- Location
- West Quebec
Guess I did not have the patience to follow thru with them
Updated Different Technique Results: Anyone use powder scoops for load development?
- Thread starter RonR
- Start date
Guess I did not have the patience to follow thru with them
I started with them, before I had a scale or a powder measure. Before I got my first chargemaster I would often use the scoops to get close and trickle from there because I could grab a scoop a lot faster than I can set a measure. I'll travel with them because they don't weigh anything.
The most consistent weights I've been able to get with the scoops is with a technique from Lee's book. Put powder in a container
that can be filled close to the top. A coffee cup is usually pretty easy to find. Take the scoop and press straight down into the powder, just enough for the powder to fill it under its own weight. Lift it straight up and use a business card to strike it off level. Used like that it is very consistent. The most consistent way to use a scoop is to not scoop with it. Scoop with them and you'll never get the same weight twice in a row.
The most consistent weights I've been able to get with the scoops is with a technique from Lee's book. Put powder in a container
that can be filled close to the top. A coffee cup is usually pretty easy to find. Take the scoop and press straight down into the powder, just enough for the powder to fill it under its own weight. Lift it straight up and use a business card to strike it off level. Used like that it is very consistent. The most consistent way to use a scoop is to not scoop with it. Scoop with them and you'll never get the same weight twice in a row.
Hmmm. So it “flows” into it... I’ll give that a try. Thanks.
Thanks for explaining.
This clarifies.
I will give it a go when I can, and compare.
Ronr
- Location
- West Quebec
That was a better option for me as seeing small objects was a challenge
results comparison - different techniques using scoops
Here are some results
Givens - IMR 4064, 2.8cc Lee scoop, 10 samples per example, swipe with business card after each "dip" to level, RCBS 502 scale
Plunge: forcing the scoop down starting perpendicular to level of powder in container, allowing powder to flow into scoop until heaping
Scoop: swiping the scoop to the bottom of the container in a circular motion
Tap: a mild tap on the edge of the container...nothing violent
Plunge, swipe Avg: 37.10gr ES: .5 SD: .18
Plunge, tap tap swipe Avg: 37.07gr ES: .4 SD: .15
Scoop, swipe Avg: 36.52gr ES: .4 SD: .14
Scoop, tap tap swipe Avg: 37.51gr ES: .7 SD: .19
If I take out the worst one (compared to average) (i.e. the flier lol ) of the 10 samples of each method the scoop, swipe sd is slightly better...
It would be cool to compare the avg to the value of slide card value contained with the Lee scoop kit...to see if one technique vs. another approaches book value lol...
Why did I do this you may be asking?...well...I figure that if I have a load developed on OCW principles, with a custom sized scoop (thank you Kodiak
, that I could produce a repeatable enough powder charge at the range without taking scales. And try for distance.
Something about making reloads at the range with a setup like this is a cool thing I want to try. I know others do this but the tooling/setup seems complicated and prone to higher probability of variations to ambient conditions like wind...unless there are pre charges from home in tow.
This (custom scoops and tested techniques) maybe a way to get around that. A person can shoot until something runs out
FWIW
Regards
Ronr
Here are some results
Givens - IMR 4064, 2.8cc Lee scoop, 10 samples per example, swipe with business card after each "dip" to level, RCBS 502 scale
Plunge: forcing the scoop down starting perpendicular to level of powder in container, allowing powder to flow into scoop until heaping
Scoop: swiping the scoop to the bottom of the container in a circular motion
Tap: a mild tap on the edge of the container...nothing violent
Plunge, swipe Avg: 37.10gr ES: .5 SD: .18
Plunge, tap tap swipe Avg: 37.07gr ES: .4 SD: .15
Scoop, swipe Avg: 36.52gr ES: .4 SD: .14
Scoop, tap tap swipe Avg: 37.51gr ES: .7 SD: .19
If I take out the worst one (compared to average) (i.e. the flier lol ) of the 10 samples of each method the scoop, swipe sd is slightly better...
It would be cool to compare the avg to the value of slide card value contained with the Lee scoop kit...to see if one technique vs. another approaches book value lol...
Why did I do this you may be asking?...well...I figure that if I have a load developed on OCW principles, with a custom sized scoop (thank you Kodiak
, that I could produce a repeatable enough powder charge at the range without taking scales. And try for distance.Something about making reloads at the range with a setup like this is a cool thing I want to try. I know others do this but the tooling/setup seems complicated and prone to higher probability of variations to ambient conditions like wind...unless there are pre charges from home in tow.
This (custom scoops and tested techniques) maybe a way to get around that. A person can shoot until something runs out
FWIW
Regards
Ronr
I've never bothered to try a single scoop charge method with the Lee scoops. I have just used whichever scoop is suitable to get me in the ballpark of being close and then used the small one to trickle finish into the beam scale pan, Some cases take 1 large scoop, 1 med size one and 1 small one and a trickle. I always do it onto the beam scale pan. I can do them just as fast as on a Chargemaster, which I also own. Once you get the hang of it on the first couple of cases you can scoop pretty close to the full weight. I often get it within 1/2doz actual grains of powder on some cases. I prefer using the small scoop to any powder trickler, far quicker. The only difference for me, from using the scoops to using the Chargemaster is the routine and the amount of exercise I get from one to the other, time wise there is no appreciable difference as far as I can tell. I will only use a powder thrower at the times when I want to load 50+ rounds, and only with powders like 760 or AA9. When using the thrower with AA9 at the range with my schuetzen rifle, I could adjust for temps or wind and be completely sure that it threw +/- .1gr..
Overall I use the Lee scoops more than any other method though.
Overall I use the Lee scoops more than any other method though.
I don't use a "powder thrower" other than the ones on my Pro 1000's. For anything else, I use good old Lee scoops and, as of late, a little Lyman digital scale to true the charge up. I did try to use an RCBS trickler, but find it more relaxing and easier to just use the scale. I load a fair number of various light rifle loads using Unique and/or 700X. I find that having no distractions is important for consistent loading methods.
One time I was using my Beretta 301 12 ga. for shooting gophers in an abandoned farm yard. I fired one that was likely close to a double charge. Nothing seemed to be damaged, so I kept shooting. Cheap lesson learned there.
One time I was using my Beretta 301 12 ga. for shooting gophers in an abandoned farm yard. I fired one that was likely close to a double charge. Nothing seemed to be damaged, so I kept shooting. Cheap lesson learned there.
Thank you for the work and the data. I've always had an interest in "traditional" technologies, and when I got interested in cartridge loading and in the various manifestations of black powder shooting in the late '60s/early '70s, there was still lots of information fairly readily available from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Among this was the use of powder scoops and and the related filling of a powder measure from a horn or flask. Scoops, Lee Loaders, and Lyman/Ideal tong tools served me well for quite a while before before I added scales, measures, and presses to the mix, and they occasionally still do to this day.
I find this quite interesting because the conventional wisdom, and experimental data occasionally adduced, was that the "scoop" techniques were generally less consistent than the "plunge" ones, and IIRC tapping to settle (and topping if pouring from a flask) usually gave somewhat better consistency than a simple fill. Either the conventional wisdom was wrong or you must have a remarkably consistent scooping motion. Also, if I recall correctly, it often took more than two taps to achieve a maximal density and consistency of fill, and adding the swipe, sometimes called "strike off", generally achieved more consistency compared to just filling (whichever way you did it). Might you be interested in exploring this further?
Regards,
Joel
I find this quite interesting because the conventional wisdom, and experimental data occasionally adduced, was that the "scoop" techniques were generally less consistent than the "plunge" ones, and IIRC tapping to settle (and topping if pouring from a flask) usually gave somewhat better consistency than a simple fill. Either the conventional wisdom was wrong or you must have a remarkably consistent scooping motion. Also, if I recall correctly, it often took more than two taps to achieve a maximal density and consistency of fill, and adding the swipe, sometimes called "strike off", generally achieved more consistency compared to just filling (whichever way you did it). Might you be interested in exploring this further?
Regards,
Joel
Glad to know someone found this interesting.
I took my time and tried to make every motion consistent. Further, to be truthful, the 10 samples were not consecutive. If the level of powder in the spoon appeared grossly different it was discarded. At first there was likely 2 or 3 attempts in producing the 10 were not used. For this test I'm ok with that because it's not totally mechanized. (There's a subjective component to this method.)
Like anything repetitive we do, we should get better and it showed in the results. The 2nd batch of each method only had one discard. Some may think this skews the results but in time with repetition the techniques would be more repeatable. I consider this no different then getting the simple Lee powder thrower to get consistent results. For myself at least, the powder thrower wasn't consistent at the beginning.
Noted on 2 taps vs. more to achieve consistent density within the spoon. I needed to keep the parameters manageable but I will look at that going forward for sure. Thanks for the tip.
From previous powder scooping, the largest factor I believe is the vessel that's holding the powder and the level of the powder in the vessel. As the powder level decreases the angle of the spoon to submerge below the surface changes. It's natural to try and compensate and that's where I think a person can go wrong in a hurry. A little more attention to keeping the powder level in the container consistent to "compensate" for any mental desire to change I think is beneficial. That's what I'm going to try next along with a container shape that I think lends itself better ergonomically.
There are likely many that couldn't be bothered...I know...but I like the challenge. For small batches, if I can improve before it hits the scale then why not...
Regards
Ronr
