rgchristensen wrote on May 30^th, 2020 at 6:26pm:


Thanks, Chris.  I'm glad to see that somebody remembered.

Forty plus years ago I had a great deal of experience shooting damaged and flawed bullets.
Since then I became a much better caster.

Back on track -
Not often but sometimes I have saved and loaded my cull match bullets (BPCR-match bullets) on the theory I would like to use them to get more trigger time and practice shouldering the rifle prone.

To my surprise, I would leave the line shaking my head after shooting some of the best groups at 300 meters, 385 m and 500m!  Tight little knots would often show up on the steel silhouette targets or round steel load work up targets.

I think that often, the noise in the air between muzzle and target at these longer ranges trumps any flaws in the bullets. Master class riflemen can read the conditions. 
It is not luck the same few people that win most of the matches.
I do only shoot perfect bases as I have proven to myself that everything that is said about the base flaws on a bullet is true. The rest of the match destined cast bullets are culled for flaws still, but I doubt I am putting many points on the scoreboard by doing that.

-CW

I have never been able to tell any difference between my match grade and my culls. All that tells me is my standards are too high and my casting techniques are satisfactory. 

I have never purposefully damaged any bullets to see if it affected them.

One of our top shooters used an electric Lee ladle to cast LR bullets.  He put a few wheel weights in and left it while he worked around his shop.  When he thought about it, he would fish the clips out of the ladle and pour 3 or 4 bullets in a cold mold.  He added a few wheel weights to the ladle and went about his business while they melted.  I was in shock!    He won lots of our matches with those bullets. 

I thought this was all done and dusted years ago.
I used be into competitive air rifle shooting and remember Walther or it might have been Anschutz doing the same sort of test's over forty years ago and the conclusion was that a nick on the skirt of a pellet wasn't good but the same on the nose didn't affect accuracy.

JLouis wrote on May 31^st, 2020 at 9:06pm:

How many years did Mann take to compile his test?

Wayne, my unscientific testing of bullet weights has led me to this procedure:

I lay out my bullets in sequences as I cast.  I weigh them all, and make a bell curve of sorts on a large piece of paper on the bench, by putting them in groups that are 0.2 grains apart in weight.  Normally they make an almost perfect bell curve, with a slight bump in too light from the ones at the beginning of the casting run.  

I create a "match A" lot out of those that fall within +_0.2 grains of the peak.  I create a "match B" lot from those that fall more than +_0.2  grains but less than 0.4 grains outside of the peak.  I cast about 130 bullets at a time, and generally get two 50 bullet lots out of that, one match A and one match B.  Often I have to fill out the Match B from the Match A.  

The remaining bullets are culled if they show obvious defects or vary - 4 grains from the mean.  All the heavies are kept, they never go more than 2 grains heavy.  The +2 -4 grain bullets from all the casting lots are mixed into sighters and practice lots, without any consideration for sorting.

I have never been able to discern any difference in any of the three weight lots, but have had fliers if I shot some lighter than the -4 grains.  But, weighing to the standard I have chosen gives me confidence that there's not a weird hollow in the bullet somewhere. 

JLouis wrote on May 31^st, 2020 at 3:12pm:

WE shot 2 day 90 - 100 shot matches from 200 to 800 yards at Tacoma, Douglas Ridge and Chilliwack BC 4 times a year.  All on high power targets.  Tacoma used standard NRA, DR used 5V.  Canadian used their HP target.