bullet weight or length more important to consistency.

GW Hunter

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
376
Location
Orangevale, Ca
I see where some guys separate their bullets by weight and some separate their's by length to ogive for seating depth. And some do both.... If you were only able to do one of the two, which do you consider more important to producing the most consistent ammo?
 

MagnumManiac

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2008
Messages
2,868
After testing several bullets of either match or hunting style, BTO length is far more critical than weight variance.
I never found weight variance up to .5gr+/- to alter groups at 800mtrs, this was the furthest I could comfortably test at home, any further required a large uphill jump in elevation.
I also found the tip made very little difference at that range, it just didn’t matter how ugly they were, they grouped well.

I have to say that I still sort by BTO, still tip my bullets and DO weigh my bullets out of curiosity, but unless there is a HUGE difference, I don’t take much notice.

Cheers.
:)
 

GW Hunter

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
376
Location
Orangevale, Ca
After testing several bullets of either match or hunting style, BTO length is far more critical than weight variance.
I never found weight variance up to .5gr+/- to alter groups at 800mtrs, this was the furthest I could comfortably test at home, any further required a large uphill jump in elevation.
I also found the tip made very little difference at that range, it just didn’t matter how ugly they were, they grouped well.

I have to say that I still sort by BTO, still tip my bullets and DO weigh my bullets out of curiosity, but unless there is a HUGE difference, I don’t take much notice.

Cheers.
:)
I weigh them also out of curiosity and don’t think I have ever seen more than a .5 gr spread in TTSXs. BTO is what I focus on.... Thanks for the replies...
 

Lefty223

Active Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2016
Messages
40
Using the old Stoney Point tools, I used to measure the base to ogive length of Sierra MatchKings ... but gave up as they were sooooooo consistent within the same lot!

FWIW I saw more variation on the target (where it counts ...) by shooting the OCW method, than ever by bullet weight or ogive length.
 

Zen Archery

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
569
I unfortunately no longer have the space to extend the range where it matters for my .308 and .264 (500 yards) so I no long pay attention to finite details like that.
 

gohring3006

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
4,049
Location
Ohio
In a perfect world both should be held to a absolute minimum.
But length is more important to me. The small variation in weight, doesn’t reflect as much with the chrony, but length has showed up on target at long range. This is all compounded when other factors are thrown in, like variations in case capacity and inconsistent neck tension. In other words, getting all variables as consistent as possible is what I do. Because fixing one and not the others, quickly cancels out all your hard work.
 

Primary

LRH Assistant
Here are some related products that LRH members are talking about. Clicking on a product will take you to LRH’s partner, Primary, where you can find links to LRH discussions about these products.

 
 
Top