I am going to post a hypothetical question to all you re-loaders out there.

Here goes-

If all else was equal (group size, bullet type, cost) would you rather load a heavier bullet or a lighter bullet?

Why?


Thanks,
Claybirds

Well it's like saying which is the best tool. A screwdriver or a hammer. Well depends on the job. The only criteria you mentioned that had anything to do with the bullet it self, is the group size. I used to think that the lighter the bullet the faster it went and the better the group. Might be true if ranges were short , wind didn't exist and success was measured strictly by the size of the group. Now if you want to reach out and touch something, new story. Light bullets usually lose velocity faster, drift more in the wind and lack humane killing energy at longer ranges. I shoot two different AR-15's I load my wifes with light bullets to reduce recoil and I shoot heavy bullets because my fast twist AR-15 like heavy bullets. That's another issue slow twist barrels won't stabilize long bullets. Pick a bullet weight your gun likes. Use a bullet design that does the job YOU want. Put the amount of powder in it that makes it as close to perfect for you and forget what others use. There is no best bullet, just one that does what you want done, better than others.

Based on the question as posed I would opt for the heavier bullet. I like the higher BC's myself.

Not knowing what caliber or what the bullet choices are....In most insances, I'd have to agree with Glen. Since heavier bullets typically have a higher B.C., range is extended as long as you have enough energy to push it. At some point, super heavy for caliber bullets no longer shoot flat enough to be reasonably effective for hunting at UNKNOWN ranges. An 80 grain A-Max might shoot very well in a match .223 at a known distance, say 600 yards, but the arc like trajectory would make it very difficult to consistantly hit prairie dogs that are scattered all over at greatly varying distances.

How about some more hypothetical information? Ha

So if all was equal, if your after lower recoil, not needing to shoot longer distances, a lighter bullet would do better.

On the other hand, shooting greater distances, retaining energy longer, and wanting better BC, the heavier bullets are generally better.

Is it out of the norm for a gun to be able to shoot both weights just as good?

Yes, it is odd for most guns to shoot a light and a heavy bullet equally well. At least in my experience most guns like one weight the most and others may not shoot poorly but will not have the sweet spot that one weight and style may. It has a lot to do with twist in the barrel.

Having said that, all other things equal, I prefer a slightly heavy bullet.

A good point has been regarding bullet weights . Light and heavy bullets usually don't do as well through the same barrel . Soooo let's separate the two bullets by just a bit . Say 200 grain and 240 grain . As a reloader I see the cost lowering in one end and rise on the other . With the 240 bullet there is more cost for lead but less for powder . So if all things are equal then a simple cost of this and a cost for that is called for . Then comes another variable . The life of the brass will be less with a heavier load . Another variable .The life of the barrel will be lengthened with the lighter load . A bullet cast with less expensive lead (wheel weights) fired at high velocity will benefit from a gas check . They cost . Stronger lead (linotype) costs more but usually doesn't need a gas check . Wasn't that fun ?

yeah, what are we talking about? Is it PURELY hypothetical or do you have something particular in mind?



I mean my 223 shoots 55 and 60 grain bullets equally well. I've owned 22-250's that shoot 40's 50's and 55's well. On the other hand some are more finicky. Actually it's the length of the bullet, not the weight, that determines how fast the rifleing must be in order to stabalize it. The bullet weight/twist rate ratio is a guideline only.

I think in the .224 class it would be out of the norm. The reason being there is such a huge difference in that weight class. From a 50gr bullet to a 65 or 70gr bullet is huge & I doubt any .224cal rifle would shoot them equally well. On the other hand the range in .204 bullets is much less & a lot of folks are shooting 32gr up to the 40gr'ers equally well. I think it depends on the caliber & the case.

And yes & yes to the the 1st two questions about lighter bullets & higher BC's for longer range.

When I was considering light and heavy I was thinking about 150gr and 200gr .308 diameters to be honest. But ya, it would not surprise me if both a 55gr and a 50gr shot well out of a .223 at any time that is not a drastic difference. And yes it is length not weight that determines how a bullet will respond to rifling. But agene I was thinking about a short little 150gr vs a 168gr or even a 200gr and more or less, heavier bullets have longer bodies when the weight shift is that drastic.

Going back to the original question. From a different view, thinking purely in .223ish terms, I would have no preference for 55gr over 50gr or visa versa if they shot the same. At that point it would boil down to bullet style and if the style was the same it would boil down to price. If the price was the same at that point, if the only diff really was the bullet weight, I would probably buy which ever one I found on the shelf first. But as people have pointed out, 5gr is not a big diff. I have seen few applications where 50gr will not do the job of a 55gr or visa versa. Otherwise if we are talking a wider spread in weight, go back to my original statement.

FYI: Along the same line(s) is a good article in the latest Predator Xtreme magazine regarding bullet size/weight and wind drift.