How well you set up and operate a powder meter has a lot to do with ammo consistency. Here are a few tips on getting the most from this tool. READ MORE
Going back to our last conversation, the topic was dispensing propellant charges, and whether to weigh each charge or dispense each charge using a powder meter. Generally, most seem to agree that weighing each is the sure way to better consistency. I don’t always agree with that, and I say that mostly because my chronograph and group size numbers don’t support superiority of either approach. However! I sure do know that metering charges is way on faster and easier than weighing them all out!
Once again: the only answer that works is to experiment for yourself and settle the question based on empirical evidence. Right: shoot it and see!
This next offers a few tips I’ve had good success with over the years. I can tell you that, without any doubt, learning how to set up and operate a meter has a decided influence on those chronograph and group size measurements.
First: I very strongly recommend setting the meter throw based not on one single charge, but on multiple charges. Here’s my method: After running a few single throws to get it close, I set my scale to 10 times the desired single-throw propellant charge weight, then throw 10 charges into the scale pan. I have done this (so) many times over (so) many years that I can tell you that I have no memory or record of this tactic not influencing the final setting I have dialed in. Do this 3-4 times and see what you see. There’s a huge likelihood there will be an adjustment needed. And for some reason, supported by my notes at least, the final setting is usually a tick lower than I gauge for one-throw-at-a-time weight checks.
Now, I know that if the meter is accurate then each single charge will weigh what it should, but maybe the difference that makes this method work best is that scales aren’t perfectly accurate. Maybe it’s the damping system, or continual issues with calibrations, but a 10-throw lot ultimately results in a more precise setting. I’ve proven that too many times to myself to qualify it with a “may.” No, it does.
As mentioned in a past article, the smaller the propellant granules the more precise each fill can be. Longer-grained kernels provide more air space and “stack” more than smaller-grained kernels. It’s also clear that the higher degree of precision on the meter internal sliding surfaces, the more “clean” the strike-off will be.
And, meter operation has a whopping lot to do with the consistency of filling the meter drum. Just like tapping a case bottom settles the propellant to a lower fill volume, same thing happens filling the drum in a meter.
The trick to good throws is working the meter handle consistently, and also settling on a contact force when the meter handle comes to a stop in the “fill” direction: It should bump but not bang… I wish I could be more clear on that, but it’s a feel. Don’t go too slowly, gingerly taking the handle to its stop, and don’t slam it there either. You want a positive, audible “thunk” when the handle stops. If it’s the same each time, fill consistency will, not can, improve. Focusing on operating the handle at a constant rate of speed teaches this in short order. It’s a positive movement that, for me, takes about one second to lift the handle.
There’s a few more tips in the photo captions, and here’s another: Do not leave propellant in a meter! Return it to a sealed container when you’re done for the day.
This article is adapted from Glen’s books, Handloading For Competition and Top-Grade Ammo, available at Midsouth HERE. For more information about other books by Glen, visit ZedikerPublishing.com
Crawfish Cup winner, SFC Adam Sokolowski is the 2018 NRA Bianchi champion! READ MORE
SOURCE: Various news outlets
With a perfect score of 1920-176X, SFC Adam Sokolowski of the U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit (USAMU) is the 2018 champion of Colt’s NRA Bianchi Cup, the NRA Action Pistol championship event. Additionally, Sokolowski won the Multi Gun Championship with a score of 3822-329X.
Mark Blake was second, ending up in a points tie with 18-time Bianchi Cup winner and perennial “top gun” best-bet, Doug Koenig; scorecard review broke the tie.
Sokolowski won Midsouth Shooters Supply Crawfish Cup earlier this year, and became now the third time the winner of this event went on to claim the NRA championship. We’re very proud that the Crawfish Cup has attained that status: if you can win here you can win there…
SFC Sokolowski holds another distinction as an NRA Action Pistol champion: he is the only shooter who has won all three Bianchi Cup divisions — Open, Metallic, and Production (and the first-ever perfect score in the Metallic [sights] division. This man can shoot a pistol! And all that in just four years on the circuit.
Rob Vadasz is the 2018 Metallic champion with 1912-155X, his sixth win in this division. Second place Metallic was Enoch Smith (also 2018 World Action Pistol Metallic Champion) 1907-150X. Third was Roman Hauber with 1906-141X.
In the Production division, Sokolowski’s AMU teammate SFC Patrick Franks took the championship home to Ft. Benning with a 1894-136X. Franks previously won back-to-back Bianchi Metallic Championships, as well as having earned a NRA National Precision Pistol Championship. Second went to legendary action pistol shooter Rob Leatham of Team Springfield Armory with a score of 1862-129X. Seiichi Ishikawa followed Rob in third place with 1822-109X.
Anita Mackiewicz, now a three-time champion, won the Women’s Championship with a score of 1911-153X. Second place went to last year’s winner, Cherie Blake, 1910-137X. 2016 champion Tiffany Piper finished third with 1903-154X.
Read complete coverage by John Parker HERE and HERE
How about some pure fun on the range? This .22LR blends authentic style with competition-ready quality. READ MORE
by Major Pandemic
When the Henry Rifles first re-appeared, the public enthusiastically embraced the brand and for good reason. Anthony Imperato and family have made it a passion to restore the Henry firearms name and even made it better in the process. The Henry rifles are beautiful to own, look at, and shoot. This Evil Roy .22 is yet another incredible rifle from Henry.
I have noted before that when it comes to Henry Rifles, there are only two types of people; those who have yet to shoot a Henry and those who have and now lust after them. Just as Ruger has arguable made one of the best updated single action cowboy revolvers, Henry has updated the Henry design to deliver something so refined that Benjamin Tyler Henry himself would have only dreamed was possible back with the original design. I love them and own several Henry rifles in .44 Magnum, .357 Magnum, and .22LR and this Evil Roy Henry seemed to be just the perfect gun to add to the collection.
The international winning CAS (Cowboy Action Shooter) Gene Pearcy with his CAS alias of “Evil Roy” partnered up with Henry to create something a bit different. Evil Roy suggested taking the very popular Henry Golden Boy .22LR rifle but with a shorter 16.5-inch barrel, with a more durable plastic buttpad, a brushed nickel receiver and barrel band, and a shorter overall stock — a combination and/or slight modification of existing parts of various models. The result is a short, quick-handling, and accurate .22LR rifle that is a blast to shoot.
The Evil Roy is at its heart a Golden Boy with a few configuration changes which include the nickel finish receiver with grooved scope rail, shorter 16.5-barrel, shorter stock, and plastic buttpad instead of brass.
Although I have no real complaints with my original Golden Boy, there were times where I felt the 20-inch barrel was a bit long. For youth shooters, the full-sized Golden Boy stock can seem a bit big.
The thought of a lever action rarely crosses many people’s minds when shopping for a new rifle, until they put one in their hands. Henry Rifles draw you in, the fit feel and finish begin your mind’s journey back in time to the Old West, and by the time you pull the trigger and rack in the next round as you watch your tin can dance, the hook is set so deep that a love affair of Henry rifles is inevitable. Someone once told me more Henry rifles are sold at the range than in gun stores… Everyone falls in love with Henry rifles not only because of their history and quality, but also because they shoot and cycle exceptionally well. Most people will say the same thing when they pick up a Henry, “they knew something about firearms and shooting back then.” The Evil Roy is a bit lighter than the Golden Boy but still retains the balance, pointability, and of course accuracy.
The Evil Roy is priced with an MSRP of $499 and is about $50 less than the standard Golden Boy. It carries the same high quality features as their Big Boy brothers. The Evil Roy rifles feature the same historic semi-buckhorn style rear sight, brass bead front sight, stunningly beautiful blued octagonal barrel, banded barrel, steel parts, and perfectly finished American walnut stock. It also add a large action charging loop versus the smaller loop. The Big Brother has a solid brass receiver, the Golden Boy a Brasslite receiver and the Evil Roy has a nickel-base alloy receiver that is also grooved for a .22 scope mount.
The Henry Evil Roy tube magazine holds 12 rounds of your favorite .22LR ammo or up to 16 of the spooky quiet 22 Short/CB rounds. That is a huge ammo capacity by any standard which makes the Henry Evil Roy a blast to shoot up box after box of inexpensive ammunition. The Evil Roy feeds and fires anything from a .22CB all the way to hot .22LR high velocity rounds. The reload does takes a bit longer than a magazine change but is simple enough and requires the magazine spring tube to be pulled partially out and rounds slipped into the tube. One company makes a speed loader if you are so inclined, but I just use a 3/8-inch aluminum tube with a stopper as a speed loader.
The next point I feel I must make is how fast the Henry Lever actions can be fired. Shoot the Henry Evil Roy next to a semi-auto 22 and you will be surprised how well you keep up the pace. The large loop helps to improve speed. The action is safe and simple to operate, shoots faster than a bolt action and slows the beginners (and old) shooters down enough that shots connect more consistently connect due to better sighting. Lever actions are also far less dirty than their semi-auto cousins because gas is not being blown back during the cycling process. Due to the cleaner cycling, lever actions are also very reliable as the round count continues to grow all afternoon.
From a safety perspective, the simplicity of the transfer bar safety prevents accidental firing when decocking/lowering the hammer. The Henry Rifles have what I call a “single-action revolver safety” which negates the need for additional safety mechanisms. For hunting, having the ability to safely have a live round in the chamber and only requiring the hammer to be cocked prior to a shot makes this a very safe rifle to carry. As the rifle’s lever is racked, a new round is automatically chambered and the hammer is cocked — it could not be simpler.
The Henry Evil Roy rifle is an easy gun to shoot accurately using only the semi-buckhorn sights, but adding on the 4X Burris Micro scope delivered some nice little1/4-inch 25-yard groups with SK Standard and CCI Standard Velocity rounds.
Once you see how well the Henry Evil Roy shoots, you start to forget about shooting bulls-eye targets and start hammering spinners and cans.
The front brass bead front sight works great. The rear semi-buckhorn is also highly functional, but just notmy favorite. My plan is to swap the rear sight with a historically fitting brass Skinner peep sight which I have on several of my other Henry Rifles.
I was not sure at first whether I would shoot it as much as my Golden Boy, but with the flexibility to pop a scope on and off really added a lot of utility and upped the precision.
Any time someone wants to start shooting, I start with the Henry. These rifles are safe, simple, and non-threatening for anyone to use, and with the shorter length stock it is also a kid friendly rifle to use for learning. This is one heck of a family-oriented rifle that everyone loves and it is that universal appeal that is special about the Henry Evil Roy — everything about this gun is not just good but great.
[Major Pandemic is an editor at large who loves everything about shooting, hunting, the outdoors, and all those lifesaving little survival related products. His goal is simple, tell a good story in the form of a truthful review all while having fun. He contributes content to a wide variety of print and digital magazines and newsletters for companies and manufacturers throughout the industry with content exposure to over 2M readers monthly. Click HERE to learn more.]
This is a great free resource compiled by some of the best. Get it, read it, practice it! MORE
SOURCE Team Springfield
When and where legal, there are many positives to carrying a pistol concealed. Chief among them is the lowered visibility to the outside world. The whole point of concealed carry is to be discreetly armed.
When it comes to drawing your concealed firearm, though, how do the experts do it? What’s the safest and most efficient way?
Our e-book, “Anatomy of a Concealed Carry Draw,” demonstrates:
The two-handed draw and re-holster
The one-handed draw and re-holster
Safety guidelines for firearm handling
Our top recommendations for concealed carry pistols
IF YOU WANT TO CARRY LIKE A PRO, MAKE SURE YOU CAN DRAW LIKE A PRO.
DOWNLOAD the Springfield Armory e-book now, and our experts will show you, step by step, exactly how to draw like a pro.
Publix caves to shock-tactics orchestrated by David Hogg. Read what happened… MORE
SOURCE: Tampa Bay Times
The supermarket giant acknowledges its support of Adam Putnam has “led to a divide in our community.”
Publix, facing consumer boycotts, student protests, and threats to its wholesome image for its generous support of Adam Putnam’s bid for governor, announced May 25 it is suspending all corporate campaign contributions immediately.
The popular retailer, facing a rapidly escalating public relations crisis fueled largely by social media and the debate over guns, issued a statement at the start of the three-day Memorial Day holiday weekend acknowledging the “divide” that it has caused by its unprecedented financial support of Putnam’s campaign.
“At Publix, we respect the students and members of the community who have chosen to express their voices on these issues,” the company said. “We regret that our contributions have led to a divide in our community. We did not intend to put our associates and the customers they serve in the middle of a political debate. At the same time, we remain committed to maintaining a welcoming shopping experience for our customers. We would never knowingly disappoint our customers or the communities we serve.”
The company’s action suggested that the furor over its contributions was having a significant effect as the 2018 political campaign attracts growing attention from Florida voters.
David Hogg and other students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, the scene of a February shooting, organized a 4 p.m. “die-in” Friday at a Publix parking lot in Coral Springs.
Students drew chalk outlines of human bodies and lay still on the floor for 12 minutes.
Moments before the protest began, Publix released its statement.
Several dozen protesters followed through with the protest. Some held sunflowers as they lay sprawled on the floor of the grocery store. They were flanked by a smaller group of counter-protesters chanting “NRA” and “Trump,” but the demonstration was peaceful. Officers with the Coral Springs Police Department stood by during the event.
Publix is Florida’s largest private employer with more than 175,000 employees. The company has stores in seven southeastern states.
Publix Supermarkets, Publix executives and family members have donated at least $670,000 to the campaign of Putnam, the elected state agriculture commissioner and an opponent of new gun restrictions who called himself “a proud #NRA sellout” last year.
David Hogg, a survivor of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., demands $1-million donation and anti-NRA pledge from this supermarket giant. READ ABOUT IT
SOURCE: AP and Washington Times
The public face of the gun control movement demanded $1 million Thursday from the Florida-based grocery chain in a tweet, just one day after calling for a “die-in” protest at its stores.
Publix is being targeted by Mr. Hogg for its support of Adam Putnam, a Florida Republican gubernatorial candidate who is currently the state’s agricultural commissioner. The Tampa Bay Times reported earlier this week that Publix had given $670,000 during the last three years to Putnam campaigns.
Mr. Hogg not only sought atonement money from the grocery chain in Thursday’s tweet, he also demanded a pledge of ideological fealty to the gun-control movement.
“I call on @Publix to donate double the money they gave to Putman [sic] to the Stoneman Douglas Victims fund, $1,000,000. And never support an A rated NRA politician again,” he wrote.
The monetary demand came a day after Mr. Hogg called for disruptive demonstrations Friday at all Publix stores, one of the biggest chains in the Southeast and especially Florida, where it is the largest private employer.
“@Publix is a #NRASellOut,” he tweeted. “In Parkland we will have a die in the Friday (the 25th) before memorial day weekend. Starting at 4pm for 12 min inside our 2 Publix stores. Just go an lie down starting at 4. Feel free to die in with us at as many other @Publix as possible.”
When asked by the Tampa Bay Times about its support for Mr. Putnam, a Publix spokesman did not mention guns.
“As the hometown candidate, Publix has had a long-standing relationship with Commissioner Putnam,” spokesman Brian West said. “We support pro-business candidates, and believe Commissioner Putnam will make a great governor.”
Great news for hunters and recreational shooters: Julie Golob, pro shooter for Smith & Wesson will help lead the way for expanded outdoor opportunities for us all. READ MORE
Last week, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke announced the members of the Hunting and Shooting Sports Conservation Council. In addition to Chris Cox, the executive director of NRA-ILA, Smith & Wesson pro shooter and NRA Board Member Julie Golob has been named to the Council.
“What an exciting time for our hunting and shooting sports! This Shooting Sports Council is yet another way Secretary Zinke and staff is making the expansion of our great American heritage a priority,” said Golob. “It’s an honor for me to be a part of it alongside so many influential and truly passionate leaders in outdoors sports.”
“America’s hunters and recreational shooters have a champion in Secretary Ryan Zinke,” said Cox. “Zinke is fighting for our sportsmen and women to have greater access to our public lands. I am pleased to work with the Trump Administration’s new Hunting and Shooting Sports Conservation Council to make it easier for Americans to enjoy our public lands.”
The Council was established earlier this year to provide the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture with advice on recreational hunting, recreational shooting sports, wildlife and habitat conservation. Additionally, the Council will examine ways to encourage partnership among the public, sporting conservation organizations, state, tribal, territorial, and the federal government.
“Over a century ago, Teddy Roosevelt established the American conservation ethic — best science, best practices, greatest good, longest term,” said Secretary Zinke. “These sportsmen carry on the American conservation ethic in the modern day. Bringing these experts together will be key to ensuring the American tradition of hunting and shooting, as well as the conservation benefits of these practices, carries on.”
Don’t believe the smoke screen: the anti-gun agenda won’t rest until they’ve got your gun… READ MORE
The May 11, 2018 headline of the USA Today op-ed said it all. Anti-gun Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) last week advocated for legislation to ban an as-yet undetermined class of semi-automatic firearms and to “go after resisters” who refuse to relinquish their lawfully-acquired firearms. Lest anyone mistake his intentions, Swalwell followed up with a lengthy NBC News interview this week in which he made clear that his own proposal is a departure from prior gun bans that allowed those who obtained the firearms when they were lawful to keep them. Swalwell said that after thinking “about the different ways to address it … I concluded the only way to do this is to get those weapons out of our communities.”
According to the NBC piece, Swalwell is modeling his own proposal on laws passed during the 1990s in Australia. The article then inaccurately states, “But while Australia comes up often in gun debates, almost no prominent figures have proposed national laws that would demand that gun owners turn in existing weapons en masse.”
The truth is that anyone who suggests the United States should adopt Australian-style gun control — a club that includes such infamous gun ban advocates as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton — is by definition advocating for the forcible disarming of “resisters.” That, in fact, was the signature feature of the Australian approach.
The widespread disarming of Australian citizens occurred through a comprehensive scheme that proceeded as follows. What is no longer debatable, however, is the true agenda and ideology that lies behind the gun control project in America. It is the abolition of the right to gun ownership in America as we know it … “resisters” be damned.
First, the various political subdivisions within Australia unanimously agreed to a uniform ban on large categories of popular firearms. The ban was both retroactive and prospective.
Second, the government instituted “amnesty” periods, which allowed those who had previously acquired the newly-banned firearms lawfully to surrender them to the government for a fixed and nonnegotiable rate of compensation.
Third, and most importantly, anyone who refused to relinquish their formerly lawful property was to be treated as an armed criminal, with all the physical jeopardy and legal consequences that entails.
The Australian government also uses a “may-issue” licensing scheme for firearm acquisition, which among other things requires an applicant to show a “genuine reason” for needing the gun. Self-defense — which the U.S. Supreme Court considers the “central component” of America’s right to keep and bear arms – is not recognized under Australian law as a permissible reason for the acquisition, ownership, or use of a firearm.
Australian-style gun control, in other words, is completely foreign to and incompatible with America’s history, tradition, and rights of firearm ownership. Simply put, there is no reconciling Australian-style gun control with America’s Second Amendment, a fact which even some gun control advocates in their more candid moments are willing to admit.
If Swalwell has distinguished himself at all from other American advocates of the Australian approach, it’s because he is willing to be more forthcoming about the fact that it would turn millions of formerly law-abiding Americans into armed “criminals” with the stroke of a pen.
In his NBC interview, however, he tried to have it both ways.
First, he insisted:
I’m not proposing a roundup or confiscation. It would be like anything else that’s banned: If you’re caught with it there would be a steep penalty. Any fear of ATF agents going door to door to collect assault weapons is unfounded and not what is proposed here. They don’t go collecting drugs that are banned or any other substance or weapon that’s banned and I’m not proposing that here.
That, of course, is a lie. Law enforcement agents with enough probable cause that someone possesses drugs or other contraband to get a warrant absolutely do go after the contraband. Some might even say they are duty-bound to do so. A quick Internet search will show you what that looks like in the real world.
Anybody who illegally possesses a contraband firearm potentially risks the same treatment. Swalwell, who touts his credentials as a former prosecutor, surely knows that.
But when asked to elaborate about the “stiff penalties” that would supposedly ensure compliance with his scheme, Swalwell seemingly contradicted his no-confiscation stance, stating, “I’d want to first get the gun.”
To their credit, NBC asked Swalwell directly whether he was “prepared for some of the confrontations that might erupt from this,” adding, “You’re surely familiar with the slogan, ‘I’ll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands.’” Swalwell brushed aside the question, indicating that Parkland survivors who have been advocating for gun control have given him “courage” for resolute action.
The actions he is calling for, however, carry inherent risks of further unnecessary loss of innocent life.
But that is what the gun “debate” has come to in America, with at least one gun control advocate so emboldened that he’s openly willing to put violent confrontations on the table to advance the agenda.
Whether Rep. Swalwell is serious or whether he is just hoping to move the Overton Window on what is considered legitimate rhetoric in the realm of gun control policy is perhaps debatable.
What is no longer debatable, however, is the true agenda and ideology that lies behind the gun control project in America. It is the abolition of the right to gun ownership in America as we know it … “resisters” be damned.
A brand new propellant was introduced last time in this space that’s competing with Hodgdon’s legendary Varget. HERE’S MORE
by Ken Johnson, Shooters World
I presented a challenge to the common sense of the reloading world. In my last blog article, I introduced Precision to the readership. You might call that article a “tickler,” and it certainly generated a lot of questions! When we hear about questions, it means that people are paying attention, reading, and thinking! Good stuff!
Being a ballistician, several of those questions really stood out. I want to address them in this article. I’d also like to present data to support our claims.
First, relating to the burn speed and performance of Precision versus VARGET:
Some folks took the results of one test to state that Precision was 25 fps slower than VARGET. Therefore, they reasoned that it couldn’t have the same performance.
Fair enough. But we have to digest this.
We in the industry estimate a true burn rate differential by witnessing a velocity of 30+ fps at equal pressure. And in some ammunition, 1/10 of a grain can represent a better part of that 30 fps. The performance of Precision and VARGET do fall within the guidelines. Likewise, we found across several test loads, VARGET and Precision exchanged velocity supremacy. This is perfectly indicative of equivalent burn rate.
As an example, you may find the included .30-30 Winchester data and .223 Remington data interesting. These are the same lots of VARGET and Precision. At equal charge weight in .223 REM, Precision is within 26 fps and 955 psi of VARGET. Were we to add back that 955 psi, we’d also add back the better part of that 26 fps. In other words, in .223 Remington, Precision and VARGET the same velocity/pressure relationship.
Now, taking the same exact propellant lots, we performed a cursory test in .30-30 Winchester. At equal charge weight, we found 6 fps and 200 psi difference between the two propellants. And indeed, as we tested these propellants in other calibers, we found similar results.
Thus, we attest that if you like the velocity and charge weight of VARGET, you’ll find very similar velocity and charge weight in Precision.
Next, folks wanted proof of temperature insensitivity (and no marketing fluff!). And one person in particular wanted to see ballistic data BELOW 165F. So, we shot a test at 150F, to help the readership visualize the relative performance of these two propellants.
A common load for VARGET is the heavier class of .223 REM. We fired a baseline velocity and pressure test at ambient conditions. We found the VARGET ambient velocity from an 18-inch test barrel at 2544 fps. When we shot this same load at 150F, the velocity DECREASED to 2505 fps. The velocity change between ambient and 150F was 39 fps. And the pressure at 150F decreased by 2202 psi.
The Precision ambient velocity from the same 18-inch test barrel at ambient conditions was recorded at 2518 fps. When we shot this same load at 150F, the velocity increased to 2521 fps. The velocity change between ambient and 150F was 3 fps. Pressure at 150F decreased by 562 psi.
Precision’s temperature insensitivity beat that of VARGET, both in pressure and in velocity. Likewise, the velocity standard deviation of Precision at 150F outperformed that of VARGET in our tests.
To challenge both propellants in foreign environments, we further witnessed these same standard deviation results in .30-30 Winchester. Precision had better ignition characteristics than VARGET. And those differences were especially noted when ignition was challenged. What does this matter? Accuracy! The Grand Poobah of all importance.
Now, if you’ve ever read anything by me over the years, you know I’ve made the boisterous claim that weighing your powder to the 0.10 of a grain (let alone a single kernel) is tantamount to trying to teach a pig to sing. Folks, I’m here to tell you that all this craze of “weighing your propellant” to perfection is a waste of time. There are FAR more variables more important than the weight of your propellant in your case. IMHO, powder weight consistency is NOT a key to accuracy. Is it a contributor? Sure. But as long as you’re within +/- 0.2 grains of your intended charge weight, you’re doing pretty well.
Sure, if you’re off by a half a grain, you’ll see a minor effect in accuracy at 100 yards. And you might witness a half MOA shift at 200 yards in some cartridges. But unless you’re actually weighing each and every projectile, and documenting each and every case neck hardness, and measuring and documenting the internal volume of every case, I can tell you that 0.10 of a grain of consistency in powder weight just ain’t gonna matter even a little bit.
So, before I receive flaming hate mail and am declared a heretic in this sport and industry, here’s my statement:
If you’re an accuracy nut who enjoys (REALLY enjoys) shooting PRS matches or NRA High Power Rifle, or even just poking it out to 1,000 yards for fun, your time will be far better spent studying the art and science of MARKSMANSHIP than it will in trickling grains of powder. No, really…
To that end, I took the liberty to DUMP charges of Precision and VARGET in .308 Winchester, 175-gr Sierra Match King loads. I threw caution to the wind, and had at it. Oh — about 42.5 grains of powder, dumped through a Lyman 55 and into some plain-old Norma cases. Federal 210M primers. Fired at 250 yards. Results?
0.6 MOA for Precision. And 0.49 MOA for VARGET. Could have been better, sure. But how much better do YOU need it to be? Both powders appeared to dump fairly well. And shoot fairly well without even trickling. As a matter of fact, both of those non-weighed groups were some of the best groups I shot. But you just go ahead and keep on trickling those charges! LOL. Just know that some folks are practicing marksmanship, while you trickle your time away….
Okay, what about accuracy between Precision and VARGET? After all, we’re claiming great accuracy with Precision, right?
We completed 6 each, 5-round group tests at 250 yards. This, with a .308 Winchester and 175-gr Sierra Match King bullets. All loads were tested at 42.5 grains of both Precision and VARGET. According to calculations, this charge weight should yield identical velocity with both propellants. Those results:
Once we finished that .308 Winchester test, we decided to continue into the 6.5 Creedmoor. It seems that caliber is everybody’s latest darling. And it seems that everybody claims H4350 as the perfect propellant. Our brief test showed that there’s room for other propellants in that particular cartridge! We’re happy to assist…
Precision’s accuracy out-performed VARGET, and H4350, in the 6.5 Creedmoor.
Now, for the next question posed in the blog: Data. When we founded this company, and when we decided to start selling in the reloading market, we knew we had our work cut out for us. I told the partnership that Americans are insatiable for data. And that we’d have to focus for years and years on feeding that need.
Well, here we are. The new kids on the block. And just as sure as the sun rises, we’re being inundated with requests for more calibers, more projectiles, more propellants. The matrix of possible combinations is bewildering. But, we chose the path, so we’re working furiously to meet the demand!
Many folks don’t know that we actually support two data sets for reloading. Both are accessible directly from our home page (www.shootersworldsc.com). The first data set is SAAMI-type reload data. The second set is derived from tests conducted by Explosia under the Lovex brand. That data set is tested to European CIP standards. While there can come ballistic differences due to bullet hardness, cartridge overall length, and bullet form, both data sets are complimentary. And both support reloaders across a myriad of cartridges and propellants.
I do hope that my efforts described in this blog article have helped folks better understand the nature and capabilities of Precision. It’s quite a good powder.
Should you have further questions, or suggestions, our most important job is to listen. We’re always happy to help, and always interested to hear from folks!
This is an age-old debate among precision reloaders, and here’s to hoping you can find your own answer. Here’s a few ideas on how…
Since we (well, I), have been on the topic of velocity consistencies, clearly, this next here factors mightily among points in this general topic. I would also very much appreciate feedback on your own experiences. This, therefore, isn’t so much me trying to convince anyone of anything, but rather an effort to give some credibility to “both sides” of this question. The question, as suggested by the article title: Are meter-dispensed propellant charges equal in performance to singly-weighed charges?
Most are going to own a powder meter. Technical tickiness (that’s actually important): such a device is a meter, not a “measure.” Meters don’t measure. It’s most accurately called a “dispenser.” That’s what it really does. The “measure” is comparing a meter drum volume to a weight on a scale. It’s a volume, not a weight. The volume corresponds to a weight that was arrived at through adjusting the meter volume.
And this kind of keeps going in circles: is it a weight or a volume, then, that matters? A good many chemistry-inclined folks have told me over a good many years that any and all chemical measures are always weight, never volume.
Now then there’s a question about adjusting volume for that weight. I don’t know if you’ve ever experimented with this, but I’ve weighed the “same” powder charge at different times and had different weights (storing it in a sealed film canister and weighing on different days). It’s not much, but it’s different. It pretty much has to be moisture content that’s changing the reading, and, most lab-standard dispensing recipes (such as used in pharmaceuticals) have a set of condition-standards that accompany compound weight. Compounding that, using some electronic scales, I’ve had to re-zero, more than once, in a loading session weighing out charges. I have an inherent suspicion of scales. Old-trusty beam scales with a magnetic damper can finish a little high or low due only to the magnetic device. There’s a certain amount of inertia the beam has to overcome. Tapping the beam a few times will show that, indeed, it can come to rest variously +/- 0.10 grains, or more.
I don’t have a definitive answer to this question!
I can safely say that “it depends,” and what it depends on is a long list. First, as suggested, is scale accuracy. I don’t know that it’s always all about money, but that, no doubt, is a leading contributor in product quality. As said, I become suspicious of any device that requires a re-set during one use-session. For myself, I have confidence in my meter, and that’s come from countless “quality checks” I’ve run over the past couple of decades. I’m not a mathematician, so perhaps those who are can tell me if my logic is flawed in making the next assumption, but I developed confidence in metering charges based on collectively weighing multiple charges. Like so: throw 10 into a scale pan, weigh it. Repeat, repeat, repeat, and make note of how much plus-minus there is in each try. Using the propellant I stick to for competition NRA High Power Rifle loads (Hodgdon 4895) I get never more than 0.2 grains variance for a 10-throw batch. I don’t know how many single throws might be more or less than that and maybe it’s pure luck that all unseen errors offset rather than compound, but I prefer, at least, to believe that means my meter throws pretty well.
That’s for me. A different propellant, different meter, different scale, might all mean a different way of thinking, a different method to follow. So, to be most clear: I am not saying not to weigh each charge, and I am not saying not to trust a meter. Let your chronograph and on-target results give you the best answer for your needs. This debate is probably as close to a religion as exists in reloading (well, along with full-length case sizing and neck-only case sizing). And most of the answer is plainly anticipated: if you’re throwing large-granule stick propellant (especially large amounts per charge), you might better ought to weigh them out, but if you’re throwing a small-grained stick propellant, a good meter might actually prove more accurate, given any questions about scale accuracy. Spherical propellant? Weighing that is truly a waste of time.
The point to this, beyond bringing up a topic for input-discussion, is to find some way to settle such questions for yourself. For me, and likely for you, the ultimate answer is founded in the confidence we can have in whichever is the primary dispensing apparatus: the scale or the meter.
[Ballistician and Olympic Shooter, Ken Johnson, shares his thoughts on this topic in his piece on Precision propellant.]