<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: .243 Win Brass Comparison Test &#8212; Surprising Results</title>
	<atom:link href="https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/243-win-brass-comparison-test-surprising-results/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/243-win-brass-comparison-test-surprising-results/</link>
	<description>from AccurateShooter.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 14:06:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.26</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/243-win-brass-comparison-test-surprising-results/comment-page-1/#comment-33509</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:08:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/?p=8269#comment-33509</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just came across this article as I am starting to do more rifle shooting after years as Bullseye shooter. 

I used an RCBS digital scale that has 0.1 grain of accuracy for this test.  

I purchased Nosler Brass N=50 and all testing was conducted as it came from the factory without any further modification. 

The statistics included mean 174.6 grains, ave. dev 0.21 with min of 174.2 and max of 175.2 and percent of ave. 0.57 which appears to be better than the statistics for brass tested by the author.

The Nosler brass is advertised as manufactured at the factory with uniform primer pockets, chamfered necks and cut to length which upon observation can be seen with the naked eye.  

I then tested case volume for min, max and ave. case weights with each being very close at 52.0, 52.2 and 52.3 which means probably that for small cases weight does not necessarily translate into large volume differences say for example a 300 Winchester Magnum.  I am wondering how much difference in accuracy can case weight make for smaller cases?

I also am planning to look at overall length, neck size and neck inside diameter which may tell more about accuracy.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just came across this article as I am starting to do more rifle shooting after years as Bullseye shooter. </p>
<p>I used an RCBS digital scale that has 0.1 grain of accuracy for this test.  </p>
<p>I purchased Nosler Brass N=50 and all testing was conducted as it came from the factory without any further modification. </p>
<p>The statistics included mean 174.6 grains, ave. dev 0.21 with min of 174.2 and max of 175.2 and percent of ave. 0.57 which appears to be better than the statistics for brass tested by the author.</p>
<p>The Nosler brass is advertised as manufactured at the factory with uniform primer pockets, chamfered necks and cut to length which upon observation can be seen with the naked eye.  </p>
<p>I then tested case volume for min, max and ave. case weights with each being very close at 52.0, 52.2 and 52.3 which means probably that for small cases weight does not necessarily translate into large volume differences say for example a 300 Winchester Magnum.  I am wondering how much difference in accuracy can case weight make for smaller cases?</p>
<p>I also am planning to look at overall length, neck size and neck inside diameter which may tell more about accuracy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/243-win-brass-comparison-test-surprising-results/comment-page-1/#comment-8330</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Josh]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 21:52:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/?p=8269#comment-8330</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The above criticism aside, we should all thank the author for actually having done something and published his results.  For those who disparage his data - where&#039;s yours?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The above criticism aside, we should all thank the author for actually having done something and published his results.  For those who disparage his data &#8211; where&#8217;s yours?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike C</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/243-win-brass-comparison-test-surprising-results/comment-page-1/#comment-8128</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike C]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2010 15:07:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/?p=8269#comment-8128</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;d suggest the results show that weight sorting brass is a waste of time(which I believe). But, your results also imply that capacity checks are a waste of time.. 
Something&#039;s amiss about this testing, that needs qualifying. 
Why was the brass sized before the test?
Were the cases all NEW, or Fireformed to the same chamber?
Were the pockets &amp; flash holes uniform and primers qualified by weight, height, and seated te same?
Were the necks trimmed to the same length?
What information is concealed in the &#039;averaging&#039;?

I&#039;m amazed(and suspicious) that the capacity spread among these cases was so low. I have not seen capacity spread so low with lots of Lapua, Norma, and Tubbs in 223, 6br, or 6xc. But have had similar results only with different lots of Win WSSM reloading cases(the best brass I&#039;ve seen to date).
To qualify my testing is always on fully fireformed/unsized cases, which I scale stand on a plastic golf tee.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d suggest the results show that weight sorting brass is a waste of time(which I believe). But, your results also imply that capacity checks are a waste of time..<br />
Something&#8217;s amiss about this testing, that needs qualifying.<br />
Why was the brass sized before the test?<br />
Were the cases all NEW, or Fireformed to the same chamber?<br />
Were the pockets &amp; flash holes uniform and primers qualified by weight, height, and seated te same?<br />
Were the necks trimmed to the same length?<br />
What information is concealed in the &#8216;averaging&#8217;?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m amazed(and suspicious) that the capacity spread among these cases was so low. I have not seen capacity spread so low with lots of Lapua, Norma, and Tubbs in 223, 6br, or 6xc. But have had similar results only with different lots of Win WSSM reloading cases(the best brass I&#8217;ve seen to date).<br />
To qualify my testing is always on fully fireformed/unsized cases, which I scale stand on a plastic golf tee.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl Porter</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/243-win-brass-comparison-test-surprising-results/comment-page-1/#comment-2801</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Carl Porter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 19:48:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/?p=8269#comment-2801</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My data:
Fed 179.0 gr ave case weight over 300 cases.
Frontier 163.2gr             over 200 cases
Rem 166.5 gr                 over 700 cases
PMC 190.0 gr                 over 100 cases
Lapua 171.6 gr, 53.1 gr cap  over 100 cases
Norma 169.0 gr, 52.9 gr cap  over 100 cases

I also have Win and Lake City around somewhere.

The Remington has batches from 1980 and 2000 the PMC is all from 1980. All the brass from the 80s has been shot and annealed more than 20 times.

I don&#039;t shoot max loads anymore, not since I first started. All cases seem to handle normal loads in a bolt action just fine. The PMC seems to work better in the AR. I rarely shoot .15&quot; groups but with the exception of the Frontier &amp; PMC brass the groups are very close in average size.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My data:<br />
Fed 179.0 gr ave case weight over 300 cases.<br />
Frontier 163.2gr             over 200 cases<br />
Rem 166.5 gr                 over 700 cases<br />
PMC 190.0 gr                 over 100 cases<br />
Lapua 171.6 gr, 53.1 gr cap  over 100 cases<br />
Norma 169.0 gr, 52.9 gr cap  over 100 cases</p>
<p>I also have Win and Lake City around somewhere.</p>
<p>The Remington has batches from 1980 and 2000 the PMC is all from 1980. All the brass from the 80s has been shot and annealed more than 20 times.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t shoot max loads anymore, not since I first started. All cases seem to handle normal loads in a bolt action just fine. The PMC seems to work better in the AR. I rarely shoot .15&#8243; groups but with the exception of the Frontier &amp; PMC brass the groups are very close in average size.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Whitley</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/243-win-brass-comparison-test-surprising-results/comment-page-1/#comment-2800</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Whitley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 13:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/?p=8269#comment-2800</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I can only say I use 243 Win brass as the base brass to make my 6mm Super X brass and I have made it from Lapua, Remington, and Winchester brands of brass.  I won&#039;t dispute that weight sorting Winchester brand brass is advisable for high accuracy target shooting.   I also prefer Winchester brand 243 brass over over all the others.  If you weight sorted batches and pitch out an occasional case you cull for a visible quality issue (as you would do with any brand of brass), I think Winchester has better than or equal quality to all of them and it is also the hardest and handles pressure the best.  Winchester brand 243 brass is also one of the least expensive as well, so if you have to pitch out a few cases here or there, no big deal.

Robert Whitley]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can only say I use 243 Win brass as the base brass to make my 6mm Super X brass and I have made it from Lapua, Remington, and Winchester brands of brass.  I won&#8217;t dispute that weight sorting Winchester brand brass is advisable for high accuracy target shooting.   I also prefer Winchester brand 243 brass over over all the others.  If you weight sorted batches and pitch out an occasional case you cull for a visible quality issue (as you would do with any brand of brass), I think Winchester has better than or equal quality to all of them and it is also the hardest and handles pressure the best.  Winchester brand 243 brass is also one of the least expensive as well, so if you have to pitch out a few cases here or there, no big deal.</p>
<p>Robert Whitley</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John CS</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/09/243-win-brass-comparison-test-surprising-results/comment-page-1/#comment-2799</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John CS]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 06:20:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/?p=8269#comment-2799</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting analysis, but misses out some key information. For example what scales were used and what tolerance do these scales measure to?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting analysis, but misses out some key information. For example what scales were used and what tolerance do these scales measure to?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
