What would be a reasonable accuracy tolerance for BR bullets?

[sicero]

In other words there has to be some sort of industry standards as to the known cappabilities of hunting bullets, premium bullets target bullets. I know the larger bullet Manufactures have underground shooting ranges to do some testing but there still has to be some uncontrolable variables.Could we be sometimes be shooting groups better than the bullet is actually cappable of? I am not reffering to me of course. I was just remembering back to touring the Hornady plant this summer and of course wishing I would have asked more questions.As I remember at one station the tour guide mentioned taking bullets off the line and shooting them. If they shot a certain size group they were deemed within tolerance and the machine continued to run. Inquiring minds want to know. Kenny

[WayneShaw]

The acuracty expectations for true BR bullets is 100% perfect. No mass produced bullet can approach this level of accuracy. Maybe 20 years ago they could, but the level of accuracy being shot today is simply awesome, even scary at times.

Use a bullet for which it is made, hunting, varmint, etc. But when it comes to BR competition, anything less than a perfect BR bullet will loose.

[sicero]

I find that very interesting. Kenny

[Al Nyhus]

Wayne has pretty much summed it up. Surprisingly, the one thing in a BR bullet that doesn't seem to make much difference is minor weight variances. Given the current level of BR competition, nothing can be left on the table...'cuz the competition sure won't make that mistake.

[Rodgervich]

Could we be sometimes be shooting groups better than the bullet is actually cappable of?

My Savage 22-250 has 2 loads that will shoot 55gr Ballistic Tips 5 shots CTC less than .10" at 100 yds. These don't qualify as "benchrest" bullets and the rifle has a factory barrel. I have shot this rifle the most of all that I own and know how to shoot it pretty well. I doubt I could do the same with yours, or most of the rest of mine. I would answer your question with a "yes", but cannot say exactly how. It may be more of "should be capable of" rather than "actually". Some folks can likely shoot a particular bullet better than someone else but chances are good that the person could do that with any bullet/load. I doubt that any amount of case prep, benchrest action and the finest barrel could overcome a non concentric jacket/core but it would probably shoot it better than an off the shelf Remchester barrel. Same way a competitive shooter could shoot a tighter group than a twenty rounds a year deer hunter with any rifle.
The big bullet manufacturers I am sure qualify the bullets on a relative scale. If I were doing it all variables would be constant, barrel, , scope, machine rest, brass (weight segregated), primers (tens of thousands from same lot), powder (again, large amounts from same lot), single set of dies that never get adjusted once set. Every round would be as identical as physically possible and the groups would be compared to an initial grouping from a set of bullets that at one time was deemed "acceptable" by some other set of standards. As we all know by now, changing the gun, powder, etc. will change a group size so it can only be judged in a relative way.
They check the jackets and cores and each step along the way to some QC standards but ultimately the finished bullet must be fired to see how it shoots.

[Pappy]

All the BR bulletmakers try to get perfect uniformity, and it's a never-ending task. Every lot of jackets (I only use Berger J4s) is different, and unfortunately, sometimes there are differences between cases and buckets of the same lot. It keeps a guy alert. The variation in jackets from lot to lot means the dies have to be reset for each new lot, and also if there's a change in core weight or alloy. I try to find the core weight that makes the noses come out the best for each J4 lot. The jacket weights are mostly plus or minus a tenth of a grain, but if your cores are uniform you can feel it when you seat the core if a jacket is heavier or lighter than that. Then you set it aside and weigh it later to see if you were right.

[R.G. Robinett]

Ultimately, the quality of BR bullets is measuered in the heat of competition - the level of which, as pointed out by Wayne,often borders on unimaginable - during "CONDITIONS", as opposed to in the dead calm of a tunnel or AM/PM stagnation. Active BR competitors are ruthlessly demanding - an entire big milage/big $$$ trip hinges upon every bullet! Equipment lists (often published with match reposts) in the BR journals are a good quide to the quality of bullets. However, these equipment lists may overlook the occasional "newcomer"; they are not the end all - just a very good yardstick.

The two primary contributers to bullet quality: 1) Jacket quality - total indicated run-out (TIR) should be less than 0.0003" (Most "lots" of J4 jackets are well under this wall thickness variation);2) Point-up die concentricity - many dies feature non-concentric shanks/nose sections; the resulting eccentricity is a precision killer. In general, "steel" dies are [relatively] immune from this potential problem; with carbide dies, Niemi Engineering is the best insurance policy;Bill's dies are simply THE BEST.

We could argue the various hypothetically correct/incorrect methods of core lubing/squirting/seating/washing/etc, however, without the first two attributes, the balance of the discussion becomes moot.

Once a bullet maker becomes familiar with his dies, and religiously moniters jacket quality (TIR, length, etc.), very little "testing" is necessary - our customers will not accept anything short of winning potential! Our reputations ride on every shot. I do 90%+ of my testing in either IBS or NBRSA registered tournaments, where the clock is ticking, the wind and mirage are doing what they will, and there are NO alibis. After some interval of experience, one becomes CONFIDENT in his ability and in his dies/gauges . . .

Further, hand swaged bullets afford the maker THREE opportunities (squirting/seating/pointing) to cull any "odd" feeling core or bullet - this "tactile judgement" is something uniquely human; I believe this attribute
substantially separates man from machine: there are no culls in a box of BR quality bullets. The "funny feelers" may prove fine, but we don't sell them.

Keep 'em ON the X! R.G.

[Bryan]

I agree with Randy 100%, but on the 3 opportunities the bullet maker has, point forming is the one that has the least number of screw-ups. Usually this is a folded jacket, and with proper setup and lube, almost never happens. Core seating is the single most important step in making a good bullet, and I think 99% of bullet makers would agree on this. I had to quit making bullets about a year ago, but at the time I was actively working on an "assisted" press for point forming. The idea was to use the setup for varmint bullets initially, and work it into the BR bullets when I was totally satisfied with the results.
The setup is basically the press and mount for the assist being an integrated unit, utilizing a linear actuator and limiting switches. One button would raise the ram and stop it close to the die, the next would take the ram over center (which is how I set my dies) and return the ram to the bottom.
Production would be increased slightly, but the big thing is reduction of fatigue.
Randy, have you ever looked into this kind of setup? and have you seen Bob Dodd's new swaging press?
Bryan

[R.G. Robinett]

Originally Posted by Bryan

I agree with Randy 100%, but on the 3 opportunities the bullet maker has, point forming is the one that has the least number of screw-ups. Usually this is a folded jacket, and with proper setup and lube, almost never happens. Core seating is the single most important step in making a good bullet, and I think 99% of bullet makers would agree on this. I had to quit making bullets about a year ago, but at the time I was actively working on an "assisted" press for point forming. The idea was to use the setup for varmint bullets initially, and work it into the BR bullets when I was totally satisfied with the results.
The setup is basically the press and mount for the assist being an integrated unit, utilizing a linear actuator and limiting switches. One button would raise the ram and stop it close to the die, the next would take the ram over center (which is how I set my dies) and return the ram to the bottom.
Production would be increased slightly, but the big thing is reduction of fatigue.
Randy, have you ever looked into this kind of setup? and have you seen Bob Dodd's new swaging press?Bryan

Hello, Bryan; Yes and Yes.
1) For BR bullets, fatigue is part of the deal; my customers do not like paying for folds! Since I began selling bullets, I have had exactly TWO returned. Further, regardless of whether they might shoot just fine, I cull every "odd" feeling bullet; my reputation rides on that. Do you do a visual inspection of every finished bullet?

2) I had a prototype of BOB's press for a short while: he ignored the geometry info which I had provided (ram travel was too short for thirty caliber bullets) and blamed me and Walt Berger for the error! I returned the press (I believe in January 06) and have never heard another peep about them. R.G.

[Bryan]

I have seen, but not used Bob's press. Looks like a very rugged piece of equipment. Maybe some changes are in the works.
As far as culling the funny feeling bullets during point forming, I commend you for your dedication. Your reputation rides on each and every bullet you make, and my hat is off to you. I'd be willing to bet those culls are very, very few though. I still have about a thousand of your 6mm's, and have tested nearly everyone's bullet. Yours are certainly top shelf!
Bryan