Why is BP measured by volume rather than weighing on a scale?

[Mach_Cat]

Learning more about my ROAs.
Why do you measure by volume?
Is there any reason not to measure by weight?

Ed

[Golfswithwolves]

I speculate that black powder measuring by volume rather than weight has to do with most BP guns being loaded from the muzzle end rather than being loaded with cartridges. It would be a pain to weigh out powder charges in the field! Also, if you load those substitutes for black powder please note that they do not have the same weight per volume as the black powder- always measure the subs by volume.

[dondiego]

You can certainly weigh out your charges if you want to.

[Col4570]

I always weigh my powder charges and put them in plastic tubes for Muzzle loading.Powder Flasks and Horns are not consistent in delivery.

[oldracer]

In reading the many articles in Black Powder Cartridge News and also Major Roberts book, back in the 1800's there were no scales on the plains and at most matches that were held on the East Coast. In my experimenting I found that with Goex FFG and also FFFG that volume was almost exactly the same as weight. I made powder measures in 10 grain jumps from 70 to 120 so the volume would always be the same at my muzzle loader matches.

[koger]

Most synthetic BP subs will weigh lite, IE, if you weigh 70 grains of powder on a scale, you will end up with 115 grains, etc, so 100grains weighed would be way up there. Use a measure.

[Toymaker]

Oldracer has the right of it, although we can go back even further than the 1800's. Black powder is very forgiving, a little too much or not quite enough isn't going to make that much difference in accuracy.

Buddy of mine and I shot a lot of heavy bench rifle together. We were about equals in ability. He'd weigh his charges ahead of time and put them in vials. I volume measured on the spot. I used a drop tube down the bore to get the powder all the way to the bottom. He didn't. We're pretty even in winning medals, etc. You never knew who was going to finish on top, but we'd always be within 2 or 3 points.

Two weeks ago I whooped him pretty good in an off-hand match. Been doing that fairly regular in recent times, but that's another story.

There was an article in the NMLRA magazine, MuzzleBlasts, some years back by the Bevel Brothers. They tested weighed versus volume charges. The results were that weighed charges had more consistent velocities and lower standard deviations. There was no difference in accuracy.

[Toymaker]

Oh, and slug gun is a different story too. They weigh their charges at the bench. They have more equipment to measure barometric pressure, temperature, humidity and whatever than you can think about. They also swage bullets so they weigh the same. Then they'll sit there all day to get one or two shots off,,,,, or none at all. I've seen more than one guy take a week of competition to finish one target. They're crazy people.... said with loving admiration.

[oldracer]

I should have mentioned......try BOTH methods to see which works best for you and your gun. Remember that velocities and standard deviations are just for the BS sessions, ACCURACY wins the match!

[joken]

I always weigh my powder charges and put them in plastic tubes for Muzzle loading.Powder Flasks and Horns are not consistent in delivery.

I also do this to insure that my loads are always the same, minus the powder that ends up on the ground when I'm all amped up and trying to reload in a hurry.

[starmac]

Never used a horn or flask to load with, but do just use a measure. When I carried one elk or deer hunting I just used carried 4 speedloaders, instead of a powder horn. I didn't figure there would ever be any scenario that I would need 5 shots or more.

[DIRT Farmer]

I dip charges for shotgun, use a perminatly set mesure for rifles and weigh charges for the Gibbs. the vatiance in the round ball guns is well inside of my shooting ability.
When working up loads for a few of my match guns I have weighed the charges. Remember that the weight vs volume can change with each lot of powder.Thee is a case dedicated to the Gibbs and a case for the round ball guns. a new lot of powder can and will change sight settings.

[DIRT Farmer]

And you are right Toymaker, the round ball bench guys are nutz. I hang around with some of them.

[Whiterabbit]

First off, I DO weigh smokeless powder by volume. It's just that I use a very nice measuring tool made by RCBS to do it, not some brass tube like for black powder.

And why measure BP using an innacurate brass tube rather than use a scale? Because its easier at the range, and:

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=99883&d=1395166184

it doesn't make a whole lot of difference, in my experience.

[jcwit]

I can just see a mountain man weighing out a powder charge as the grizz comes at him. LOL

[Maven]

With the exception of eldercare (post #5) and Whiterabbit (post #14), no one really answered the OP's question. In fact, I couldn't either so I looked up what Sam Fadala had to say about weight v. volumetric measurement of BP. The following reasons are from Fadala's "Black Powder Loading Manual," (DBI Books, 1982), p .14:

1) Loading BP and Pyrodex by volume doesn't degrade accuracy.

2) When compared side by side, all else being equal, Fadala found "no increase (italics are the author's) in accuracy in the rifle tests between carefully thrown volumetric charges of powder and charges weighed to .1 grains weight on a powder/bullet scale."

3) "The 3rd reason we have used the volumetric load is that this is the standard practice in black powder loading, and it corresponds with the responsible way to use Pyrodex."

Hope this helps!

[Mach_Cat]

Thank you very much for all the answers.
Ed

[Geezer in NH]

And you are right Toymaker, the round ball bench guys are nutz. I hang around with some of them.He was not talking about round ball bench, but slug gun bench this from a round ball bench shooter. I use a measure for powder.

[Omnivore]

Why is BP measured by volume rather than weighing on a scale?

It isn't. Black powder SUBSTITUTES are measured by a volume that is equivalent to the volume of a given WEIGHT of black powder. It's as simple as that. Don't complicate it. Really.

The substitutes are less dense than black, but they are designed to replace the same volume of black, so you can use the same field measure you already had for black powder. See? It's all for purpose of being able to use the same spouts and measures for both BP and the substitutes, even though they don't actually weigh the same at all.

Sure; we don't weigh out each charge of BP in the field because it's simpler to use a measure (a tube) that's been calibrated by weighing the charges thrown from it. That's a whole different concept, but you still, hopefully, have checked to see how many actual grains of real BP are being thrown by your field measure, by using a scale.

The confusion comes from the unique tactic of designing black powder substitutes-- they are designed to replace black powder by volume so you can use the same field measure for either powder.

No other type of powder is made like that, and so, for example, when we use smokeless powders in our metal cartridges, we use a scale to weigh our charges. Even if we're dispensing powder from a "volumetric" measure without weighing each and every charge, we still use a scale to weigh several charges to calibrate the measure. As soon as you change powders, you have to get out the scale again, because every powder has a different density. If you want to know if your BP measure is at all accurate, you'll use a scale to weigh real BP from it. Even if you're using a BP substitute, you can weigh real BP from your field measure and then you'll know you have the "volume equivalent" to that many actual grains BP.

[Omnivore]

Or are you just playing with us, starting yet another "grains by volume" thread, of which there are already hundreds?

[Mach_Cat]

Not playing with you! Just learning.

[Omnivore]

That's cool. Learning is good. Didn't mean to jump on you there. I suppose, since someone brings this up every few weeks or so, that this subject should be covered in a sticky. "This is what black powder is. This is what substitutes are and why we use volume equivalents for them. This is why we tend to use pure lead projectiles. This is why we use softer lubes, or lubes at all, with lead bullets as opposed to dry, jacketed bullets", and so on. Title it "Black Powder basics" or some such. The typical BP gun owners manual tends to fall far short of answering these basic questions.

it can get a little exasperating when long term BP shooters use the term "gains by volume" for real black powder, because a "grain by volume" of black powder is in fact a grain of black powder, and a grain is a measure of weight. You'll even see people emphasize, e.g. "grains BY VOLUME", when referring to real black powder, which is nonsensical being as the term applies only to substitutes.

I suppose there is the issue of accuracy in dispensing powder into the firearm. Measuring out your real black powder charges with a field measure, rather than weighing each charge, will result in a lot more error, so if we're trying to emphasize the fact that we're not weighing each individual charge, we could say we're using x grains, "not weighing charges individually" or suchlike. You take your good ole reliable measure and weigh charges from it, and you'll find out right away that your charges are varying by several grains. That goes for any powder, save some of the really nicely flowing powders like smokeless ball powder. The ball powders tend to meter very consistently in a good quality measure. Flake or stick powders, not so much. Your BP measure probably throws charges much less consistently that using a mechanical measure, as sold for reloading metal cartridges, for the worst-metering smokeless powder. That mechanical measure, on a bad day using a poor metering powder, will still be to within a few tenths of a grain, as opposed to several grains.

Too much information?

[Mach_Cat]

All good to know. Basically I guess from what I am reading. Black powder has a lot more room for error as opposed to smokeless. So once I am up to speed in how to do it, don't sweat it.

[Maven]

MC, Several years ago I tried an experiment loading BP (Diamondback FFg) by volume v. by weight for my .45-70. The volumetric measure was an Uncle Mike's, which I use for my ML guns set to "70" grs., tapped 10 times (to settle the charge), and leveled off with the built in "funnel." I then dropped each of 10 charges into the pan of my digital scale (Pact), weighed them, and charged the cases via a drop tube. Weight varied less than 1 grain, but it took a lot of micro-manipulation of the volumetric measure to get that outcome.

[Whiterabbit]

tap-settling powder really makes it accurate. But see above. If you get the other factors right, it's just not all that important to weigh.

Any of you that own a progressive press for smokeless also do not weigh your smokeless!

[montana_charlie]

It can get a little exasperating when long term BP shooters use the term "gains by volume" for real black powder, because a "grain by volume" of black powder is in fact a grain of black powder, and a grain is a measure of weight. You'll even see people emphasize, e.g. "grains BY VOLUME", when referring to real black powder, which is nonsensical being as the term applies only to substitutes.
It's only exasperating if you aren't interested in how the writer actually measures his powder.

If loading my Hawken I would write that 'I seated my patched ball on top of 60 grains of Swiss #2', and I would assume that the reader would take that to mean a volumetric measurement because of the type of gun. If I wanted to be certain he understood, I would add the detail by saying 'on top of 60 (volume) grains'.

The experienced muzzleloading reader would know that a volumetric measurement of 60 grains of Swiss #2 would not weigh the same as 60 grains of Swiss #1.5 ... and it would not weigh the same as 60 grains of Goex 2f.
As a matter of fact, if ANY of those three charges actually weighed 60 grains on a scale, it would be a matter of pure chance.

So, while density (weight) of the powder charge differs by granulation and by brand, the volume of something is a constant that any muzzloader can relate to. So, most of them use that form when describing their loads.

Cartridge shooters who use black powder usually establish (and describe) their loads using numbers from a scale.

CM

[Geezer in NH]

Duh! who could afford scales?? The black powder did not need them. Only anal cyber folk do.

If you want to learn get back into history without attitude

[dondiego]

I can't afford not to have scales! Rarely use them for shooting black though.

[Idz]

Truth is except for a few reloaders everybody measures BP and smokeless by volume. All your powder measures drop a known volume of powder. In the case of smokeless powder the volume is cross calibrated to a weight of powder. The commercial loads are done by volume also. BP density will change as it absorbs water from the air so measuring it by volume without cross calibrating makes more sense.

[ResearchPress]

Long range target shooters will often be seen on the range using phials of pre-weighed charges when loading. This was also the practice in the 19th century and such range boxes survive. When you're shooting at 1,000 yards small changes can make a big difference at the target. For me, also I like the fact that I eliminated one more variable. As with most things there isn't a set answer - short range, long range, informal plinking, competition, hunting, personal preference; there's many reasons why using volumetric measures will give satisfactory results and why others prefer to use scales.

David

[Outpost75]

Measuring black powder by pouring enough in the palm of your hand to cover the ball, versus using a volumetric measure, versus weighing it, is exactly the same as tasking an engineer, a farmer and a logger to plan how to remove a 2-ton rock from the center of a muddy field.

The farmer will dig a trench in front of the rock, put a sling around it and drag it out intact with oxen or a dozer.

The logger will laborously break apart the rock and remove it piece by piece.

The engineer will assess how far the rock is from structures which may be damaged, then drill holes into the rock, set charges, blow it up and have a team of laborers stack the pieces in a truck to be carted off.

They all get the job done, you have to decide whether time, labor or finnesse are most important for you.

[bigted]

All good to know. Basically I guess from what I am reading. Black powder has a lot more room for error as opposed to smokeless. So once I am up to speed in how to do it, don't sweat it.

this is ... to my knowledge any how ... the skinny of the weigh/volumn charges for blackpowder and the substitutes;

back in the 1970's when I first began foolin with blackpowder in muzzleloaders we never heard of any "fake" blackpowder. sooo ... the volume of a charge could either be measured by volume or weight. they both equaled the same charge as black powder can be either weighed or measured by volume.

THEN came a company that announced a "NEW" blackpowder substitute and they called it "Pyrodex". the instructions were and are to use a volume measure that would hold {for instance} 60 grains of black powder and this VOLUME would be the same VOLUME that this new powder was to be measured by. the NEW powder was and is lighter then black powder and is built to have the same power volume to volume as real blackpowder. it was touted to be less corrosive and easier to clean as well as NOT being an explosive ... thusely having the ability to be stored like any other "smokeless" powder that is flammable but not explosive like the real thing.

all aftermarket powders that followed that NEW powder were required to be measured by this same volume method so as to equal the same volume as the real McCoy.

so as to cover the base of the question ... volume and weighed loads are equal to each other IN REAL BLACKPOWDER ONLY ... not the substitutes ... non of them. blackpowder has always been THE powder and all weights and volume charges are interchangeable. not so again with the aftermarket stuff.

BPCR shooters almost always load their cartridges with weighed charges of black powder. the better muzzleloader shooters at the target line [GENERALLY] weigh their charges. the hunter needing around 2 and maybe 3 MOA do not require [again] [GENERALLY] a weighed charge to bring home the bacon ... or venison ... or elk ... ect.

long winded tho it may be ... this is the skinny as I know it about this subject. hope this helps and I too would like to see these basics covered in a sticky so that other new folks could have a reference to refer to.

[Zouave 58]

One thing to consider is consistency, the technique you develop for measuring needs to be the same shot to shot. I measure by poring directly from the powder can to an adjustable brass tube measure with a swinging funnel and tap the tube twice to level the charge before I swing the funnel to cut off the excess. In truth I have no idea how many grains of powder by weight I actually load. All I know is that I try to keep the charges as equal as possible. Black powder being as tolerant as it is, you don't need much more precision than that. I suspect weighing charges didn't come into general usage until after the invention of smokeless powder which as we all know, can be dangerously intolerant.

[gandydancer]

Oh man! I forgot the question?

[Dan4570]

You can measure by weight, surprisingly if you do weigh real Black Powder say, 35 grns FFF or FF and dump it on a ballanced scale it will weigh aprox 35 grns, I can then take the weighed charge and either dump it into my Uberti Arms 3rd Mod Dragoon, or I can dump it into a .45 Colt casing (drop tube required here) compress and load it, quite accurate out of 66, or 73 SA Uberti. (every load can be allmost identical given 100th or so of a grain. The cartridge BP firearm is more picky for some reason and there are other factors for accuracy to consider too.
The Dragoon on the other hand I dump it, add a pre-lubed felt wad, Round ball or heel based conical, and then compress all of it with the loading lever...it shoots quite nicely, (actually it is more accurate @ 25 paces than my SA .45)
One of my shooting budies weighs every charge he puts in a paper cartridge or tube, makes them all the same, and the battle sights on his original Springfield buck&ball, or conical projectiles on target with the sights set at the correct range. All loading is done into the cartridges before he goes to the range.
The differance will show up on paper, with high/low rounds. The most place where it really tatles is over a chony, though things such as a 51 navy .36 will average about 750 fps, with a relatively small (about 5 ftps) variation. Go to something like a 45-70 cartridge gun and sloppy loads may run 50-75 I have evn seen 100 fps spread over a course of 10 shots, big issue @ 100 yards and beyond w/ 400-500 grns of lead only moving 1150-1250 fps That can make a huge difference, missed targets and wounded and lost game.
muzzle loader hunting range with patched RB in all reality is only about 150 yards max, I will not shoot at a deer if it apears to be more than 100 yds. I have taken game with a front stuffer, everything has been between 35-75 yards away.

The powder if measured by volume, and done the same way every time, and then weighed, it will likely come to within 1/2 grain (respectfully +/-) every time, this allows for the guns to fire accurately.
I like pop cans for judging acuracy, If I can hit a pop can 6 out of 6 times @ 25 yds with my 60 Army, then I'm happy.
If I can hit a pop can 2 out of 3 times @ 75- 100 yards with my .50 cal front stuffer, I'm happy, and that is adaquate to deer hunt with.

hope this helped.

"I stand with the idea that smokeless powder is nothing more than a novelty item; just a passing fad that will undoubtedly never catch on"