Well i wouldnt argue about loading procedure having an affect on accuracy. I also wouldnt argue that the procedure i personaly use couldnt be improved upon for that purpose. But over the many years we have been hunting in this manner, lack of accuracy hasent been the reason for our failures when they happen. As a rule it comes down to an avoidable mistake, or lack of a proper education for wind calls.
Now again, a perfect score with more Xs than the others having perfect scores isnt necessary for us to win either, but then life is all about choices.
As for the original topic, fact is i dont really use the Lee scoops myself.
I may well be the only here using a measure that hasent been made in decades, and was my fathers back in the early 50s.
Belding & Mull, made in Phillipsburg Pa. Depending upon the powder, it will throw consistently to a tenth of a grain, which works pretty well for minit of at least the bigger rocks and deer.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I bought my Lyman 55 three years before I was married. I was married in 1980.
Holds to 1/10 grain if I use ball or short-cut powders. Flake & long kernel I throw short into a pan and trickle to desired weight.
"They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance." Last words of Gen. Sedgwik
I always like to say.....Beware the old geezer showing up with a rusty pipeOriginally Posted by Robinhood
duct taped to a 2x4 !!
I do a lot of testing. In that sense you want to be close as accurate as
your components will allow. My old Ohaus 10-10 has more then served
me well. I did buy a small Peregrine electronic that measures to .00
Drop in one kernal of of R-16 and it jumps to .02 No beam scale can see
that unless you scare yourself into a Promethius !! I do the normal dip,
dump, and trickle on the Ohaus for the bulk of my work. Touchy stuff
for out long, I've been using the Peregrine. The Peregrine is the nut for
weighing bullets and case.
Keeping my bad Karma intact since 1952
[QUOTE=Robinhood;476115]
Yep, thats the one. I keep a funnel in the top of mine so that the hopper can hold more powder.
You know what im talking about RH, some of those cases we use can almost empty the thing. lol
Needed some drop tubes custom made also.
I do use an old Lyman 55 on small cases like 223 and pistol cartridges.
Just drop directly into the case with 50 of them in a loading block.
308 and 708 quite often get the same treatment.
It goes pretty quick that way, and when all 50 are done i just take a good look to make sure i didnt miss any.
When you have a few kids (and adults) whacking away at clay birds and pieces of clay birds at 400 yds, it can be a full time job just loading the ammo.
I have reached the conclusion that the Varget and 4064 and similar powders can't be loaded accurately enough with either the RCBS or Lee powder measure. The Lee is closer and usually has a lot more right on the money but there are always a few that are off enough I wouldn't be comfortable with it. I think the Lee would be accurate enough to use on the CFE 223 powder without weighing every charge. Another thing, .1 or .2 difference in a 223 is a lot different than in a 300 Win Magnum. I would think in the big calibers maybe the Lee would be close enough but I don't have anything bigger than a 243.
Bite the bullet and get a Harrels and never look back...
"As long as there's lead in the air....there's still hope.."
I've just ways went for about half grain under and then trickle to the exact point I want.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
So tell us about all the weighing and trickeling you dont do either, especially with one of those. lol
What took you so long? I have been waiting for this...:)
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I have a Culver design Harrels. You still need to trickle. They are close
though. Too me it's like putting more bling on a Harley. It's still going to
drip oil on your living room carpet.....One of these days, when
I have another major moment of weakness, I want to bolt it up to a
Promethius, stand back, thump my chest, and yell like Tarzan.....
Keeping my bad Karma intact since 1952
Well first before you do all that, i need to ask a question.I have a Culver design Harrels. You still need to trickle. They are close
though. Too me it's like putting more bling on a Harley. It's still going to
drip oil on your living room carpet.....
I have another major moment of weakness, I want to bolt it up to a
Promethius, stand back, thump my chest, and yell like Tarzan.....
How long has it been since youve taken some ammo loaded to 1/10 or so of a grain, then used match grade bullets without weighing them, and went someplace where you could shoot at small rocks on steep side hills from a bench, at various distances out to say 1000 yds?
And id prefer a direct answer, not one claiming small groups would permit that anyway.
I know they would, but thats not the point of the question.
Next time you go over to Ridgeway, place some clay birds on the berms from say 500 out to the limit of 1000 yds. No target, just the clay birds, with loads like ive described. Of coarse wind is wind, regardless of the type target, so lets not get into that with this.
Id venture to say you have never tried it without going through all the very important loading steps people talk about but in fact not everybody does.
Remember, you only need to hit the rock or clay bird one time, and like a deer they rarely run off if you miss. lol
I gave up trickling a long time a go, once I found a good measure. 4064 does not cut well in any measure, so I avoid it when I can. Varget doesn't cut good as other powders unless you know right technique. When you can get e.s. of a single digit, tricking is a waste of time that is better spent on concentricity.
"As long as there's lead in the air....there's still hope.."
I'm pretty content with my methods I think. The rounds I load that use ball or flake i will throw with my rcbs (with handgun insert) and hornady with rifle insert, then stick powders i hand dip and trickle , i trickle ball and flake also , weigh every charge on digitals that are good to .05 and double check every charge on ohaus. I think i got lucky with the digital because they are always accurate and you know right away if they have floated because when you set the empty pan they will be .01 off instead off 000.00 , i have used them enough that I have confidence in them
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
First time ive heard the word (concentricity) used here far as i can recall.
Im just assuming that means that straight loads trump loads with precise powder charges.
And of coarse the logical question will be, why not both?
But for those not having the type dies that will produce perfectly straight loads, is there a solution that might at least help?
I always partially seat the bullet, then rotate the case and seat some more.
It might be another mind over matter thing also, but it does seem to help.
I have a shooter friend who checks the runout, marks the high spot on the case head, then places that in the same place each time when he puts it into the gun.
But regardless, it opens up the discussion to more than just precise powder charges.
Lol, you just opened pandoras box my friend..
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
Fred, Can you give us a list of the cartridges you get single digit spread with when using a Harrels? Groups at long range with those cartridges? No pictures required.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I've decided to machine a new set of bearings for my ohaus 5-0-5... the little free floating v blocks.. what a cannot decide is if I should use stainless, aluminum or some other metal or if I should use nylatron.. im kind of thinking nylatron because it is ultra slick and may offer the least friction.. anyone have any opinions or even better suggestions?
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
Send me one and I will PMI the material
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
The nylatron?.. will do.. pm me where to send it. It is extremely tough stuff, I remember making a nut (the part that holds the guitar strings at the tuning end of the neck) and went through 2 belts on my belt sander honing its final shape.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
I thought they used jewels/stones. Ruby, agate, etc.
I am not sure what the factory material is, it seems like it may be a high impact plastic or similar but i really don't know.. it didn't feel stone like.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
You may be thinking of Jeweled movement/bearings. Often found on things like indicators and watches. Interesting thought. The load might be a bit high for something like that. I always wondered what a high precision, small ball, frictionless bearing mounted to self align would do. The engineers seem to like the knife edges though so there must be a reason.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I've thought the same thing. I can think of ways (at least in my mind) would be more accurate but as you stated, the must use or like that sharp edge for a reason.. maybe that reason is as simple as cost. I drew up plans that would use potentiometer . It would not tell you the weight but once you found your charge you would use that charge as your weight to balance against. Some of the cheaper potentiometers are capable of detecting even a micron or less of movement so all you would be looking to do is replicate that charge weight.. idk.. maybe its a dumb idea.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
I just know my old Ohaus triple beam lab scale had agate bearing blocks.
You can use anything that is near frictionless. That's why conventional bearings don't work for measuring small differences, too much friction. That potentiometer idea is good but even the smoothest will have a lot of friction for measuring small amounts, like fractions of grains. When making a scale the total load is usually at odds with the best bearing point. That's why the electronic scales have taken over the industry.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks