Good stuff, John. Challenged my way of thinking. Looks like I need to do a little experimenting and see if I can spend less time at the bench and more time at the range.

Appreciate your insight.

Published where?

Handloader magazine -- Wolfe Publishing. February 2013 No. 282

Thanks, I'll visit the news stand.

Ain't read it yet, but I know more time shooting garners more than time spent at the bench. Dump and go is the only way.

I'd just like to read John's take on it. I'm already loading straight from my BR-30 most of the time.

I've heard some folks actually weigh every charge and use powder tricklers, funny stuff...

I tried that once....about forty years ago. Glad I learned back then it was a total waste of time.

Steely, I know you use a ton on Ramshot stuff, and when I'm using that I just dump charges and seat, but with powders like '15 and 7828ssc, do you have any tricks/methods for getting a nice consistent throw? I find my '15 charges are damn close, but bigger stuff can vary up to .5-.6gr...

This is what I do....funnel keeps equal pressure on the powder in the tube. I think it's about equal volume as much as weight.

Thanks Pat, that thing looks like it's loaded a round or 3!

I'm using the RCBS Chargemaster with their powder baffle, and that definitely helped with the weight/pressure coming into the tube, but I'll have to give that a try as well.

Have you ever measured what kind of variances you get when using powders like H4350/Varget?

Tanner,

That's exactly what my article's about. I experimented with different powder measures and techniques using powders of several granule sizes from ball to IMR4350 and reported the results.

.3 to .5grs.

I am pleased you started this thread.
My brother and I have been �discussing� case charging technique for years.
I shoot many heavy bullet, low velocity loads using fast powder. Many light loads in the 45 Colt and 45-70. I charge cases one at a time with the case mouth facing down in the load tray until I have charged the case.
My brother shoots very few low velocity loads and is comfortable with the technique exhibited by MD in the title picture. That is: holding the tray full of cases up to the charger and running along the rows charging cases. With case filling loads this is a quick method of charging cases.
What technique do you use?

Have the same charger on the bench. Obtained it used around the middle 70's. Maybe a little later, when I think about it. Throws charges better than good. Including RL-15.

I haven't read the article yet either...

But as with my dillion and HP reloading -I always throw about 12 loads before I consider the thing to stabolize, and then you have the little how much powder column trick on top of it.

Great article. Thanks John.

Sacrelege!!!!

LOL

cecib,

Thank you!

JB,Good spot on the Redding BR-30,best I've had!

MD, do you know if the BR Culver type drop charges anymore precise than an RCBS or Redding ?

Anybody know if the RCBS powder baffle will work with the RCBS Chargemaster?

No, I haven't tried one of the Culver-style Harrel measures. They might work even better than the Redding, but the Harrel is designed to throw anything up to 120-grain loads. Redding has found through testing that a measure specifically designed for a smaller range is more accurate. My tests indicated they're right.

Besides, if you need 120 grains, just throw 40 three times.

So now I'm a rifle looney and an anal handloader.

Off to my support group meet.

I work hard to stay below 76 grs....my shoulder thanks me!

I have been using the "Ron Popeil" method for 10's of thousands of loads, it has never let me down; "Just set it and forget it"...

Don't forget your wallet.

Neat shop.

I thought I had a bunch of stuff. I believe you have more Dillon tool heads with dies than I do. And I have only one blue press, but three green ones. Had four, but gave one to a good bud who is getting into reloading. My stack of die boxes is about the same.

Those photos should warm the heart of any real Loony worth his salt...

DF

Warm my heart yes; pisses me off too cuz I have far less stuff yet a far bigger mess!

Sweet man cave there Shrapnel; I want to be like you when I grow up!

For my 15 yrs of reloading I've measured each charge. I had a measure early on but am not terribly patient in learning to operate such equipment. Furthermore, I like to have time at my bench... I even sometimes cleaned primer pockets... But over the last few years have upped my volume of shooting and cut back on such work. I got an OLD Lyman Ideal recently and have run Ramshot Hunter, Verminator, H-335, IMR-4895, and RL-15 through it. Only the RL-15 has needed to be checked.... actually it didn't "need" checking, I only did so because those loads were not for me but for a friend.

I look forward to Jon's article. I have much to learn about tossing charges!

If charge weight accuracy is meaningless, why is everybody asking which powder measures throw the most accurate charges?!?!

LOL!

I haven't cleaned primer pockets since the '70's, but still weigh charges out of a powder measure. If I'm using Ramshot or a similar smooth metering powder, I check a few and then load direct, as the charges seem to be real consistent. With stick powders, loading precision rifle loads, I still weigh. Most charges are on the money, a few need minor adjustments.

If I'm going to check concentricity and straighten to less than .002" run out, why not weigh stick powder. I'm not in that big a hurry and don't load huge quantities of rifle ammo at a setting. For pistol rounds, I use a Dillon and load a bunch at a time.

DF

You guys are nutz. I count the number of kernels in each grain. For example there are 4 kernels in .10 gr of H4350, 40 kernels per grain. So for my .280AI it would be 58x40 = 2320 kernels.

Just be sure to use a good pair of tweezers. Recounting is NO fun.

I see you list Texas and W. Va. as locations. Do you adjust your count based on relative humidity? I noticed my kernel counts changed after I moved from humid South Florida to Idaho where it is much drier.

JB - What was Brand X ?

Because getting concentricity under control gives a better ROI.

I don't have to since the lids on my 8lb jugs are hermetically sealed. I really don't want to over complicate things either-nice and simple is always the way to go.

I do have to raise the elevation on my rigs in WV. I'm pretty sure it's because there are a whole lot more trees which cause shade and cooler temperatures than down in TX. That slows the bullets down.

.

But doesn't weighing every charge to less than 0.01 grains build character ?

.

I found my RCBS powder thrower gave about the same results and it drove me potty..my OCD simply does do well knowing such variations might exist!

I don't load or shoot in large volumes, so I used to to trickle and weigh each charge. These days I use a ChargeMaster which has speeded up the process quite a bit and still keeps the variation down to what I term acceptable levels..

Regards,

Peter

Have you ever worked with the Johnson Quick Measure? Ken Howell and Rocky Raab have said good things about it.

I think what DF is saying is that it takes the same amount of time to seat a bullet and spin a loaded round on the gauge as it does for a chargemaster to weigh a charge. So if you're checking each round as it's loaded, you're not losing any time.

What lot number was that??

I use the RCBS Chargemaster. The process is:

(I size and tumble in a separate operation. I tumble after I size to remove the lube and clean primer pockets).

* start powder charge
* trim & chamfer on Giraud
* prime
* seat bullet from previous cycle
* Check concentricity
* drop powder in case
* repeat this process

I have to work to keep up with the Chargemaster and I'm within .1 grain every time! There is absolutely no down time.

I load prepped cases in operation blocks:

Prime them all

Charge them all

Seat all the bullets

Spin them all



By switching between operations case to case you may not have down time, but it's a good bet you use more time.

If +/- .1 grain of a Lincoln Log powder like 3031 is what's to be held, then I can "thweigh" charges using my measure and electronic scale. If one is off I don't waste time adjusting it, I return it to the hopper and throw again. Between 2/3 to 3/4 of the charges meet spec as thrown (yes, I've tested it many times), so it's quick.

I did an article for GUNS magazine where I tested how much time various loading methods took. Mathman's guess ir correct: The fastest way to load ammo is to perform each step on all the brass, then go to the next step.

This discussion came up on the Campfire a while back, and somebody was bragging about how he could load 100 rounds of precision rifle ammo an hour using an electronic scale. He was somewhat dismayed when I told him using a powder measure to charge cases in a loading block would easily double that. In fact I've eliminated so many wasted steps in my handloading that I can come close to the per-hour production of a basic progressive press while using a turret press.

Of course a lot of handloaders prefer spending as much time as possible in their loading room. If that's what they prefer, then that's what they should do. But I handload for part of my living, and anything that saves time in the loading room means more time to shoot, write and test other stuff.

There is no way in hell I could do it Clint's way. Size 500 cases, prime 500 case, dump powder in 500 cases, seat bullets in 500 cases.

Yep.

Last spring I loaded several hundred rounds of ammo for EACH of five rifles in .17 Fireball, .17 Remington, .204 Ruger, .221 Fireball and .220 Swift for an extensive prairie dog "field test" of a new line of varmint bullets. I got it all done in three afternoons. I couldn't imagine loading that many rounds without having worked out some form of mass manufacturing--and eliminating useless steps.

I'm so lazy I'll actually decide which way to load, -- turret, progressive, or electronic dispenser -- based on what's in the press.

Yeah, I know, capital L.

I liked it too

I plan to get one... they work without power.

Still for most parts I will continue to weigh

Snake

John, Mathman, and Scott,

I'm at 15 seconds per round plus sizing time which I'd guess adds another 4-5 seconds (at most). I'm totaling 20 seconds per round, 3 rounds per minute, 100 rounds in 33 minutes. That includes sizing, trimming, and chamfering each peice of brass, priming, weighing each charge, seating bullet, and checking run out.

Does it get much faster, especially considering trimming, weighing each charge, and checking for runout?

For the mathematically inclined ...

If you have a "micrometer" adjust powder measure and a fancy calculator or software on your computer that does statistics, linear regression in particular, you can get set so you don't have to use a scale much at all after doing the initial work. What follows works best for loaders who buy large quantities of single powder lot numbers.

Here's what we do with a Redding BR-30 for a new lot of powder. Set the adjustment to 20. Not 20 grains, just the 20 mark on the dial. Fill the hopper with powder and throw some charges to stabilize the powder column. Now throw five charges and weigh them together. Divide by five. Record this average weight.

Adjust the dial to 25. Throw some stabilizing charges, returning them to the hopper. Throw five charges and weigh together. Divide by five. Record the average weight.

Adjust the dial to 30. Throw some stabilizing charges, returning them to the hopper. Throw five charges and weigh together. Divide by five. Record the average weight.

.
.
.


Adjust the dial to 75. Throw some stabilizing charges, returning them to the hopper. Throw five charges and weigh together. Divide by five. Record the average weight.

So now we have a collection of ordered pairs, each a match between a dial setting and a powder weight. If the powder measure is a good one and our throwing technique checks out, we can plot these ordered pairs on an x-y coordinate system and they should lie very nearly on a line. Here's where the calculator/computer comes in.

Enter the data into a stat package and do a linear regression. The result will be a function relating dial setting to powder weight for that lot of powder. Record this on a reference sheet taped to the powder jug.

I've done this for many jugs of powder, and using the weight-dial function works very well for quickly getting a powder measure adjusted to new charge weights. Of course, once pet loads are established, their measure settings go on a cheat sheet taped on the wall near the powder measure.

ctsmith,

That's pretty good.

Have you ever actually timed how many rounds you can produce in an entire hour or two? I ask because you say you're guessing about sizing time.

I'm pretty sure that's cheating somehow.

John, the sizing time is an educated guess. All the other steps are performed in the time frame of one charge on the Chargemaster which ranges depending on charge weight, but less than 15 seconds for a 308 case. The Giraud really speeds things up.

The Chargemaster is like a timer, it keeps you humping trying to stay ahead of it. There aint no relaxing or beer drinking going on. Its like a sprint, but I'm okay with that. Unlike some, I HATE spending time at the reloading bench.

I will definitely pick up this issue and check out the article.
In late 2004 I did a powder measure test. It was pretty rough but fun and I did learn a bit:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/409097/1

ctsmith,

Yeah, a lot of time in handloading is used up in case trimming, one reason steeper-shouldered cases are popular for high-volume shooting. The Giraud and similar tools save a lot of time if you have to trim.

If I don't have to trim I can load 250-300 rounds an hour on my Redding T7 turret press. I like it a lot because it will hold up to 3 sets of dies, which a lot of time when loading for different rounds--which I do a lot.

I'm standin' here holdin' my bullschit flag down by my leg, I ain't wavin' it yet, but I'm thinkin' about it. 300rd/hr is decent, un-hurried pace for a Dillon 550, loading rifle, using the Dillon measure.

I don't think calling John out on a statement he made is Kosher. He's not in the habit of making outlandish statements and I, for one, take the man at his word.

That'a lot more than I can say for a whole bunch of Fire contributors, if you get my drift...

DF

I won't give out my address ovah the interweb. Lotsa weirdos out there.

Actually I use a BR-30 and throw all after determining the correct weight on a scale. Ball, SSC and SC powders are pretty damn close starting will the balls. Log powders are pretty much out.

I've found the jerking motion used on the BR-30 is as important as anything else. Double .

I'm not Jewish, but I like Jews, and I have the utmost respect for Mr. Barsness.

I finally had the chance to read his article in Handloader. I just ordered a Redding measure. I didnt know those measures/dispensers could be so accurate with the charge dispersal. Seems like everytime I read a JB article, my wallet gets lighter....Thanks for a great article.
Scott

I did something similar, but much less thorough. I simply recorded the micrometer setting for a given charge with a given powder, then when I want to load some more of a previously recorded powder/charge combo, I just dial in to the pre-recorded setting, double check the charge on my scale and move forward.

Your knowledge and system is admittedly much more impressive though.

Oh yeah, just record and go directly to established settings for favorites.

Right after the last ice age when I got my first 22-250 and H4841 was way less than a buck a pound, I used what was then called scoop loading by me and my ground squirrel shooting buddies. we'd fill up a cigar box with 4831 and from that scoop up enough powder to fill the 22-250 case and then seat a bullet. Not the best system but it worked and it was fast and cheap. Cheap being the operative word as I had way more time than money. I learned early on that weighting powder charges to the last 1/10 grain wasn't all that important.

Dang it. Once again the Campfire has cost me money. I got an online subscription to Handloader and ordered a Redding thrower (My old RCBS has a rusted drum). I've also got a Wish List totaling $1800+ at Dillon. I dont have the funds to pull the trigger on that one yet.

Dillon makes some real good stuff. While you're at it, you may consider picking up one of his other products.

But for Tip O'Neil we could. I hope he's in an especially hot place in hell.

John,
These questions are for you and Pat if he cares to chime in. I noticed a variation in one post of .3 to .5 tenths of a grain when dropping using a powder measure is what was posted I believe in one of Pat's posts. What have you seen is the typical variation when measuring if and when you check drops randomly? Do you notice more variation depending on the type of powder. Seems like ball type is more consistent to me.
Also, have you guys checked the differences in velocity spread when weighing each charge v: dropping and is there much if any difference in the accuracy of the load/loads.
I bought a very sensitive load cell scale which is tough to even trickle to weigh powder charges on. It will weigh pencil powder to the kernel and I have tested over my Oehler just to see if being as precise as possible made any difference.
Probably a exercise in accuracy futility but I did find that measuring as accurate as possible with the particular load I was working with was closer in velocity and spread by quite a bit. 60fps spread avarage with a Pact electronic scale and 25fps using a scale I spent way too much money on.
Since I have pretty much quit worrying about sub half minute accuracy and have been shooting 12" square plates powder measure variation isn't as important but I was just wondering about some of the questions I asked. Thanks.

Dave

Take a knee,

I checked my loading notes again and found I was mistaken on the 300 rounds per hour--but have done 250 or a little more a number of times. As noted before, this is without any case trimming. Trimming slows my output down to 200 or so per hour.

The tricks to pumping them out that fast on a turret press are these:

1) Neck-size or partial size only. This bypasses the need to lube the cases. I usually use bushing dies.

2) I start with the cases dumped into a small cardboard box with one side cut down so I can easily access the brass. After sizing I toos them in another, identical box.

3) Then I prime them with a Lee hand tool, dumping primers in the tool 100 at a time. After priming I put the cases in a 50-round loading block.

4) When the block is full I charge the cases with a measure. Since the only cases I load this much of are small varmint rounds, charging each case only takes a couple seconds.

5) When the cases in the block are all charged, I seat the bullets from a box that's tilted right next to the press, allowing me to grab bullets quickly. The loaded rounds are then placed into plastic ammo boxes, usually 100 rounders.

An essential part of the process is placing everything on the bench so there's a minimum amount of motion. Most handloaders (including me, before I really analyzed things) waste a lot of time due to the distance between tools and whatever they're taking the brass from and putting it into. After analyzing everything, I also quit putting brass into a loading block until it was time to drop the powder charges.

John, I read the article and have a suggestion. I think the article would have been much more helpful if you had actually identified the Brand X measure. Also if you had compared the accuracy of different measures with the different powders you used then I'd know which measure would work best for the cartridges I reload most often. Say compare Redding,RCBS,Lyman,Harrell and Hornady.Maybe an idea for a future article?
- Kurt

You're the second person to suggest (or ask) that I name the Brand X measure. I didn't for the very good reason that it's no longer made, and the company is still in business. There's no good reason to suggest a certain company makes an inferior product, even if the product was made 20+ years ago. There are too many nitwits in the world who would infer that EVERY product that company makes is inferior, and get pissed at me and the magazine.

If you want to test every brand of powder measure out there, go for it. It will take weeks of work (I spent one week just on the tests I did), and you won't get paid near enough for your time.

My article compared the results from a typical "affordable" powder measure (of which the world has plenty) with powder measures too expensive for average handloaders to consider--though they're about the price of a typical electronic measure. That's as far as I'm going to go, unless some gun magazine starts paying their writers $4000 per article.

Did you test the Lee dippers for accuracy?

I can't see it, but I'll bet there's an RCBS Little Dandy powder measure in there somewhere.

I too am curious about that as I have a small reloading kit put together with the dippers.
Craig

I've had a Lee Dipper kit for a long time. They're pretty damn good. In fact I did an article on the .22 Hornet a while back and found one of the Lee Dippers throws a very consistent 13.0 grain charge of Li'l Gun, which has worked so well in several of my Hornets.

But no, the Lee Dippers were not included in this article, partly because there wasn't room, but mostly because the focus of the article was weighing charges versus using a good powder measure. The Lee Dippers work, but they're not nearly as versatile or accurate as a good measure.

Thanks John,I have a small kit put together that fints in a small zip up camera case.dipper, dies, primers ,Lee Hand press,bullets case tray,H-4895,cases.
Inexpensive,and I can take anywhere .
John what method did you use with the dippers?
Just scoop it full,scoop and then use a credit card to rake across the top ?OR

Thanks
Craig

They probably figure that $3000 plus a free hunt is good enough.

IIRC Harrel has different size measures. Or at least used to.

They still do. My mistake.

Fellas, you owe it to yourself to buy the magazine and read the article. Like all of the stuff John writes that I have read, it is certainly worth the time, and it answers a lot of the questions. That was my intent on starting this thread.

Oh I will buy it. But the three magazine racks I visited last night and this afternoon aren't yet up to date for Handloader.

I still take a dump direct from my near 30 year old RCBS thrower. I measure every 10 rounds or so and have never had a problem, up, down or otherwise. 'Course I am more than happy with 1 1/2" 3 shot groups as they do tend to kill critters... Ain't rocket science...

I shoot 2" five shot groups at 300 yards with thrown charges, often with a 6x scope. Dispelling notions at the range is fun sometimes.

Well, for 37 years, I have weighed each rifle charge -- dump it close from the Uniflow and trickle it up on the scale. My handgun rounds I just dump from the Uniflow, and I always got good ammunition. I certainly don't load 200 an hour. I DO size, prime, deburr, reprime etc a larger quantity of brass at a time in preparation for reloading. The last few weeks, I have done up a bunch in 6.5 Swede(140), 30-06(240), 45-70(150), and 405 Winchester(100). I have all my unloaded 45 Colt cases prepped, primed and flared ready to go. The long, cold winter nights pass a little quicker if I have something to do, and then when I get in the mood to stick some together, I charge and seat bullets.

What John's article did for me was to challenge my thinking into trying something different. I load with a fair bit of H414 which meters very nicely. Should prove interesting.

Again, thanks, MD.

Mathman,

My kids buy me a subscription to Rifle and Handloader for my birthday every year. It's a great gift, and I don't have to look on the news stand.

Years ago Kenny Jarrett told me to throw charges and I figured if it was good enough for him, well....

Keith, nothing against John, but many of us knew what he wrote and have been beating that drum on the 'Fire for years. It seems unless many of you see it in print or from a movie stars lips, it just ain't so.

While we're on the subject of efficiency, is there a better mousetrap than an hand primer?

Okay. Got that. I, for one didn't know, and no one told me. John's article was my first introduction to the thought - - not because it was John, but because it made me think . . . . someting that always puts a twinkle in my eye.

I own mostly hunting class rifles, but I do like to shoot groups, so I have been trying to get the most out of my hunting guns. Have done okay for a fat old man with lots else on my plate to keep me away from the range.

I do appreciate your thoughts and expertise as well. . . . . . . you movie star. (thinking about the movie on youtube and the torture test. )

I was somewhat disappointed in the article. JB did not compare results with Lee Precision powder scoops. Perhaps another article.

A friend of mine loaded with them for years, and I tried to get them to work, but I never got the thing down close enough to satisfy myself, and I was always trying loads that I couldn't get with the scoop sets. Just an old dummy, I guess.

....and every time someone said they throw charges, you would have many come back and say they want to know it is exactly right and they think there is some inherent advantage. While a little experimenting on their own would have easily proven different.

My experience with a thrower was that I found variances on the long powders to be closer to 1.0 grains than 0.5 grains. I never could get comfortable with it. I would go through the progression of load development to find that perfect charge, then my thrower would miss it by a full grain. It was more than I could handle. I bought the Chargemaster when it came out (then an updated version) and have used it every since. I modified my loading procedures to the Chargemaster. I admit that I never compared accuracy with weighed loads versus thrown loads.

Within the last several years I have all but quit load development with a new rifle. I decide on a proven load and give it a whirl. If accuracy is acceptable I'm done. I don't sweat the time, money, or barrel life for that .2" better accuracy.

Johns article is not new on me, it just made me re-think it. The thrower definitely sounds more attractive to me now.

Not only that, the discussion here sold a subscription to Handloader. Win/win!

That's what I did. There was a time that I weighed and trickled then I decided to try just dumping, I verified by weighing, didn't see much of a difference and then I went from Lincoln log powders to more thrower friendly powders.

John has always been good at cutting through the BS and not following mantra.

Especially since I load in steps (size all, prime all, etc) the electronic throwers are far too slow for me. I've seen guys spend 2 hours loading 20 rounds, whatever...


A few years ago I was hunting with Bart and his son Brady. He wanted to try the 85gr TSX in his sons 6mm. All we had on hand was a box of factory loaded 100's. We knocked out 10 bullets with an inertia puller. After each bullet was knocked out we poured the powder back in and seated an 85gr TSX. They shot great and the boy killed a buck with them 2 days later.

I'm not a guy that shoots benchrest and I don't pretend to know what they do. Everything I do revolves around hunting and it just ain't that hard to put together a decent load to kill stuff with.

Far better to spend days shooting 'thrown together loads' then a like number of days spend hand crafting 20 rounds of ammo for that golden moment.


I think many folks will go to great lengths to not shoot.

And you know I was busting your balls a bit, even tried to make that post rhyme a bit...

Been thinking a lot about this

I throw charges for my prairie dog rifles. I use ball powder and the thrower is accurate. Loading bulk ammo, throwing probably works fine. For my competition rifles or hunting rifles I weigh exactly. For long range, 1/2 grain variation won't work for me

I've also talked to some of the guys I compete with as to their thoughts and what they do. Two of them are ranked in the top 50 precision shooters in the United States and are heavily sponsored. They weigh to the exact charge as well. One of my friends who competes locally mostly, but would easily be ranked if he competed Nationally, weighs each charge. He has tested simply throwing and has abandoned it because he can't attain the level of accuracy he wants.

Scenarshooter!
You throw only, even for long range competition?

If I can take a Weatherby Vanguard that I've never fired and assemble 20 thrown rounds for it, mount a scope and dust a Crown Royal box at 700 yards with the 6th round ever through the rifle, then this [bleep] ain't that complicated.

John's article acknowledges the need to weigh for long range. If I remember correctly he basically put a 500 yard blanket on thrown charges.

I too am interested in Pat's loading procedure for long range.

Nothing in concrete, I'd think you'd have to shoot to know. If it shoots well with thrown charges at 733 yards, then it shoots well. I've seen very low ES/SD's with thrown, though that ain't the do all to be all.

Agree. John and Wayne VanZowell are about the only two that if I see their name will purposefully buy the magazine. Most times it will be for that particular article only.

Rick: What are your thoughts on weighing and matching case volume for your LR loading? Not a BR or LR shooter, but it would seem if you load the exact same charges in cases of different volumes things just went out the window.

Its irrelevant to me, I'm not truly "long" range for anything other than play. 600 is my limit on killing. I don't mind the thought of taking a chance on that last 100 yards. Yawl got me wanting to throw some charges tonight I secretly have been wanting to trash the Chargemaster in the last few years.

I got enough wiggle in me to destroy a single digit ES.


When a guy works up is magical handcrafted load, shoots them one every 5 minutes, in late August, it tells you a lot about that load, when shot every 5 minutes, in late August.

Everything changes everything and although many are slight changes, enough of them together makes a difference.

I don't weigh cases. I have seen difference in load performance at long range with as little as .2 grains in cases with similar volume to the 6.5 Creedmoor

As I mentioned to battue in another thread, I'd sooner shoot a critter at 20 yards than I would 500. That ain't nothing against shooting long.

Only way I know to ensure I'm not tempted to use something again.

They are a nostalgic item for me now. Early on I learned to ignore the Lee chart and made my own with the specific powders I wanted to use.

When I was a Hunter Safety Instructor, I held an optional class to introduce students to handloading. Used the dippers along with examples of other powder measures. The kids preferred the dippers.

My Dad and Granddad made their own dippers from shells with wire handles soldered to the case.

Shootist,

As I mentioned earlier on this thread, I've owned a Lee Dipper set for many years. Mostly I use it when working up loads, and found that if I tilt the dippers a certain amount I can come very close to the desired charge. Then I top it off with a trickler.

With finer-grained powders the dippers can work pretty darn well. In fact I found one of the smaller ones throws 13.0 grains of Li'l Gun, exactly what I use in the .22 Hornet with 40-grain bullets. That's just by burying the dipper in the powder and pulling it out upright.

rcmuglia,

In the article I specifically talk about the possilbe effect of thrown charges in long-range shooting. I believe the specific example I used was my 6.5-06, where I load 56 grains of H1000 with 140-grain bullets. If I weigh the charges, the rile will group three shots into something less than 1/2 MOA out to 600-700 yards.

If I threw them with my old measure (the one called Brand X) in the article) I'd get about a .5-grain variation, or even a little more. This would open up groups at least an inch at 600-700, mostly by vertical dispersion.

After using better powder measures in other loading for the past year or so, I'm now eager to try throwing loads for the 6.5-06 and seeing what happens. Have just about shot up my supply of loads put together with the old measure and will be doing that sometime soon--but in the article I certainly didn't suggest throwing loads for 1000-yard competition.

As a more general comment, this thread could have been a lot shorter if people who haven't read the article had done so before posting.

One of the reasons I started posting on the Campfire over a decade ago, after lurking for a while, was the day when somebody posted about an article of mine they'd liked. The poster tried to summarize a 3000-word article in two sentences, and of couse created a sh'tstorm of comments from people who'd never read the article, almost all of which made vast assumptions about the article's contents. This was partly due to the 2-sentence summation not being entirely correct, but it was also due to the tendency of Internet posters to start typing without knowing exactly what in hell everybody's talking about.

There are moments on "Ask the Gunwriter's" where I feel like posting the article in question, whether mine or some other gunwriter's. But that's not why magazines pay us to wrote for THEM.

I need to resubscribe to Handloader and Rifle, but for now I will put my money where my mouth is and buy this issue from the news stand as soon as it arrives here.

John,

It does little good to defend anything on the net. Your friends trust you and don�t need an explanation. The skeptics will only use what you say against you anyway.

But that said. Thanks for posting here and sharing your knowledge with us. It is much cheaper time and money wise to read your results than doing all the testing for myself. Please keep posting here. I for one need and use your knowledge. I too, buy the mags because you have an article in it. Keep up the good work.

Richard

I read the article.

Thanks John. I haven't read the article as you can probably tell. I subscribe to Rifle Magazine. My comments were simply based upon my experience and the experience of some folks I know and shoot with.

I'm shooting games/hunting at ranges where precision in all facets is necessary and well beyond what 99.5% of recreational shooters and hunters need to do to enjoy rolling and shooting their own.

I have known that throwing charges is common in the benchrest game and we all know the kind of accuracy they get

Yeah, I did mention that! But also emphasisized the difference between short- and long-range benchrest shooting.

One of major points of the article was how many hunters think weighing every charge is essential to getting sub-inch groups in their factory deer rifles--when it ain't.

Yep. I've shot enough sub .75 MOA five shot groups at 300 yards with thrown charges of crunchy 3031 and a 6x scope to know if your deer rifle won't go below an inch at a hundred it ain't thrown charges or lack of magnification holding it back.

Which is kinda what I said.



Funny how that stuff works out.

As usual JB nailed it. Every few years I'll do a thrown verses weighed charges experiment, usually the thrown charge groups are more accurate.Why? probably just too small of sampling there is probably no real difference. I think we used to weigh charges because it was one of the variables we could control trying get poorly bedded actions shooting mediocre bullets to shoot tighter. Old long grain H4831 and IMR4064 shooting near max charges are the only loads I would weigh anymore. I don't use those type loads very often anymore so the issue has been long settled for me.

For "normal" hunting and ranges, throwing is fine.

For 1K BR, I hope all my competition throws as well......

This is exactly what I was taught by Master Sergeant Lambert (who, BTW, has a brother named Jack who chunks a football passably well) at SOTIC on Smoke Bomb Hill in 1987. When he and his buddies shot for beer at 1000yd though, they weighed the charges when they made mexican match out of M118 and 190gr Sierras.

I've always heard that Tubb shoots nothing but Dillon measure dropped charges....except at 600yd.

I think there might be a lesson or two there.

I read the article, enjoyed it, agreed with it based on my experience, and then got the itch for a Redding BR3 measure. I've got (had) an old Belding & Mull with two drop tubes on the bench along with a Lyman #55 on the bench. The B&M is the most accurate measure I've used with extruded powders and is pretty much perfect with ball and short-cut powders. But it's slow and awkward to use and because I have a neuro-muscular condition that reduces my hand strength endurance, I just sold that measure for $110 to help pay for the Redding. I'll compare the Redding and Lyman when the green one shows up... Thanks for another great article John!

I tried to get a copy, but it wasn't at the usual store. Have to look a little harder.

Get it online, I did. Fast, cheap and easy. You don't even have to leave the house. http://www.riflemagazine.com/subscription/subscript.cfm

John,
Kinda figured after I posted I should have read the article first. Normally not that quick on the keyboard.
At this point in life since I am satisfied simply hitting a 12" steel plate at 500 yards weighing powder charges isn't a big deal. Throwin them is way easier!

Dave

Dave,

Heck, if I can hit a 12" plate at 100 yards I'm happy!

John,

Do you know what number Lee scoop gives you 13.0 grains of Lil Gun?

Thanks,
Steve

I just finished the article and it (as usual for JB) puts the issue of weighing charges into prospective. When setting up to charge cases, I weigh each charge while setting the meter and then throw 4-5 more to confirm the setting. I again weigh each tenth or so charge to confirm that nothing has changed.

I rarely load maximum charges; generally, I load lesser charges for rifle and handgun cartridges. If I want more performance, I'll shoot a larger cartridge. Reduced charges are easier on everything.

or, go on-line to Wolfe Publishing Company and subscribe. It'll be the best money spent!

I could never understand why people check every tenth charge to make sure nothing has changed.

If you have kept the right amount of powder in it, used the same throwing technique, and haven't changed the setting on the measure, then why would it change? If it does come up with a different charge, are you going to dump the last 10 cases and start over?

If your charge weights are varying that much, either your throwing technique needs changed, or your measure needs upgraded.

Steve,

In my set it's scoop 052, the 3rd from the bottom. But I've had my scoops for at least 25 years and have no idea if they still use the same sizes and numbering system.

Setting on mine is held in place by a lock nut. I'm always checking if I tightened it sufficiently. Weigh every 10 throws or so to confirm again in my mind that what I started with is what I really want. At the same time I take another glance at the bottle to confirm that is the powder I want. Perhaps the one you checked is the one that bridged in the tube-have had it happen. Final step is a look into each case to ensure they are all to the approximate same level in the case.

Thanks John,

I'll try it and weigh the charges.

I have a set that probably goes back to about then, plus some recent ones.

Steve

John,

I purchased the magazine in question just for this article, and found it useful, thanks for writing it. I have been running tests with my powder measures, and asking friends with different models to do the same.

Would you mind answering a couple questions about your data? I'm using your numbers as a point of comparison but could not find in the article some of the details. Specifically regarding the powder variation numbers shown in the second table, I gather that those numbers display total variation, not +/-, correct? Is this an average, a standard deviation, or the extreme spread? Also, how many data points did you collect to determine them?

And of lesser concern, but I am still curious, did you discount throws where the extruded powder kernals were cut hard by the measure? I used to toss those ones out when loading, but in my measurements so far, they seem to fall in with everything else.

Thank you,
Carl

Excellent article. All should read it.

It must suck to be a gunwriter these days. First you have to submit a solid article that actually sells print magazines, then you have to double your word count re-stating same on the internet!

That's good, Talus.