Weighed versus measured

Discussions of powders, bullets and loading information.

Moderators: Kirk, Lucinda

mike herth
Posts: 294
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 9:22 am
Location: Buffalo, WY

Weighed versus measured

Post by mike herth »

Trying to simplify reloading. I weighed the same pan of powder 20 times on an inexpensive Lyman digital scale to check consistency. The variation was 0.6 grains for a 80 grain load of OE 1.5, then I weighed the same load on a balance 20 times and it had no variation. So I’m wondering just what amount of variability leads to discernible impacts at say 500 yards or further. At 200 yards I can’t notice a difference. How about 1 or 2 grains variation? I’m wondering if it’s worth worrying about compared to the more significant environmental factors.
beltfed
Posts: 1962
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:07 am
Location: Central Wi

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by beltfed »

I have check weighed bullets on my Lyman digital scale.
rechecked a number of bullets. Very Close.
Nevertheless, I still weigh my BP powder charges on my 1010 Balance , bringing each charge up to the correct weight
with a dribbler after dumping a slightly light weight setting from my measure.
Just have no Total Trust in the digital scale. ONe thing, I had an early problem with the Lyman digital, but they
did direct me to "reset" it to eliminate static electricity effects.
AND, the digital scale MUST be absolutely level.
DUUUHHH. Just like I did with my balance
beltfed/arnie
Coltsmoke
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 8:55 am
Location: GA.

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by Coltsmoke »

This will be very entertaining. Can't wait to read all these different opinions. :lol:
Normal isn't coming back, but Jesus is.
User avatar
desert deuce
Posts: 3845
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 10:51 pm
Location: Rio Rico, Arizona

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by desert deuce »

Just for you Smoke, I will "weigh" in. This may not be the answer anyone is expecting.

First of all, can we agree to the premise that there are many variables involved in reloading ammunition for black powder cartridge rifles?
In fact probably the most critical factor involved is the gelatinous mass that loads the ammunition and activates the trigger mechanism?
Can we further agree that the most important variable contained in this most critical factor is the few inches of mass between the ears?

OK, with these parameters in place and no degree in engineering hanging on the wall how do we arrange the variables to seduce the desired result from the rifle, load, shooter combination at the target?

Assume the six inches between the ears plays an important role in settling on the solution that provides acceptable results.

I have heard this described as a rifle that shoots to call. For our purposes this definition is OK. On steel silhouettes this is relative, if you hit the animal anywhere it generally goes down. You either hit or miss. On paper those pesky scoring rings require more precision from the rifle/shooter combination. Let's presume the maximum level of precision for paper target is the goal. Just for the sake of defining the parameters.

We learn from loading and shooting, true? We are working to find the combination for one certain rifle to group those ten record shots for smallest group, hopefully all within the X and 10 ring at distances from 200 to 1,000 yards. (Subject 44-90 RS, Badger 1-18 twist.)

Shooting this 44-90 over the chronograph with 520 grain bullet and 1.5 Swiss we "discover" one grain of powder varies the velocity 15' from the muzzle an average of six feet per second starting with a zero compressed loading adding one grain at a time. However, a load with .105" compression burns cleaner and gives an extreme spread on the chronograph of five feet per second for six shots. Three of those six shots register the same velocity. This is where that six inches between the ears should kick in and inspire the gelatinous mass to take the rifle/load combination to the range and see what the target says.

At the range we have a 600 yard standard target in the frame and firing from 600 yards. Once on paper no sight adjustments made. Fourteen consecutive shots fired at target measure one and one half inches high by eleven inches wide. Six inches between ears says this is acceptable results at target because it is the vertical dispersion that we are trying to minimize. That does require, however, a functioning six inches.

Fortunately, we wrote the loading details down and made permanent record so that load can be replicated....upon reading the notes we confirm that we weighed the powder charge to the exact weight on all twenty rounds on an RCBS Digital Scale.

Now, when I load that rifle to go to a National Championship Match I am going to weigh the powder charges to the exact weight on that same scale. Wouldn't you?

Moral of the story, focus on the results and do what produces the desired result. So what if your process is scorned by someone that didn't even bother to go to the match. The trophy is yours and you know what you did to win it and will use the same process in loading for the next match.
Sometimes you get the chicken, and sometimes you get the feathers!
bruce m
Posts: 3350
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:25 am
Location: australia

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by bruce m »

"we learn from loading and shooting, true?"
sometimes yes, sometimes no.
bruce.
ventum est amicus meus
martinibelgian
Posts: 1610
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:20 pm

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by martinibelgian »

When using digital scales, always take drift into account. I always use the same empty case for loading, and the empty case frequently goes back on the scale to re-zero it. You KNOW how much it weighs, so if you see your scale deviating, it's time to re-zero it.
Then there are air currents, vibrations, nearby power sources,.... All to be taken into account.
User avatar
Distant Thunder
Posts: 882
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:46 am
Location: NE Wisconsin

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by Distant Thunder »

Deuce,

You took so long getting to the point I wasn’t at all sure which side of the fence you were going to land on! :P Happy to see you on my side, but not really surprised. :)
Jim Kluskens
aka Distant Thunder
User avatar
kenny s
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 8:14 am
Location: Venice FL

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by kenny s »

I use a digital to weigh each 67 grain charge. 66.9 to 67.1 are acceptable, then drop tube to the case.
I also weight my 418 grain PP bullets in two batches. 415 and 418. sometimes I find a 413 and out it goes. someone said that
it is not More or Less lead...it's an air pocket. and that makes sense.

If you repeat the procedure for each round, , scale should not matter....

I'ts Hot here in FL, so my garage has a fan setup. I've noticed that the fan effects the scale. so, No fan in the BP loading process.

Ken
User avatar
desert deuce
Posts: 3845
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 10:51 pm
Location: Rio Rico, Arizona

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by desert deuce »

What a pleasant surprise, two much admired Shiloh friends both posted to the weigh the charges post.

Jim Kluskens Mr. Paper Patch of BPTR Long Range himself and none other than the impressive Bruce M. master marksman from down under possessed of boundless wit and wisdom.

Guessing that between the three of us we have burned enough charcoal to qualify as environmental polluters in some circles..

For those others reading here you also learn a lot about what does not work in your individual pursuits of that best load in your rifle only by trial and error. Logic dictates that you have to shoot the rifle in order to see the result. :shock:

Just because it works for one rifle, does not mean it will work in another. Likewise, just because it works for me does not mean it will work for you. However, the process mentioned, if applied, will likely lead you to success but you must make the effort.

The beauty of BPTR Competition is that it is almost entirely an individual pursuit to which one can excel but never perfect.

Warning, there is nothing we can do or advice we can give to overcome a dysfunctional frontal lobe.
Sometimes you get the chicken, and sometimes you get the feathers!
Coltsmoke
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 8:55 am
Location: GA.

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by Coltsmoke »

I would not use that scale on my loading bench. I weigh every charge.
Normal isn't coming back, but Jesus is.
bruce m
Posts: 3350
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:25 am
Location: australia

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by bruce m »

well zack there seem to be 2 types of bptr shooters.
1) as described by yourself that learn by experience.
2) those who work on urban myth and legend.
the latter do not respond to the theory that only an idiot continues to do the same thing and expects a different result.
often myth and legend involves an opinion of what the old dead guys did, based on what someone said as opposed to extensive research.
your 2 admired respondents are BOTH pp exponents, and I think both dual diameter bullet exponents as well.
bruce.
ventum est amicus meus
bruce m
Posts: 3350
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:25 am
Location: australia

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by bruce m »

zack,
we do not know what you think because you never tell us.
you are the sort of guy that hides behind what your rifles say.
bruce.
ventum est amicus meus
Coltsmoke
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 8:55 am
Location: GA.

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by Coltsmoke »

Back to the original question, what amount of variability in a powder charge can make a difference? You said you had as much as 0.6 grs. variation with your scale. Is that enough to make a difference? The answer is yes and no, depending on your load and caliber. I have had loads in a Shiloh 45-70 that shot great with 3 powder charges, 67, 68, and 69 grs. So I just loaded in the middle at 68grs. So a half grain difference in either direction did not make a difference. But if you went under 67 or over 69grs. with a half grain, yes it would make a difference. When I get down to fine tuning a load I will load half grain loads in both directions to dial it in. Testing loads with half grain differences comes more into play with calibers smaller than the .45's. A grain of powder in a .45 adds .020 in the powder column height which adds .020 more compression to the load, half grain only is a .010 add to the compression. I test loads in the .45 at one grain increments and cover the whole range of possible loads. In my .40 I test loads at half grain increments to cover the whole range of possible loads, if you only test at 1 or 2 grain increments in the .40 you can totally miss a good load and not even know it was there. In the .40 caliber 1 gr. of powder will add .035 in the powder column height and to the compression, you can miss a load that will shoot with a .020 addition to the compression and never know it was there with a 1 gr. add. My PP load in the .40 will shoot at 72 and 73grs. of powder, if you go to 73.5gr. accuracy goes away, if you go to 71.5gr. of powder accuracy goes away. I think it has more to do with the change of the compression on the powder, than the half grain more or less of powder which would change the velocity very little. The picture below is a .040 test, look at the 66.5 gr. load in the middle, then look at the loads on each side of it which is only a half grain of powder difference. So the answer to your question is yes it can make a difference on the target.
DSC01985.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Normal isn't coming back, but Jesus is.
User avatar
desert deuce
Posts: 3845
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 10:51 pm
Location: Rio Rico, Arizona

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by desert deuce »

Hard to compare Smoke, guessing you were either using 1F Schuetzen or Reenactor for a charge? You didn't specify.

Same here on the 45-70 being forgiving.

Bruce, I write up my highly detailed loading information and submit it upon request of the magazines and it isn't my fault it does not get printed and distributed. Possibly someone benefits. Certainly is not the magazine subscriber.

BTW, would you be so kind as to send me your home email address in a PM ? I want to join your international fan club. Hopefully there are some vacancies left.
Sometimes you get the chicken, and sometimes you get the feathers!
bruce m
Posts: 3350
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:25 am
Location: australia

Re: Weighed versus measured

Post by bruce m »

zack,
funny you should say that, the fan club has many many vacancies.
this due to more enemies than friends.
you would be surprised where I am not welcome, but then again you might not be.
those places tend to involve an "in crowd", that self glorifies each other and then basks in their own glory.
looking at their results on these pages suggests that they might be better off looking outside their inner sanctum.
bruce.
ventum est amicus meus
Post Reply