Community
Black Powder Ask opinions of other hunters on new technology, gear, and the methods of blackpowder hunting.

I WAS SURPRISED?

Thread Tools
 
Old 02-11-2006, 05:14 PM
  #11  
 
roundball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 501
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

To be clear, I'm not a 'purist'...don't have expensive custom guns that are supposed to be "period specific" and all that...but I do use TC Hawken Flintlocks, realBP, black English flints, and patched round balls...hunting has never in my life been as rewarding as it has beenfor the past four years...first Flintlock squirrel was about as big a deal as the first Flintlock buck!
roundball is offline  
Old 02-11-2006, 06:31 PM
  #12  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

its hard to think that a VOLUME measure would be so close to being precise compared to powder scale on geox 2f.that was a SURPRISE too me.its hardto think that you pour in your powder in a MEASURE ,dump it in a scale pan, weight it and it is almost within tenths of gr.close to powder measure reading .that was a surprise to me, for sure.i expected to see like maybe 2 ,3 4 gr. diffference in my POWDER SCALE reading compared to powder measure.that never happened.
sproulman is offline  
Old 02-11-2006, 06:50 PM
  #13  
Dominant Buck
 
cayugad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 21,193
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

ORIGINAL: roundball

Not responding to anyone in particular, just babbling:

BP volume powder measures are designed/calibrated to throw the same actual weight of BP...ie: a 100grn measure of BP is 100grns weight of BP.

TheBP Subs are usually a different weight...they're designed PHYSICALLY to take up the same amount of volume even though 100grn measure of Pyrodex RS only weight 72 grns or something.

Energy wise, it still equals the 100grn thrown charge of Goex...I assume otheres like 777 will weigh differently toobut they're all benchmarked against a volume measurement.
I understand this.. I was just surprised at how when I measured a volume weight of 100 grains ofTriple Se7en 2f, it weighed out at average, 68 grains. I would have guessed it would have been a little more then that. I just find it interesting.
cayugad is offline  
Old 02-11-2006, 06:54 PM
  #14  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

cayugad, now that is interesting too, i learned something there.
sproulman is offline  
Old 02-11-2006, 08:34 PM
  #15  
Dominant Buck
 
cayugad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 21,193
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

ORIGINAL: sproulman

cayugad, now that is interesting too, i learned something there.
Well due to a different post, I went and read the instructions again on the scale and found out there is a "g" for grams I am guessing, and then there is a grains setting. I was not using the right setting I think.
cayugad is offline  
Old 02-13-2006, 09:14 AM
  #16  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Union City, Michigan
Posts: 231
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

Here is data on weighed charges
http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/LoadsBallistics2.html
bowbender6 is offline  
Old 02-13-2006, 09:31 AM
  #17  
Dominant Buck
 
cayugad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 21,193
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

ORIGINAL: bowbender6

Here is data on weighed charges
http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/LoadsBallistics2.html
interesting reading...thanks for the post.
cayugad is offline  
Old 02-13-2006, 10:22 AM
  #18  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 96
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

Cayugad, your scale was on the right setting. 1 gram = 15.5 grains so if the scale was on grams you would have got a reading of like 5-6g's when you put 70-90 grains on there. You would havenoticed a problem right away.
grapeshot is offline  
Old 02-13-2006, 04:34 PM
  #19  
Typical Buck
 
LaneNebraska's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 601
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

I think the data tables are reversed for FFFg vs FFg at this web site:

http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/LoadsBallistics2.html

All my APP type powder FFFg wieghs Heavier than FFg.

I also tap my powder measure till it won't hold any more. My findings are:

Trip7 FFg
.80 x grains by volume = Trip7 FFg Actual Wieght

.80 x 80gbv = 64gaw
.80 x 100gbv = 80gaw
.80 x 120gbv = 96gaw



APP/Gold/Pinnacle FFFg
.92 x GBV = FFFg Actual Wieght

.92 x 80gbv = 73.6gaw
.92 x 100gbv = 92gaw
.92 x 120gbv = 110.4gaw



LaneNebraska is offline  
Old 02-13-2006, 05:35 PM
  #20  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
Default RE: I WAS SURPRISED?

i noticed under NOTE .it said that uncle mikes brass weighted a black powder 3f volume charge of 100 grs and it weighted 99.3 on the powder scale.i used my 35 year old THOMPSON/CENTER BRASS volume measure that goes from 50/120 grs. it was only .5 to 6 of a TENTH of a grain off from the volume measure.example, my 100 gr measured in the brass thompson was 100.5 in the powder scale. if i TAPPED the measure it was 101 gr with 2f.i was surprised it was not like 2 ,3.4 GRAINS diffferent than the powder measure. there is no reason to weight a charge ofGEOX 2F BLACKPOWDER USING THE THOMPSON BRASS VOLUME MEASURE.good articile, i learned.
sproulman is offline  


Quick Reply: I WAS SURPRISED?


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.