Zack,
When using Swiss as you mentioned I load by the weight, and don’t much worry about the amount of compression, in 1.5 it does vary a good bit.
In FG Goex, and Express though things are a bit different. In the 110 I will preface. One particular lot gives the same volume as compared to another may vary as much as 111 grs versus 106. In both particular lots once .385 compression was reached the same MV and single digits SD. On my Oehler 35P.
Something called bulk density comes into play here I believe, the amount of ball milling of the components used to make up the powder will affect the density of the powder. And I submit that maybe of some consideration. The same weight should mean the same amount of fuel at least in theory. With Swiss I believe that is most likely the case.
I put this forth as in a past life I worked as a mine chemist, texting of various coal seams for BTU energy content using bomb calimetric testing. A Cubic foot of coal was weighed, using the same cubic foot of volume in various seams had considerable weight difference even though the exact same volume. The denser coal weighs more…. It also yielded more energy.
this had to be accurate to the ninth degree as multi million dollar coal contracts were at stake here.
Goex obviously varies in bulk density as equal volumes vary in weight. But if compressed into the same amount no mater the weight it gives consistent #s.
Suffice to say in olde Eynsford 1.5 using the same weight also hasn’t worked as well as Swiss, but it’s very close. 2 previous cases 103 grs by weight were at 1406 fps, my more recent 2 cases I purchased just days after the factory blew requires 103.5 grs of powder. To achieve the same numbers. So it’s close.
So as Colt so succinctly put it, we don’t alway know what we don’t know.
Something for consideration, this was something Dan and I corresponded over in some depth.
KW
We'll raise up our Glasses against Evil Forces, Singing, Whiskey for my men, Beer for my horses.
Wyoming Territory Sharps Shooter