Sorting. Is x<y<z???

[Franklink]

Sorting is quite the polarizing topic. I personally try to avoid it like the plague. I've had a fair amount of field target success with "straight from the tin." But also have more flyers with the .22 MRDs than I like to see.

I sorted some by weight around two years ago, weighing every single pellet in 5 tins. It was miserable. It was tedious. It wasn't something I was very interested in doing again, even though I noted a difference in accuracy and claimed I would weigh for high/power long range ft matches. (I haven't been weighing anything since that experiment, too much PTSD from the first go of it, lol).

Sorting by weight (.22/25.4gr Monster RDs)

Aggregation of Marginal Gains?...perhaps Largest pellet weighing experiment I've undertaken. 5 tins of JSB branded .22 25.4gr MRDs. 200ct/tin so 1000pellets. Would be easy to get to percentages if a guy was interested. Didn't stop @ 5 tins bc of that though. Stopped there cuz I was already...

www.airgunnation.com

So, for those true diehards in the pellet weighing arena...do we think large extreme spreads in weight or imperfections in the head/dome has a grater detrimental effect on a pellet flying straight and true?

Ie, does culling out the pellets with imperfections equate to a greater gain in accuracy than primarily focusing on homogenizing by weight?

 

[Solo1]

I started weighing and while I don’t really care to do it it does seem to get rid of the flyers and after doing it im a bit surprised at how great a variation in weight there is in a tin of pellets! I would rather weigh than head size that is even more tedious in my opinion but im sure that would probably increase accuracy especially after running into a couple tins of 10.3 that were really small (4.46-4.47).

 

[wolfmangreg]

Have dabbled in both weight & head size sorting, & even sizing. All are tedious indeed, but I have seen some gains with all three. Still do it, but only to get enough for a match. All of the following observations are anecdotal, nowhere near enough data (or confidence in my "testing protocol") for me to consider it gospel.

- Have tried three different digital pocket scales, & none were repeatable enough to be useful other than catching the occasional really, really light/heavy pellet. With all three, could take 10 pellets that they originally weighed at, say, 50.1 grains, reweigh them later, & have a spread of ~49.7-50.3. No amount of calibration or taring helped. These were all sub-$30 units, so not all that surprising. Using an old RCBS beam scale now. Has great damping, so it really isn't any slower than the digital units. Absolutely repeatable to 0.1 grain with consistent technique.

- Head size variation seems to have a greater effect than weight variation in my experience, especially those that are smaller than the norm. Example, had a couple tins of AA 10.3 pellets that were 85-90% awesome, with 10-15% wild flyers. Like, really wild. Checked on a Pellet Gage & most were 4.51mm, but some were 4.43-4.45mm. Like... 10-15% of them. Once those were culled, resulted in some of the best .177 tins I've had.

- Sizing shows some promise with improving consistency. I use a TR Robb sizer, which leaves the skirt wider than the head, as it should be. Frustrating though, since most of the deviants I've found are too small & the sizer can't fix that.

 

[Jay308]

I started weighing and while I don’t really care to do it it does seem to get rid of the flyers and after doing it im a bit surprised at how great a variation in weight there is in a tin of pellets! I would rather weigh than head size that is even more tedious in my opinion but im sure that would probably increase accuracy especially after running into a couple tins of 10.3 that were really small (4.46-4.47).

I came to the same conclusion, weighing is faster than head sizing and weighing does seem to reduce fliers.

 

[oledawg]

I have spent hours weighting pellets and catagorized them in groups of 1/1000 gram variations (1.640, 1.645, 1.650 etc) and setting aside the extreme high or low 1.62’s or 1.66 etc (which is generally less than 10 out of 200). I have sizers if I choose to play around with sizing (5.49, 5.50, 5.51, 5.52, 5.53) and affects on accuracy. I’ve confirmed head sizes with The Pelletgage and confirmed that with digital calipers. I’ve done all these things many times in the search to improve my scoring and find it utterly boring. Does any of this improve MY accuracy/scoring ? As much as I would like to think my efforts are worth the time spent I’m not really sure they do. I have always done and continue to do a good visual inspection after a spritz of oil as my Lupo Rosso like them a little slippery before they go into the magazine.

What has improved my scoring? Taking that time spent fiddling with pellets to work on MY shooting form. How I am interacting with the Lupo, am I inline with my gun, the scope, the target, how is my scope sight picture before and after the shot break. What about my breathing? Then there is adjusting the trigger position, 1st and 2nd stages, trigger finger placement, correct trigger pull. Working on all those details of shooting form have improved my scoring more than playing with the pellets. I am acquiring more information about how I am affecting the shot placement, able to better identify when I am making a mistake vs. a pellet flyer. Maybe once I attain a high level of shooting skills I may revisit weighting to see if it makes any difference, until then I concede most of my errant shots are my fault.

 

[beerthief]

have not done in about two years just straight from the tin shooting .

 

[NoLimits]

You can measure and weigh and after sorting all pellets are the same.
You will not find the cause for good or bad precision this way.


And now, look and think.

NoLimits

 

[Solo1]

You can measure and weigh and after sorting all pellets are the same.
You will not find the cause for good or bad precision this way.


And now, look and think.
View attachment 393560

View attachment 393562

NoLimits

Not bad not perfectly round. How are you holding the pellet and it looks slightly polished can you do anything with it in this fixture?

 

[NoLimits]

Hello Solo1,
this testing machine is only for viewing the pellet. The pellet has not been polished.
The testing machine rotates round. The hollow turns eccentrically. The two cones are out of round. The pressing tool is slightly displaced, therefore the cones are slightly displaced. You can see it nicely by the pulsating white lights. The head rotates well symmetrically.

With a pencil, the contour can be checked better.

 

[drpietrzak]

Sorting is quite the polarizing topic. I personally try to avoid it like the plague. I've had a fair amount of field target success with "straight from the tin." But also have more flyers with the .22 MRDs than I like to see.

I sorted some by weight around two years ago, weighing every single pellet in 5 tins. It was miserable. It was tedious. It wasn't something I was very interested in doing again, even though I noted a difference in accuracy and claimed I would weigh for high/power long range ft matches. (I haven't been weighing anything since that experiment, too much PTSD from the first go of it, lol).

Sorting by weight (.22/25.4gr Monster RDs)

Aggregation of Marginal Gains?...perhaps Largest pellet weighing experiment I've undertaken. 5 tins of JSB branded .22 25.4gr MRDs. 200ct/tin so 1000pellets. Would be easy to get to percentages if a guy was interested. Didn't stop @ 5 tins bc of that though. Stopped there cuz I was already...

www.airgunnation.com

So, for those true diehards in the pellet weighing arena...do we think large extreme spreads in weight or imperfections in the head/dome has a grater detrimental effect on a pellet flying straight and true?

Ie, does culling out the pellets with imperfections equate to a greater gain in accuracy than primarily focusing on homogenizing by weight?

My testing at 30-yards and 50-yards suggest I get about .20" smaller at 30-yards and .30" smaller at 50-yards if I lube and weight sort AA Field Heavy 10.3 by 1/10 grain.

On other pellets, such as Crossman and Norma, it made no appreciable difference. On AA 8.4 Field doing sorting by weight helped some but not as much as Field Heavies. With H&N 9.57 in 4.51 head size I tried this week weight sorting was not an issue as they were very consistent in the batch I received +/-1/10th grain).

For example:

 

[MEC17670]

I like to weigh my slugs. +/- .05 gr. Alot of fliers seemed to disappear, for the most part, unless a gust of wind comes or a knat gets in my eye.

 

[MEC17670]

Hello Solo1,
this testing machine is only for viewing the pellet. The pellet has not been polished.
The testing machine rotates round. The hollow turns eccentrically. The two cones are out of round. The pressing tool is slightly displaced, therefore the cones are slightly displaced. You can see it nicely by the pulsating white lights. The head rotates well symmetrically.

With a pencil, the contour can be checked better.

View attachment 393606

View attachment 393607

View attachment 393608

Looks like an off shoot of the graph paper and glass pane .
Pretty sophisticated.

 

[Solo1]

So who has found the most consistent digital scale for trying to get pellets at least to .1 grain of each other?

 

[drpietrzak]

This one is pretty good for me.

 

[bigHUN]

View attachment 393562

I visited your site many times in the past two years since I first saw this your tool. Did you finally managed to make the "tube-chuck" for .22 and .25 ???