so... You have 11teen loads for one bullet one caliber...

[mozeppa]

and in grain weights they are all over the scale....

is it better to use a a powder that mostly fills the case?

lets say 1 grain under max for a given bullet .....

aa #2 tops out at 3.5 grains
aa #5 tops out at 6.6 grains
aa #7 tops out at 9.7 grains

now then, with #2 it might shoot as well as #7, but i see the potential for double or triple loading...and it seems i read somewhere that you get better ignition with a case that has more powder volume in it than a case that has a tiny bit of powder that is supposed to do the same job.

so what do the wise ones say?

[dragon813gt]

I don’t worry about case fill. I use whatever powder is going to give me the most accurate load. Since this is the revolver forum I have light loads worked up w/ fast pistol powders. And I have full bore loads worked up w/ magnum pistol powders.

[Finster101]

I guess case fill is a safety measure if you don't have a good scale and/or do have a short attention span. Details are important in this hobby. Life changing or ending if not followed.

[tazman]

Using a load that fills the case or nearly so, has the potential to be more consistent due to possible position sensitivity. With smokeless powdrs and cases that were designed for black powder, that is difficult to achieve.
The next best thing is to use a powder that is designed to not be position sensitive. Well, it turns out that even the powders designed to be non position sensitive, still are to an extent. Just not as much.
A lot depends on what you intend to use the load to do. Full power, go with what comes closest to filling the case. For light/target loads, use what is the most consistent in your firearm. Often a small charge will give great results.
What it boils down to is what does your gun like and perform best with. Each gun makes it's own rules and you must work with it to get what you want from the gun.

[RogerDat]

Once the case fill gets to plus 50% so you can't double charge without overflowing the case the safety aspect becomes less of an issue. When the charge is small enough that double charge or half charge squib is difficult to visually spot it requires more attention. The concentrated powders such as titegroup where the difference between a full charge and double that charge is hard to visually confirm is what can trip people up.

Using what works for you on targets seems to me to be the measure that counts. Those LED strip lights for on the press might be helpful to keeping an eye on things.

[Drm50]

I drop charges in 50rd blocks, check scale every 10th one and pass a light over the block visually
checking powder volume.

[Hick]

I worry about case fill for medium to slow powders-- I know there are differences of opinion about whether SEE is real or not, but I don't want to find out with one of my rifles. However, there are lots of loads I like that are relatively low velocity, so for those I use faster powders, and don't worry about case fill. I do as suggested by DRM50 and drop the loads in blocks of 50 then check with a flashlight (empty cases are upside down in one block, filled cases are right side up in a different block-- take the empty from the left hand block, drop the load, then place the case in the right hand block). For safety's sake you need to be very methodical about this.

[dverna]

Back in the old days, almost every Bullseye competitor used 2.7 gr of Bullseye in the .38 Spl with 148 gr bullets. We were too ignorant to know it would not work....so we used it anyway and shot amazing groups with marginal case capacity.

If a load is accurate, it is accurate. Don’t listen to the **** theories.

Double charging a case is always possible if someone is careless. I have never done it, but I added a powder check die just in case. I would never select a powder based on needing to fill the case to avoid that. YMMV

[Bzcraig]

As mentioned, careful attention to detail will almost certainly preclude a double charge. I have 9mm loads using the 3 powders you mentioned. I use #2 for range/plinking ammo, #5 & #7 in different guns for SD loads. Accuracy differences are negligible but using #2 for range ammo is more economical.

[tazman]

I worry about case fill for medium to slow powders-- I know there are differences of opinion about whether SEE is real or not, but I don't want to find out with one of my rifles. However, there are lots of loads I like that are relatively low velocity, so for those I use faster powders, and don't worry about case fill. I do as suggested by DRM50 and drop the loads in blocks of 50 then check with a flashlight (empty cases are upside down in one block, filled cases are right side up in a different block-- take the empty from the left hand block, drop the load, then place the case in the right hand block). For safety's sake you need to be very methodical about this.

I go even farther with the methodical bit. I take the case from the block, drop a powder charge in it, place the case in the press, insert and seat a boolit, and then place the loaded round in an ammo box.
This for rifle only. I don't have cases with powder standing in a block that don't have boolits/bullets in them.
My handgun loads get done one at a time on a Lee Classic Cast turret press.

[jonp]

I didn't worry about case fill until I blew up a Judge. Now I'm very cautious and double check then look again before seating. All that said, I will choose the lesser of charges to achieve the same results for economic reasons.

Hanging a blown up revolver above your bench is a great reminder.

[tazman]

Back in the old days, almost every Bullseye competitor used 2.7 gr of Bullseye in the .38 Spl with 148 gr bullets. We were too ignorant to know it would not work....so we used it anyway and shot amazing groups with marginal case capacity.

If a load is accurate, it is accurate. Don’t listen to the **** theories.


The thing about that statement you are failing to consider is by seating a full wadcutter all the way inside the case, you cut down the case capacity so it is much smaller. The smaller amount of powder does a much better job of filling the available space that way. That is a good part of the reason that load was so accurate.

[dverna]

The thing about that statement you are failing to consider is by seating a full wadcutter all the way inside the case, you cut down the case capacity so it is much smaller. The smaller amount of powder does a much better job of filling the available space that way. That is a good part of the reason that load was so accurate.

Maybe so...maybe not

My current plinking load is 2.7 gr of HP38 under the 130 gr RNFP. 1” 10 shot groups at 30 yards out of the Marlin. Maybe filling the case with TrailBoss would be more accurate....but it costs more and I am OK with what I have.

Applying benchrest techniques would likely get me even smaller groups...but I am not good enough to make a difference.

My limited experience indicates any fast powder will give acceptable results in the .38 Spl. and case fill can be ignored. Maybe with the bigger magnum cases, it is different.

In the end, we do what works for us and share our experience with others.

I will grant that case fill may have an impact but in practical terms....ar least for most of us shooting pistols...it is a minor factor IF a good reduced load powder is utilized.

[tazman]

Maybe so...maybe not

My current plinking load is 2.7 gr of HP38 under the 130 gr RNFP. 1” 10 shot groups at 30 yards out of the Marlin. Maybe filling the case with TrailBoss would be more accurate....but it costs more and I am OK with what I have.

Applying benchrest techniques would likely get me even smaller groups...but I am not good enough to make a difference.

My limited experience indicates any fast powder will give acceptable results in the .38 Spl. and case fill can be ignored. Maybe with the bigger magnum cases, it is different.

In the end, we do what works for us and share our experience with others.

I will grant that case fill may have an impact but in practical terms....ar least for most of us shooting pistols...it is a minor factor IF a good reduced load powder is utilized.

I agree with that completely. If you read my first post, I never said it would work better, just that it had the potential to do so. I use fast powders and light charges in the majority of my 38 special loads as well.

[Larry Gibson]

I do not use a case block to hold the cases during processing/prepping the cases for loading. I put the case in the loading block only after putting the powder charge in it.

My hard an fast rule is; if a case is in the loading block it already has powder in it.

Even then after charging all the cases and putting them into the loading block(s) I use a flashlight and do a visual check to ensure powder is in the cases and the level is consistent.

My progressive presses are mounted at such a height I can do a visual of each charged pistol case as it rotates to the next station.

[mozeppa]

please people....14 replies half are about shortcomings that i may have... the other half are about what the gun likes
with a few glances at what "we used to do , but we didn't know any better."

i KNOW there are a few who know what i'm talking about. it's a simple question.

does a mostly filled case do better than one that relies on a very small grain load to do the same job?

[tazman]

does a mostly filled case do better than one that relies on a very small grain load to do the same job?

I can give you a very definite maybe. The potential to be more consistent with a nearly full case is there. It boils down to what your gun likes.
You don't shoot a target with probabilities. You shoot it with a load that is accurate in your gun.
Someone on this forum has a tag line that reads something like "it is all speculation until the trigger is pulled"

[sureYnot]

please people....14 replies half are about shortcomings that i may have... the other half are about what the gun likes
with a few glances at what "we used to do , but we didn't know any better."

i KNOW there are a few who know what i'm talking about. it's a simple question.

does a mostly filled case do better than one that relies on a very small grain load to do the same job?Unique fills my 9mm case. Titegroup is just some dust at the bottom. I'm not a good enough shot to detect any difference.

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

[Finster101]

"now then, with #2 it might shoot as well as #7, but i see the potential for double or triple loading..."



Well pardon me if I read this wrong.

[CraigOK]

If I have three loads of equal accuracy and equal attributes (no leading, all clean burning, etc) I'll use the one that is cheapest to load.

[rockshooter]

I like to use the highest loading density possible to reduce position sensitivity issues. However, it depends on the powder also. Fast powders like Bullseye or 231 don't seem to be as position sensitive as flake powders like Unique or Blue Dot. Ball powders work better for me and I can deal with loading density by choosing between AA5/7/9.
Loren

[RogerDat]

Titegroup is what I use for a lot of pistol and a double charge in a 38 case doesn't look all that different. It doesn't come anywhere close to filling a case even 1/2 way. So that is why the ability to visually check a load is front and center in my thinking. I find it more accurate than Unique which fills the case more. Not a huge accuracy difference but some. Which proves nothing about a different powder or pistol but it is what my experience has been.

Try a blind accuracy check. Someone else loads for you and records which powder/load each group is. You shoot without knowing which it is.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

SNIP...

i KNOW there are a few who know what i'm talking about. it's a simple question.

does a mostly filled case do better than one that relies on a very small grain load to do the same job?
I would think it would be quite rare for a "mostly filled case do better"
...about the only time it would, is when you have a load of position sensitive powder where the load is less then 50% of case capacity.

[rintinglen]

A case that has a powder charge that fills it more than 50% might be safer, making a double charge more noticeable, but whether it would shoot better is problematic. I recently acquired a S&W 52-2 which even with my tired old eyes shoots <2" groups at 25 yards. 3.0 grains of BE barely covers the bottom of the case, and while the 358-063 wadcutters take up some of the space in the case, there is still ample room for a double or triple charge. I could go to a slower, bulkier powder like Unique or Herco but past experience tells me I will not get equal accuracy.

All powders are not equally suitable for maximum accuracy, even if they are "safer."

[fecmech]

How much a powder fills a case is immaterial to me. I use a lot of Bullseye and accuracy is always been my primary concern. I use it in .38 and .357 cases in the 4 gr range with 130,120 and 158 gr bullets with accuracy in the revolvers in the 2-2.5"@50 yds. In my .357 leverguns accuracy is in the 3 moa range@100 yds. Ballistics are very uniform with single digit and low double digit SD's. I have 2 30-30 Bullseye loads (Hows that for case capacity?) with single digit SD's! Lee 312-155-2r/ 7.0 bullseye gives 1272 fps, es=22 fps,sd=6 fps and sub 2"@100yds. Lyman311410/5.0 Bullseye gives 1140 fps with 19 es and 5 sd and groups of sub 2"@100 yds. The ballistics quoted are for 10 shot strings.