetings,

You can also measure your as cast bullets with a micrometer to weed out the ones that do not fill the mould correctly. Weigh the ones you select with the micrometer and you will be pleasantly surprised how the weight variable will be improved.

Another plus is you now have bullets that are physically the same in shape. I have found that uniformity in shape plays a significant factor in accuracy.

Cheers,

Dave

Attached Files

LWesthoff posted this 08 February 2010

Re John A's request for references to tests that show culling by weight improves accuracy; the first reference that comes to mind is Frank Marshall Jr.'s piece in the NRA CAST BULLET publication, entitled “Orientation and Selection: Two Keys To Accuracy.” I'm pretty sure there are some others; I'll have to look them up.

One thing's for sure, culling by weight will give you some peace of mind regarding the presence (or absence) of any serious hidden internal voids. And, as Dollar Bill points out, with the availability of electronic scales today, weight culling really isn't very hard to do.

Wes

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 08 February 2010

Hi... 28 years ago I knew all about cast bullets ... but now I only think maybe I spot trends and indications ... (g) ...  One good thing about getting old is that you constantly discovering new things ( sigh g ) .

I recommend base squaring, a collet lathe and a very high rake ( sharp ) tool, will improve most bullets, but not all of a batch.  Inspect bullet bases after cutting them square.  My experience is that the scores from cut bases will improve, not neccessarily the total group size ( g) ... but keep  in mind that in bean can shooting, the score is what is important, not the 2 widest shots ( ... misses are misses anyway ...   ) ...

I recommend weighing cases, not the bullets, if time is short; you only have to weigh the cases once, keep them in batches. 

ken at deltawerkes, iowa ...   2 answers for every question, no waiting ...

Attached Files

hunterspistol posted this 08 February 2010

  Batman, I'll cut thru it for you. If you weigh to make match bullets, anything under 100 grains is usually -+.5, at 100 to 115grains it's -+.7 until you get up past 130 grains and then it's -+ 1.0 grain.

     The guys gave some really good guidelines for establishing your own criteria for bullet weight.  These are just some of mine, roughly, because sometimes the alloy consistency is better or worse. If you sort, sharp bullet bases are more influential on accuracy.

     Just remember to enjoy what you're doing, it's your ballgame.

    Ron

Attached Files

Close