Powder Measures

[Cory Joe Stewart]

Hey everyone.  I am mainly a horn maker but I dabble in all sorts of accoutrements from the eighteenth century.  I really enjoy making antler powder measures but I have a question.  When I make powder measures I try to at least get .50 grains, but often clients want much more so I am often forced to buy elk antler. 
My question is what is accurate.  In Madison Grant's book he states that powder measurers were typically around .30 grains.  This seems to make sense to me because a double load would be .60, or you could jump to .90 for a long shot.  I was also at a museum this past week that I frequent and they have some measures on display, and they are tiny.  I mean really small.  .30 grains at the most.  So did hunters back in the day use less powder, or did the double up on loads?  And as recreators of past artforms, what should we do?  I am all for making them the way they were, but clients often times want 100 grains out of an antler measure. 
Just a thought.

Coryjoe

[Collector]

Switch them to a measure made from a horn tip... larger capacity capability and little to no waste on your end.  Or, use a larger antler, like elk.  Personally, I've got both and have no preference of one over the other.  Even if using a whitetail deer antler, there is no hard and fast rule that you can't use the shorter, but wider points toward the end of the rack and incorporate part of the beam also.  They are a lot easier to fill and pour with.  Good luck! 

[Larry Pletcher]

Steve Chapman, my friend and partner in Crime, made this powder measure as a gift.   He made it 50 grains.  He knew I had a rifle on the way and made this to go with it.   I think this is one of the coolest ones I've seen.


Regards,
Pletch

[Brian Jordan]

That is a very nice looking powder measure. Thanks for sharing!

[ERH]

very nice you are a lucky guy

[chapmans]

Larry buys my lunch every time we work on a project so I had to come up with something in return, besides I really enjoy making things for people who appreciate them.
   This particular piece of antler came from a deer I killed.
   Thanks for all you do Larry, the world of flintlocks is a better place because of you.
   Regards, Steve

[Berks Liberty]

Oooooo I like it!

[hanshi]

That is one beautiful measure.  Some of you guys seem to truly elevate the mundane to high art! 

!Jozai Senjo!  "always present on the battlefield"

[G. Elsenbeck]

Steve, great job on the measure and Larry, ditto what Steve said.  And thanks for posting the latest article on the net.  I'm finding the world much bigger and kudos to all the craftsman out there.  The crafts just keep getting better and better.
Gary

[Pete G.]

I think the old measures were all pretty small capacity by today's standards. The small charge was probably the target shooting charge and the double charge was for hunting. For the most part the everyday shooter did not have quite the interest in guns that the enthusiast does today, so they weren't as concerned about powder measurement down to the grain. They just wanted something that worked. Personally I would not want a charger that required double charging since I have fired several shots that were just short started, and at least twice loaded a powder, patch, ball, powder, patch, ball. It doesn't take a whole lot of distraction to cause that to happen, and most of the time when you take a flintlock to a range there are plenty of distractions. First everybody wants to watch and ask questions, and usually there is somebody down the line with an "earschlippenlouderboomer"

[downrange]

I collected Hall breachloaders at one time, before a nice specimen moved into the used car price range. I then sold my collection and moved on. In the book Hall's Military Breachloaders by Peter A Schmidt he states that riflemen of the time, armed with this weapon, adjusted for range by varying the powder charge. Since the early Hall rifle was a flintlock weapon which used a round ball, I suspect that the practice was adopted from the riflemen armed with the muzzleloading "Common Rifle" which was used concurrently, and was standard U.S. military procedure, probably based on long standing usage by riflemen of earlier eras. The use of single, double or even triple powder charges when using a fixed powder measure would make sense in this context.

[david50]

here are some i made for myself, 60, 30, and 20gr's

[Brian]

They are all nice, but that top one is outstanding.  Nice work. 

[G. Elsenbeck]

Yep, the top one gets my vote too!  Real nice work.
Gary