Sorting round balls

[rdstrain49]

Yep. The same thing the same way every time = accuracy. Can't do that if there are variables. And as long as I'm on my soap box, practice DOES NOT make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect.

 

[meanmike8665]

Should add pay attention wind and light,too.
Michael

 

[Billnpatti]

When sorting round balls by weight how much difference in weight do you use

I use Dutch's system. My criteria for discarding a ball is if it is more than 1 grain lighter than the heaviest ball. This assumes that the lead alloy that you are using is consistent and you are not introducing a difference in weight due to a change in alloys. I would not worry about sorting them any closer than one grain lighter than the heaviest ball.

The reason for using the heaviest ball as your standard is that as long as the alloy is consistent, the only reason for a ball to be any lighter than the heaviest ball is that it contains a void causing it to be lighter. The heaviest ball contains no voids. I wouldn't worry about weighing any closer than 1 grain because it is highly unlikely that you are good enough of a shot to tell the difference with less than 1 grain variation. Many of us cannot tell a change in accuracy when the ball varies by as much as 5 grains. If you don't have a copy of Dutch's Accuracy System, you owe it to yourself to get a copy. http://blackpowderrifleaccuracy.com/

If you order a copy from him, you may have to give him time to get it to you. But, he will get a copy out to you. He is old and slow. Hell, he is so old, he remembers the day dirt was invented. :haha:

 

[M. De Land]

When sorting round balls by weight how much difference in weight do you use

I use Dutch's system. My criteria for discarding a ball is if it is more than 1 grain lighter than the heaviest ball. This assumes that the lead alloy that you are using is consistent and you are not introducing a difference in weight due to a change in alloys. I would not worry about sorting them any closer than one grain lighter than the heaviest ball.

The reason for using the heaviest ball as your standard is that as long as the alloy is consistent, the only reason for a ball to be any lighter than the heaviest ball is that it contains a void causing it to be lighter. The heaviest ball contains no voids. I wouldn't worry about weighing any closer than 1 grain because it is highly unlikely that you are good enough of a shot to tell the difference with less than 1 grain variation. Many of us cannot tell a change in accuracy when the ball varies by as much as 5 grains. If you don't have a copy of Dutch's Accuracy System, you owe it to yourself to get a copy. http://blackpowderrifleaccuracy.com/

If you order a copy from him, you may have to give him time to get it to you. But, he will get a copy out to you. He is old and slow. Hell, he is so old, he remembers the day dirt was invented. :haha:

 

[M. De Land]

There are reasons for a heavy ball too that is not good and that is from incomplete closure which can happen from debris in the vent lines.
They will often have a flange partially around the parting line.
If you get vent studs then your pouring with to much pressure and these also will be heavy.
Consistent heat in the melt and mold is critical for consistent weight as well either one can vary ball weight.
Balls are the easiest of projectiles to cast uniformly and Mini balls are one of the hardest.
When one considers it, 1 grain is a much larger accuracy influencing percentage of the total weight in a ball than it is in a bullet of muzzle loading size, which is often twice or more as heavy.

 

[M. De Land]

One more thing I have thought about and that is centering the sprue. If there is a void and it almost always happens under the sprue than the the minor weight difference between balls should have virtually no effect on short range accuracy.
About the only time I have wondered about possibly witnessing an actual flier was when competing at the hundred yard bull targets.
Even out there the balls almost always struck were I called the shot.
Also, I have noticed a lot less wind drift from my .54 than with the .45 which seems much more sensitive to it.

 

[meanmike8665]

To me a flier at 50 yards is anything in the 8 ring and at 100 yards the 7 ring. Yes sometimes I can even explain them, but in my opinion they are fliers. What are your called fliers like?
Michael

 

[M. De Land]

Any shot offhand that breaks in the black and lands outside at 100 yards. If you can keep them all in the black at 100 you shot a pretty decent score.
I can see at the break using a six o'clock hold if the ball should be in the black.
Usually at our territorial matches all five in the black will take the match. I forget now but I think it is an eight ring black at 100 yards that will give you a 40. Best I ever did was a 43 but have a friend that once shot a 49 at Friendship and still didn't win. Must have had one of the Marsh brothers competing in that match. :rotf:
That Tim Marsh is a terror with a long gun!

 

[meanmike8665]

:wink: 100 yard off hand is tough. I think anything over a 30 is good, we shoot in Phoenix and the wind is terrible most of the time. High 30's is good. I also shoot in California, is Idaho and Ore. You might ask Pat Reed about shooting in Phoenix and Idaho. The wind blow's everything you the rifle and the ball when shooting off hand.
Bench scores in the high 40's are good. I have placed and even won with 46's and 47's many times. I think scores depend on where you shoot. Fliers are different, they are when everything went right and the ball when somewhere else. I once shot a zero at 100 yards off hand every shot looked ok when it broke and every shot was on the paper! Those were fliers.
Michael

 

[Rifleman1776]

100 yard off hand is tough.

Good scores are possible. But, it requires practice and strength. Holding steady is the key. Reading wind is important but knowing your gun is paramount. Watching the Hawken match on the primitive range can be a humbling experience. Range is an approximate 135 yards in a gully with devilish winds. Many of the scores almost defy belief. :shocked2: My observation has been most of the top shooters are relatively short but muscular younger guys. Here is where the axiom "beware the man with one gun" really is proven.

 

[M. De Land]

Pat is a very close friend of many years and is the guy I was referring to who shot the 49 and did not win.
I shoot with him every month in one match or another.

 

[meanmike8665]

The question was and is, is it worth the time to weight balls. To me the answer is yes! I also pre measure my loads. After I changed my bad habits my scores in everything went up. I will also say, practicing @ 100 yards off hand will improve your scores. I enjoy bench shooting and that is what I mostly practice ( light bench ).

Michael

 

[meanmike8665]

I have had the pleasure of crying at the wailing wall a few times with Pat and Keith. Meaning of crying at the wailing wall, looking at the scores posted for the shoot.

FYI, they usually remember my wife, she shoots better than me.

Michael

 

[cbashooter]

I'm curious, can any of you ball sorters definitively proof that sorting them by weight has any accuracy advantage at all or does it just make you feel better,which might transfer into accuracy enhancing confidence?
I sort 500 grain home cast match bullets to within +/- .75 grains ( 1.5 total) and the culls weighing several grains out side that parameter shoot right along with the sorted, as far as I can tell, out to 600 yards.

A few years back I spent some time weighing and sorting balls and in fact some of my I would intentionally Drill or notch and damage them.
At 50 yards with a reasonably accurate 50 caliber rifle almost all of the groups were well under 2 inches. Sometimes the balls that were damaged shot every bit as well as the ones that were perfect. I have since stopped being so picky.