Segregating Cases by Weight

This is a specially-adapted excerpt from the forthcoming book, “Top Grade Ammo,” by author Glen Zediker, owner of Zediker Publishing. Click here to order from Midsouth.

by Glen Zediker

Weight is another common means of case segregation. I can’t imagine doing this job without an electronic scale, because I have done this job without an electronic scale.

A bag full of new brass is a wonderful thing. Sorting is optional, but worthwhile to get the very most from it.
A bag full of new brass is a wonderful thing. Sorting is optional, but worthwhile to get the very most from it.

Most set a percentage tolerance for weight, not so much seeking identical weights. Otherwise, you’ll have to sort a lot of cases. The physically larger something is, the more variation can exist. 1% is pretty harsh; 1.5% is more reasonable; 2% is commonly used. You’ll figure out the viability of your segregation criteria after you go through a few dozen cases. If you have 10 piles, then the criteria might be too harsh. If you use a percentage, certainly then larger caliber cases will have a greater overall weight tolerance/variance than smaller ones. Think of it as: 1% in a 90-grain .223 is 0.90 grains, and in a .308 Win., it’s 1.7 grains, or about double.

No doubt — cost is the first segregation criteria. The author says components from Europe are better than domestically produced items. But at what cost. The author has used a lot of Norma and Lapua brass, and it’s extra-high-quality, which means low-tolerance/variance. It’s also soft and heavy. I’d be willing to spend for it, but I prefer to sort other brands that are more suitable for use in a repeating action of any type. Hours and hours of doing this showed me that Norma, for example, gives about 5% more “really good” cases compared to the domestic brand I favor.
No doubt — cost is the first segregation criteria. The author says components from Europe are better than domestically produced items. But at what cost. The author has used a lot of Norma and Lapua brass, and it’s extra-high-quality, which means low-tolerance/variance. It’s also soft and heavy. I’d be willing to spend for it, but I prefer to sort other brands that are more suitable for use in a repeating action of any type. Hours and hours of doing this showed me that Norma, for example, gives about 5% more “really good” cases compared to the domestic brand I favor.

This segregation method or means is nearly universally adhered to by NRA Long Range competitors. The belief is that weight reflects on case capacity: heavier cases, lower capacity; lighter cases, higher capacity; and, mostly, same-weight cases, same capacity. Most are not looking for “light” or “heavy,” just “the same.” There’s a correlation between wall thickness consistency and weight consistency, I’m sure, but it’s not direct.

Don’t confuse the ultimate results from an exercise in segregation. We will get what we look for, but that’s all we know for sure. No doubt, the combination of segregation by weight and wall thickness should result in the best of the best, but, dang, that might also result in a very small pile.

Important: Fully prep all the cases prior to weight segregation! The reason is a matter of reliability in the result. Primer pocket uniforming, length trimming, chamfering, and inside flash hole deburring all require removal of brass. The amounts will vary in each instance. I’ve collected and weighed enough shavings from prepping before and can tell you that, if you’re segregating by fine increments, you’re kidding yourself if you don’t follow this advice. The amount of brass removed does not at all directly reflect on the quality of a case because the areas where the weight is originating don’t influence the “overall” quality. But it can influence the scale. Which is the criteria, right?

Weight segregation is easy, but tedious. Establishing criteria limits (defining the contents of each pile) comes mostly from experience in checking examples of the stock being used. Just weigh as you go and label as you learn. Get some plastic containers and label them, after deciding on the range you’re sorting by, and toss the case into the appropriate bin when you pick it from the scale pan. Keep in mind that the goal is to find “light” “heavy” and “okay.” Most shooters I know who weight-segregate are looking for three piles and, of course, the occasional culls.
Weight segregation is easy, but tedious. Establishing criteria limits (defining the contents of each pile) comes mostly from experience in checking examples of the stock being used. Just weigh as you go and label as you learn. Get some plastic containers and label them, after deciding on the range you’re sorting by, and toss the case into the appropriate bin when you pick it from the scale pan. Keep in mind that the goal is to find “light” “heavy” and “okay.” Most shooters I know who weight-segregate are looking for three piles and, of course, the occasional culls.

The procedure used by most winning 1000-yard shooters is to segregate by weight and then outside-turn the case necks to make the neck walls consistent. Again, it ultimately will be a better test if the neck turning is done prior to weight segregation. At this point, however, we have done a lot of work.

So, looking back on the last article, which was segregating by neck wall thickness variations, here’s what I think: If most of your shooting is under 300 yards, go with neck-wall thickness. If you’re covering more real estate, I’d suggest sorting by weight. No doubt, a combination is the ultimate.

Since I focus on concentricity both before and after bullet seating, I can’t say any weight-segregated cases have outperformed my concentricity-selected ammo at 600 yards. I also know, from experience, that the cases I favor are demonstrably low in weight variation. For me, segregating by wall thickness makes more sense. I use the same brand/lot for 200, 300, and 600 yards; the difference is the load. I am pretty much looking for a good, better, best to coincide with my needs for accuracy at 200, 300, and 600 yards.

This might sound contradictory, but it seems that when firing on targets at short range, where weather conditions aren’t overly influential and bullet limits are not nearly being approached, it’s superior concentricity that prints the best groups. Further on down the pike, though, concentricity is important, certainly and always, but it’s really the consistency of bullet velocities that gets “10s.” A good long-range shooter (who can keep a handle on condition-influenced corrections) will lose more points to elevation shots than to wind. High-low shots are, for a Master or High Master, pretty much the fault of the ammo. The reason velocity deviations are just not that important to short-range groups is solely a time-of-flight answer. The longer a bullet is in the air, and the slower it’s moving, the farther and farther it flies, the more initial velocity consistency factors in.

The preceding is specially-adapted from material in the forthcoming book “Top Grade Ammo” coming (very soon) from Zediker Publishing. Check BuyZedikerBooks.com and ZedikerPublishing.com for more.

*Some of our stories include affiliate links. We may earn an affiliate commission if you buy something through one of these links.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn