I can account for Chucks MADNESS! It may have rubbed off on me a little bit. I spend hours during the week sorting my pellets with the same process. All I can say is IT WORKS! I shoot my best groups with his method of pellet/shooting prep. Is he crazy, probably
...but a great friend and a straight shooter.
...but a great friend and a straight shooter.Upvote 0
There's too much lead in your punch bowl... or is that your cereal?
Either way there's your problem
Either way there's your problem
Upvote 0
The original post made no mention of caliber, so I wasn't aware you were soliciting advice only relating to .25. Moot point anyway, considering your question isn't caliber-specific.
All the trophies pictured are State and National Champion field-target awards, so all were shot with .177.
However I also have State Champion and National Record air rifle and pistol awards captured with 14.3 grain .22 JSBs, and (club) Match Winner and ten-in-a-row awards captured with 18.1 grain .22 JSBs and 34 grain .25 JSBs.
Again, all with ammo straight from the tins.
All the trophies pictured are State and National Champion field-target awards, so all were shot with .177.
However I also have State Champion and National Record air rifle and pistol awards captured with 14.3 grain .22 JSBs, and (club) Match Winner and ten-in-a-row awards captured with 18.1 grain .22 JSBs and 34 grain .25 JSBs.
Again, all with ammo straight from the tins.
Upvote 0
Personally I think ANY effort to maximize outcome, and mitigate deficiencies, that has at least a modicum of plausible benefit, is worth the time. If for no other benefit than a placebo, and/or factoring out probable causes of failure. Howeverrrrrr.... if your wife gouges your eyes out for cluttering up the kitchen table... you might shoot worse.
Upvote 0
Hmmm, just to be clear...
A weight difference of 2.5% will have roughly a spread in velocity on its own of 2%...removing that variable is quite HUGE depending on the range you're shooting, at 10-50 yards that may only correlate to a change in drop of .07", but at 100 yards that same drop changes to .66"...over 1/2 MOA.....
For for Field and Target that is generally shot between 10-50~ yards, that .07" max change in drop from pellet weight is 1/7th of a MOA...
So...if you adhere to the math and want to reduce your spread quite significantly at range, its best to weight your pellets...hands down. Can take you from 1 1/2 MOA to 1 MOA...or even SUB MOA...
A weight difference of 2.5% will have roughly a spread in velocity on its own of 2%...removing that variable is quite HUGE depending on the range you're shooting, at 10-50 yards that may only correlate to a change in drop of .07", but at 100 yards that same drop changes to .66"...over 1/2 MOA.....
For for Field and Target that is generally shot between 10-50~ yards, that .07" max change in drop from pellet weight is 1/7th of a MOA...
So...if you adhere to the math and want to reduce your spread quite significantly at range, its best to weight your pellets...hands down. Can take you from 1 1/2 MOA to 1 MOA...or even SUB MOA...
Upvote 0
I agree but believe it is more complicated than that single parameter. Add in possible variations in head size as well (resistance could increase/decrease velocity and possibly harmonics) and in total it all COULD become significant, and COULD be significant at shorter ranges. Not that it WILL become significant but that it MIGHT. If it could eliminate unexpected fliers it would seem to be worthwhile.
Upvote 0
"are you saying its a waste of time and useless to weigh or sort pellets?" Not sure I'm saying that, Sonny.
Guess what I'm getting at is, since pellets straight from the tin are good enough to capture titles and records at the highest levels of competition, some shooters might consider heavier investments in trigger-time, rather than drudgery. Of course I realize some folks might actually "enjoy" weighing/measuring/sorting/washing/lubing pellets; but find it hard to believe anyone wouldn't enjoy shooting even more! And some folks enduring such drudgery to shave a few thousandths off their group sizes might find more actual shooting improves their skills enough to shave hundredths or tenths off their group sizes.
But I've always favored play over work.
Guess what I'm getting at is, since pellets straight from the tin are good enough to capture titles and records at the highest levels of competition, some shooters might consider heavier investments in trigger-time, rather than drudgery. Of course I realize some folks might actually "enjoy" weighing/measuring/sorting/washing/lubing pellets; but find it hard to believe anyone wouldn't enjoy shooting even more! And some folks enduring such drudgery to shave a few thousandths off their group sizes might find more actual shooting improves their skills enough to shave hundredths or tenths off their group sizes.
But I've always favored play over work.
Upvote 0
I just supplied you with the math that proves weighing pellets will shave TENTHS off your group size when shooting at 100 or more yards...and HUNDREDTHS at 50 or less...please don't misinform people by claiming weighing pellets only shaves 'thousandths' off your group size...
Upvote 0
I think you and Ron are talking past each other. You are assuming that the only kind of shooting is shooting groups at 100 yards from a benchrest. Ron is referring to shooting offhand in target disciplines where trigger control, stance, breathing, stability of hold, and reading the wind-- things one has to learn by incessant practice-- are far more important than one hundredth of a group size.
Ron has a habit of being facetious, to the point of being provocative, but I don't think I would ever say he is "misinforming" anyone. That wall full of silver he's got, and the guns with which he won many of them, gives him a degree of authority very few of us have.
Upvote 0
Ron has a habit of being facetious, to the point of being provocative, but I don't think I would ever say he is "misinforming" anyone. Thank you Functor; I see 'you get it'.
I guess that means no? Correctamundo, Sonny. Accuracy improvements are undoubtedly possible from weighing/measuring/sorting/washing/lubing pellets. It's simply a matter of how much return, at what cost.
I just supplied you with the math that proves weighing pellets will shave TENTHS off your group size when shooting at 100 or more yards…and HUNDREDTHS at 50 or less…please don't misinform people by claiming weighing pellets only shaves 'thousandths' off your group size… I misinformed no-one Ack; and would venture to say my statements at least as accurate as your math puzzle, as proven by my own actual testing.
In as-scientific-as-I'm-able testing at 100 yards with my extremely-accurate .25 Cricket, I shot three consecutive five-shot groups with JSB Exact King Heavy (33.95 grain) pellets varying .9 grain against three consecutive five-shot groups with those pellets sorted to within .1 grain. I couldn't believe the .9 grain pellets shot tighter groups, so repeated the test with the same results. Still in disbelief, I then retested using ten-shot groups; and again the inconsistent-weight pellets outshot the consistent pellets! Hard to believe, but that's reality.
Suffice to say I've always preferred putting faith in personal experience(s), and this accuracy experiment blew hell out of my faith in theory, conjecture, and/or others' experiences.
FWIW, now convinced weight-consistency is almost a non-issue (within reasonable limits, of course), I believe head-size consistency more important than weight consistency to the accuracy equation. "Your results may differ"; I'd love to hear details of your testing.
I guess that means no? Correctamundo, Sonny. Accuracy improvements are undoubtedly possible from weighing/measuring/sorting/washing/lubing pellets. It's simply a matter of how much return, at what cost.
I just supplied you with the math that proves weighing pellets will shave TENTHS off your group size when shooting at 100 or more yards…and HUNDREDTHS at 50 or less…please don't misinform people by claiming weighing pellets only shaves 'thousandths' off your group size… I misinformed no-one Ack; and would venture to say my statements at least as accurate as your math puzzle, as proven by my own actual testing.
In as-scientific-as-I'm-able testing at 100 yards with my extremely-accurate .25 Cricket, I shot three consecutive five-shot groups with JSB Exact King Heavy (33.95 grain) pellets varying .9 grain against three consecutive five-shot groups with those pellets sorted to within .1 grain. I couldn't believe the .9 grain pellets shot tighter groups, so repeated the test with the same results. Still in disbelief, I then retested using ten-shot groups; and again the inconsistent-weight pellets outshot the consistent pellets! Hard to believe, but that's reality.
Suffice to say I've always preferred putting faith in personal experience(s), and this accuracy experiment blew hell out of my faith in theory, conjecture, and/or others' experiences.
FWIW, now convinced weight-consistency is almost a non-issue (within reasonable limits, of course), I believe head-size consistency more important than weight consistency to the accuracy equation. "Your results may differ"; I'd love to hear details of your testing.
Upvote 0