1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

For Pat I>

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by Jim Porter, Apr 8, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jim Porter

    Jim Porter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,316
    Mr. Pat hope all is well and targets are breaking with recless abondon!
    You made a statement on another post about weighing powder (small weight) to a nat and dumping shot (large weight). I have wondered the same thing. I have had a long time friend who accurizes .45 auto's. Ex-Airforce and actally built their team guns for years. He blew me away when first I saw him load for target testing years ago when he weighed cast bullets at 180gr (large weight) to .1 grain and sorted them, and then dumped Unique powder that was at about 3 gr (small weight)or less. This seemed backwards to me just like you are suggesting on the other post. If you figure percentages of totals that you are off by a .1 grain on each it makes no sense.
    We do strange things--
     
  2. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Jim- It is strange that we would become concerned about a reloader who trusts a bushing chart for powder and does not check weights with a scale. But we do the same thing with shot bushing charts.

    Also, several, including me, in other threads have argued against a rule change that would limit shot weights to 1 oz. We defend the current 1 1/8 oz limit, but then we load with bushings that drop less than this weight.

    Pat Ireland
     
  3. Mike Michalski

    Mike Michalski Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    637
    Location:
    Troy Michigan
    Just as a matter of interest, the factories do not load powder by weight but rather by volume. Always made me wonder why we get so precise with powder, especially in rifles.
     
  4. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Mike, they load a volume of a given weight. It is measured by volume, but it is weight that is critical.

    Pat Ireland
     
  5. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Pat

    "they load a volume of a given weight. It is measured by volume, but it is weight that is critical."

    That is correct Pat that is why the guy that Jim is talking about weights the bullets because the weight is critical.

    As long as the drops by volume are consistent they are of little consequence. If the drop by volume is the same or as close to the same all the time. the bullet weight is critical.

    I shot Bullseye pistol with a guy that cast his own bullets and he weight every one if the weight varied by more than a couple of tenth of a grain he dropped it back into the furnace and just made another.

    Bob Lawless
     
  6. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Bob- The short time I got involved with bench rest shooting, I did weigh every bullet. But, when I shot Bullseye, and I did that actively for many years, weighing every bullet is a bit excessive. A two inch group at 50 yards is not too bad for a 45 auto.

    Now for real volume/weight accuracy, I did a commercial appraisal for a powdered soap manufacturer. Each soap box was filled using volume, but then the weight was checked as the box went down the line. A plunger knocked out any box that did not have the proper weight. Powdered soap may be loaded more accurately than factory shotgun shells.

    Pat Ireland
     
  7. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Pat just for giggles do you check the weight on the powder drops on your PW? What is the variation?

    If you feel that a "A two inch group at 50 yards is not too bad for a 45 auto." and weighing the bullets is a bit excessive.

    What would you call 1/4 to 1/2 grain in a 30" circle at 40 yards? Yet I am willing to bet that almost all of the loading police that frequent this site would go through a major malfunction if they had a series of drops that were a 1/2 grain high/low of target number on the scale. BTW your PW drops by volume not by weight.

    It does get nit-picky doesn't it. Funny but I can crab a hand full of shells any shells(that are legal)and with out knowing any information about shot size, speed, or shot weight. I will break targets with them. Not more than I am breaking with the known shells and not less.

    Bob Lawless
     
  8. smifshot

    smifshot TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    161
    7 1/2s or 8s?
     
  9. Mike Michalski

    Mike Michalski Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    637
    Location:
    Troy Michigan
    Bob Lawless, My experience seems to be the same. 1050 to 1300 fps, 7/8, 1, or 1 1/8, factory or reload, they all break the target. Some more spectacularly of course, but no changes in apparent lead etc. Go figure.
     
  10. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Bob- Using volume as a measure of weight is a standard practice (mass per unit volume) and it is an accurate method. If 1 ml of water (at 4 degrees C) does not weigh 1 gm, then you know that you don't have pure water or you don't have a good scale.

    Pat Ireland
     
  11. hmb

    hmb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,434
    The weighing of the cast bullets main purpose is to detect bullets that have an air pocket. This air pocket formed during the casting of the bullet can destroy accuracy. This is because the bullet is spinning when it leaves the barrel, and a bullet with an air pocket will be out of balance. Small weight variations in bullet weight have little or no efect on accuracy. HMB
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.