Weight or Volume

[Ranch 13]

  David you ever find one of them scales that reads out in volumes? I can't find any around here....

[Mako]

David you ever find one of them scales that reads out in volumes? I can't find any around here....

There are several, one of the best is a Belding and Mull "Visible Powder Measure.  I know several who have them.  One person you should be familiar with who uses one is w44wcf.

They look like this:


~Mako

[Mako]

Hey Ranch13,

Please don't take offense to my reply, but I do have a dog in this fight and I have a hard time walking away from it...  I'd like to address your post.  Seriously, no offense  

Looks to me like there's a handful of folks that have confused the replacement crap with the real black.
 Even in the 1870's sharps, remington and winchester catalogs, they cautioned what a 1 gr difference in powder charge could make. Sharps recommended apothacary scales, and a table to convert apothacaries to grains.

Then you can get into the Ideal reloading instructions and how the powder measures were graduated to throw "x" amount of grains of black powder.

I hope you don’t think I am confused.  I was just using the Bulk powders that were available at the beginning of the 20th century to support my claim that Black Powder was traditionally reloaded and even from the factories loaded by volume.  They made bulk powders because that’s how people measured black powder.  If they used weight they wouldn’t have needed the analog volumetric powders, they would have simply said load "XXX" grains of King's Semi-Smokeless, or Win. Lesmok, etc.  These powders COULD NOT be loaded by the same weight the BP they were replacing had been.  They were to be loaded by the same volume.  I'll ask the same question I asked John Boy but in a slightly different way.  If BP was loaded by weight, then why didn't they make a replacement powder that weighed the same for a given charge instead of having the same bulk?  

They went to considerable trouble to make a powder that performed in a similar fashion, with similar pressures, etc.  that literally had to be loaded by volume.  Why would they do that if it was simply a matter of weight?  It is much easier to develop a powder and add fillers to change the weight than to start with a fixed volume and then develop the pressures necessary.  The first option is done today with lot powders.

Now I will admit w44wcf has been doing some research that is supporting weight as the basis for many factory loads.  I respect his methodology and he may yet convince me that the factories loaded by weight (that is they set their measures by weight). And he has some evidence that not all factory BP loads were full to the top, there may have been some with space in the cases.  That is a very different question and begs he question " why has it been handed down to us by our fathers that BP must be loaded with no space between powder and projectile?"  But, that is a subject for another day.

Black powder charges have always been expressed in grains weight. The substitute crap has always been designated to be thrown in the same volume as a blackpowder measure set for "x" amount of grains weight.

If that is true, I can find no evidence of it. You have mentioned some catalogs, is there any way we can get copies of those?  Seriously I would love to have that knd of information.

44wcf is correct that bp can be measured either way, but 9 times out of ten if you have a quality bp measure the grains weight setting will be very close for the intended size of bp.

Well then let’s use w44wcfs own measurements to determine if that is true.  On October 31, 2005 he posted that he used a very nice Belding & Mull volume measure to dispense 40.0 grains by volume and then weighed different powders of the 2Fg type.  This was the result:



So let’s say you were shooting some .45-70 loads, we’ll use 70 grains to make it nice and round.  This would be the results that you said would “9 times out of 10” be the same.



I don’t know, but 11.11 grains difference between KIK 2Fg and Swiss 2Fg (both of which make great BPCRS powders) seems a bit extreme to me.  That is a 17% difference in volume…Call me crazy, but that seems like lot.

Now before everybody starts spouting off about how swiss is heavier,,,, might want to compare powder sizes, 2f Swiss is more the kernel size of Goex 3f, and there in lies the dirty little secret some are oblivious too....

Now Ranch 13… I’m surprised you said that since you have been a pupil, studying at the feet of Dutch Bill and John Boy.  No. 3 Swiss (FFg) has been measured by those two and I know you have read the results because you have been a party to the conversations.  This is what Bill and John Boy have related as far as grain sizes of Swiss and Goex FFg.

Swiss No. 3 FFg (grain %  retained by the named meshes):
20 Mesh  (opening size 0.0331”)  - 76.16% Retained
30 Mesh  (opening size 0.0234”)  - 23.50% Retained
Passing Through                            - 0.34%

Goex  FFg (grain %  retained by the named meshes):
20 Mesh  (opening size 0.0331”)  - 79.2% Retained
30 Mesh  (opening size 0.0234”)  - 20.8% Retained

Surprisingly similar… And surprisingly no fines reported by Dutch Bill.

Dutch bill also reported on Goex FFFg which you said Swiss No.3 (FFg) resembles in grain size.

Goex FFFg (grain %  retained by the named meshes):
20 Mesh  (opening size 0.0331”)    - (Trace) Retained
30 Mesh  (opening size 0.0234”)    - 70.8% Retained
40 Mesh  (opening size 0.0165”)    - 26.2% Retained
Passing Through                          - 3.0%

According to Bill a common 3Fg powder like Goex  is a much finer powder by the measured grain sizes than Swiss 2Fg.  Maybe Bill’s wrong… hmmmmmmmmmm...

There is a unit of volume called a grain, it's not just a unit of mass.  And, the volume standard is determined exactly the same way a grain of weight is determined.  It is a volume of water.  That volume of water weighs exactly one grain.  One ounce of water by volume weighs exactly one ounce of weight as well.  If you take 7,000 grains of water by weight they just so happen to be one pint, which just happens to weigh 16 ounces.  There is actually no "just so happens" involved, it is by intent.

Regards,
Mako

[Advertising]

[Mako]

... The term of load by volume was not present in the shooting sports until the advent of the sub or fake black powders!!

Fairshake,

A friendly answer now...

Then explain the Bulk and Semi-Smokeless replacement powders of the early 20th century.  Read my reply to Ranch 13 above.

Now if you are referring to those powders as being the "fake" black powders then it still doesn't explain why they were designed to be bulk equivalent.  And as always there is that nagging question as to why our Great Grandfathers, Grandfathers and Fathers taught us that BP was to be loaded by volume and that we needed to have a full case to be safe, or in the case of a long rifle or C&B revolver we were to leave no space.  Is that something that was started by some writer like an Elmer Keith (I'm not indicting him, I said similar to)?  It is pretty universal in the spread of it, ask almost any Wholly Black user and they will reel that off as one of the requirements.

You may be right, but the jury is out, I think the majority believe it is volume driven. That definitely doesn't make it right.  The majority of people don't even know how the volume unit of a grain came about.  They will look at a Lee Dipper chart and confuse themselves even further because it is a weight to volume conversion chart for smokeless as well as the BP listings.  I have found Europeans tend to be less "confused" because they speak in terms of CCs when talking about charges, there is no mistaking what the metric is for that measurement.  

Most of us started with smokeless and had the mantra, "weight of charge, weight of charge, weight of charge..." drilled into us.  I am afraid we think in 20th and 21st century terms and try to apply  what our Great Grandfathers did to what we know now.

Don't get me wrong  think there is definitely a place for weight measured charges of BP to be used for precision shooting or even very special types of load development.  BUT, and that is a big BUT if someone does that then Brand X to brand Y powders should be treated no differently than if you would talking about Smokeless Powder "Cosmos" and Smokeless Powder "International Pots".  They are different, they have different densities and pressure curves.   If you Treat Swiss FFg as a different animal than KIK FFg then you may use a scale to your hearts content...  (now empty space...well that is a different matter)

Regards,
Mako

[Ranch 13]

Mako, I grew up on a Belding and Mull, and the SCALE that went with it to WEIGH the POWDER CHARGE IN GRAINS>
 No offense, just thought you might be interested....

[Mako]

Mako, I grew up on a Belding and Mull, and the SCALE that went with it to WEIGH the POWDER CHARGE IN GRAINS>
 No offense, just thought you might be interested....

Now I'm confused...If you have a Belding & Mull measure why were you asking David for a reference to a volumetric measure?  Don't you have the grain graduated Charge Tubes like these?  Besides the measure doesn't come with a scale (look at the picture of it in a box, no scale...), it comes with a conversion chart to allow you to use the incremented charge tubes to throw "equivalent" weights of smokeless propellant.  For BP you just set the increment to the volume grains and go to town.  No scale and you bought additional charge tubes if you wanted dedicated measures.  There are three types of charge tubes, Grain Incremented, "Micro Adjustable" and the tube and slider bodies meant to be fixed.  Some had locking collars others were sold to be glued or soldered as they recommended.

 

In the group picture, the tube on the left is specifically incremented for volumetric grains.  Several of the other six have been set to specific grain increments and then the sliding inner tube has been soldered in place.  The adjustable charge tubes are very accurate.  I have three tubes set by weighing the measured volumes of water in grains and that was the exact volume in grains and then soldered.

Get your instruction sheets out and read up on the charge tubes.  You should also have the conversion table that will allow you to use the adjustable charge tube for measuring smokeless propellants with the tube graduated in volumetric grains.  Some people used these measures without ever owning a scale hence the conversion table, which is similar to the Lee Dipper Chart.  The big difference is the throw accuracy, the B&M is very repeatable.

You have to have charge tubes or you can't use it, do you only have fixed tubes, or one of those "micrometer" style adjusters like the first picture?  If you do then start looking for an adjustable "increment" tube.  There have been some copies made and those tubes work with the B&M.

~Mako

[Ranch 13]

Point is son, the measure tubes are adjusted to a specific grain weight..... And if the weight according to the scale isn't right, you either added powder or took some out.
 Yes you can set a volumetric measure to put out a predetermined grains weight charge, and if you're really careful and consistant those charge weights will be fairly close... But they are still expressed in grains weight....
 Now go find us a source other than an internet forum that says blackpowder charges are expressed in anything other than grains.
 
AND then tell us where to find the table to convert volumes to grains.

[Mako]

Point is son, the measure tubes are adjusted to a specific grain weight..... And if the weight isn't right, you either added powder or took some out.
 Now go find us a source other than an internet forum that says blackpowder charges are expressed in anything other than grains.
 
AND then tell us where to find the table to convert volumes to grains.

No offense Ranch but I'm not your son, I'm past retirement age. 

The Measures were sold as INCREMENTED measures, that's one of the reasons they were so unique,  you can also see the charge through the sight glass before dropping and another is that the sight chamber is decoupled from the hopper so the volume of powder in the hopper has no effect on the accuracy.

They were designed so they could be used WITHOUT a scale, they even provided a conversion table to allow you to throw weight equivalent charges of smokeless powder.  Most people not measuring BP used a scale and used them for their accuracy.  But if you needed a volumetric measure it was the mechanical measure of choice.

I'm getting the impression you don't have a B&M anymore, or that you don't have the instructions and conversion charts.  If you had a incremental charge tube you would know what I was talking about.

  Mako

[Ranch 13]

 Mako, son... you are right in that I don't have the Belding and Mull, I was long gone from the house when Dad passed away, and had my own loading set up, so my little brother kept it, and mores the power to him, I'm not all that fond of it, and much happier with the various measures I have now. Bytheby, you ought to see how uniform the velocities are with loads charged from the Lyman dps 1200, and there's lots of glowing reports from the rcbs chargemasters.
 Now just to further your education just a bit , in the 1970's and early 80's I did a lot of blackpowder competition shooting, Yes I'm quite familiar with graduated and labeled slides on powder tubes.
 But no matter how you slice it dice it or try to bully other folks into your point of thinking, blackpowder charges are always expressed in grains or drams weight. (by the way sometime if you get around someone with experience and different equipment, you might be shocked to find out that the 1 dram setting on a shotshell measure/dipper will throw 75 grs of USA labeled 2f when checked on a scale, but you need experience to actually see that sort of thing). Also from the Ted Cash powder measures to the cheap taiwan junk sold thru KMart etc, rifle measures will throw well within reasonably close weight of the settings on the scale when using USA made 2f. Also just for kicks, you might be interested to know that KIK 2f will throw the same weight as goex 2f express without changing the setting.
 You're next assignment is the same as the one Johnboy put out. Find and bring back a credible source to show that blackpowder charges are expressed in anything other than grains or drams, and don't be bringin some link from the internet somewhere where the poster has a higher post count than actual experiencd.
 Have a good day..

[Mako]

... But no matter how you slice it dice it or try to bully other folks into your point of thinking,

Mako, son...

I haven't tried to belittle you Ranch.  I think I'm done here.

[Lucky R. K.]

 You're next assignment is the same as the one Johnboy put out. Find and bring back a credible source to show that blackpowder charges are expressed in anything other than grains or drams, and don't be bringin some link from the internet somewhere where the poster has a higher post count than actual experiencd.

Looks like you failed on that one Mako but you do make nice pictures.

Lucky 

[Mako]

Looks like you failed on that one Mako but you do make nice pictures.

Lucky 

Lucky,
Anyone who wishes to look at an old textbook concerning the customary measurement units will find that all Apothecary and Imperial units of volume were determined by units of mass.  There had to be some universal standard.  The original "grain" was actually a grain of wheat it was redefined as 1/7000 of a pound.  Then how do you determine volume you used water.  All measures of volume had a corollary unit of mass.  A grain of water was used as the smallest unit  in the Imperial system, but the Apothecary system was used more often because not many had  a use for such a small unit of volume.

Maybe I'll scan some pages from reference books for you, but in the meantime I wanted to show you that the unit was used prior to the 19th century so this is all I have in my e-book files.





Unfortunately the Imperial chart established in 1824 that is mentioned is not shown.  I have it in textbook somewhere, I'll dig it up when I go into the office.  The pharmacists didn't use the volumes or even the Common Units system we use now.  And some Imperial Units have to be converted as well others remain in place today.  I was looking for a quick reference that would place itself before the advent of cartridges to show the volume measurements were as well as weights were set with the universal constant being water.  You can't use Black Powder as a constant, every batch and every manufacturer had a different mass density.

This is expressed in the engineering world and in the ammunition industry as the "VMD" or the (Volume Measure Density).  It is what all manufacturers use when setting their metering equipment.  For instance when a contract manufacturer is producing ammunition for the military we get what is called "Lot Powder" instead of "Canister Powder" that is sold commercially.  The best analogy I have heard likened it to Scotch Whisky, then Canister Powders are like blended whisky where they make it have the same pressure rates and curves for uniformity because reloaders are instructed to reload by weight.  It can't vary from year to year.  They actually will blend propellants or manage the properties during production by pulling samples and testing it in the pressure bombs.

When a Lot Grade is produced it is more like a single malt whisky, it has unique properties.  The propellant manufacturer tests it based on the required limits of the pressure profiles required and then creates a unique chart for that batch which is attached with the shipment and can now be downloaded from their database.  When the lot arrives we retest the propellant using the proposed loading values per the Lot Performance Data at the volumes used for the particular cartridge to be loaded.  When it has to be changed beyond the control limits sent with that LPD then assembled test rounds have to be sent to two plants that are designated as testing sites for approval.  We used to be able to send them to Lake City and McAlester, now I believe that McAlester has been removed from the list for anything except filled munitions,  so then it will be ATK and another site with government QA/QC personnel at the facility.

What I am getting at is that propellants vary and have to have means of standardization even today from the same manufacturers but different lots or plants.  With Black Powder there is significant variation in weight from manufacturer to manufacturer, why would we expect it to have been any different in the 19th century?  The different companies that loaded for instance .44-40 ammunition would bump up against the volume constraints if they relied on weight because the case was designed to be crammed as full as possible to wring out the maximum performance they could get with BP.  They set their metering equipment (which is always by volume) and just ran.  We do the very same thing today, how may of you use charge bushings on your shotshell presses and never even think about rechecking your loads after maybe the first time you load them?  Shotshells are volume dependent as well they require balance wad, shot volume, powder volume to get the correct crimps and chamber pressures.

Well, I tried...

Not going to be a bully anymore...

Regards,
Mako

[Noz]

Boy, this one just won't go away!


I suffered with this for a long time until I realized:

A long time ago someone put enough black powder on a scale and it weighed 1 grain.

He then put that weighed grain of powder into a brass tube and marked the tube at the top of the grain of powder.

This volumetric measurement of a weighed grain of powder became the standard for all black powder measurements.

Does one grain (V) of FFg Diamondback weight the same as one grain (V) of Goes/Swiss/Elephant/etc?

Probably not. 

Does it make any difference?  Only to those that consider themselves to be precision shooters.
They use only the highest quality of powder, socked, and weigh each charge.  This precision only comes into play in bullseye and long range competitions. 

The every day, run of the mill use of black powder in hunting, plinking and cowboy is quite well served by volumetric measurment.

[Lefty Dude]

Kinda like, "Which came first the Chicken or the Egg".

This thread can go on for ever,and ever.

[Ranch 13]

Noz I'm betting darn few if any of the top shooters in the target world sock their powder.
As stated before even way back in the 1800's the major companies stressed the importance of carefully measured and weighed charges when loading cartridges.
 Paul Matthews has an interesting perspective on the importance of weighed charges in cartride guns vs the volume dropped charges in a muzzleloader, in a chapter on reloading the 45-70 in the Lyman 48th manual, and I believe he's correct.
 For the barn burning accuracy necessary to hit a pickup door sized target at the powder burn close ranges involved in CAS shooting a person probably could get by very well with reloading cartridges by scooping the primed case thru a cup full of powder and then shaking off the excess and seating a bullet. That method does work, but it won't do well to wonder why the near or complete miss, even tho the sight picture was good....

 PS, forgot to add that yes Goex, KIK and Elephant 2f powder will all 3 weigh within reason of the setting of a blackpowder measure. Swiss and Schuetzen will weigh heavier due to the smaller kernel sizes thus more powder in the case, altho those powders in 2f are pretty close to Goex 3f in size and therefore will weigh very close to what a "volumetric" measure set to throw a charge of goex 3f.

[Cuts Crooked]

OK, by now either one "gets" it or one doesn't.

I'm not taking sides here I just think this has gone on long enough and has gotten a little close to feuding. I'm locking it. It has good info in it but it needs go no further.

Thanx to everyone for their input to this point.