? about Powder Measure's

[bowfisher]

Hi Ive been reloading for about a Yr now. I have the lee classic starter set. For now I mostly am only reloading 380 and 9mm. but plan on moving on to 45 and some rifle cartriges. Im looking at upgrading my powder mesure. Im looking for something that might be a bit more consistant ( I get that it has some to do with the type of powder) and one that hopefully doesn't drop powder all over my bench. What are peoples preferances and pro vs cons of rcbs and hornaday,. Are there any others that I should look at? I would appreciate any and all help and opinions. Thanks Dave

[OldmanFCSA]

For pistol or revolver I use RCBS powder measures.
For Rifle cartridges I use Hornady powder measures.

BUT

When using my Dillon's, I use their powder measures.

For Match loadings, I prefer a RCBS ChargeMaster (when it works) but am currently using two Smart Reloader ISD units which work well after reprogramming for 248 grain loadings.

Have FUN, be SAFE, get TRIGGER-TIME !!!!!

[Seismic Sam]

The other question is what kind of powder scale do you use?? For mid-range charges of powder that are just for "plain old shooting ammo" it doesn't have to be anything special, but if you start broadening your horizons and want to work up stronger loads, you need a GOOD scale. I will try and compress my usual rant about cheap digital scales, and ANY digital scale that has a spec of 0.1 gram / .01 grain and costs under $100 is a piece of crap. I generally use a plain old cheap Lee Perfect Powder measure and then weigh the loads with a scale that has .001 gram precision, but I'm working up very hot loads with a wildcat cartridge.

If you want to set up a powder measure to give you the best results, you can follow this procedure:

Set up the measure to throw a charge that is very close to the weight you want. Then then throw 10 charges in the pan together and weigh them. Say you want 12.4 grains of something. Ten charges should give you 124.0 grains, and notice you get an extra decimal point accuracy with 10 charges. If it's 123.1 grains, which means your AVERAGE weight is .09 grains low. Keep adjusting until you get 124.0 grains, and your loads will be centered on 124.0 grains. One very important thing!! When throwing the charge, you go from throw handle UP (meaning fill the measuring chamber) to down (dump powder) and back to up. This allows the powder to settle to a constant volume in the measure between loads while you get a new case, and get more accuracy. If you do it the other way around, you are screwing up the whole deal and will get variable weights for as long as you do it this way.

[crbutler]

Sam, you have been saying that for some time, and you are wrong.

You cannot gain significant digits by massing your measure and then dividing.

Your measurement is still only good to 0.1. You need a better scale to go to a second significant digit... I can pull the analytic chem book out to quote chapter and verse if you wish. You have it right that a cheap electronic is somewhat inaccurate, but on the other hand, a cheap electronic is easy to use and will encourage folks to check more frequently. I guess I am trying to say that the cheap scales have a place in a beginner's kit, as long as you follow directions and work up, you won't get in trouble with it.

As to the power measure question... For general purpose reloading (no African guns or .50 BMG) I have had good luck with a plain old RCBS. I did get a Harrel for playing around with accuracy loads, but mostly for accuracy and big game hunting use a Chargemaster. Both of those are spendy as is something like Erud's Prometheus. For someone just starting to do more variety, I would go with the RCBS, although some folks really like Hornady's.

[grimbeaver]

For what it's worth I have a Redding 3BR and have been very happy with it. It's the only thing I've ever used so I can not really compare. The only thing I've found so far that it really hates is 700x. I was trying to do 45acp and throw around 5gr I think. Doing pistol rounds with other powders though when I've checked I'm usually within .1gr with the occasional .2gr probably. Obviously your experience may vary depending on the powder.

[Seismic Sam]

Sam, you have been saying that for some time, and you are wrong.

Your measurement is still only good to 0.1. You need a better scale to go to a second significant digit... I can pull the analytic chem book out to quote chapter and verse if you wish. You have it right that a cheap electronic is somewhat inaccurate, but on the other hand, a cheap electronic is easy to use and will encourage folks to check more frequently. I guess I am trying to say that the cheap scales have a place in a beginner's kit, as long as you follow directions and work up, you won't get in trouble with it.

As to the power measure question... For general purpose reloading (no African guns or .50 BMG) I have had good luck with a plain old RCBS. I did get a Harrel for playing around with accuracy loads, but mostly for accuracy and big game hunting use a Chargemaster. Both of those are spendy as is something like Erud's Prometheus. For someone just starting to do more variety, I would go with the RCBS, although some folks really like Hornady's.

Yes, I have been saying that for some time, and obviously you and maybe some other people don't get it. The whole purpose of the exercise is to make sure THAT ON AVERAGE your weight is accurately centered AROUND your selected weight. Even if you weigh 10 separate charges, you can only average to 0.1 grain accuracy. You cannot gain significant digits by averaging your separate ten 0.1 grain measurements, because maybe 2 were .02 grains high and 8 were .02 grains low. Those fractions of a tenth of a grain are going to get shaved off and lost if you do it that way.

If, however you throw 10 charges in a row and weigh ALL of them at once, then you can say that you are throwing charges that ON AVERAGE are 12.37 grains rather than an average of 12.40 grains. As such, you can make an informed judgement about whether your powder measure is dead nuts on, or off by some fraction of a tenth of a grain on average.

The first way I describe it, the weight errors that are less than .05 grains each are thrown away. The way I recommend doing it, ALL TEN minor errors are added together, so you can interpolate the total error by weighing 10 charges at once instead of one at a time.

[crbutler]

You miss the point.

Mathematically you are right. (X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X)/10 = X

Statistically you are not correct. 10 (~X)/10 is not X... it is ~X. You are trying to indirectly measure ~.

As pertains to measurement you are wrong. You HAVE to preserve significant figures. If I measure 10 objects with a yard stick, I can't figure out how big they are to the inch, I have to say it is to the closest yard, no matter how many of them I measure.

You can't say the scale is off by 0.02 grains by your averages method, you are inducing a rounding error calculation in your measurement, not a true measurement of the error.

Your method SOUNDS good, but it is scientifically invalid.

Admittedly if you measure enough items, you can gain some significant figures...for what you are doing, you need at least 100 (to get the 3 significant figures, which probably puts you over the max capacity of your scale...)

This is basic statistics.

[srtolly]

I use the Lee (not so) Perfect Powder Measure and I find that if I tap the handle at the top of the stroke and again at the bottom my charges within .1 grain. If you want super accurate loads get a good scale, I like a beam scale like my Hornady and trickle to the load you want.

Hornady or RCBS are both good measures but you also need a good scale more than the measure.

[Seismic Sam]

You miss the point.

Mathematically you are right. (X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X)/10 = X

Statistically you are not correct. 10 (~X)/10 is not X... it is ~X. You are trying to indirectly measure ~.

As pertains to measurement you are wrong. You HAVE to preserve significant figures. If I measure 10 objects with a yard stick, I can't figure out how big they are to the inch, I have to say it is to the closest yard, no matter how many of them I measure.

Vey poor analogy. A yard stick is 36 times bigger than an inch, not 10 times bigger, and every yard stick I have ever seen has inch markings on it. Are you talking about a 36 inch long 2x4??

You can't say the scale is off by 0.02 grains by your averages method, you are inducing a rounding error calculation in your measurement, not a true measurement of the error.

Ummmm, excuse me, but I'm talking about the weight coming from THE POWDER MEASURE, and NOT the scale!!!
I in no way have ever inferred that you can get an extra decimal point in accuracy from your scale, but by averaging 10 charges you CAN get that extra decimal point on the accuracy of THE AVERAGE weight of the power thrown FROM THE POWDER MEASURE!!! This method is for setting a powder scale to deliver, ON AVERAGE, 12.4 grains of powder dead nuts on, and not .02 or .03 grains off on the AVERAGE, which you approximate by weighing 10 charges together. This method is a hell of a lot better than throwing one charge from a measure, weighing that single charge at 12.4 grains, and calling it good. You know as well as I do that powder measures are very inexact devices, and things such as settle time, vibration, throw speed, and return throw speed can significantly effect the weight thrown.

Your method SOUNDS good, but it is scientifically invalid.

Once again, you seem to have missed my basic premise that this concerns the average weight coming out of the powder measure, and I have NEVER said that you can by some trick get an extra decimal point of measurement OUT OF YOUR SCALE.

Admittedly if you measure enough items, you can gain some significant figures...for what you are doing, you need at least 100 (to get the 3 significant figures, which probably puts you over the max capacity of your scale...)

This is basic statistics.