By John Kleespies
For a while now, I’ve wanted to conduct some sort of a bullet test to compare the consistency of rounds between various manufacturers. Having recently acquired an A&D Weighing FX-300i scale – which I’ll use for next-level powder distribution with my precision rifle loads – I now feel that I have the capability to do some data runs. At .02-grain increments, the FX-300i’s resolution is remarkable, and I’ve verified its own consistency and precision with an E2-quality calibration set.
Weight can be a great way to track the quality control of mass-produced products, and since bullets are composed of only two ingredients – copper and lead – they make an ideal guinea pig for this method. While weight should not be relied upon as the sole test for comparing bullet consistency, it does stand as a valid data point. This being the case, I thought I’d compare the weight consistency of bullets across three highly regarded manufacturers.
For my test subjects, I’ve acquired samples from some of the most popular precision bullet manufacturers out there: Berger, Sierra, and Nosler. Because I want to compare apples to apples as much as possible, I’m using these company’s offerings for their .308 175-grain “match” round: the Berger “Open Tip Match Tactical” has a G1 ballistic coefficient of .512 and a G7 BC of .263; Sierra’s “MatchKing” has a G1 BC of .505 and G7 BC of .250; and the Nosler “Ultra-High BC Match” has a G1 BC of .536 and G7 BC of .270. While these ballistic coefficients are different, they are close enough in form to serve as my “apples.”
I weighed 50 random samples for each offering and input the results into Calculator.net’s standard deviation calculator for the following results:
BERGER
Standard Deviation: 0.0540
Mean: 175.0612
Variance: 0.0029
SIERRA
Standard Deviation: 0.0592
Mean: 175.0518
Variance: 0.0035
NOSLER
Standard Deviation: 0.159
Mean: 174.9584
Variance: 0.0252
So… what does it all mean?
While Berger came out as the “winner” of this data pull, Sierra was close enough on Berger’s heels that most folks would consider their data to be statistically equivalent. In fact, even with Nosler’s “three times worse” Standard Deviation, their quality control is still pretty doggone good, making their round-to-round weight difference essentially irrelevant.
How can I make such a bold statement? Go to a ballistics calculator and punch in the data for any of the above rounds. Run two dope charts for the 175-grain .308 Winchester at a common velocity but then vary the bullet weight by plus one grain above 175 for the first and minus one grain below for the second. What you will find is that at 1000 yards… or 1500 yards… or name the distance… the drops will calculate as exactly the same.
Alas, weight variance alone, with this level of consistency, is inconsequential.
Was the above test a waste of time, then? Not at all! If nothing else, it proved that the above companies have excellent quality control.
More importantly to me, though, while the QC differences are slight, they do exist… and they may be indicative of QC variances in other areas such as overall form, which may have a greater effect on bullet performance. More testing would be required to make that determination, but this is a simple test that can be performed by just about anyone… with a scale as nice as mine!
If you’d like to learn more about A&D Weighing’s FX-300i, check out my website CloverSpear.com, where I’ll put it through the wringer as a reloading scale while I also test the above bullets through my newly built .308 Winchester bolt-action.
