powder measure that just dont seem to work

[reloader89]

reacently i just bought this RCBS power measure and i cant get it to make consistant loads. how do i fix this problem.

[oneokie]

Need more information. Which powder are you using? Stick, Ball, or flake? Do you have a baffle in the resivoir?

[Dale53]

ANY powder measure requires consistent movement to give consistent results. You must operate it EXACTLY the same each time if you expect consistent results.

Further, as mentioned above, ball powders are the easiest to use but some small grained powders measure well. Long grained powders, such as 4831, do NOT measure well. That is just the nature of the beast.

If you are new to reloading, you'll find it quite helpful to practice by weighing every drop. In short order you'll pick up on what it takes to get good results. Bang the lever hard one time and easy the next will give you variable results. After a good deal of practice it'll start becoming natural and you will get proper results. Ball powder should measure +or- .1 of a grain. Small grain powders like RL-7 will measure almost as well. I aldo get good results with small flake powders like Bullseye. I get less satisfactory results with large stick powders like 4831 and 4350. Fortunately, the large stick powders are normally slow burning and the variance is a small part of the overall charge so it doesn't seem to cause as much of a problem as you would think.

Keep the powder hopper at least 1/3 full and use a powder baffle. This gives you a more consistant head weight which will help you to maintain low variables.

FWIW
Dale53

[Char-Gar]

The RCBS measure has a good reputation. There is no powder measure that will throw EXACT identical charges. The difference varies with the quality of the measure, the type of powder and the skill of the user.

The good news is that most times it doesn't make a difference. With most powders accuracy doesnt suffer much , if any at all, due to these normal variations.

I use a pair of 50's vintage Hollywood measure and they do must fine for me.

[lee n. field]

A Uniflow? Check and make sure the measuring cylinder bushing (part 7 in the instruction manual (http://www.rcbs.com/downloads/instructions/Uniflow_Powder_Measure_Instructions.pdf)) isn't coming unscrewed. Mine used to do that if I wasn't mindful of it. I've since put a dab of light loctite on the threads to keep that part in place.

[Swagerman]

Which metering chamber are you having the most trouble with, the pistol 1 to 10 grains or the rifle 10 to 90 + grains.

I've still got one RCBS Uniflow measure, and it doing OK as I'm mindful of keeping it clean after each use.

However, the Redding No. 3 powder measure is doing very well and is easier to use with the calibrated knob metering chamberings. The Redding PM are sometimes forsale here on our classifieds, or the other forum auctions.

Jim

[montana_charlie]

It is also quite common for a reloader to set his measure to throw a charge that is several tenths lighter than desired weight. Then, with the charge on the scale, he uses a trickler to add enough powder to bring the charge up to exact weight.

This cancels out any variance in the thrown charges, and assures that every charge loaded is on the money.

By the way...
There is an Ohaus 10-10 scale for sale on eBay right now. It looks like a good one, and still has the plastic cover intact. Currently, it's around $20...with two days to go.

CM

[DLCTEX]

With powders that don't meter well I do as described above, throw the powder onto the scale pan a few tenths light, then bring it to par with an electric trickler(Midway $16). Its about as fast as saying it. Dale

[Marshal Kane]

Good advice from everyone that responded. Would suggest, after using a Uniflow for 40+ years, that you be consistent and very gentle with the operating handle. When the handle is operated roughly, it tends to compact the powder in the reservior particularly at the bottom end which contributes to varying charges. With large flake or stick powders, when the drum gets stuck, rocking the handle slightly back and forth and left to right will often free the drum. It's usually a few powder grains that are begging to be sheared that sticks the drum. When too many grains get sheared, the powder becomes compacted which leads to varying charges. When the load calls for large flake or stick powders, I prefer to drop a slightly lighter charge onto the powder pan and finish it off with a powder trickler while the pan is on the scale.

[Char-Gar]

The best way to set a powder measure is to throw multiple charges and use the average weight. This is how it works... Let's say you want a charge of 10 grains of powder. Throw five charges into the scale pan and weigh them. When the weight read 50 grains, you know your measure will throw and "average" charge of 10 grains.

[reloader89]

thanks for your help ill try the stuff you mentioned

[standles]

Also be careful that only powder gets into the hopper.

A pc of brass (don't ask) or a pc of the paper from the powder can seal..

Worth a look..

Steven

[spurrit]

Also be careful that only powder gets into the hopper.

A pc of brass (don't ask) or a pc of the paper from the powder can seal..

Worth a look..

Steven


How the hell.................? :groner:

[JoeBrotch]

I wipe down the inside and outside of my powder measures with anti static fabric softener wipes that you put into clothes dryers to stop static cling. Seems to stop clogging and lumping of powder granules and more consistant drops by weight.

Try it and weight your charges to see if it helps.

[pa_guns]

Hi

Sometimes it's really simple stuff. Is the measure mounted rigidly to the table? Are you seeing variation from one charge to the next, from a full tube to an almost empty one.

Bob

[TNsailorman]

Some great suggestions to your question. I have found that any powder measure will throw a slightly light or heavy charge from time to time. That is why I never depend entirely on the powder meaure itself. I use a scale(both electronic or manual) to check weigh each and every charge. The usually amount of error seldom amounts to more than .1 to .2 of a grain depending on whether you are using ball, stick or flake powder. Ball usuallly weighs the most consistant. Also, when loading on a high humidity day you may have more problems depending on the powder also. The best advice I can give you is to practice load several charges on the scale to get a feel going before you get serious about the actual loads. I like to very lightly bump the handle against the stop on each end of the swing as a way of settling the powder uniformly in the measure cavity. My experience anyway.

[felix]

There appears to be too much emphasis on powder weight consistency on our board. Bullet/boolit initial resistance is the primary cause of erratic ignition, assuming everything else is Kosher. Get that area of consistency down first and foremost. The Houston Warehouse has proven that even circa (plus/minus) 0.25 grains from nominal is within BR accuracy standards. We are talking maintenance of groups in the zeros. Naturally and obviously, this means to us using normal guns, is to select a powder speed that allows this kind of variation. ... felix

[pa_guns]

Hi

I have seen a number of people do a fairly simple experiment with coarse grain powder:

1) Use a normal RCBS powder measure and load up 10 rounds.
2) Throw another 10 charges, weight each, correct to < 0.1 grains

At that point you have 20 rounds of nearly identical composition. Same brass, same bullets same primer.

Fire the 20 bullets at two targets. Alternate targets and bullet batches. Batch 1's all go to the target on the right. Batch 2's all go to the target on the left. Allow adequate time for things to cool. The experiment takes a *while*.

Each time I have seen it done, the groups were quite small (< 0.25" at 100 yards). In each case either batch 1 was best or you could not tell the difference.

You could claim that anybody can make it come out in a desired fashion. I agree with that. After seeing it done the first time, I made sure that the "batch number" was not known to the shooter.

The rounds involved were all > 40 grains. 0.1 grain is a pretty small amount at that level.

Would the outcome be different at 1000 yards? I can't say.

Bob

[TNsailorman]

felix, I couldn't agree more with you about most of us worrying too much about small groups. We don't really need loads that will shoot under 1" consistantly but we try and try. After all, any load that will shoot inside of a 4" circle at 100 yards is plenty good enough to hunt deer and elk. Cutting down on the different variables and getting the absolute smallest group that I can out of a rifle, bullet, powder combination is what make reloading so interesting to me though. I guess I'm just one of those who are still looking for the "perfect" load, full well knowing I'm never going to find it.

[spurrit]

After all, any load that will shoot inside of a 4" circle at 100 yards is plenty good enough to hunt deer and elk.

Only in a survival situation would this be true, if you have any ethics at all.

[felix]

Agree 100 percent, sailorman. Always make it a fun endeavor getting to that "small" group, while keeping in mind there are different personalities which are required to make that "perfect" gun system. The most important one is the person doing the shooting, which leaves 95 percent of us out in the pasture in terms of qualifying that gun as the best it can do. That is where the term "good enough" really shines! ... felix

[pa_guns]

Hi

An awful lot of rifles these days will shoot 1/2" three shot groups. May will do the same for 5 shot groups. That's at 100 yards.

The real question is how close they come to point of aim. I have not seen a lot of rifles that shoot within a 1/2" of point of aim at 100 yards. There's a lot of hand waving that goes on when you bring this up. Unless you are very careful it's not real easy to do ...

Bob

[felix]

Bob, point of aim is a function of the scope settings. You must not be talking about that, so I remain in the dark. ... felix

[carpetman]

Get a Belding & Mull powder measure and it doesnt seem to matter what type powder--they will meter any type has been my experience over 40 years with them.

[MT Gianni]

Only in a survival situation would this be true, if you have any ethics at all.

I would say any load that you can shoot off hand into 4" @100 yds is good for either elk or deer at 100 yds. If you are talking bench loads 4"@ 100 yds that should be improved. Gianni

[Newtire]

Get a Belding & Mull powder measure and it doesnt seem to matter what type powder--they will meter any type has been my experience over 40 years with them.

I got a Belding & Mull from Madcaster last year and have to agree with Carpetman that nothing even comes close for measuring out uniform charges of anything you put thru it. I still use the Lee Auto-disc pro version for ball powders in my peestol loading as it does a great job. Have had bad luck with it not throwing uniform measures of stuff like Unique. Always use the flashlight after charging the cases in the loading block.

[robertbank]

"After all, any load that will shoot inside of a 4" circle at 100 yards is plenty good enough to hunt deer and elk."

+1, What you are now talking about is "practical accuracy". This also assumes you are taking a shot at 100 yds. Up here 100 yds, in some areas, would be considered a very long shot given the amount of cover available.

Take Care

Bob

[spurrit]

I would say any load that you can shoot off hand into 4" @100 yds is good for either elk or deer at 100 yds. If you are talking bench loads 4"@ 100 yds that should be improved. Gianni

Gianni,

Yes, that's what I meant. I shoulda specified. Most people I talk to these days don't own a rifle without an optic, and they'll put one on top of their handguns just as soon as it's the popular thing to do.


"After all, any load that will shoot inside of a 4" circle at 100 yards is plenty good enough to hunt deer and elk."

+1, What you are now talking about is "practical accuracy". This also assumes you are taking a shot at 100 yds. Up here 100 yds, in some areas, would be considered a very long shot given the amount of cover available.

Take Care

Bob

BUT, if you accept that kind of accuracy, or lack thereof, you also need to limit your distance. If you are going to wait until you can make a "damn sure" kill shot, then you better practice calling quite a bit. You're gonna need them sitting in the blind with you.

[pa_guns]

Bob, point of aim is a function of the scope settings. You must not be talking about that, so I remain in the dark. ... felix

Hi

Point of aim *is* a function of scope settings and a number of other things as well.

1) Did you use the same ammo / conditions to set up the scope?
2) Did you set it up with the barrel hot, or cold (most set hot and hunt cold)?
3) How clean is the barrel now, how dirty then?
4) Is the barrel *really* free floated ?
5) Do you remember what range it's set at / did you reset the rings to 0?
6) When you shoot groups do you throw out that "first flyer"?
7) How well did you dope the wind when you set the scope?

The list can run on a bit past that. Watch guys at the range next time and you can see *lots* of examples.

You can take care of *every* single issue on the list, and some people do so.

I have seen relatively few people who take the time to get things within a half inch on a hunting rifle. That despite the fact that many of the rifles *will* run at that level of accuracy. If the scope is off by an inch vertical and another inch horizontal, that's pretty typical. With that setup, it's the scope, not the rifle that's defining what you can or can not do.

Bob

[spurrit]

If you just give up before your rifle is shooting to POA, you need to just stay home, or kill all your deer from a bar stool. :(

[pa_guns]

If you just give up before your rifle is shooting to POA, you need to just stay home, or kill all your deer from a bar stool. :(

Hi

I agree that it's a matter of not giving up.

My observation is that most give up way to soon. Some of what you have to do takes time and (gasp!) effort. Things like bedding may actually cost you a couple of bucks.

I think a lot of it is expectation. If you expect a 3" rifle, you stop when you get to 3". For a long time 1" has been some kind of mythical standard. If 1" is best, then maybe 2" is ok. If a 1" group is great, then getting the sight to an inch or so probably is ok. A 2" first shot flyer must be ok ...

Keep settling for "ok" and sure enough your rifle is going to be hitting a long way from point of aim.

Obviously I have no real idea exactly how it happens on each rifle. With decent magnification I can easily sit at the range and see what others are doing. Got a lot of time waiting for times to cool down .....

Bob

[spurrit]

Well, I doubt if these guys that make 400 yard head shots on the 'net realise that 1" high and right at 100 yards is exponential, according to distance. I refer you to the guy that said 4" at 100 is fine. Okay, how about when they're at 2 or 300 yards? Is being eight inches or a foot off good enough for you? If it is, you might be better served by using a pickup to hunt with. Get a 1 ton crew cab dually, and call it a super magnum.

[pa_guns]

Hi

Trust me, I'm not in any way suggesting that an inch here and an inch there is something you should put up with.

I also agree that checking things at 300 yards is a *very* good idea. I don't have to spend much time at the range to know just how little use the 300 yard positions get ...

The sooner we forget the 1" group at 100 yards, the better. I would much rather look at what's going on at a longer distance. 300 yards is a fine distance to use. A rifle that always hits within 1" of point of aim at 300 yards would be useful. Getting a modern rifle to that point is a very reasonable goal.

Bob

[spurrit]

Hi

Trust me, I'm not in any way suggesting that an inch here and an inch there is something you should put up with.

I also agree that checking things at 300 yards is a *very* good idea. I don't have to spend much time at the range to know just how little use the 300 yard positions get ...

The sooner we forget the 1" group at 100 yards, the better. I would much rather look at what's going on at a longer distance. 300 yards is a fine distance to use. A rifle that always hits within 1" of point of aim at 300 yards would be useful. Getting a modern rifle to that point is a very reasonable goal.

Bob

Bob,

1" at 300 yards would be .33 MOA. Damn fine shooting, and just drop the rifle off at my house! (WITH load data and ammo samples.)

[robertbank]

Not sure what the fuss is all about. If you can hit a 4" circle at 100 yards you are going to take any moose I have seen recently at any hunting ranges up here. Seems to me what a rifle does at the range shooting at paper changes significantly when you are cold, wet and excited and your moose is there for the taking. Been my experience anyway.

Take Care

Bob

[BruceB]

I like small groups just as well as the next guy, and expend a lot of effort in the pursuit of same, but for HUNTING purposes there are some other factors that come into play, and for cast-bullet hunting we have to add even more factors, such as reduced velocity in many cases.

I will NOT, positively will NOT, be firing cast bullets at big game beyond my self -imposed limit of +/-200 yards (and I now have a range-finder to enforce that limit accurately). My next hunt will be with the .416 Rigby, 365-grain cast softpoint, zeroed at 160 for +3"/100 and -3" / 200 yards. The targets will be elk and white-tail (BIG Alberta white-tails, over 300 pounds in good examples). This means vital-zone areas of 12-18" or so, and for that kind of work I need a 1/2" rifle like a goose needs jet engines. Just this week, my Ruger Rigby delivered a pair of TEN-round groups under 2" at 100 yards with the hunting load. For my purposes, within my limited range, for my intended game, this is AMPLE accuracy. At the more-limited tight-cover distances, two inches at 100 yards is MORE accuracy than needed. I've killed a lot more moose under 50 yards than over 50 yards, and sometimes the "range" was measured in FEET.

The .416 rifle hadn't been fired for months, when I took it out this week. It also hadn't been cleaned, so the bore was still fouled by cast loads. The first round landed precisely on the point of aim from 100 yards, and the next 9 clustered nicely around it. The first round was meat-on-the-table accurate, and THAT'S the one that really counts. When hunting time comes, the rifle will be re-zeroed from a COLD fouled barrel, and that's how the rifle will be kept until after the hunt, at least. This week's shooting was at 30 degrees F, and the last previous outing was at about 90 degrees F...same point of impact. This does give me considerable confidence in the rifle!

I have 1/2"-capable rifles, but not when using cast bullets. Nor is such tight-shooting needed, except for varminting with jacketed-bullet loads.

[robertbank]

"I've killed a lot more moose under 50 yards than over 50 yards, and sometimes the "range" was measured in FEET."

Hey I missed one at 10' back in the 60's and it sure wasn't the rifle! In fact two of us missed the darn thing and to this day there is a Moose running around Northern Alberta deaf as a mute.:mrgreen: You may have seen him in the Territories back in 1968 Bruce. He was the one with five bullet holes in his antlers and running like heck.

Take Care

Bob

[pa_guns]

Bob,

1" at 300 yards would be .33 MOA. Damn fine shooting, and just drop the rifle off at my house! (WITH load data and ammo samples.)

Hi

Within 1" of point of aim would be a 1" radius. The circle would have a 2" diameter. That's .66 MOA. Not the same thing, but similar to the .5" at 100 yards numbers I was using earlier.

There's a guy up the road here who will set up a factory rifle to do roughly what I'm talking about for $250 or so. He doesn't *guarantee* that performance, but it's what he gets on most rifles.

Bob

[spurrit]

My math get fuzzier than Ted Kennedy's eyechart when I'm tired.

[pa_guns]

My math get fuzzier than Ted Kennedy's eyechart when I'm tired.

Hi

I had to go over it a couple times before I posted it. The first time I typed it I came up with the same .33 MOA number you did. That locked me up for a couple minutes.

Bob

[PatMarlin]

"I've killed a lot more moose under 50 yards than over 50 yards, and sometimes the "range" was measured in FEET."

Hey I missed one at 10' back in the 60's and it sure wasn't the rifle! In fact two of us missed the darn thing and to this day there is a Moose running around Northern Alberta deaf as a mute.:mrgreen: You may have seen him in the Territories back in 1968 Bruce. He was the one with five bullet holes in his antlers and running like heck.

Take Care

Bob


..........:mrgreen:

[pa_guns]

"I've killed a lot more moose under 50 yards than over 50 yards, and sometimes the "range" was measured in FEET."

Hey I missed one at 10' back in the 60's and it sure wasn't the rifle! In fact two of us missed the darn thing and to this day there is a Moose running around Northern Alberta deaf as a mute.:mrgreen: You may have seen him in the Territories back in 1968 Bruce. He was the one with five bullet holes in his antlers and running like heck.

Take Care

Bob

Hi

You are supposed to check for moose *before* you pitch the tent. Finding one inside the tent you just pitched is a difficult problem to rectify...

Bob

[robertbank]

"You are supposed to check for moose *before* you pitch the tent. Finding one inside the tent you just pitched is a difficult problem to rectify..."

In my mispent youth I have woken up with worse....

Take Care

Bob