what charge throw is acceptable to you? fixes and musings.

[mozeppa]

this is a little long, i'm trying to observances out there that maybe some else may benefit
or at least make some go HMMM?
yet others will think i'm nuts.


Pistol round shooters,
how far off does your charge throw need to be before you dump it and try again?

I've mounted a quest for perfection as i'm "OCD" when it comes to powder throws. (other stuff too.)
here's some of what i've done....and some of my observances and fixes implemented.

I'm currently using unique powder and a case activated hornady powder measure.

1. I tried to to use it as it came from the box with a really good cleaning job and after running 5 full hoppers thru it to coat everything inside with gun powder dust (i've been told it's similar to "graphite" dust.)
observance= the throws were all over the scale...5 to 6 tenths of a grain high or low.

2. I added a vibrator at the top of the throw to get every granule out of the measure drum.
observance= it helped but not too much.


3. So... I added a switch to facilitate vibration at the bottom of each throw as well as the top to vibrate the powder into the charge drum as well as out of the drum with some consistency.
observance= it helped, but was still 3 to 4 tenths off at times but would hit my target mark more often. the high or low charges were erratic ...even with a constant cadence they still occurred.

4. I took it apart and examined each piece ...on the linkage I filed or sanded all the burrs off and polished each piece ...even the end of the measuring stem.

no change

5. pulled everything apart ...again... this time i examined the drop tube that screws into
the bottom of the measure body. it appears to me that the bore thru it was done on a lathe with a small boring bar ...they drilled 1/2 way thru it ...then took it out of the chuck, reversed it then drilled thru to complete the boring step. i'm assuming that it was done in 2 steps to keep the boring bar from walking off center too far.

observance=the bores did NOT perfectly line up and created a shelf like edge in the center of the drop tube. PLus ...when the lathe operator reached the center he backed out the boring bar while it was still spinning , leaving a spiral record groove from end to end. Dear hornady , how hard wood it be to run a ream thru there?
sanded and polished to high shine with diamond paste. did the same with the caliber specific belling funnel.

6. examined the internal area of the measure body ...made of cast iron i think.
the inside was rough as could be. the throat and the area right below the baffle was as rough as
40 grit sandpaper ...then hornady powder coated the insides of the body red.
fix= i used a dremel tool grinding ball on a whip to smooth out the roughness and the i used a brake
cylinder hone on a drill press to polish the internal funnel and measure throat tube.

next came a cleaning job a surgeon would approve of.

assembly ...it was a pretty sight to behold.

ANd with all my careful work ....the throws are better ...but still will drop a charge 2 to 3 tenths off
at times...it hits the target number of 5.6 grains of unique often then the "off" charge might hit 2 or three times then it hits normal for a while...then off, then on, driving me nuts!

with the anal retentive attitude of achieving perfection by removing as many variable flaws that could mechanically be an issue ... my final observance is that the powder granules are NOT of UNIQUE size!
pun intended.

smaller granules = heavier load ...medium size = target load...larger granules = lighter load.

i think to achieve the most consistent powder throw with this measure as it is now , will be the use of
powder with very small granules like #5, #7, H110, win 296, to get the void in the measure drum to fill on each throw more consistently.




so .....how far off will you accept a powder throw?

another observance ....beam scales are WAY more accurate than a measure ...even more than electronic scales.

try this:

turn on your electronic scale...zero it with the pan on it.
pour some powder (any kind ...even sand or salt will work)

scale at zero...take a pinch of sand and slowly rub the sand between your fingers into the pan ...slowly! if you are slow enough the scale will still read zero.

you can do this until the pan is full AND it will still read zero.
even the scales on hornadys electronic powder measures will do this.

sorry for being so long winded.

[silhouette_shooter]

I use a powder scoop with Unique, it frequently hangs up in the drop tube of my Little Dandy. And my RCBS Uniflow. Other than that . . . more than one tenth of a grain is bad ju ju.

[Steppapajon]

I just weigh everything. I enjoy the loading as much as the shooting. One required the other so a win win in my book.

[Kraschenbirn]

Electronic measures aren't my thing. Had one maybe a year after they hit the market and sold it after only two or three loading sessions: a) too slow and b) accuracy not up to my standard. For 'rifle' powders, I've yet to find anything to match the old Belding & Mull for repeatable accuracy. I've added a vibrator to mine and, as a test, dropped 10 consecutive charges of 32.5 gr H4895 (weighed on my RCBS 10-10) with max. variance +/- .1 gr. Ran same test using 25.5 gr IMR4198...same result. With ball powders like WW760, I get, essentially, ZERO variance.

For 'Pistol' powders, like Unique or AA#5...the two I use the most...the Dillon measures on my SDB and upgraded RL450 will maintain +/- .2 gr so long as I manage the level in the powder reservoir properly. FWIW, though...I've polished/shimmed/graphited the innards of all my Dillon measures and, for my 'standard' charges, fabricated my own fixed volume charge bars.

Bill

[TNsailorman]

I use both Lee Scoops and powder measures to throw the charge I want onto a scale less about .2 and then trickle the rest of the charge onto the scale until it reads dead on. I do not use a charge that does not read the exact amount of powder I want for that cartridge. Yes I weigh each and every charge I load. Maybe It is overkill but that is just me. my experience anyway, james

[str8wal]

I'm currently using unique powder and a case activated hornady powder measure.

If you are gonna use a powder measure I'd suggest changing powders.

[ascast]

I'm not a shrink, but I think that your posting this means you don't have OCD, just a half tad off

[country gent]

Mozeppa,
I did the same with an rcbs uniflow only I went the other way. In my checking I found the drum housings hole was out of round and had some extra clearance, the flow areas were rough and grabby. the drum was smooth but not true as to round and flat surfaces. the drum also had a lot of side play in operation. The fit of the measure stem was poor.

I set the cast iron housing up in a jig grinder and cleaned up the drum hole to round and true it is now very smooth and round with in .0001. I then set it up in the surface grinder and ground the sides of the housing smooth flat and parallel to each other.. Last I reamed the flow holes with a taper pin reamer so they got bigger as the powder dropped. just enough to clean up then a polish on these surfaces. A wood dowel turned to match and lapping compound. Last on the housing was a new drop spout turned from aluminum and finished and fit.

The drum was set aside and a new drum turned up with a shoulder on one side. this was turned .010 large the meter hole machined .010 small and holes drilled and tapped. A side plate was made up also. These parts were hardened to 48-50 rc then ground to size finish. the drum has .0003 clearance the shuoulder is square to the drum and the drum is flat and smooth no ridges or high spots. the drum was ground so that the side plate screwed down tight had only .002 end play. the meter hole was ground to the size of the micrometer adjust conversion that was added. And fitted into it. all sharp edges were broken but on the meter hole It was deburred but left sharp. On assembly it was very smooth operating with no binding or tight spots. no clerances big enough to grind or pinch powder granuales and a very good looking measure.

I also fabricated a insert for the hopper that gave a double chamber similar to the belding and mull measure to take the hopper level out of the system.

With some powders it does very good with others it still varies a little but not as bad. This mesure has several lunch hours of time in it. It is better, the micrometer adjust made it easier to reset to a given charge. And it is very smooth and easy operating. It does a good job. And is close to my 2 harrels measures.

The powder measure needs consistant operation of it. I believe that's one reason the press mounted seem to run better is the consistency of the press operating them. Powder type granual shape and density play a big role also. A light fluffy powder just dosnt flow as well as a heavy ( denser) tick or ball powder. The fluffy powders don't pack as well into the measures either a flat grain may lay flat or on edge giving different airspaces. Ball powders flow and fill the same every time better. stick powders are the same its how they stack in. Think of stick powders as logs a load of wood stacked takes way less room that when thrown in a pile. One thing a baffle or the double chambers do is to alighn the grains more so.
I have thought about a small spiral channel to the measure drum to "spin" the powder in but then bridging and packing become an issue

[mtgrs737]

Love Unique, but if you want consistent drops then give W231 a try, it is the most consistent dropping powder I have found. I also like Alliant 20/28 for it's consistent drops and it is similar to Unique in speed but you would need to contact Alliant with any load you would want to try.

[kmw1954]

Tolerance. We all set one at some point.

Pistols, I shoot with 3 different powders; HP-38, AA#5 and Ramshot Silhouette. They are all fine grained powders and meter well. With these powers I have found I can hold pretty consistent to within 0.10gr with the Lee Disk measure.. Also while working up loads I started working in 0.1gr increments from start to max. I could not tell the difference in felt recoil or point of impact within 0.2gr with any of these powders. So a 0.2gr spread is my set tolerance for these powders.

Also I have found that with volumetric measures they will tend to vary to the light side rather than to the heavy side of the target weight.

[Wayne Smith]

Unique is the powder that I will ONLY use in the B&M measure. It is inconsistent and hangs up in all of my other seven powder measures!

It's more the powder and less the measure, although you did a great job on the measure and increased it's utility and value immensely.

[mdi]

Neither of my main powder measures will be much less than .25 to .3 grains off with Unique (Lee PPM and a C-H 502), as consistent use of the powder measure helps greatly (the exact same motion, same speed, etc.). But Unique, being a flake powder, just doesn't meter as well as others. When I'm working up a load, or just reloading for "fun", I weigh every charge. Powder measure set .3-.5 below target charge and trickle up. No big deal as I'm set up for that process and have done it thousands of times, and it isn't too slow for me...

[JBinMN]

When I'm working up a load, or just reloading for "fun", I weigh every charge. Powder measure set .3-.5 below target charge and trickle up. No big deal as I'm set up for that process and have done it thousands of times, and it isn't too slow for me...

Ditto, with the exception of I try to meter the charge at .2 or less then trickle up. Regardless of powder used. I am "particular" that way.. Then again, I ladder test in 0.1 grain increments also, so maybe I am just a bit OCD/"picky" about things when I reload. I figure the, "Aim small, Hit small" concept works in the reloading room as well as when shooting. That's just me, as YMMV, of course.
;)

[Bmi48219]

Guess I'm lucky. I measure with an old Lyman 55 (doesn't have the adjust screw) & check with a Redding #2 scale. My loading bench is in a un-airconditioned garage in south Florida. Used Unique for years, switched to TiteGroup for same cartridges when Unique was hard to find at a reasonable price. I weigh 33% of loads measured. The Lyman stays within one half of one tenth grain (I think that would read .05 grain) with both powders. As long as I keep the hopper at least 1/2 full. I use the rapper once after dump & again once when the powder chamber is in fill position.

But on one loading session last year I was getting wild weight swings up to .5 grain with TiteGroup. Drove me crazy for a while until I noticed a small spider was trying to build a web on my powder scale pan swing. I weigh a load, fill a case, weigh another and let it sit on scale until I've measured/ filled 3 cases, then fill the next case with the charge that's been sitting on the scale. He (or she) had enough time between the charges I weighed to get started lashing my pan down before I used the weighed load sitting on it.

[DCM]

Excellent write up with Lots of useful info. Thanks for sharing.
As someone else mentioned I also use different powder measures for different powders.
I found the Hornady to work best with ball powders, the Lee perfect powder measure works the best with stick powders and much better than ones costing 10 X the price for that purpose. I got to try a friends $250 measure and found the Lee to work way better for stick powders. Transfer bar types with baffles seem to work well with flake powder.

[rmcc]

2nd on B&M. If you want consistent, get a B&M. Especially with "Lincoln log" powders!!

[Hick]

I mostly shoot offhand for pleasure, which means my accuracy is limited. I've found no problems wiht loads being off as long as its within half a grain. For some of my pistol loads I use 700x-- and with the RCBS measure at light load ( 4 or 5 grains) it does vary by half a grain. I hav e a powder trickler for times when I really want precision, but don's use it often. When I qualified for my concealed carry I had to place 30 rounds in the 9 ring at 7 yards. I allowed the powder load to be within half a grain out of 4 grains and it only took 31 shots to get 30 for qualifying. So, I figure half a grain is close enough in my 38 special.

[tazman]

I won't use flaky powders that will throw inconsistent charges.
I use small grain powders and they all drop within 1/10th of a grain using my Lee Pro Autodisk.
After hearing all the horror stories about Unique and it's problems in measures, I simply don't use it.

[farmerjim]

I use a Lee auto drum. I do not load unique, but with the flake powders I am usually within 0.1 grains, sometimes 0.2. rare, rare 0.3. I usually use herco for most of my pistol loads, and it is so fluffy that my loads nearly fill the case. I can see a .03 + or -.
With the stick powders I like varget in my 223's because the powder charge I use comes into the neck where I can see a small difference in volume.
Again, I do get 0.1 to 0.3 grains variance, but not many 0.3.
All my longer range hunting loads are dropped light and trickled to the exact charge.
I find the lee auto drum to be highly consistent.
The lee auto disk is fine with one layer but it varies too much when they are stacked.

[jmort]

I am good with +/- .2
If you own a Lee Auto Drum drop 10 charges and divided by 10
It is like magic, you will be dead-nuts on and the charges will be +/- .2
Crazy deal
I can live with variance as I never red-line loads
I go for the practical not perfection

[Motor]

Wax it. I'm serious. After cleaning wax it with a good quality car wax. This also works great with drum type dispensers like the Uniflow.

Motor

[ukrifleman]

Regardless of what powder I am using at the time, all my charges go from my measure into my Redding No.2 scale.

I don't trust any powder measure to consistently throw the same charge.

ukrifleman

[largom]

I just weigh everything. I enjoy the loading as much as the shooting. One required the other so a win win in my book.

Same here. I weigh Everything!

[mac60]

I am good with +/- .2
If you own a Lee Auto Drum drop 10 charges and divided by 10
It is like magic, you will be dead-nuts on and the charges will be +/- .2
Crazy deal
I can live with variance as I never red-line loads
I go for the practical not perfection

That's good insight. Once I get my measure adjusted to my satisfaction, I proceed to get the job done - making sure each one has a charge that looks like it's neighbors. I'm not obsessive about a little variance in the powder charge.

[Outpost75]

When I shot bullseye pistol at national level, NOBODY weighed powder charges.

Bullet quality and consistent crimp are more important.

Weighing charges on pistol ammo is "mental masturbation."

The only thing that matters is groups on paper, not less than ten-shot groups, and not less than three of them. If you want to be OCD, then measure the x, y coordinates of every shot, calculate the mean center of impact, then measure the distance of each shot from the MCI and calculate the radial standard deviation, which considers EVERY shot. Measuring extreme spread gives you very little useful information unless you shoot TEN-shot groups.

In .38 and .45 wadcutter WST is your friend. For full charge loads use AutoComp.

Acceptable powder charge weight variation is an extreme spread not exceeding 1% of the mean weight of the powder charge, or +/- 0.1 grain in .38 wadcutter, +/- 0.2 grain in 45 ACP. Weigh and record ten individual charges, move the decimal of the sigma, for X-bar, then compare the extreme spread of the high and low individual charges. If your measure won't hold the extreme spread of ten charges to within 1% of mean, either change powders or measuring technique.

[Motor]

When I shot bullseye pistol at national level, NOBODY weighed powder charges.

Bullet quality and consistent crimp are more important.

Weighing charges on pistol ammo is "mental masturbation."

The only thing that matters is groups on paper, not less than ten-shot groups, and not less than three of them. If you want to be OCD, then measure the x, y coordinates of every shot, calculate the mean center of impact, then measure the distance of each shot from the MCI and calculate the radial standard deviation, which considers EVERY shot. Measuring extreme spread gives you very little useful information unless you shoot TEN-shot groups.

In .38 and .45 wadcutter WST is your friend. For full charge loads use AutoComp.

Acceptable powder charge weight variation is an extreme spread not exceeding 1% of the mean weight of the powder charge, or +/- 0.1 grain in .38 wadcutter, +/- 0.2 grain in 45 ACP. Weigh and record ten individual charges, move the decimal of the sigma, for X-bar, then compare the extreme spread of the high and low individual charges. If your measure won't hold the extreme spread of ten charges to within 1% of mean, either change powders or measuring technique.

What an awesome post. Could not be more true and it doesn't even mention ball type powder which dispensers like the Uniflow and similar types will throw with accuracy often at +/-.1gr or in another words more accurately than most scales will measure.

But everyone is free to do what makes them feel good.

Motor

[JBinMN]

When I shot bullseye pistol at national level, NOBODY weighed powder charges.

Bullet quality and consistent crimp are more important.

Weighing charges on pistol ammo is "mental masturbation."

The only thing that matters is groups on paper, not less than ten-shot groups, and not less than three of them. If you want to be OCD, then measure the x, y coordinates of every shot, calculate the mean center of impact, then measure the distance of each shot from the MCI and calculate the radial standard deviation, which considers EVERY shot. Measuring extreme spread gives you very little useful information unless you shoot TEN-shot groups.

In .38 and .45 wadcutter WST is your friend. For full charge loads use AutoComp.

Acceptable powder charge weight variation is an extreme spread not exceeding 1% of the mean weight of the powder charge, or +/- 0.1 grain in .38 wadcutter, +/- 0.2 grain in 45 ACP. Weigh and record ten individual charges, move the decimal of the sigma, for X-bar, then compare the extreme spread of the high and low individual charges. If your measure won't hold the extreme spread of ten charges to within 1% of mean, either change powders or measuring technique.


Well, I currently, and respectfully disagree. Until it is proven to me otherwise.

Powder charge amount should have an impact on results.

I find it difficult to believe that if my bullets weigh +/- 0.1 grain or two & my case to boolit/bullet crimp remains the same, I use the same lot/strength of primer, the same lot of cases all equally the same OAL, and the rounds assembled with the same OAL, that the amount of powder has no or negligible effect on the results of shooting those rounds.

What I am reading is that I can pay strict attention to the above list of parameters & I can change the powder type and or amount & it would not have any effect?

Nope.. I disagree. Perhaps at certain distances the powder amount in handguns may have little effect, meaning the powder amount variance for 25 yds target or less it might be negligible due to the short distance from muzzle to target, but if you were to take the same round & fire the same powder type & amount at 50 yd, or even 100 yds with the same set up & handgun, I am sure that there would be an effect on accuracy due to the powder type & amount.

Why would powder companies even give a start to max. load data list and with more than one powder, if the effect of the amount of & type of powder did NOT have any effect on the results?

If I am mistaken, then someone is going to have to explain to me , "HOW" the powder type & amount does NOT have any effect on acccuracy in handguns, or even rifles for that matter.

Perhaps I am misunderstand the quoted posts I read...

I may not have "national " match experience, but I darn well know how to shoot & do so accurately out to easily 500 yds, with some rifles, and at one point in time my life & the lives of others depended on it.

To think that powder type and amount means little in reloading for accuracy somehow escapes me...

To stay on topic/subject, that is why I measure my powders to .1 grain increments, instead of .2 or more. I have found by my own experience that accuracy in a particular firearm can vary depending on the amount of powder when all other parameters are close to equal. Using a powder measure & then a trickler helps me to achieve that type of "exactness" of keeping the powder I happen to be using to amounts that do indicate speed in FPS should I be checking it with a chrony, as well as accuracy checking off a bench/sandbags where the only error is usually the shooter. As well as keeping the other components to a certain "standard".
The firearm is stabilized & fired in the same manner & the rest of the components are "tuned" to each other, and , IMO, the powder amount I am using DOES have an effect on accuracy.


P.s. - I did not add in other variables like , Size of boolit as compared to barrel, length of bbl., lubrication, & others ... What I consider variables that can have an effect on accuracy, but I was trying to be brief & still make the point that I think powder type & amount DO have an effect on accuracy, as well as those other factors & should not just be dismissed as "mental masturbation", when reloading.

[dverna]

Outpost nailed it.

[JBinMN]

Outpost nailed it.

Then show me some proof or documentation. I already asked him & since you agree & are here right now.

How about it?

-----------------


ETA: Posted & then saw a reply from Outpost75 & moved the ETA to a new post to follow his...

[rmcc]

Been reloading since 1982 (not saying that I don't have a lot to learn yet) and have found the following for reloading for accuracy:

1) segregate cases by same manufacturer
2) weigh cases and keep them separated by weight
3) do the same with bullets
I have used Uniflow, Redding, Pacific, Lee, Hollywood, Belding and Mull (B&M on this site), and Dillon powder measures for rifle and pistol. I have always set the charge and weighed every 10th. Yes, there is some variance. A lot of variance on stick powders. For stick powders, the B&M is the only measure I have found that will throw consistent charges with extruded powders. Followed by Hollywood. I use a LOT of Unique through Dillon measures and have never found that much variance. Jim Carmichael and Warren Page always said that the powder charge was the least of what they worried about in bench rest shooting, good enough for me!! Curiously, shotgun powder measures using bushings have the greatest variance in weighed charges. Most of those powders are flake powders. In my experience, anyway.

[Outpost75]

Well, I currently, and respectfully disagree. Until it is proven to me otherwise...

P.s. - I did not add in other variables like , Size of boolit as compared to barrel, length of bbl., lubrication, & others ... What I consider variables that can have an effect on accuracy, but I was trying to be brief & still make the point that I think powder type & amount DO have an effect on accuracy, as well as those other factors & should not just be dismissed as "mental masturbation", when reloading.


Go back 50 years or more through American Rifleman and read match technical reports which used to be published, of what the top shooters used, how they loaded their ammo, fellows like Bob Chow, Alton Dinan, Gil Hebard, Jim Clark, Ellis Lea, Byron Engle., Joe White, Tom Gaines, Jerry Jackson, Mo DeFina, etc. Read the summaries published in the NRA Handloader's Guide and the several articles on loading .38 wadcutter and .45 wadcutter match ammunition which described how all the champions did it.

I can tell you also that Homer Culver, Wally and PJ Hart never weighed a powder charge
at benchrest either, but rifle shooting is another story. Most of the highpower guys I shot with, Clint Fowler, Bert Rollins, Alan Cors, Max Brandt, Arvid Benson and the rest of the Virginia group only weighed powder at 1000 yards. At 600 and in it didn't matter.

In my time 1970s-1990, among civilian pistol and police revolver National champions who were winning all of the marbles without government furnished factory loads, not a man was weighing powder. Not one. You will have to go through the bound volumes of the Camp Perry reports and interviews of champion shooters, because the published data predates the Internet era, but I knew personally many of these guys and shot against the best of them and they spent their time shooting and practicing and not weighing powder, I can assure you of that!

Most of these fine gentleman and dead and gone now, and these 2600-club guys were doing it without scopes, red dots and the nonsense technical crutches and myriad excuses of today.

[JBinMN]

I see that you posted when I was adding to an earlier post & may have miiseed that ETA on the previous page.

Here it is & I will reply to your latest post in a following post.

--------------------
Just to try to be clear...

What I am reading from Outpost75 & then apparently confirmed by dverna, is that ladder testing for accuracy in handguns is a waste of time & is some sort of "mental masturbation?

That the amount of powder is irrelevant to shooting handgun in terms of accuracy?

I find this hard to believe considering I have ladder tested many times using .1 grain steps in the ladder tests of 10 or more rounds each & found variations until I came across the most accurate grain amount for that particular pistol using those other factors/parameters I mentioned in the post where I mentioned them.

Even without using a chronograph I could ID what round makeup of components with using a particular type of powder was the most accurate in that spread of steps of the ladder.

I.E - for a 45 ACP I use & testing Alliant Red Dot I found that going from 4.5 to 5.0 grains in .1 grain steps, on a sandbagged/ benched platform demonstrated that the 4.7 gr. load using that reload was the most accurate of the steps of the ladder. Then I re tested again on another day & confirmed those results.

I have done the same with reduced loads of Red Dot in 38spec, & 357mag, as well as normal range of loads from load data charts in reloading manuals. Also with normal loads of the same powder in .380, 9MM, & 44 mag. Just to verify what each handgun does with using that particular powder & the varied boolit weights I use for each.

I am currently doing the same for 3 other powders in 45ACP. based on ambient temps, as well as have many sets of other powders I am testing in all of those different firearms & powders & I am being told, even though I have seen it with my own eyes, that it is a waste of time & "mental masturbation"?

I am gonna need more than just anecdotal info to change my mind after my own experiences that demonstrate a contrary position.

My apologies if I am straying from the gist of the OP topic subject, and perhaps this should be a stand alone topic. If asked I will certainly delete these posts after I transfer them to another stand alone topic & ask there for some "evidence" that is not anecdotal in form, to demonstrate just how "ladder tests" are a waste of time & "mental masturbation" in handgun accuracy testing.

[JBinMN]

Go back 50 years or more through American Rifleman and read match technical reports which used to be published, of what the top shooters used, how they loaded their ammo, fellows like Bob Chow, Alton Dinan, Gil Hebard, Ellis Lea, Byron Engle., Joe White, Jerry Jackson, MoDeFina, etc. Read the summaries published in the NRA Handloader's Guide and the several articles on loading .38 wadcutter and .45 wadcutter match ammunition which described how all the champions did it.

In my time 1970s-1990, among civilian pistol and police revolver National champions who were winning all of the marbles without government furnished factory loads, not a man was weighing powder. Not one. You will have to go through the bound volumes of the Camp Perry reports and interviews of champion shooters, because the published data predates the Internet era, but I knew personally many of these guys and shot against the best of them and they spent their time shooting and practicing and not weighing powder, I can assure you of that!

Most of these fine gentleman and dead and gone now, and these 2600-club guys were doing it without scopes, red dots and the nonsense crutches and excuses of today.

I do not have those magazine back issues. I would go thru them if I did.

Since I am posting/talking to you, at present, so I am going to ask you some questions about this , unless there is a complaint from the OP about them.

So, what you are saying to me is that these esteemed shooters , including yourself as well, did not weigh their loads for competition?

If that is the case, then how did they come up with the proper amount of powder to use & the type of powder that might have given them the "edge" over the others?

As well, if they were all using the exact same firearm & the exact same reloading components & the exact same of everything, then it would be the "shooter" who took those equal components & did better than the other shooters in order to win, so is that correct?

Are you saying, that they , including you, just took a pile of powder & put it in the case, seated & crimped a boolit/bullet over it & then went to compete?

NO weighing, no testing to see what powder or amount of that powder would give better accuracy in their handguns to see if the could get an "edge"?

If that is/was the case. I wish I had been competing as well back then & DID do the testing I have done & found the most accurate combination & then it would certainly come down to the "shooter", as well as the combination of components.

I suspect that something is missing in what you are saying, or perhaps "I" am missing something, as I have difficulty believing that these fellow & yourself in competition would not be weighing the charges they were putting into their rounds to fire in their firearms.

Perhaps you used "powder measures " as in "dippers". Some sort of "control" on the amount of powder that was being put into the cases? Or, what I am understanding you to say is that they just put a gob of powder in the case & called it good?

How would one know that it would not change POI if one changed the amount of powder used?
Or, even, type & the usual change of powder amount?

No one cared, like apparently you seem to not care?

I don't get it & really have a hard time thinking that they would just go out & willy nilly shoot without some sort of effort to find a good combination for accuracy..

I just don't get it..

ETA: So you are telling me that you do not weigh your powder( or measure/"control amount) before it goes into your handgun cases, as well?

I also find that hard to believe, as well...

[beemer]

I have two old Herter's measures, one has a 1/4 in. chamber the other has a 3/8 in. chamber. The small one will not throw consistent charges of Unique, it is fine with BE or ball powder. The larger one is best for Unique. I just went back and tried it, went for four grains of Unique. I dropped about 25 charges and recorded 10. Eight were between 4 and 4.1 with 2 going right at 4.2.

This has been my experience with this measure for many years. I shoot 4 grs a lot and would have fine tuned this close to a spread of 3.9 to 4.1.

Large chambers don't do as well with small charges and some powders don't settle or flow well in small chambers. You just have to figure what works for you.

Dave

[jmort]

Outpost nailed it.

No...

[Outpost75]

...

So, what you are saying to me is that these esteemed shooters , including yourself as well, did not weigh their loads for competition?

CORRECT

If that is the case, then how did they come up with the proper amount of powder to use & the type of powder that might have given them the "edge" over the others?

NOTHING 'MAGIC' ABOUT POWDER CHARGE. USE A SUITABLE CHARGE OF A SUITABLE POWDER WHICH APPROXIMATES FACTORY WADCUTTER LOAD VELOCITY AND SHOOTS CIRCULAR-NORMAL TEN-SHOT GROUPS OFF MACHINE REST. MOSTLY USED STANDARD LOADS RECOMMENDED BY THE GUNSMITH, REFINEMENTS IN PRIMER, BULLET DIAMETER, SEATING TESTED DEVELOPED BY SHOOTING GROUPS ON PAPER, NOT OVER CHRONOGRAPH.

FOR THE MOST PART, GUNSMITHS RECOMMENDED AND STANDARDIZED ON 'BOOK' LOADS, NORMALLY 2.8-3.2 GRAINS OF BULLSEYE IN .38 SPECIAL, 3.5-4.5 GRAINS IN THE .45 ACP. USUALLY A LOW RECOIL LOAD FOR TIMED AND RAPID AND A HEAVIER LOAD TO BUCK THE WIND BETTER AT 50 YARDS. I SHOT THE SAME LOAD FOR TIMED AND RAPID AS WELL AS AT 50 YARDS AND USED THE .45 FOR ALL CENTER-FIRE STAGES, 4.2 GRAINS OF BULLSEYE WITH H&G#68 REMINGTON PRIMER.


IN THE GARAND LC MATCH CASES, SIERRA 168 INT. 47 GRS. IMR4895 FEDERAL 210M AT 200 AND 300, AT 600 46 GRS. WITH 180MK, BECAUSE THE 174 MK AND 155 PALMAS DIDN'T EXIST THEN. IN 7.62MM 41 GRS. IMR4895 IN LC CASES WITH 168 AT 200 AND 300 AND 40 GRS. WITH 180 AT 600. 39 GRS. OF IMR3031 WITH 168 ANOTHER VERY GOOD LOAD AT THE SHORT RANGES. IN EARLY DAYS OF 5.56 WHEN EXPERIMENTAL NAVY SHOOTERS USED 25 GRS. OF 4895 WITH XM287 HEAVY BALL BULLETS SELECTED BY SORTING AND SPINNING USING 9" TWIST COLT BARREL FROMM CMG2 MACHINEGUN PROGRAM. FERRIS PINDELL, LOU PALMISANO AND I DREW DOWN SIERRA 6MM JACKETS TO MAKE FIRST 69-GRAIN MATCH BULLETS WHICH LATER BECAME THE 69 SIERRA IN PRODUCTION. POWDER CHARGES ALL MEASURED WITH CULVER OR SEALY-MASKER CONVERSIONS

As well, if they were all using the exact same firearm & the exact same reloading components & the exact same of everything, then it would be the "shooter" who took those equal components & did better than the other shooters in order to win, so is that correct?

IT IS CALLED SKILL

Are you saying, that they , including you, just took a pile of powder & put it in the case, seated & crimped a boolit/bullet over it & then went to compete?

INITIALLY ALWAYS STARTED WITH THE LOAD RECOMMENDED BY THE SMITH WHO BUILT GUN. IN THE .45 ACP 4.2 GRAINS OF BULLSEYE WITH EITHER H&G130 OR H&G68 THE STANDARD FOR COMPARISON, COMMERCIAL-CAST LINOTYPE SIZED TO THROAT DIAMETER OF CHAMBERING REAMER, 'PERFECT' LUBE OR 'MIRROR'. ALOX-BEESWAX OK IF YOU AVOID USING TOO MUCH, WHICH OPENS GROUPS. MOST BARRELS BAR-STO OR COLT NM. REFINEMENTS TESTED IN PRIMER AND CRIMP ONLY. BACK THEN STAR OR PHELPS PROGRESSIVES EXCLUSIVELY. CHARGES ALL MEASURED.

NO weighing, no testing to see what powder or amount of that powder would give better accuracy in their handguns to see if the could get an "edge"?

BULLET FIT IS KING. REFINEMENTS IN DIAMETER, SEATING DEPTH, CRIMP TO FIT BARREL AND CHAMBER.


I suspect that something is missing in what you are saying, or perhaps "I" am missing something, as I have difficulty believing that these fellow & yourself in competition would not be weighing the charges they were putting into their rounds to fire in their firearms.

TIME IS BETTER SPENT ON OTHER THINGS. WHO HAS TIME TO WEIGH 10,000 CHARGES OVER A COMPETITION SEASON? OR EVEN 5000 IF YOU AREN'T AS 'SERIOUS?'


Perhaps you used "powder measures " as in "dippers". Some sort of "control" on the amount of powder that was being put into the cases? Or, what I am understanding you to say is that they just put a gob of powder in the case & called it good?

FIXED POWDER SLIDE ON STAR MACHINE!!!! ADJUSTABLE POWDER SLIDES MAY VIBRATE LOOSE AND CHANGE SETTING!

FOR RIFLE AMMO CULVER CONVERSION OF LYMAN 55 AT HOME OR A HOLLYWOOD AT THE MTU. DUMP AND WEIGH TEN CHARGES, MOVE DECIMAL OF SIGMA, ADJUST AND CHECK AGAIN. CHECK POWDER DUMP EVERY TIME WITH SCALE TO VERIFY NOBODY HAS TWIDDLED KNOBS ON POWDER MEASURE.

How would one know that it would not change POI if one changed the amount of powder used?

SHOOT FIVE CONSECUTIVE 10-SHOT GROUPS OFF REST, INITIALLY BRACKETING CHARGE EITHER SIZE OF GUNSMITH'S RECOMMENDED BASE LOAD +0.2 AND -0.2, LOOK AT CENTER DENSITY AND LACK OF FLIERS, CIRCULAR NORMALITY.


Or, even, type & the usual change of powder amount?

ALMOST EVERYBODY USED BULLSEYE BECAUSE SMALL PARTICLE SIZE MEASURED UNIFORMLY. SOME USED OTHER POWDERS, BUT MOST USED 452AA OR BULLSEYE, THIS WAS BEFORE THE VARIETY WE HAVE TODAY.

No one cared, like apparently you seem to not care?

I FIND NO PRACTICAL DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF POWDER CHARGE NEEDED OR STAR POWDER SLIDE SETTING BETWEEN BULLSEYE I BOUGHT AT CAMP PERRY IN 1974, 1994 or 2014.

I don't get it & really have a hard time thinking that they would just go out & willy nilly shoot without some sort of effort to find a good combination for accuracy..

I just don't get it..

ETA: So you are telling me that you do not weigh your powder( or measure/"control amount) before it goes into your handgun cases, as well?



See my answers after each question above.

[JBinMN]

INITIALLY ALWAYS STARTED WITH THE LOAD RECOMMENDED BY THE SMITH WHO BUILT GUN. IN THE .45 ACP 4.2 GRAINS OF BULLSEYE WITH EITHER H&G130 OR H&G68 ...snip]

So, the way I understand this is that the SMITH who made the firearm did the load data work & testing for accuracy, then gave the shooter of the firearm the "weighed" amount suggested to put in the round to shoot..

IOW, the Smith did the measuring/WEIGHING & load workup to get the accurate load & the end user/shooter/reloader just had to use that data to reload & shoot the rounds made..

The SMITH, DID figure out the accurate load PRIOR to the shooter/reloader getting the firearm & did the "home work" ( <You used the term, "mental masturbation") to develop the accurate load to be used in the particular firearm he made.

I can see where you could say here that you & those other shooters/reloaders did not "weigh" or even develop the loads, but omitted in your earlier posts that those competitors just went off anothers(SMITH) data for the particular firearm to be used.Therefore.. You & the other shooters also DID "measure"( weigh/load by volume) in order to get the proper, "SMITH suggested" amount of powder into the individual cases.



In yours & what seems to be the other competitive shooters case(s), the SMITH, actually did the WEIGHING, and thus you folks did not have to do anything, but try to "measure"(weight/load by volume) the suggested powder amount to fill the cases to that suggested amount, using a
POWDER SLIDE ON STAR MACHINE. . Someone else did the "homework" & likely "ladder tested" those loads FOR YOU & the OTHERS so you did not have to do it... But, definitely SOMEONE( the SMITH)did WEIGH( measure) the loads to get them for you.


You have answered my question(s) & the BOLD you provided helped in making out the answers, BTW. I understand that the emphasis of your answers were in different sizes , but that was not necessary, Thanks anyway...



Now, I would submit that most of us here as CB.GL forum, DO NOT have SMITHS who develop our loads for us & have to do so ourselves. Thus, WE need to be able to MEASURE either by WEIGHT , Volume or both, to accomplish what you competitors had done for you.

Accuracy based on load development was the work that the SMITH did, where many of us have to do it ourselves.

And THAT is what I reckon was the reason the OP decided to post & ask about what those of us WHO DO OUR OWN Load Development, for our opinions on doing such weighing/measuring & what parameters we will accept for accuracy in weighing & measuring those loads.

"MEASURED", likely by "volume", like a powder measure as per the OP, instead of weighed is what I understand you & the other fellows did, but someone has to WEIGH in order to set the "measure" correctly & then make sure that it stays at the Measure it is set at, by verifying that Measured load by Weighing what the measure throws for a load".


Thanks again for taking the time in answering my questions, and I found them informative once more details were supplied.

-------------------------------------


---Quote (Originally by JBinMN)---
...

So, what you are saying to me is that these esteemed shooters , including yourself as well, did not weigh their loads for competition?

*CORRECT*

If that is the case, then how did they come up with the proper amount of powder to use & the type of powder that might have given them the "edge" over the others?

*NOTHING 'MAGIC' ABOUT POWDER CHARGE. USE A SUITABLE CHARGE OF A SUITABLE POWDER WHICH APPROXIMATES FACTORY WADCUTTER LOAD VELOCITY AND SHOOTS CIRCULAR-NORMAL TEN-SHOT GROUPS OFF MACHINE REST. LOADS DEVELOPED BY SHOOTING GROUPS ON PAPER, NOT OVER CHRONOGRAPH.*

*FOR THE MOST PART, STANDARD 'BOOK' LOADS, 2.8-3.2 GRAINS OF BULLSEYE IN .38 SPECIAL, 3.5-4.5 GRAINS IN .456 ACP. USUALLY A LOW RECOIL LOAD FOR TIMED AND RAPID AND A HEAVIER LOAD TO BUCK THE WIND BETTER AT 50 YARDS. I SHOT THE SAME LOAD FOR TIMED AND RAPID AS WELL AS AT 50 YARDS AND USED THE .45 FOR ALL CENTER-FIRE STAGES, 4.2 GRAINS OF BULLSEYE WITH H&G#68 REMINGTON PRIMER.
*

As well, if they were all using the exact same firearm & the exact same reloading components & the exact same of everything, then it would be the "shooter" who took those equal components & did better than the other shooters in order to win, so is that correct?

*IT IS CALLED SKILL*

Are you saying, that they , including you, just took a pile of powder & put it in the case, seated & crimped a boolit/bullet over it & then went to compete?

*INITIALLY ALWAYS STARTED WITH THE LOAD RECOMMENDED BY THE SMITH WHO BUILT GUN. IN THE .45 ACP 4.2 GRAINS OF BULLSEYE WITH EITHER H&G130 OR H&G68 THE STANDARD FOR COMPARISON, COMMERCIAL-CAST LINOTYPE SIZED TO THROAT DIAMETER OF CHAMBERING REAMER, 'PERFECT' LUBE OR 'MIRROR'. ALOX-BEESWAX OK IF YOU AVOID USING TOO MUCH, WHICH OPENS GROUPS. MOST BARRELS BAR-STO OR COLT NM. REFINEMENTS TESTED IN PRIMER AND CRIMP ONLY. BACK THEN STAR OR PHELPS PROGRESSIVES EXCLUSIVELY. CHARGES ALL MEASURED.*

NO weighing, no testing to see what powder or amount of that powder would give better accuracy in their handguns to see if the could get an "edge"?

*BULLET FIT IS KING. REFINEMENTS IN DIAMETER, SEATING DEPTH, CRIMP TO FIT BARREL AND CHAMBER.
*

I suspect that something is missing in what you are saying, or perhaps "I" am missing something, as I have difficulty believing that these fellow & yourself in competition would not be weighing the charges they were putting into their rounds to fire in their firearms.

*TIME IS BETTER SPENT ON OTHER THINGS. WHO HAS TIME TO WEIGH 10,000 CHARGES OVER A COMPETITION SEASON? OR EVEN 5000 IF YOU AREN'T AS 'SERIOUS?'
*

Perhaps you used "powder measures " as in "dippers". Some sort of "control" on the amount of powder that was being put into the cases? Or, what I am understanding you to say is that they just put a gob of powder in the case & called it good?

*POWDER SLIDE ON STAR MACHINE.*

F*OR RIFLE AMMO CULVER CONVERSION OF LYMAN 55 AT HOME OR A HOLLYWOOD AT THE MTU.*

How would one know that it would not change POI if one changed the amount of powder used?

*SHOOT FIVE CONSECUTIVE 10-SHOT GROUPS OFF REST, INITIALLY BRACKETING CHARGE EITHER SIZE OF GUNSMITH'S RECOMMENDED BASE LOAD +0.2 AND -0.2, LOOK AT CENTER DENSITY AND LACK OF FLIERS, CIRCULAR NORMALITY.
*

Or, even, type & the usual change of powder amount?

*ALMOST EVERYBODY USED BULLSEYE BECAUSE SMALL PARTICLE SIZE MEASURED UNIFORMLY. SOME USED OTHER POWDERS, BUT MOST USED 452AA OR BULLSEYE, THIS WAS BEFORE THE VARIETY WE HAVE TODAY.*

No one cared, like apparently you seem to not care?

*I FIND NO PRACTICAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BULLSEYE I BOUGHT AT CAMP PERRY IN 1974, 1994 or 2014.*

I don't get it & really have a hard time thinking that they would just go out & willy nilly shoot without some sort of effort to find a good combination for accuracy..

I just don't get it..

ETA: So you are telling me that you do not weigh your powder( or measure/"control amount) before it goes into your handgun cases, as well?
---End Quote---
*See my answers types after each question above.*

ETA: P.S. - O.P./Mozeppa - I hope that this discussion did not "take away" from the gist of this topics subject & hopefully added to it.
:)

[kmw1954]

I seemed to lose track of just what point was trying to be made.. Or even how this applied to the original question.

[JBinMN]

I seemed to lose track of just what point was trying to be made.. Or even how this applied to the original question.

the OP, Mozeppa was posting about how his powder measure was not throwing consistent amounts of powder, even after adding a means of vibrating the powder to help it "shake" when it was metered into a case or a weighing pan, as well as other mods to try to make it work better for him..

Later, Outpost75 said it was a waste of time in his post # 25, calling loading handgun rounds as an exercise in "mental masturbation" & it was not necessary to do it.

I questioned that statement & attempted to find out how one could verify measured powder without weighing it at some point in order to have the powder metered & accurate for loading a specific amount.

That is what has been going on that may have confused ya...

So, now anyone can continue with the discussion of,

"What charge throw is acceptable to you?"

as per the OP & the title of this topic. Hope that explains things for ya....

Here is the OP quoted, so you can reread it & start up again if ya want.

------------------------

this is a little long, i'm trying to observances out there that maybe some else may benefit
or at least make some go HMMM?
yet others will think i'm nuts.


Pistol round shooters,
how far off does your charge throw need to be before you dump it and try again?

I've mounted a quest for perfection as i'm "OCD" when it comes to powder throws. (other stuff too.)
here's some of what i've done....and some of my observances and fixes implemented.

I'm currently using unique powder and a case activated hornady powder measure.

1. I tried to to use it as it came from the box with a really good cleaning job and after running 5 full hoppers thru it to coat everything inside with gun powder dust (i've been told it's similar to "graphite" dust.)
observance= the throws were all over the scale...5 to 6 tenths of a grain high or low.

2. I added a vibrator at the top of the throw to get every granule out of the measure drum.
observance= it helped but not too much.


3. So... I added a switch to facilitate vibration at the bottom of each throw as well as the top to vibrate the powder into the charge drum as well as out of the drum with some consistency.
observance= it helped, but was still 3 to 4 tenths off at times but would hit my target mark more often. the high or low charges were erratic ...even with a constant cadence they still occurred.

4. I took it apart and examined each piece ...on the linkage I filed or sanded all the burrs off and polished each piece ...even the end of the measuring stem.

no change

5. pulled everything apart ...again... this time i examined the drop tube that screws into
the bottom of the measure body. it appears to me that the bore thru it was done on a lathe with a small boring bar ...they drilled 1/2 way thru it ...then took it out of the chuck, reversed it then drilled thru to complete the boring step. i'm assuming that it was done in 2 steps to keep the boring bar from walking off center too far.

observance=the bores did NOT perfectly line up and created a shelf like edge in the center of the drop tube. PLus ...when the lathe operator reached the center he backed out the boring bar while it was still spinning , leaving a spiral record groove from end to end. Dear hornady , how hard wood it be to run a ream thru there?
sanded and polished to high shine with diamond paste. did the same with the caliber specific belling funnel.

6. examined the internal area of the measure body ...made of cast iron i think.
the inside was rough as could be. the throat and the area right below the baffle was as rough as
40 grit sandpaper ...then hornady powder coated the insides of the body red.
fix= i used a dremel tool grinding ball on a whip to smooth out the roughness and the i used a brake
cylinder hone on a drill press to polish the internal funnel and measure throat tube.

next came a cleaning job a surgeon would approve of.

assembly ...it was a pretty sight to behold.

ANd with all my careful work ....the throws are better ...but still will drop a charge 2 to 3 tenths off
at times...it hits the target number of 5.6 grains of unique often then the "off" charge might hit 2 or three times then it hits normal for a while...then off, then on, driving me nuts!

with the anal retentive attitude of achieving perfection by removing as many variable flaws that could mechanically be an issue ... my final observance is that the powder granules are NOT of UNIQUE size!
pun intended.

smaller granules = heavier load ...medium size = target load...larger granules = lighter load.

i think to achieve the most consistent powder throw with this measure as it is now , will be the use of
powder with very small granules like #5, #7, H110, win 296, to get the void in the measure drum to fill on each throw more consistently.




so .....how far off will you accept a powder throw?

another observance ....beam scales are WAY more accurate than a measure ...even more than electronic scales.

try this:

turn on your electronic scale...zero it with the pan on it.
pour some powder (any kind ...even sand or salt will work)

scale at zero...take a pinch of sand and slowly rub the sand between your fingers into the pan ...slowly! if you are slow enough the scale will still read zero.

you can do this until the pan is full AND it will still read zero.
even the scales on hornadys electronic powder measures will do this.

sorry for being so long winded.

[Outpost75]

So, the way I understand this is that the SMITH who made the firearm did the load data work & testing for accuracy, then gave the shooter of the firearm the "weighed" amount suggested to put in the round to shoot..

NO "LADDER" TESTING. JUST A GENERIC BOOK LOAD.

GILL HEBBARD, BOB CHOW, JIM CLARK, ALTON DINAN, ET AL PUBLISHED THEIR RECOMMENDED GENERIC TIMED AND RAPID AND SLOWFIRE LOADS IN THEIR CATALOGS. NOTHING FANCY.

...Smith did the measuring/WEIGHING & load workup.

I SAY AGAIN, GENERIC BOOK LOAD, SAME IN ALL GUNS, BY ALL SHOOTERS ON TEAM. MEASURED USING FIXED POWDER SLIDE ON STAR MACHINE, SELECT THE CORRECT POWDER SLIDE TO THROW CLOSET TO 4 GRAINS OF BULLSEYE, ETC.

The SMITH, DID figure out the accurate load PRIOR to the shooter/reloader getting the firearm & did the "home work"

GENERIC LOAD TO ATTAIN FACTORY WADCUTTER VELOCITY 770 +/- 30 fps FOR RELIABLE GUN CYCLING WITH 14 POUND RECOIL SPRING.

.... I can see where you could say here that you & those other shooters/reloaders did not "weigh" or even develop the loads, but omitted in your earlier posts that those competitors just went off anothers(SMITH) data for the particular firearm to be used.Therefore.. You & the other shooters also DID "measure"( weigh/load by volume) in order to get the proper, "SMITH suggested" amount of powder into the individual cases.

GUNSMITH DID GO THROUGH ANY EXTENSIVE LOAD TESTING. PROVEN GENERIC LOAD BASED ON EXPERIENCE. SAME GENERIC BOOK CHARGE USED IN ALL, ONE CHARGE FOR TIMED AND RAPID, ANOTHER FOR SLOWFIRE, DIFFERENT CHARGES DETERMINED BASED NON FIRING RESULTS WITH CHOSEN BULLET, SELECTING FROM AMONG FIXED STAR POWDER SLIDES, NO HAIR SPLITTING 1/10 GRAIN INCREMENTS, GENERALLY PICKED A 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 GRAIN SLIDE AND WEIGHED WHAT IT ACTUALLY THREW IN OUR MACHINE AND LOT OF POWDER, MAYBE WE GOT 3.8 OR 4.2, BUT YOU MADE TEST BATCHES WITH EACH POWDER SLIDE IF YOU HAD SEVERAL; FIRED IN TEN GUNS AND THEN PICKED ONE.

...But, definitely SOMEONE( the SMITH)did WEIGH( measure) the loads to get them for you.

NO GUNSMITH HOMEWORK, NO WEIGHED CHARGES, I SAY AGAIN, GENERIC BOOK LOAD, EVERYBODY LOADED AND SHOT THE SAME, MEASURED CHARGES, BULK LOADED AMMO BY THE THOUSANDS OF ROUNDS. I DON'T KNOW HOW I CAN MAKE THIS ANY MORE SIMPLE...

...Accuracy based on load development was the work that the SMITH did, where many of us have to do it ourselves.

YOU ARE MAKING TOO MUCH OUT OF A SIMPLE PROCESS, WO4 GUNSMITH SAID, PUT THE 4 GRAIN SLIDE IN THE STAR AND LOAD US 10,000 ROUNDS FOR CAMP PERRY...

WEIGH in order to set the "measure" correctly & then make sure that it stays at the Measure it is set at, by verifying that Measured load by Weighing what the measure throws for a load".

WEIGH CHARGES TO DETERMINE WHICH FIXED SLIDE TO USE ON THE STAR. AN ADJUSTABLE POWDER SLIDE CAN CHANGE, SO NEVER USED. YES, YOU DO CHECK WHAT THE POWDER SLIDE THROWS WITH THAT POWDER LOT, SO YOU KNOW WHERE THE SWEET SPOT IS IF YOU MUST CHANGE POWDER LOTS IN THE MIDDLE OF A 10,000 ROUND RUN.



Hope the above comments clarify. You are over thinking something and making it much more complicated than it needs to be.

[JBinMN]

Hope the above comments clarify. You are over thinking something and making it much more complicated than it needs to be.

Ok. Thanks for clarifying. I think I understand.

You took the particular "measure slide/bar" that held a set amount of grains of a particular powder, apparently by half grains as described & then used them to "measure" the loads. You also tested those loads for use at different rates of fire, or boolit weights to find out which one works best for whatever firearm you were going to use. You were not concerned if the amounts thrown varied more than a couple grains one way or the other from the "targeted" "measure slide bar" powder amount

Simply , using a larger "step" of +/- 2-3 tenths of a grain for each part of a ladder of half grain increments to suit the type/weight rating of the boolits & rate of fire.

I prefer to be more specific than that & have found that it Does matter to me in my particular ladder testing to further reduce that "range" from 1/2 grain +/- .2-.3 steps in a ladder to smaller .1 steps.

Which is what I think the OP was attempting to do as well.

"Narrow the range" of +/- to a smaller range.

You do not think it should matter. I think it does, as it has worked for me.

Thanks again for your repeated efforts to clarify.
:)

[Outpost75]

Point is we were developing one load to use the same in eight to ten guns. In a team environment you cannot keep straight ten different loads for ten different guns, both timed and rapid loads and slowfire loads.

Everybody uses the same loads, all the guns are built alike, chambered alike. Timed and rapid loads would all shoot 25-yard X-ring, 50 yard loads would shoot under 2 inches average over a series of ten-shot groups, not less than 50 consecutive rounds without discarding any data.

All Master and half of them high Master and Distinguished level shooters.

[JBinMN]

Thanks for the additional info...

Your being specific & using the term "slide" &/or "bar" for the Star made me think of the MEC loader I used to use for reloading shotguns & the "powder bushings" we used to set powder charge & "charge bars" to set shot amounts. No weighing was necessary for those loads as the powder & shot was "metered" to within a small margin for error. A sort of example would be a 16.4gr. load of Red Dot was metered out of a bushing marked with a number ( #28) for that amount of that powder, while that same "bushing" might throw 19.8 gr. of Herco . The "charge bars" did basically the same for shot from 7/8 oz., on up, dependent on shot size.

Of course, shotguns are not the same as handguns & rifles, but that loading concept popped into my head with the clarification you gave.

As an individual & not a team, & speaking about handguns or rifle. I prefer to find the respective, most accurate load based on 0.1 gr. "steps" of the "ladder".

With a suggested load range of , for example, Red Dot in 45 ACP 230 RN of 4.5 - 5.1, then staying .1 gr. down from max & then stepping down the ladder by the remainder of the load range. Being .5 grains range from 5.0 to 4.6, I test 10 shots each at 4.6/.47/4.8/4.9/5.0 off sandbags/bench & at 15 or 25 yds for that handgun.

These tests were at 25 yds...

The results in the 45ACP I own & tested, was that 4.7gr. had the best accuracy in that set of rounds all reloading with the same components in the same manner. Then I retested to confirm the results & they did confirm.
I would not have found that "sweet spot" load if I had only used a range of 0.5 grains and going from 4.5/4.6gr. & then jump to 5.0/5.1 gr.. Being that I used a smaller "step" for the ladder of 0.1 gr instead of 0.5 larger step helped me develop that load for the most accurate with those components & that powder, in "that" handgun.

I will stop posting here now, as I appear to have already made at least one reader/member get confused as to what I was trying to understand & how it related to the subject of this topic..

Thanks again for the patience of any readers & for the clarification, once again.

[kmw1954]

JB I understand what you are describing and the reasoning behind it. Though I many be mistaken but the vast number of shooter I meet are not precision Bullseye shooters. Especially when it comes to Handgunners. Most today are Defense shooters and shoot to defense distances. Which is a whole different platform than precision Bullseye.

So let's break it down into 3 categories; Precision Target, Hunting and Defense. All three disciples have different requirements and expectations. A Defense handgun shooter doesn't need 1/4"MOA at 50yards because they will hardly ever face a shot like that. Same as a Long Distance Precision shooter doesn't need a firearm that will fire 15 shots in 30 seconds. As for Hunting, I would not go out into the woods to hunt with my 2.5" 357mag or my 4" 15 round 9mm. It's all relative to what the purpose is.

I made the point earlier that as a normal defense style pistol shooter at distances to 15yds I cannot differentiate between two rounds that are only 0.30gr difference in charge weight when all else is the same. I neither see on target or feel in amount of recoil any difference.

Lastly I do not test my loads from a supported stance or sandbag as that is not the way the firearm will be used. I test standing, unsupported with a two hand grip and yes I can tell when a load is working or not. Might not be as precise as what you expect but it does work and these loads also work in more than one gun.

Now the OP in his opening post states that he is loading pistols and is using a powder measure to drop his charges so I am going to assume that he is not a Target Bullseye shooter or a Long Distance Precision shooter.

[sawinredneck]

Now that this has gotten wildly off topic, I’ll try and get back to the original question.
I like to hold +/-.1grn with my charges. I guess I’m also one of the very fortunate ones as I’ve had little issue getting Unique to meter well? I’ve had no issues with a Lee PPM, the Dillon powder measure ore my old Redding Master powder measure. Once setup all three of them will easily hold +\-.1grn as long as I repeat my process. The silly Lee, even with its leaks, will hold tighter than all of them with Unique, that’s the main reason I can’t seem to part with it!
So if you’re planning on sticking with Unique it might be worth dropping the $25 or so and getting one, don’t let its flimsyness fool you, they really are very accurate.

[dverna]

I shoot a lot of pistol caliber ammunition and thus all of it is produced on progressive machines. I have over 15 lbs of Unique but have never used it so I cannot comment on how it will run in a Dillon or Star measure. (I got a good deal on the Unique but have not got around to using it yet).

Using HP38 or Clays, I never vary more than .2 gr. And normally, each drop varies about .1 gr of the average. I have run these loads through a pistol caliber rifle and I get 10 shot groups of 1-1.5 inches at 30 yards with unsorted cast bullets. It is likely possible to do better than that but I am not willing to weigh bullets or powder charges. Good enough is good enough....at least for what I use pistol ammunition for.

If I hunted with a pistol caliber at longer ranges, I would be more anal. I would use the same protocol I use for rifle ammunition in working up a load and producing it. Even though it may have no effect.

By that, I refer to a test I read years ago. I believe it was comparing weighed vs thrown charges for a .223 match rifle used for HP competition. In that test, the thrown charges were slightly better than the weighed ones....go figure?

[Outpost75]

What an awesome post. Could not be more true and it doesn't even mention ball type powder which dispensers like the Uniflow and similar types will throw with accuracy often at +/-.1gr or in another words more accurately than most scales will measure.

But everyone is free to do what makes them feel good.

Motor

Bravo Zulu Motor!

A double rum ration and a mention in dispatches for you.

I think you may be the only person who read my post who understood. I am done with this discussion.

[sawinredneck]

Bravo Zulu Motor!

A double rum ration and a mention in dispatches for you.

I think you may be the only person who read my post who understood. I am done with this discussion.
No, I also understand what you are saying, you set up for volumetric measuring. Set it up, throw ten charges to equalize everything, measure once to make sure you didn’t have a brain fart and load like a mad man. Using the pre-set bars is akin to the Lee dippers or the Little dandy rotors in the pistol world. Once it’s set and throwing there’s nothing that can change unless something in the equation changes, which most likely would be a new batch of powder in this instance.
As I’m using adjustable powder droppers, as most of us do nowadays, I tend to check every 20 or so rounds to be sure nothing has moved.
Your method is also why the Lee autodisc is so popular, once you have it dialed in, it’s easy to go back to it and hard for anything to get out of adjustment.

[kmw1954]

No, I also understand what you are saying, you set up for volumetric measuring.

Your method is also why the Lee autodisc is so popular, once you have it dialed in, it’s easy to go back to it and hard for anything to get out of adjustment.

Agreed. If I work up a load and find a 4.0gr charge works best but the volumetric disk measure or dipper will only fill to 3.8 or 4.1 then I will load to 4.1 and be perfectly happy and never know the difference in my everyday world. As I stated also I test loads freehanded and to a distance of 10yards because that is what I shoot. If I was consistently shooting to 50yds then I would test to that distance and set my loads to reflect that distance.

[jamesp81]

this is a little long, i'm trying to observances out there that maybe some else may benefit
or at least make some go HMMM?
yet others will think i'm nuts.


Pistol round shooters,
how far off does your charge throw need to be before you dump it and try again?

I've mounted a quest for perfection as i'm "OCD" when it comes to powder throws. (other stuff too.)
here's some of what i've done....and some of my observances and fixes implemented.

I'm currently using unique powder and a case activated hornady powder measure.

1. I tried to to use it as it came from the box with a really good cleaning job and after running 5 full hoppers thru it to coat everything inside with gun powder dust (i've been told it's similar to "graphite" dust.)
observance= the throws were all over the scale...5 to 6 tenths of a grain high or low.

2. I added a vibrator at the top of the throw to get every granule out of the measure drum.
observance= it helped but not too much.


3. So... I added a switch to facilitate vibration at the bottom of each throw as well as the top to vibrate the powder into the charge drum as well as out of the drum with some consistency.
observance= it helped, but was still 3 to 4 tenths off at times but would hit my target mark more often. the high or low charges were erratic ...even with a constant cadence they still occurred.

4. I took it apart and examined each piece ...on the linkage I filed or sanded all the burrs off and polished each piece ...even the end of the measuring stem.

no change

5. pulled everything apart ...again... this time i examined the drop tube that screws into
the bottom of the measure body. it appears to me that the bore thru it was done on a lathe with a small boring bar ...they drilled 1/2 way thru it ...then took it out of the chuck, reversed it then drilled thru to complete the boring step. i'm assuming that it was done in 2 steps to keep the boring bar from walking off center too far.

observance=the bores did NOT perfectly line up and created a shelf like edge in the center of the drop tube. PLus ...when the lathe operator reached the center he backed out the boring bar while it was still spinning , leaving a spiral record groove from end to end. Dear hornady , how hard wood it be to run a ream thru there?
sanded and polished to high shine with diamond paste. did the same with the caliber specific belling funnel.

6. examined the internal area of the measure body ...made of cast iron i think.
the inside was rough as could be. the throat and the area right below the baffle was as rough as
40 grit sandpaper ...then hornady powder coated the insides of the body red.
fix= i used a dremel tool grinding ball on a whip to smooth out the roughness and the i used a brake
cylinder hone on a drill press to polish the internal funnel and measure throat tube.

next came a cleaning job a surgeon would approve of.

assembly ...it was a pretty sight to behold.

ANd with all my careful work ....the throws are better ...but still will drop a charge 2 to 3 tenths off
at times...it hits the target number of 5.6 grains of unique often then the "off" charge might hit 2 or three times then it hits normal for a while...then off, then on, driving me nuts!

with the anal retentive attitude of achieving perfection by removing as many variable flaws that could mechanically be an issue ... my final observance is that the powder granules are NOT of UNIQUE size!
pun intended.

smaller granules = heavier load ...medium size = target load...larger granules = lighter load.

i think to achieve the most consistent powder throw with this measure as it is now , will be the use of
powder with very small granules like #5, #7, H110, win 296, to get the void in the measure drum to fill on each throw more consistently.




so .....how far off will you accept a powder throw?

another observance ....beam scales are WAY more accurate than a measure ...even more than electronic scales.

try this:

turn on your electronic scale...zero it with the pan on it.
pour some powder (any kind ...even sand or salt will work)

scale at zero...take a pinch of sand and slowly rub the sand between your fingers into the pan ...slowly! if you are slow enough the scale will still read zero.

you can do this until the pan is full AND it will still read zero.
even the scales on hornadys electronic powder measures will do this.

sorry for being so long winded.

2 to 3 tenths is as good as you're going to get with Unique. It's a largeish flake powder that doesn't meter as well as smaller grain powders.

I think you fixed your measure, but if you want more accuracy than that, use a smaller grain powder or a ball powder.

[Tenbender]

Buy yourself a Redding 10X and you will drop with in .1 all the time. This is a small charge measure. Use a 3BR for larger cases. I kicked around every brand of measure before I bought the 10X. It didn't take long after that to buy a 3BR. You get what you pay for ?