chrono my load of bh
11-17-2013, 08:07 PM
#1
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SOUTHERN Illinois USA
Posts: 820
chrono my load of bh
I used my chrono to find out ny speed snd to my suprise 100 gr of bh209 with a 250gr tez from a tc triumph averages 2050fps at the muzzle. I used to shoot 120ges but never chrono that load. Im happy with 100gr speed.
11-18-2013, 04:43 AM
#2
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,585
I assume you use a volume measure if that is so I recommend that you weigh about 10 loads and average them so you can get the actual load back.
My reason for recommending this procudure is that I have had something like a dozen volume measures over the last 55 years and none were within 3 grains and only one the U-View came that close, the one that was off the most was 23 grains off. It is my opinion that at least 50 % of shooters do not know what there best shooting load weighs.
My reason for recommending this procudure is that I have had something like a dozen volume measures over the last 55 years and none were within 3 grains and only one the U-View came that close, the one that was off the most was 23 grains off. It is my opinion that at least 50 % of shooters do not know what there best shooting load weighs.
Last edited by lemoyne; 11-18-2013 at 04:47 AM.
11-18-2013, 06:50 AM
#3
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
I assume you use a volume measure if that is so I recommend that you weigh about 10 loads and average them so you can get the actual load back.
My reason for recommending this procudure is that I have had something like a dozen volume measures over the last 55 years and none were within 3 grains and only one the U-View came that close, the one that was off the most was 23 grains off. It is my opinion that at least 50 % of shooters do not know what there best shooting load weighs.
My reason for recommending this procudure is that I have had something like a dozen volume measures over the last 55 years and none were within 3 grains and only one the U-View came that close, the one that was off the most was 23 grains off. It is my opinion that at least 50 % of shooters do not know what there best shooting load weighs.
11-18-2013, 07:45 PM
#6
Fork Horn
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 370
Problem with weighing powder by weight is powder by weight is seldom a constant . While by volume it is usually 100 percent consistent. There is a reason the top bench rest shooters use volume measuring as opposed to weighted charges.
The reason is somewhat simple powder absorbs moister from the air like a sponge. To test this theory simply open up a container from your safe storage area and place it on a digital scale. Come back in a short period of time and you will see that it has actually gained in weight. But the volume has remained constant .
Volumetric charges if measured properly are simply more accurate that weighed charges!
The reason is somewhat simple powder absorbs moister from the air like a sponge. To test this theory simply open up a container from your safe storage area and place it on a digital scale. Come back in a short period of time and you will see that it has actually gained in weight. But the volume has remained constant .
Volumetric charges if measured properly are simply more accurate that weighed charges!
11-21-2013, 06:28 PM
#7
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 3,732
....................There is a reason the top bench rest shooters use volume measuring as opposed to weighted charges......................
Yes indeed there is a reason. What the reason may be, is they shoot hundreds of rounds every week, and it takes far too much time to weigh each charge. What they do is purchase the very very most accurate powder drop to load their cartridges, knowing their loads will never be perfect, but hoping they will be 'good enough'
Yes indeed there is a reason. What the reason may be, is they shoot hundreds of rounds every week, and it takes far too much time to weigh each charge. What they do is purchase the very very most accurate powder drop to load their cartridges, knowing their loads will never be perfect, but hoping they will be 'good enough'
................Volumetric charges if measured properly are simply more accurate that weighed charges!
This statement should be accompanied by a link, or footnote, otherwise it is just your opinion. If you will, please provide documentation for your seemingly biased opinion.
This statement should be accompanied by a link, or footnote, otherwise it is just your opinion. If you will, please provide documentation for your seemingly biased opinion.
Ask yourself why the volume measure of black powder is in grains, which is a unit of weight? A possible answer is there existed no easy way to weigh charges in the field, however one could measure charges by volume fairly accurately. Measuring powder in the field, even today, is difficult to do with a scale. However, using a weighed charge in a cartridge works good. For muzzle loader hunters, measuring powder in the field kinda requires a volume measure, does it not?
Ask yourself, how was volume measure in weight units the 'grain', arrived at? Right or wrong, it is my opinion, a scale is used to calibrate them volume measuring devices.
If you wish to have your opinions respected, it wouldn't hurt to provide some documentation to support what, to some, may seem to be just WAG.
11-22-2013, 01:25 PM
#8
Fork Horn
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 370
Ask yourself why the volume measure of black powder is in grains, which is a unit of weight? A possible answer is there existed no easy way to weigh charges in the field, however one could measure charges by volume fairly accurately. Measuring powder in the field, even today, is difficult to do with a scale. However, using a weighed charge in a cartridge works good. For muzzle loader hunters, measuring powder in the field kinda requires a volume measure, does it not?
Ask yourself, how was volume measure in weight units the 'grain', arrived at? Right or wrong, it is my opinion, a scale is used to calibrate them volume measuring devices.
If you wish to have your opinions respected, it wouldn't hurt to provide some documentation to support what, to some, may seem to be just WAG.
Ask yourself, how was volume measure in weight units the 'grain', arrived at? Right or wrong, it is my opinion, a scale is used to calibrate them volume measuring devices.
If you wish to have your opinions respected, it wouldn't hurt to provide some documentation to support what, to some, may seem to be just WAG.
Ask yourself, how was volume measure in weight units the 'grain', arrived at? Right or wrong, it is my opinion, a scale is used to calibrate them volume measuring devices.
If you wish to have your opinions respected, it wouldn't hurt to provide some documentation to support what, to some, may seem to be just WAG.[/QUOTE}
Couple of points to ponder for you sir.
First.
If you think for one second that the top bench rest shooters just drop a load and "Hope" that it will be good enough..then you have never been around bench rest shooters or you are sadly mistaken.
Those guys have learned over the years by chronographing tens of thousands of rounds both weighed and measured that .5 Grains is not going to make any difference in the real world of ES (Extream Spreads) of the load. You cannot fight ES no matter how hard you try to get the grain measurment down. Heck you could count each and every grain by hand and still not beat the ES. Too many varibles go into each and every shot. Again READ MY NOTES about how SMOKELESS powders absorb MOISTURE like a sponge. Feel free to google that if you do not belive me as there is a ton of information on bench rest circles about why they do not try and measure by weight. Its because when they are on the bench they cannot control the atmospheric conditions and the weight of the powder is changing during the course of the match. By the end of the match the weight of the powder is "unknown" while the volume of the powder is "known".
Now with that said you do realize that most manfactures of ammunition measure by Volume and not by weight? Wonder why that is? Speed of production would be your first thought probably???? But NO. Its saftey and consistancy . For the same reasons as stated above there is no way that a ammunition company like Remington or Federal for instance can handle a gazzilion barrels of powder and keep the powder at a 100% stable temperature 100% of the time. Therefore the powder is always changing WEIGHT. But what the powder is doing is maintaining VOLUME. THEREFORE VOLUME MEASUREING IS MORE ACCURATE THAN MEASURING BY WEIGHT!
I did not clarify my remarks well enough apparently. My remarks were geared more towards the mearsurment of smokeless powders and black powder as they are much more susceptible to moisture and changing weight in the atmosphere. Again if you are sceptical about that I challenge you to take out a scoop of your favorite smokeless powder or black powder out of your safe storage container and introduce it into your digital scale. Take a reading and step away for a while and come back and take another reading. You will find that it has gained in weight. But the VOLUME has stayed the same.
Now with BH209 we are still in the learning stages with it. All of the initial reports as well as my personal testing on it all seem to be postive. One of the members here even wet BH209 rolled it up and put it in ML and shot it. Cannot remember who that was but that was impressive. It would be interesting to test BH209 to see what effects it has on MOISTURE absorbtion and weight gain. I personally have not tested it yet to see so I cannot comment on it.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...4103034AAkdEDh
AS to the conception of the Volume Measure? I cannot say for sure. I know the early formulas for Powder from both China and The Middle East all deal in "parts" and "percentages" of sulfur,realgar and saltpeter and no mention of the word grain pops up anywhere in any of the books I have read .
Last edited by edwardCVAmason; 11-22-2013 at 02:14 PM.
11-23-2013, 05:38 AM
#9
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 3,732
When i go to the field, or the range with my rifle, i carry vials of powder. The vials are filled with a measured charge of powder. These charges of powder, i measure by volume. All of my shooting is done by using powder charges measured by volume. Measuring powder charges by volume works good for me.
Every now and again, i weigh a volume measured charge. Their weight varies. These are charges measured and weighed from the same batch, and within minutes of each other. These volume measured charges are not consistent in weight, nor do they consistently get heavier.
If one were to weigh each and every charge, then measure their volume, one would see they all have exactly the same volume. Obviously, this is because of the accuracy limits of the volume measure.
A scale can detect differences in weight measured by a volume measure, but a volume measure cannot detect differences in volume measured, by a scale. Which is the more accurate?
Every now and again, i weigh a volume measured charge. Their weight varies. These are charges measured and weighed from the same batch, and within minutes of each other. These volume measured charges are not consistent in weight, nor do they consistently get heavier.
If one were to weigh each and every charge, then measure their volume, one would see they all have exactly the same volume. Obviously, this is because of the accuracy limits of the volume measure.
A scale can detect differences in weight measured by a volume measure, but a volume measure cannot detect differences in volume measured, by a scale. Which is the more accurate?
11-23-2013, 06:07 AM
#10
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
I've only been to mountain man type BP shoots, and we all used volume to measure the powder. More to keep with the period than anything.
However, I have seen video's of serious bench BP shoots, and they were all using scales to measure the powder.
Someone needs to do an experiment. I'd do it, but I don't have a scale.
The experiment should be comparing volume to scale accuracy. Compare 10 loads weighed to 10 loads by volume. Same gun, and conditions for both. You'd have to as precise as possible with the volume loads to make sure you're doing your best to make them consistent. Tapping the powder to settle it the exactly same way each time. Making sure it's right on the mark each time etc.
I'm going to guess if there is any difference that it will be so small as to not matter for hunting. I hope so anyway, or i'll have to buy a scale.
btw BH 209 doesn't absorb moisture, so it should stay consistent. At least that's what Western claims.
However, I have seen video's of serious bench BP shoots, and they were all using scales to measure the powder.
Someone needs to do an experiment. I'd do it, but I don't have a scale.
The experiment should be comparing volume to scale accuracy. Compare 10 loads weighed to 10 loads by volume. Same gun, and conditions for both. You'd have to as precise as possible with the volume loads to make sure you're doing your best to make them consistent. Tapping the powder to settle it the exactly same way each time. Making sure it's right on the mark each time etc.
I'm going to guess if there is any difference that it will be so small as to not matter for hunting. I hope so anyway, or i'll have to buy a scale.
btw BH 209 doesn't absorb moisture, so it should stay consistent. At least that's what Western claims.