Weighed vs. Metered charges?

[Yance]

Days off weather hasn't cooperated for me to get in much range time these past couple of months to run a simple "head to head" test of weighed charges versus metered charges from my Lyman 55 measure.

I've always weighed rifle charges, mostly smokeless since I've just begun shooting BPC a little over a year ago and was wondering if there was a noticeable difference in accuracy and SD between weighed and metered charges.

I have noticed as much as .5 gr +/- in charges dumped into the scale pan and either "pinch out" or trickle up to my desired charge.

I'm sure some of you who have been at this game for several years have tried this test and wondered what your findings were after the smoke cleared.

My "weighed" charges were good enough for a 49-3X on the 100 yd buffalo target at Saturday's match but the turkeys were a little "skinny".<G>

TIA

[Don McDowell]

For the most part I've not seen anything running loads over a chronograph that shows anything much more the 5-10 fps deviation with good loads dumped from my 55 measure right into the case. Sometime even with loads that aren't so great 20 fps extreme spread can crop up, and I'ld be at a loss to think anyone could hold the difference in groups that 20 fps would make.

It also seems like it take at least 2 -5 grs of powder to make any appreciable difference in velocity.

[405]

Early on I tinkered with checking between metered and weighed charges for BPCR. I couldn't tell much if any difference. You say SD? I assume your talking velocity readings.... If so I would imagine most of the SD you may see would come from the other zillion variables in loading a good black powder cartridge round. If you meter-drop to a marked spot (depth) in the case and it doesn't vary much among several tries.... that should be your guide. You'll want to check that as you go to make sure you get as consistent a powder compression, bullet to bullet, as possible. A drop tube can sometimes help settle and stabilize the volume within the case.... again checking for variation among several cases. I use a Lyman BP measure with a home made drop tube and have pretty good luck. Sometimes it depends on how the handle is pulled and how consistent the technique- as with all powder measures. The coarser FF powder is a little trickier to meter than FFF. Just as with the different smokeless powders.

[Guido4198]

With all the steps required to load a good quality 45/70 round for black powder shooting...weighing the charge doesn't add much to the overall effort. My BPCR rounds aren't used for "blasting ammo" like I would load for an AR rifle. That's just me...
Cheers,
G.

[Boz330]

When I first got my Lyman 55 I loaded for a couple matches weighing each dropped charge and it held with in +- .2 and most were within .1. Now I just check when I start to make sure nothing has gone wrong and then just drop the charges thru a 30" home made drop tube on the measure.
When I have chronoed the loads, the worst ES that I can remember was 13fps for 10 rounds. I haven't spent a lot of time on the chrono but with my 40-65 it seems like it takes 2 full grains of powder to change the velocity 20fps IIRC.

Bob

[Yance]

Thanks for all the replies guys.

I figured that as many folks that shot "dumped and droptubed" charges and still shot good scores that the extra trouble of weighing each charge to the .01 or less was little gain for time expended.

Think I'll go install mounting blocks on the wall for my Lyman 55 and drop tube.

Thanks again

[405]

Boz makes a good point. Since we all like to tinker with loads it's a good idea to weigh a few once you've got the powder charge column (volume) where you want it with a particular load. I record that in my log book along with bullet, bullet seating depth, particulars on wads used, grease cookie, amount of compression, etc. Then some time in the future if I want to go back to that load I have a starting point where to set the meter to throw a certain weight of charge. Then double check the charge column height in the case. Just saves a little time in resetting everything when returning to a load you've already tested.

[McLintock]

I've always weighed my charges and dropped them through a 24" drop tube and let it go at that. After reading an article by Dick Trenk of Pedersoli Rifle I'm wondering about it some more. He says powder column height in the case is the major thing you're looking for and it has to be consistent as possible. He came up with a method using a volume measuring device like muzzleloaders use. He uses a measurer that he's able to overfill and then skim off the excess. For the volume he wants, he overfills the measurer, taps it 10-12 times to settle the powder and then either pours it through a 30" drop tube or puts it in the case and vibrates with a mild vibrating device for a set time period. He says he gets the same powder height in the case using either method and ends up with very low SD's. Don't know if it's worth it or not, but I bought a CVA powder measure to try it just for the hell of it. You can read the whole article over at bpcr.net, filed under Technical Info I think, pretty interesting stuff. I've never seen any of the major shooters comment on this method so don't know what the general opinion is on it.
McLintock

[Don McDowell]

Its' entirely possible to outthink yourself on this powder column deal. The powder column will always be the same if you're throwing the same charge of powder. The only way it will change is if you go to switching bullets or the seating die is sloppy.
If you need to put a bullets base 1/2 inch into the case to get it to chamber, the top of the powder is always going to be just that high, don't matter how you get it there, the bullets base will always have the final say on powder column height.

[McLintock]

That's true that after compressing and seating of the bullet the powder columns are all the same height, but Dick claims there's more to it than that. Quoted from the article, he says, "Because powder compression affectrs BP accuracy much more than does a slight charge weight variation, it becomes more important to have a charge in the case settled to a constant height, before actual mechanical compression takes place." Further on he states, " But...in order to obtain even nd consistent powder compression, we MUST start with even and consistent column heights in the ctg. case." Again, I don't know or have an opinion, but it's definitely food for thought.
McLintock

[Don McDowell]

Well maybe yes and maybe no.
Here not long ago a shot a handful of test rounds,68 grs of cartridge, 10 each were compressed before seating the bullet, and just seating the bullet. It's impossible to tell which was which without actually seeing them strike the target, as they fell to the same group, and this was at 270 yds.

I think it depends alot more on the bullet and alloy, how hard it wants/needs to be kicked down the barrel as to accuracy. I've had the lee 500 3r cast from 20-1 shoot marvelous with 65gr of goex 2f, and go clear to pot with a full 70 gr charge. Yet that same bullet cast from 16-1 shoots real well to about 400 yds or more with 70 grs 2f, but starts tumbling when it gets to 500.
I also think how far the rifle wants the bullet off the lands, or hard into the lands, before the firing pin scares the crap out of the primer , makes a great deal of difference.

[Boz330]

Personally I think it is all in how you hold your mouth.:mrgreen:
Kidding aside, I have used volume measures and weight measures and I think the big thing is consistancy. My cases are reformed from 45-70 and I can load either way and by the feel of the compression die the column heights are not all the same after dropping the charges. How much difference there is I never spent the time to find out, but the weights or volumes are the same. The cases are all trimmed the same and they are weighed into lots but there is a difference that you can feel in some of the cases. I've even seperated out those rounds but haven't been able to tell a noticeable difference so I don't worry about it.
I'm not near as anal as some guys about this stuff but I enjoy shooting more than reloading. I've long since given up the idea of winning a national championship and the only peson that I feel obligated to beat is my best shootin and huntin buddy and me. I don't beat him often ( he is really good) but it sure makes good ribbin over beers when I do.:drinks: If you can't tell I do this for fun.:bigsmyl2:

Bob

[Don McDowell]

:-D Boz it only does any good to have a powder column at 1.38795, and compression of .37896432 if you hold the left corner of your mouth at a downward transverse angle of 16.3 degrees on sunnydays........:drinks:

I agree whole heartedly folks tend to make a whole bunch more out of this than is necessary. It takes good loads put together in a consistant fashion, but beyond that it takes trigger time and tons of it to win matches either local or national.

I get a chuckle out of Dennis Wiley describing how Dave Gullo was reloading the ammo while shooting with the US team in South Africa a few years back,whenever this subject comes up
. Just decapped and primed the cases, scooped the case into a bowl of powder shook the top off with a table knife , thumbed in a wad and jammed a bullet home. It don't get much simpler than that, and those boys served the USA with pride in that match.:Fire:

[Kenny Wasserburger]

I weigh,

+- .1 grain for my long range loads, bullets are in a .3 lot. Cases are in a 3 grain lot. Powder is poured in a swirling method into the funnel, on a 30 inch drop tube.

I aneal after every firing.

The results, from 800-1000 yards to 1 mile, speak for them selves.

My shooting pard Jimbo Terry does the same.

The Lunger

[John Boy]

It don't get much simpler than that ...
Don, alot of truth to the statement. Harry Pope did the same: One 33-40 case - pour the powder to the mouth - cap with a felt wad - breech seat the bullet and rip the living devil out the bullseye at 200 yds ... that's offhand too!

[Boz330]

I weigh,

+- .1 grain for my long range loads, bullets are in a .3 lot. Cases are in a 3 grain lot. Powder is poured in a swirling method into the funnel, on a 30 inch drop tube.

I aneal after every firing.

The results, from 800-1000 yards to 1 mile, speak for them selves.

My shooting pard Jimbo Terry does the same.

The Lunger

Kenny,
I'm assuming that since you are annealing that you use neck tension. How much? And how do you keep your annealing consistant from case to case?

Thanks
Bob

[Kenny Wasserburger]

Boz,

I use about 1.5 thou neck tension best as I can measure. However I also anneal my PP cases every firing to get the same neck size on ever case and no neck tension there.

Cases last alot longer and the, well? the Results speak for themselves.

KW

[Black Prince]

Yance

I know it flies in the face of conventional wisdom, but it was either Keith or Hatcher that wrote about each charge being at exact weight as opposed to charges dumped directly from the powder measure and which was more accurate. Although I don't remember who wrote it, I do remember that the loads dumped from the measure without being of exact weight were equal to or better than the weighed charges. All that whiskey is begining to tell now that the little gray cells are pickeled in Evan Williams. Maybe some of you guys who are more interested in this than I am can look that up and sumerize the discussion for us here.

Since reading that, I have never used my powder trickler to bring each charge to exact weight again. Of course, I shoot large cartridges and the small weight variances are of much smaller percentage of overall powder capacity, so they probably don't matter all that much. If you are shooting a .223, it probably would matter more.

So weigh each powder charge if it makes you feel better about how the rounds will shoot. Confidence in your equipment is very important and I am not discounting that aspect of shooting at all. I'll set the Lyman 55 with a scale and once it is where I want it, I'll charge the whole loading block without checking the weight again. I'll weigh the last charge and if it's still in the ball park, I'll stick a bullet on top of the powder and go shoot it. Those loads will shoot as good as those I fret over, and weigh, and index, and make blood sacrifices to the shooting Gods, and yours will too.

[Black Prince]

Wal, I looked in Hatcher lass nite and it wadn't there. I'm look'in in Keith now to try to find that article. Dang I wuisht I cud see more better.

[montana_charlie]

On the basic subject of 'consistency' in powder charges...

Those who use volume to measure a charge have different ideas about how to fill the measure.
Some will drag the measure through a bowl of powder, and others will pour powder into the measure. With either method, there is no way to control how the various sized granules are arranged in the case. So, I think the density of the powder charge will vary some with each scoop...or pour.
The shooter who fills his powder measure while pouring through a drop tube might reduce this variation considerably.

Although (I believe) some small degree of inconsistency will exist, none of the variations, in any of the above methods, is likely to be great enough to have a major impact on a large charge...maybe not even a detectable impact.

Therefore, I will concede that volume measuring of large black powder charges is a dependable way to load accurate ammunition.

However, weighing a charge on a dependable scale erases any lingering question about 'how much' powder is in the charge.

Therefore, I can see nothing to make one believe that a volume charge must be better than a weighed charge when the goal is a fine degree of 'consistency'.

That leaves it to the shooter to decide how much 'inconsistency' he is willing to accept.

The only danger (if you can call it that) in a willingness to accept an inconsistency...is when that willingness will accept other inconsistencies like...
- How big does a flaw have to be to reject a bullet.
- How important is case weight.
- Is sorting bullets by weight worth the effort.
- Does having the same headstamp on all cases really matter.
- and the list goes on....

Great care in building ammunition should show up as great results on paper targets.
But, if the target is a steel gong or silhouette...or a game animal...ammuinition loaded with less intense scrutiny might still be totally adequate.

My only gripe about the difference between volume vs scale is when guys post their loads.
I wish they would specify which method they used to measure out '70' grains of powder...
CM

[Boz330]

Good point. Swiss BP weighs 10% more per volume than Goex. I usually try to remember to qualify by weight or volume for that reason.

Bob

[Black Prince]

It is incumbundant on those who use volume as the measurement method to say so because when you say 70 grains, it is assumed to be a weighed measurement. That is the standard unit of measurement, not volume. If you use volume as the unit of measurement, the statement should be 70 grains by volume. But as we know, many people do not go by standards any more and many more do not even know that there are standards. We can thank our wonderful government run schools for that.

I'm looking in Keith's Gun Notes for that dern article about the comparison of weighed and charges thrown by volume. I'll run it down fer you boys yet. I found it right interestin' since the ole man knew a thing or two about shooting and loading.

[Black Prince]

Wal dang it, I looked in both volumes of Gun Notes and in Hell I Was There lass night and couldn't find it. I'll look in Sixguns tonight.

[martinibelgian]

My opinion? a grain is a WEIGHT measurement, not a volume measurement - if you talk volume, don't talk grains, because you still use the scales to set your volume measurement. I load by volume with a RCBS Uniflow, and use the settings on the micrometric adjustment as reference mark - so I load 2 drops of the '8' setting in my #2 Musket. Depending on lot or brand of powder, that corresponds with something between 79 (TPPH) and 84 (Latest lot of Swiss 1 1/2Fg) grs in weight. But I always load the same volume...

[McLintock]

In the article I quoted above, by Dick Trenk, he talked about the differences between scale weight and volume weight. He said that a 62.0 gr settled charge of Swiss 1.5, in his adjustable measure, would weigh 72.7 grs on his electronic scale; quite a difference. So, when talking about powder charges, it should definitely be specified what kind of charge you're talking about.
McLintock

[Black Prince]

That there are differences in scale weighed and volume charges is and has been known for about as long as men have been shooting powder in rifles. That those two units of measurement are differentiated by nomenclature and termonology is commonly known and understood. You CAN NOT say I shoot 70 grains of FF-G Goex in my rifle when you are refering to a volume measurement, and if you do, you are WRONG!

70 grains is a weight unit of measurement. It is NOT a volume unit of measurement and the two terms CAN NOT be used interchangably. Most people who ever bothered to read a loading manual know all about this and ALWAYS say "by volume" when referring to a volume unit of measurment since the weighed unit is standard. Anytime you deviate from the standard, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for telling everyone since they are thinking in standard terms like most rational people usually do.

This is a soultion to a non-existant problem for everyone except newbie reloaders, and those who never took basic inorganic chemistry where you had to know units of measurement. That some gun writer has discovered this and wrote an article about it is ANOTHER example of the dufusess now pretending to be gun writers. Once upon a time gun writers actually had to have experience BEFORE they started earning a living as a gun writer. But that all changed with Jack O'Connor and so today we have these "pretend" writers. Next thing you know they are gonna discover that rifles actually make noise and write an article about the need for ear protection.

[montana_charlie]

You CAN NOT say I shoot 70 grains of FF-G Goex in my rifle when you are refering to a volume measurement, and if you do, you are WRONG!
Take a deep breath, Prince.

Now that you are more relaxed, picture the average guy with his new muzzle loader. He has bought the 'accessory package' to go with it, and contained therein is an adjustable powder measure...a volumetric one.

As he pulls the inner part down, out of the outer part, little numbered lines align with the bottom edge of the outer sleeve. His instruction sheet tells him that the line marked '70' means "70 grains". He is very thankful for that explanation, because (otherwise) he will only be able to tell his friends that his powder charge is "70". When they ask, "70 what?" he would only be able to say, "70 I don't knows."

You and I know that the '70 grains' thrown by his measure will not weigh 70 grains on a scale. The difference comes from the fact that his measure is calibrated in 'water grains'. A grain weight of water (water being denser than powder) will have less volume than an equal weight of powder would require.
(Ever see a guy complain because his .45/70 case won't hold 70 grains of powder? You could say, "True, Grasshopper, but it will hold 70 grains of water. and that's why it's called a 70-grain case.")

The point of all of this, in an effort to keep you breathing easy, is to say that for some guys using a term like '70 grains' is most natural...even if they are talking about a volume-measured charge. Why? Because 'grains' is what the lines on the measure are supposed to represent.

Since almost everybody running loose and shooting guns during the early days was using volume devices to measure their powder...and since Sharps (for example) was using the same system when producing metallic cartridge ammunition...it may be more proper to refer to 'water grains' as 'grains' when the subject is black powder.
However, since all of us are so modern, now...and because most of us also deal with smokeless powders which MUST be specified in 'scale grains'...we get fooled when somebody doesn't alert us to the fact that the 'grains' he is talking about are the 'water grains' thrown by a volumetric measure.

(A caveat...That comment I made about the system used by Sharps is an assumption. I'm not an historian, so I may have that wrong...but it seems logical.)

CM

P.S. And, Oh Yeah...about Dick Trenk!
He is the US rep for Pedersoli. So, he knows a lot about their guns, and he does a lot of shooting...making him better equipped to handle questions from customers.

I don't know how well he shoots, but he knows a fair amount about the subject.

CM

[Don McDowell]

I got to wondering about this muzzleloader powder measure business once, and checked. Both my Ted Cash powder measure and the elcheapo made in the famous ol blacksmith TAiwans shop and sold at Kmart, threw charges of 2f Goex reasonably close to what the setting said they would.

[Black Prince]

Well fellas, all I am gonna say about this business is that once I was called out on a coroners jury because I owned a little gun and reloading shop, was a former deputy sheriff, and knew all the local law dogs, so they came and got me to serve. We went over to the coroners office and here was a young guy about 17 or 18 with half his face blown off. It was opening day of muzzle loading season in Mississippi. Our "case" lying on the slab, had managed to kill himself trying to shoot a muzzle loader.

The facts were that he had bought his rifle, powder and everything he needed, in a "complete kit" from Wal-Mart the evening before. He took it home, loaded it up, but we don't know how or with what, and took it hunting the next morning. Apparently he saw a deer and shot at it, the resulting blast killing him. His blown up rifle was there in the room too. The game warden had found it near the body, or he found pieces of it. Taking a deep breath is what it is all about, but it's dam difficult to breathe with half your head missing.

I don't know if the "case" didn't know weight measurement from volume measurement, but I do know that he was as dead as they come. This stuff is serious and it can kill you or some unsuspecting innocent standing beside you. It is therefore somewhat important that people actually KNOW what they are doing and what they are saying when it comes to loading and measuring powder. Or at least, it could have been important to the young man lying on the slab in the coroners office that day. As it was, it wasn't important to him anymore.

It is those kinds of things that cause me to say that if you don't know what you are doing or talking about regarding powder measurement, you might want to find out.

It could be important to you.