Weighed a box of 100 Remington Green Label 22LR

[DaveInOroValley]

That post on weighing 22LR got me interested.

Out of the box I had the following results. Be aware this needs to be done in a draft free environment, no fans, A/C running etc since that will affect the weighted result.

15 @ 3.1 Grams

23 @ 3.2 Grams

33 @ 3.3 Grams

21 @ 3.4 Grams

8 @ 3.5 Grams


So the majority fell between 3.2 and 3.4 overall. Now that they're separated I'll eventually take them out a put them on paper to see the difference.

[SharedShots]

IMO, weighing cartridges doesn't take into account the weight variable of each component.

Two cartridges, one weighs more than the other. Which component contributed to the difference or did more than one or all of the components?

Invariably, there is a POI shift between group weights. Therefore you'll need to test each weight group otherwise you have accomplished nothing but using all groups without knowing how each performs as a group relative to the other.

Those are things often not spoken of and only the accuracy of a group is taken as proof something like this works or doesn't work in a real life shooting session. While interesting, it's proof of nothing other than one weighed group shoot to a certain accuracy but without any relationship to other weighed groups. When that is tested, the POI shift, considering the objective is to obtain some accuracy benefit, is meaningless. Then all you are doing is introducing yet another variable, the adjustment of sights or optics to adjust for the POA/POI shift.

What exactly is the difference between a variation of one round to the next and one group to the next when neither are going to shoot to the same POI? All that that has been accomplished is that now you have ammo divided into groups and they all shoot different.

Given the time and energy to find out what really doesn't matter, just buy better ammo. If the idea is to measure group size in the 100ths of an inch then what good is having multiple weighed groups which won't give you the benefit compared to each other?

Find the best ammo you can, buy larger lot sizes and shoot that.

So many of these interesting procedure lack a clearly defined objective and goal past doing it just to do it without any consideration of the practical application, the energy and resources used to obtain the information and yet still not be able to identify what the component variable is that created the weight inconsistency in the first place.

Weighed 500 22lr cartridges and grouped them by weight. Great.

1. Does each group shoot to the same POI? No
2. Did you determine which component contributed to the weight difference? No
3. In a larger sample size do same weight group all perform the same? Don't know.

What was learned? Not much

You see, individual cartridges within the same group can have individual components that do not weight the same. Coming to the conclusion that weight of the cartridge makes any difference is false because over a larger sample like weighed groups might not and often do not perform similarly to each other.

That is the fundamental flaw in these tests. They prove nothing.



















.

[Tango_Down]

I did this with quality .223 rounds of the same brand. I assumed that the bullet, casing and primer all weighed the same and the powder amount was the difference.
Unfortunately I didn't see a difference in group sizes like I expected to see.

[ysr_racer]

All ammo is more accurate than I am. For me, it wouldn't make any difference.

[DaveInOroValley]

Yeah I'm not going crazy doing my 22LR but the previous post that was done by a vendor here on CalGuns did show that when he shot the rounds he had grouped by weight they did show a marked improvement over just shooting random grab as you go rounds.

As a reference since it obviously did make a difference: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/...t=22LR+weighed

The increase in accuracy percentage wise was negligible but I did it just out of curiosity. No big deal either way.

[67Cuda]

Some day, I hope to have this kind of time to burn.

[Killer Bee]

next let's do gas mileage to the range with / without 100rds of .22 onboard

[SharedShots]

Originally Posted by DaveInOroValley

Yeah I'm not going crazy doing my 22LR but the previous post that was done by a vendor here on CalGuns did show that when he shot the rounds he had grouped by weight they did show a marked improvement over just shooting random grab as you go rounds.

As a reference since it obviously did make a difference: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/...t=22LR+weighed

The increase in accuracy percentage wise was negligible but I did it just out of curiosity. No big deal either way.

Yeah. These things have been done before CalGuns existed. Thats the problem with relying on the Internet as the source of all knowledge, nothing before it is remembered except by a diminishing number of people and anything after the year 2000 is a new discovery.

It won't be much longer before the first pistol invented was a Glock and the first rifle was an AR15 and anything before them were just failed curiosities.






.

[ar15barrels]

Originally Posted by SharedShots

IMO, weighing cartridges doesn't take into account the weight variable of each component.

Two cartridges, one weighs more than the other. Which component contributed to the difference or did more than one or all of the components?

Invariably, there is a POI shift between group weights. Therefore you'll need to test each weight group otherwise you have accomplished nothing but using all groups without knowing how each performs as a group relative to the other.

Those are things often not spoken of and only the accuracy of a group is taken as proof something like this works or doesn't work in a real life shooting session. While interesting, it's proof of nothing other than one weighed group shoot to a certain accuracy but without any relationship to other weighed groups. When that is tested, the POI shift, considering the objective is to obtain some accuracy benefit, is meaningless. Then all you are doing is introducing yet another variable, the adjustment of sights or optics to adjust for the POA/POI shift.

What exactly is the difference between a variation of one round to the next and one group to the next when neither are going to shoot to the same POI? All that that has been accomplished is that now you have ammo divided into groups and they all shoot different.

Given the time and energy to find out what really doesn't matter, just buy better ammo. If the idea is to measure group size in the 100ths of an inch then what good is having multiple weighed groups which won't give you the benefit compared to each other?

Find the best ammo you can, buy larger lot sizes and shoot that.

So many of these interesting procedure lack a clearly defined objective and goal past doing it just to do it without any consideration of the practical application, the energy and resources used to obtain the information and yet still not be able to identify what the component variable is that created the weight inconsistency in the first place.

Weighed 500 22lr cartridges and grouped them by weight. Great.

1. Does each group shoot to the same POI? No
2. Did you determine which component contributed to the weight difference? No
3. In a larger sample size do same weight group all perform the same? Don't know.

What was learned? Not much

You see, individual cartridges within the same group can have individual components that do not weight the same. Coming to the conclusion that weight of the cartridge makes any difference is false because over a larger sample like weighed groups might not and often do not perform similarly to each other.

That is the fundamental flaw in these tests. They prove nothing.

Due to the significance of the bullet weight to the complete loaded round weight and the more controlled manufacturing processes involved in making the cases, priming and charging the cases, it goes to reason that the bullet weight variation probably accounts for most of the weight variation on a 22LR cartridge across a 100ct box.
This is merely because the bullet is most of the weight of the loaded cartridge.
The powder and priming compound is around 3 grains.
The case without priming compound (after firing) is about 9.6 grains.
The bullets are typically 36-40 grains.
Therefore the bullet is at least 3x the weight of all the other parts of a loaded cartridge.
We can call the bullet's weight the most statistically important part of the overall weight and therefore it's the statistically going to be responsible for at least 3/4 of the weight variation since it makes up at least 3/4 of the total cartridge weight.

That would explain why the weight-grouped cartridges shoot better groups than ungrouped "control" cartridges did in actual accuracy testing.

[SharedShots]

Originally Posted by ar15barrels

Due to the significance of the bullet weight to the complete loaded round weight and the more controlled manufacturing processes involved in making the cases, priming and charging the cases, it goes to reason that the bullet weight variation probably accounts for most of the weight variation on a 22LR cartridge across a 100ct box.
This is merely because the bullet is most of the weight of the loaded cartridge.
The powder and priming compound is around 3 grains.
The case without priming compound (after firing) is about 9.6 grains.
The bullets are typically 36-40 grains.
Therefore the bullet is at least 3x the weight of all the other parts of a loaded cartridge.
We can call the bullet's weight the most statistically important part of the overall weight and therefore it's the statistically going to be responsible for at least 3/4 of the weight variation since it makes up at least 3/4 of the total cartridge weight.

That would explain why the weight-grouped cartridges shoot better groups than ungrouped "control" cartridges did in actual accuracy testing.

No need to reinvent wheels here. The idea of weighing standard 22LR cartridges goes back many decades ( at least back to the 60s that I know of but probably long before that too) and every once in a while, it comes up. What is well known is that powder charge weights in 22LR for what we call standard and high velocity loads vary by about 10% and more. The smaller the charge weight the more effect even small changes have on performance.

I'd suggest anyone interested check our forums specific to rimfire like rimfire central because they do the deep dive on everything rimfire there.

Your explanation doesn't hold true other than to explain which component weighs more. It doesn't explain how a variation in the lesser weighing component (powder) is less important than a variation in the bullet which weighs many time more. That leads to supporting an assumption based on a correlation and not causation. You're assuming that the small variation in powder charge is less important than a small variation in the larger weight component (the bullet). Without knowing the weights for both the assumption doesn't work. Whether or not that is your intention, it's the result.

If the powder charge is the smaller of the components compared to the bullet being the heaviest how do minor weight variations become statistically more important for the heavier weight when the percentage of even very minor variations affect the powder charge weight as a percentage much more than a similar variation when applied to the bullet? It doesn't work.

Weighing one box of bullets isn't accuracy testing other than what happened with that one box. If the accuracy results can't be duplicated nothing was learned because the reason for the differences are still unknown and based only on assumptions. In other words, anomalies are unaccounted for yet likely present.

Using your own example of the typical weight of the powder charge (again, typical is an assumption all by itself but we'll go with that), it takes less of a variation in that powder's charge weight to make a larger percentage difference than the bullet typical weight which is many times that.

Powder/priming charge weight is 3 grains.
Bullet is 36-40 grains.

Which one has a greater percentage of change if the variation is only 1/2 grain? The significance of a 2.5 grain powder/primer charge weight is statistically more important than a bullet that is 35.5-39.5 grains. A .25 grain of difference in powder weight is statistically more important than a .5 grain variation in bullet weight if we take into account how powder to bullet weight ratios are applied.

What is generally the most important factor with over the counter bought components when reloading for accuracy and all the components are the same brand (all primers are the same, cases, bullets, powder - all the same)? Powder charge.

Powder charge. We accept that all the cases are prepared the same, the bullets are seated the same etc so the most significant variables will be the components. It's powder charge. If the smaller weighing component is the least important or less important factor then explain why when all other components also have variations that it's the powder charge that makes the biggest difference?

As the powder charge becomes less and less weight compared to other components such as the bullet even slight variations have greater and greater influence.

Take note than in the measurements being taken, the results of velocity testing are absent. That is yet another unknown in the testing protocol. A .5 grain variation in powder charge is going to have a lot more to do with velocity in the stated test than .5 grain in bullet weight. Anyone who has reloaded will know this. One reason people chase nodes is to allow for variations while maintaining practical consistency in accuracy. Where are node criteria applied most? Powder charge.

The statistics you are working from as assumptions aren't applicable in this application, there is no foundation of fact other than random correlation.

If the OP disassembled the cartridges and weighed all the components and then used that as the basis for applying some conclusion about weight that would be valid. Then at least, with data indicating that for the lot tested the variations in weight for each component would be known and then so the results of accuracy testing could be reasonably attributed to which component weight made the difference. As it is, no more is known now than before the test. One could also reasonably apply although with no certainty, that boxes from the same lot would be expected to perform similarly when sorted by weight since the standard variations in weight for each component would be known.

All one need do is apply accepted standards of reloading using virgin components to see that powder charge variations cause far more effect than variations in the other components, especially the bullet. If this were not true then we could all vary the weight of the bullets and not change the powder charge and that difference would be statistically more important.

In summary, as I stated before, the test is a curiosity but proves nothing. It's not statistically valid other than a standalone sample that can't be applied to replicate the results. Its a good though and has value as just to identify the inconsistencies prevalent in 22lr ammo manufacture.

Minor variations in powder charge are much more significant than minor variations in bullet weight unless we're into the nose bleed of very high precision reloading. Then, when that is the case, all components save maybe primers are weighed and no one makes assumptions on why one assembled cartridge weighs more than another. Even then, powder charge is what varies the most and affects accuracy to a greater degree in proportion to other components.

This is why it pays to expend the effort and money for match ammo when it's practical and you're chasing the best accuracy you can get. Otherwise, you can weigh 22LR all day and go through hundreds of cartridges and not be able to compare one box to another and predict or explain how two identical weight cartridges perform much differently than each other.






.

[kcheung2]

Wow. So much typing, over so many posts, to discourage people from experimenting.

OP, I'll be succinct (unlike some others): Not something I'd bother with, but I'm glad you did it and posted the results. Most of us aren't know-it-alls so it's informative reading.

[SharedShots]

Originally Posted by kcheung2

Wow. So much typing, over so many posts, to discourage people from experimenting.

OP, I'll be succinct (unlike some others): Not something I'd bother with, but I'm glad you did it and posted the results. Most of us aren't know-it-alls so it's informative reading.

Succinct, like all the posts around here where someone says something like "that sucks, hard pass" and doesn't bother to explain why?

I explained why the results didn't explain the cause and why. Thats more than most who just say things and never backup why they say it.

I'll be succinct, what did you learn from this test?