real blackowder weight vs volume

[camerl2009]

ok so i want to know whats the diff if i say take my adjustable powder measure and set it to 85
will this be 85 grains of fg 

[Dphariss]

It will depend on the calibration of the measure and the density of the powder being used. In my experience most measures are calibrated for FF-FFF powder similar to Swiss blackpowder.

Dan

[BrentD]

Depends on everything. Which brand of measure you are using makes a difference.  I have two, one measures 25% more than the other when set at the same value on the staff.

And then it will matter which brand and batch of powder you have.  Different batches of Swiss can vary a fair bit  - certainly 10% from batch to batch.  Goex seems to vary more over the years. 

Personally, I find granulation to be the least variable, but it still matters to some degree.

Brent

[Pvt. Lon Grifle]

I checked my old brass measure with the funnel attached recently. It is from the middle 70s. At 30 grains the charge of fffg Goex weighed 30 grains on my balance beam scale and 60 grains on the measure weighed 62 grains on the  scale.  Difference is because longer pouring allows for more settling and a bit more weight, as I do the 30 grain pour quickly, usually overpouring, then thumbing off the overage, but wiggle the horn more for 60 .  Lon

[chuck-ia]

I think where some people get confused is weight vs volume with pyrodex, I could be wrong but I think there is more, (volume) in a pound of pyrodex, vs a pound of black powder. I have weighed charges of black powder and they come out very close in actual weight. flinch

[Scott Semmel]

What everybody else said! especially the part about different measures not being necessarily equal. If you are coming from a smokeless reloading perspective about measuring powder you may be in a mouse milking mode trying to keep weight vs volume exact. Stick with the same measure and find out what your particular gun/load shoots the best. Blackpowder shooting is a much more "everything is relative" proposition than smokeless. I personally have never noticed a difference in load variations that are less than five grains + or- by volume.

[SCLoyalist]

Lee used to make (probably still does make) a set of plastic dippers for dipping powder by volume if you were handloading and didn't have a drop measure.   It included a cardboard slide rule that allowed you to select a powder and see weight in grains vs volume.   The largest dipper was a 4.3cc dipper.   According to the slide rule  4.0 cc of Fg weighs 55.7 gr,  of FFg weighs 58.8 gr, and of FFFg  63.7gr.  In comparison, 4.0 cc of a modern smokeless powder  would weigh a featherlight 37.6 grains.

I just tried it on my scale, and 4.0cc weighed in at 58.8gr for 2F Goex, 60.8 gr for 3F Goex, and 59.9gr for Jacks Battle Powder (an unglazed powder, approx. 3F grade made by Goex).

So, that gives a general idea of the variation in density with grade of powder.  An adjustable powder measure set at 85 grains probably doesn't really throw exactly 85 grains of anything - it just throws a repeatable volume of powder that would weigh close to 85 grains.

[Daryl]

My suggetion is to make your powder measures of the smallest diameter tubing or smallest diameter holes drilled in antler you can get away with for a given calibre.  The reason is the smaller the hole, the more even, throw to throw they will be.  I was able to hold powder charges thrown with both 2f and 3F to within 1gr. weight,using a 3/8" diameter brass tube measure. Using a horn measure, with a 1/2" hole, the variations were way over 3gr., throw to throw.

This is largly calibre specific - ie: a 3/8" or larger hole in the measure makes it difficult to pour the powder into a .25 or .30 cal rifle barrel without a lot of spillage.

Too, a 5/16" tube holding 110gr. of 2f would be unbearably long to use for a .54's measure.

The standard measures having a 3/8" inside diameter throw much more accurate charges, throw to throw than a 1/2" hole will throw.  Somewhere in the archives, is a thread dealing with this, along with a test I did using several or maybe only 2 different diameters of measures. It changed my outlook on measure diameters.

I suspect if you can thumb-start your patched ball, the diameter of the measure won't matter much at all, if you get my drift. With a black powder rifle, consistancy is a large part of accuracy.  My most accurate rifles are the ones which give me less than 10fps per shot variation.  Consistancy is something to strive for- if you are intersted in the accuracy part of this game.

All marked measrues are approximate - the numbers really don't mean anything in terms of accuracy.  On top of granulation sizes, and pouring methods, both which change the actual weight thrown, different makes and even different lots of the same make of powder have different specific gravities - which absolutely gaurantees different weights with the same from the same measure.  in other words, whtout a scale, you have no idea what your measrue is throwing.  If it isn't important to you, it matters not.

If knowing what the measure throws is important - as in - you might want to make a period correct measure to throw that amount, or simple must know what it's throwing in case you lose those 'sticken' measures - you need to know to make another.

I use an ajustable to find the load that gives the best accuracy in a given gun - smooth or rifle.  I then weigh that charge on an accurate scale and I record it.

[Mad Monk]

ok so i want to know whats the diff if i say take my adjustable powder measure and set it to 85
will this be 85 grains of fg 

That all depends on who produced the powder measure.

I have an old Treso adjustable powder measure dating back to the late 1970's.  One day I took it into the lab.  Sealed the bottom with wax and filled it with water.  I found that at a setting of 100 the measure threw 100 grains weight of water.
Now that made sense.  Water is used as "1" when comparing weight to volume ratios.  There is no such thing as grains volume in what we are doing.  Grains is a measure of weight.


No two powder manufacturers produce powder to the same weight to volume ratio as another.  There is also some variation within a particular manufacturers production of powder lots.

Some produce to a "loading density" less than 1 g/cc while others are higher than 1 g/cc.  So with one brand you may see an actual weight below the throw setting.  Such as GOEX where you might see 97 to 98 grains weight at the 100 setting on the measure.  With another brand you might see 105 grains weight at the 100 setting on the measure.  And of course lot toot variations in this.

If you want charge to charge uniformity in the amount of powder going into the gun you can weigh all of your charges.  Or you develop a technique for measuring by volume that gives you the best throw to throw consistency.

A big thing with measuring powder is how much it will settle after it is in the measure if using volume measure.  Fill the measure and then tap it gently and watch how much it settles in the measure.  I have seen some brands settle as much as 10% of the original volume and some with no settling or up to 2% settling.

E. Ogre

[hanshi]

I basically ignore the idea of charge weight and just use bp volumetrically.  Our forebears did not use scales and I also prefer primitive antler, etc. measures or sometimes an adjustable.  Bp isn't smokeless.

[Leatherbelly]

2f goex,75gr volume charge, weighed on a good digital scale. = 74grains... Spilled a few kernels.  Gotta say that that is very close. I pour into an antler measure holding between thumb and forefinger, gently tap with my Saturday night finger whilst pouring. I fill to a small mound on top, the same every time. I got to say how surprised I am at the closeness of these weight/volume comparisons.
( counted about fifteen kernels that bounced out of the scales' dish.)

[RonT]

I found that my nifty adjustable Brass measure was a little off...to the heavy side, on all the settings.  I learned to live with it....eventually.  Then I saw the neat antler tip measures that others made and copied those...a little rough maybe but... 
I most likely dribble a few grains off the side, or over the top...I guess I'll live with that too.                                     
R
 

[Dphariss]

I basically ignore the idea of charge weight and just use bp volumetrically.  Our forebears did not use scales and I also prefer primitive antler, etc. measures or sometimes an adjustable.  Bp isn't smokeless.

But a scale makes it easier to make new powder measure if you need one. It allows exact reproduction of a charge.
So as Daryl says I use an adjustable to get a load then use a scale to figure out what it really is.
Using a heavy metal adjustable measure all the time results in stock dings. So I use light tin or
Did the frontier rifleman use a scale, no. But I do have one so I use it. I tend to load from a pouch but I know people who weigh charges into vials and use these at "chunk" matches.
How discriminating the shooter is often depends on the level of competition.
If shooting at 12x12" steel plates at 50 yards accuracy is defined differently that when shooing on paper for closest to center from a solid rest at 60 yards. Folks also need to understand that from a rest for closest to center is how most rifle matches were shot in Colonial America from my understanding.
Offhand was not considered a good test of the rifle back in the day.

Dan

[northmn]

I use volume for loading but consider the numbers on the adjustable measures to be guides.  As others have stated charges vary by granulation and brands.  My measure for my 25 is set at about 22 grains or so to get 20 grains of 3f Grafs.  I have always weighed charges out of a measure that shoot well in my ML's to make sure of be sure of duplication if the measure is misplaced.  For me it is not a matter of attaining pin point accuracy as much as knowing what I am shooting.  when I chronographed a few loads, they were measured but the measures calibrated to the weights I wanted to test.  Using good technique you get only a couple of grains variance from load to load.

DP

[smylee grouch]

When shooting and working up a load I use the same adj. measure I have had for 40 years. This keeps me consistant but Dan makes a good point because if you should loose your measure you could check your records and see what the actual wt. of the desired charge was and therefore calibrate a new measure if it didnt throw the right charge. Hope that made sense.    Gary

[Daryl]

Interesting point, Dan - the 'accuracy' shooting in history usually was comprised of rest shooting - D. Boone, D. Crocket (both I think) shot chunk or over the log events.
 
On the other hand, some shooting on the frontier was performed in the offhand positon, ie: non-regulated events or challenges, whereas the formalized accuracy events seemed to be always rest shooting of some form - even to the development by the mid 1800's of Target Shooting Clubs, coast to coast, or rather, on both coasts. Near as I can figure out, they had mostly rest shootng, but also developed offhand shooting contests by the 1860's- as were held in some areas in Europe.
 

[northmn]

I remember going to neighborhood sportsman's club turkey shoots.  The benchrest were popular because of the gadgets that could be bought to win.  They tried to make them deer rifle only to eliminate the 22 varmit rifles, but what constituted a deer rifle   I could beat the centerfires offhand with a muzzle loader, but they would have about 3 bench matches to one offhand.  I am sure little has changed and the forefathers wanted to shoot in matches like chunk matches where a rifle could be made to give an edge. At least in perception.

DP 

[Daryl]

huh?

[Mad Monk]

Interesting point, Dan - the 'accuracy' shooting in history usually was comprised of rest shooting - D. Boone, D. Crocket (both I think) shot chunk or over the log events.
 
On the other hand, some shooting on the frontier was performed in the offhand positon, ie: non-regulated events or challenges, whereas the formalized accuracy events seemed to be always rest shooting of some form - even to the development by the mid 1800's of Target Shooting Clubs, coast to coast, or rather, on both coasts. Near as I can figure out, they had mostly rest shootng, but also developed offhand shooting contests by the 1860's- as were held in some areas in Europe.
 

Daryl,

Here in Southeastern PA, following the Revolutionary War there were large monthly militia shoots held in different cities.  These were gatherings where one could go to get away from the wife and kids for a weekend.  Lots of eats and drinking.  Most of these shooters were not out to shoot for extreme accuracy.  They were simply citizen soldiers.

In the late 1700's there was a report in the Pottstown Mercury (Pottstown, PA) of a death at the militia shoot.  A militia member was waiting for his turn on the firing line.  His flintlock rifle was loaded and ready to go.  As he stood waiting his turn he was leaning his chin on the muzzle of the rifle.  It was thought that he bumped the stock or the lock with a leg.  The rifle discharge and sent the ball up through his head.  The newspaper writer commented that this was commonly seen at these shoots and that the militia captains ought to do more to discourage this practice.

I suspect that you had some shoots were extreme accuracy was the order of the day and then the militia shoots where you might think of most of the crowd as plinkers.

If you could find a copy of this book through a lending library.
The Pennsylvania Militia
The Early Years, 1669-1792
Samuel J. Newland, Ph.D.
Professor, Military Education
U.S. Army War College
Carlisle, Pennsylvania

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
Annville, Pennsylvania
Copyright 1197 by The Pennsylvania National Guard Foundation, Inc.

This Annville address is close to Fort Indiantown Gap in Lebanon County.  These are the boys who sometimes drop 155mm rounds over onto the recreation trail area I sometimes bicycle on.  The A-10's on the gunnery range are awesome!!!

I bought the book as a way of dealing with those who claim that "a well regulated militia" means we common folk should not be allowed to own guns.  This book follows the evolution of militia groups into government run groups.

E. Ogre

[Daryl]

TKS for the mention of the book and explanation of the military-type shoots in Penn, Ogre.  I was't aware of them- thinking more in terms of the chunk shoots - beef or turkey-type - along with the off paper punching that occurred coast to coast in personal challenges as well as regular matches set up at new 'Target Shooting Clubs' that sprang up throughout the 1800's.  Many, I am sure, got their start or foundation from the military. WEven here, that was the case, I believe with the first clubs being military run, now the DCRA ie: Dominion of Canada Rifle Association, which is still a military run club open to the general public with branches in some Provinces, ie: our own BCRA.

[northmn]

huh?

My point was that even now it seems that people prefer to shoot off rests for informal competitions.  Why would GGG granddad have been different.  Some of the offhand shooters at the Rondy's I wnet to were pretty bad.  When I set up matches I used the 50 yard pistol targets which were about 2 feet across so that some of them could score. Some were lucky to have 5 shots on paper even with them.  Today some of us shoot more than our forefathers such that some of them were likely just as awful shots as today.  We have 25 yard matches, which is a good pistol range for rifles.  We have made offhand today a competition style, but reat shooting permits a person to think he can buy prizes with gadgets.


DP