Powder measuring...ACCURATELY

[eb in oregon]

I have also used Unique for pistol in the past and all of the tips to try to make it work clean are above. Second to the top of the list of these tips would be a consistent cadence, or throw, along with making sure you get a little "rap" top and bottom of the lever to settle the powder. #1 for me though would be to switch powder.

I've been using it for about 45 years, I see no need to change and "follow the crowd." I think I've got it down.

 

[eb in oregon]

Consistency does NOT always equal accuracy.

I think one large ragged hole at 25 yards is accurate enough.

 

[RVTECH]

If your not looking at your beam scale perfectly straight on it can be off up to .1gn.

Ditto this.

I have a shelf above my loading desk that puts my beam scale at nearly eye level.

 

[bcp]

Precision is how similar each shot is to the ones before and after, making a small group on target.

Accuracy is adjusting your sights so that small group is where it should be.



Bruce

 

[P7M13]

Rubber banding an aquarium air pump to a dipper is next level ftw.

That or get the rotating tingy out of yer ol' lady's vibrator.

 

[kmk1012]

That or get the rotating tingy out of yer ol' lady's vibrator.

Depending on the lady it may take a bit of a fight.

 

[oremike]

If you think about it, if your scale goes down to a 10th of a grain it can never be more accurate than +/- that 10th of a grain. It can't measure less than that.

 

[bpyycpyy]

Like others have said earlier, I found Unique to be horrible for measuring consistent throws even when using good technique. I also found it to be a fairly dirty burning powder so I switched to True Blue and haven't looked back (insert many other powders that will work too). For best results, do load work up that when you chronograph it the fps doesn't vary much between a range of powder charges that are plus/minus a few grains. This becomes your powder load node and this ensures that your SD (standard deviation of fps per round) is similar enough that if your powder charge does vary slightly it won't matter as the bullet fps is the same enough to hit the same point of impact.

 

[Spitpatch]

Powder is more repeatable by volume

Some is. Some isn't.

I think one large ragged hole at 25 yards is accurate enough.

With no doubt. But the topic was comparison toward consistency of powder measuring, thrown vs weighed. (A debate from which you have successfully removed yourself.)

 

[eb in oregon]

Ditto this.

I have a shelf above my loading desk that puts my beam scale at nearly eye level.

I just hunker down to eye level.

 

[eb in oregon]

I also found it to be a fairly dirty burning powder

I just clean my guns, but Unique isn't dirty enough for me to abandon it. I've fired over 500 rounds of Unique in a 1911 without needing cleaning so it's clean enough for me.

 

[eb in oregon]

With no doubt. But the topic was comparison toward consistency of powder measuring, thrown vs weighed. (A debate from which you have successfully removed yourself.)

So you're saying without weighing charges a reloader can't have consistency? Weird as many bench rest shooters use a dipper for their cartridges. I've also known several bench rest shooters that had no problem with a measure.

 

[orygun]

If you think about it, if your scale goes down to a 10th of a grain it can never be more accurate than +/- that 10th of a grain. It can't measure less than that.

With a beam scale you can tell when it is precisely lined up, or a shade heavy or light. That is the beauty of analogue vs digital. I quit using my RCBS digital for powder measuring as you can not read any discrepancies less than a 1/10th of a grain.

I just clean my guns, but Unique isn't dirty enough for me to abandon it. I've fired over 500 rounds of Unique in a 1911 without needing cleaning so it's clean enough for me.

I love Unique. Probably my favorite powder for 45 ACP. It does makes my gun look dirty on the outside which prompts me to clean it. but the insides aren't any dirtier than other powders I've used.

 

[orygun]

Some is. Some isn't.

I don't try and hit the number on the head when using stick powders thrown from my measure as it's inconsistent and I use the trickler to come up to the charge I want.
Would this be an instance where volume might be better than weight?

 

[Hemlock]

Do you really think all those ammo manufactures are weighing each powder drop?

 

[orygun]

That's the difference between accuracy and precision. High ES wont be as precise at longer range.

I believe that and it's why I mentioned it in my post, but how much and when?
Is there any reason to expect anything different than extrapolating the 100 yard group sizes?

 

[orygun]

Do you really think all those ammo manufactures are weighing each powder drop?

I'm sure it's by volume. Heck, my powder measure throws charges by volume, but charges are listed by weight in the manuals.
Since there's not listing of volume by anyone besides Lee, we have no options but to measure by weight.

@oremike and @Cerberus Group can certainly speak on this better than I can.

 

[Koda]

I believe that and it's why I mentioned it in my post, but how much and when?
Is there any reason to expect anything different than extrapolating the 100 yard group sizes?

The only reason would be if one planned to hunt or target shoot "long range". I dont know where the line is and it probably depends on the caliber etc. but since most hunting isnt long range a higher ES/SD in a hunting handload isnt really going to show up much even at 300 yards.

Bryan Litz has a good post about this, but from the long range perspective.

https://www.facebook.com/BryanLitzBallistics/posts/pfbid02N14dUNiDHncotvLgiH9H63tFjQJVqfQPT4X65Now8NpoK1F9Dm4orC6D4HmXJamQl

View: https://www.facebook.com/BryanLitzBallistics/posts/pfbid02N14dUNiDHncotvLgiH9H63tFjQJVqfQPT4X65Now8NpoK1F9Dm4orC6D4HmXJamQl

 

[RVTECH]

I just hunker down to eye level

Well, one of the reasons I have my beam scale on a shelf at eye level is because a powder trickler sits right next to it - filled with Unique.

I too have used Unique for years but because of its difficulty in metering I stopped using it in pisto cartridges (other than .357) and I use it for reduced loads in .30-30 WInchester.

Because I shoot .357 in my Henry I typically hand weigh charges for it as well as the .30-30 as I am looking for maximum accuracy with both.

Hand weighing goes fairly quickly as I simply set my powder measure just 'shy' of the charge I want, dump it into the beam scale dish, set it back in the scale and 'top' it off with the trickler. I then put the case into a funnel I have mounted on a holder and dump the charge into it.

This system works pretty well and fast. From 'throwing' the charge, to top off and back into the case averages about 15-20 seconds per.

 

[Koda]

Well, one of the reasons I have my beam scale on a shelf at eye level is because a powder trickler sits right next to it - filled with Unique.

I also have my beam scale on a shelf at eye level (Im over 6ft...) and with the powder trickler next to it. I had it on the bench and absolutely wore my back out using it there, plus its how I learned that eye level parallax consistency is a real issue in accurate powder measuring with a beam scale (I load for precision rifle ammo).
I dont trust electronic scales, have a cheap one on the bench to quickly get close then transfer it to the beam scale to use the trickler to dial in precisely.

I wouldnt do it this way for mas producing pistol ammo, of course. Im just showing how parallax is an issue in consistent charge weights with a beam scale. You cant just stoop down to read the scale you also have to stoop down to the same eye level, consistently.