Reloading Issue: Why do measurements vary?

[BillLarson]

No.
You may meolat bullets for weight however that is NOT the general intention of meplat trimming. Bullet weight variations has the least to do with BC while exterior shape such as length or nose profile to air contact consistency has far more effect.

Length has absolutely no direct corelation to weight in bimetallic bullets, Period. Measuring the variations in the length of the lighter material dies NOT AT ALL equal the weight or dimension of the heavier metal inside. Sorting the outside dimension and/or uniforming the outside dimension does uniform the aerodynamics of the exterior profile though. Uniformity of the jacket wall, centering of the lead core, consistent velocity, bullet runout in cartridge, chamber runout from bore and exterior shape consistency have far more to due with accuracy than +/- the weight a sliver of copper.

I don't mean to be rude, but if you do in-fact meplat (trim) bullets for weight, I would suggest you research how a bullet BC is calculated and much value weight consistency has in that calculation.

So..... we remove material when we meplat bullets.... before repointing....
you say it does not change the weight of the bullet.....
How is this possible....????

 

[WiscGunner]

there are lots of 600,800,900,1000,1200 yd.matches run regularly throughout the country.
All who pay money to compete use the best materials to do it with....

The "best" (read: most accurately made) bullets are not necessarily the "best" (read: applicable design) for the task at hand. Lathe turned solids will ALWAYS be more consistent in at least one dimension than jacketed bullets even when turned on a bent lathe by a blind man. That doesn't mean they are the best tool for every job. Long range needs high BC because of changes in the fluid the projectile travels thru (wind, temp, humidity, etc).

Lathe turned bullets composed of copper weigh considerably less than lead bullets in a protective copper shell. If we could lathe turn solids from a material as dense as lead the would entirely dominant in long rand paper punching.

Hunting bullets sacrifice performance for performance or in other words …there are trade-offs. Bigger open tip, more drag/less bc. Smaller open tip (Berger), higher bc/less reliable expansion.

As far as "All who pay money to compete use the best materials to do it with...." this simply an naive over simplification of life that results an factually inaccurate statement.

Copper has a density of 8.93 g/cm3, Lead is at 11.34 g/cm3 while Gold is 19.30 g/cm/3. So solid gold bullets would be superior ballistically than copper or lead bullets but I don't see anyone shooting those, probably because they aren't "the best material to do it with…". Osmium (22.587 g/cm3) on the other hand would yield the highest BC bullets known to man at twice the weight to size ration of a lead projectile. Haven't seen many people shooting those 6mm 230gr Osmium DTAC's though.

In reality, "All who pay money to compete use the best materials to do it with...."…in a budget! Be it a budget of money or physics or time it is still a budget. There is no reason not to use a 4000x frozen scope for 50yrd benchrest to get THE most accurate crosshair placement possible…except for size, cost, time to acquire target, impracticle use at any other distance or lack of ROI.

It is ALL compromises. Name ANYTHING that is "the best" for "600,800,900,1000,1200 yd.matches" and I can nullify that choice with a better one.

@orkan said it very well. Shooters use what is popular, popular is what people talk about. The more people can afford it the more people that can talk about it. Competition takes repeatition and I don't see many billionaires running "the. Best" anything in matches. There is a reason sponsored shooters use better equipment and consumables than the average shooter and that is simply because the cost to practice and compete goes down.

Rarity, price, availability, time, entry fees, range time, range availability, etc all play into the choice what "All who pay money to compete use the best materials to do it with...."

 

[WiscGunner]

@RidgeTop

I see your picture and politely respond with an equally relevant picture…




A small group have no direct correlation to statistical results from weight sorting. Heck I get lots of groups better than that and I don't sort or weigh anything but powder.

Just thought you might have pertinent input to the discussion along the lines of " in fact I weight sort after all other steps and group my bullets into 17 different weight categories and only load the weight group when there is enough to complete a match coarse of fire. With all other processes being the same, my groups have shrunk 6" @ 5000yrds since weight sorting"

But..thank you for your reply, I did enjoying seeing your picture posted a second time in this thread. Helpful AND educational.

 

[WiscGunner]

So..... we remove material when we meplat bullets.... before repointing....
you say it does not change the weight of the bullet.....
How is this possible....????

Could you please highlight the line where I said Meplat trimming does not change the weight? I think you didn't read my post or missed the point all together.

 

[BillLarson]

Length has absolutely no direct corelation to weight in bimetallic bullets,

 

[WiscGunner]

Again…
"Could you please highlight the line where I said Meplat trimming does not change the weight?"

 

[Harry Knutz]

The "best" (read: most accurately made) bullets are not necessarily the "best" (read: applicable design) for the task at hand. Lathe turned solids will ALWAYS be more consistent in at least one dimension than jacketed bullets even when turned on a bent lathe by a blind man. That doesn't mean they are the best tool for every job. Long range needs high BC because of changes in the fluid the projectile travels thru (wind, temp, humidity, etc).

Lathe turned bullets composed of copper weigh considerably less than lead bullets in a protective copper shell. If we could lathe turn solids from a material as dense as lead the would entirely dominant in long rand paper punching.

Hunting bullets sacrifice performance for performance or in other words …there are trade-offs. Bigger open tip, more drag/less bc. Smaller open tip (Berger), higher bc/less reliable expansion.

As far as "All who pay money to compete use the best materials to do it with...." this simply an naive over simplification of life that results an factually inaccurate statement.

Copper has a density of 8.93 g/cm3, Lead is at 11.34 g/cm3 while Gold is 19.30 g/cm/3. So solid gold bullets would be superior ballistically than copper or lead bullets but I don't see anyone shooting those, probably because they aren't "the best material to do it with…". Osmium (22.587 g/cm3) on the other hand would yield the highest BC bullets known to man at twice the weight to size ration of a lead projectile. Haven't seen many people shooting those 6mm 230gr Osmium DTAC's though.

In reality, "All who pay money to compete use the best materials to do it with...."…in a budget! Be it a budget of money or physics or time it is still a budget. There is no reason not to use a 4000x frozen scope for 50yrd benchrest to get THE most accurate crosshair placement possible…except for size, cost, time to acquire target, impracticle use at any other distance or lack of ROI.

It is ALL compromises. Name ANYTHING that is "the best" for "600,800,900,1000,1200 yd.matches" and I can nullify that choice with a better one.

@orkan said it very well. Shooters use what is popular, popular is what people talk about. The more people can afford it the more people that can talk about it. Competition takes repeatition and I don't see many billionaires running "the. Best" anything in matches. There is a reason sponsored shooters use better equipment and consumables than the average shooter and that is simply because the cost to practice and compete goes down.

Rarity, price, availability, time, entry fees, range time, range availability, etc all play into the choice what "All who pay money to compete use the best materials to do it with...."

Those who win are using Lathe turned copper solids for the King of the 2 mile, Most people don't use them because of the cost, Not because they aren't superior.

 

[WiscGunner]

Those who win are using Lathe turned copper solids for the King of the 2 mile, Most people don't use them because of the cost, Not because they aren't superior.

Exactly my point.

Too many shooters, or people in general "sell from their own pocket" as they say in retail. Subconscious and sometimes conscious mentalities such as If I don't have it, it isn't useful to you. If I can't justify the cost, its too expensive for you. If I can't get it to work, you won't be able too either. If my restaurant doesn't service donuts, no one likes donuts. If I don't read about it in match circles, its no good in hunting. If its not used in 50yrd Benchrest, it can't be good for Ko2M. If its not popular in F-Class, why would you use it in the PRS. If the military doesn't use it, it can be any good for real people. Most of these mental conclusions are simply the brains way of avoiding uncontrollable depression by choosing the "not-inferior" complex.

The list of endless erroneous conclusions of correlation/causation never stop. Most people don't even realize they do them.

 

[WiscGunner]

@BillLarson

You may need to reread my post because what you quoted still does not say meplat trimming doesn't remove weight.

 

[ohiohunter]

Geez… this is still going??

Are you using an arbor press? Is all your brass properly annealed? What is your neck tension? What's your run out? How do you size your necks and are they turned?

Pssst… neck tension

 

[BillLarson]

Consistent bullet dimensions are only one element... Hunting bullets have a totally different design intent than competition bullets which typically results in lower ballistic coefficients than competition bullets.

Many...Many,,, people are using the most accurate bullet for hunting......
I have killed elk,moose and many deer with the most accurate bullets.....