adamsgt
Jerry Adams
Thanks Michael, I did have my head up and locked on that one. I'll remember that on the next cruise. Hopefully that will be a cruise around the Hawaiian islands next year.
Labradar
- Thread starter R Stiner
- Start date
Thanks Michael, I did have my head up and locked on that one. I'll remember that on the next cruise. Hopefully that will be a cruise around the Hawaiian islands next year.
adamsgt
Jerry Adams
Hmmm. I measured some LT-30 tonight and came up with .00067 per kernel. As my scale resolves to .02 Gn, my sample size (30 kernels) may have been too small. I'll try it again tomorrow with at least 100 kernels and see what that shows. I had laser surgery in my left eye today and it's getting tired.
Went to your previous post about using a difference of .5 gn to get velocity differences and extrapolate to fps per kernel. If my figure of .00067 gn per kernel is correct that means there are 750 kernels in .5 gn of LT-30. I sure hope I'm wrong because that would be a lot of tedious counting.
Well, my rememberer misplaced a decimal point. So my LT-30 is .0067 gn per kernel. That means there are 75 kernels in .5 grains of powder. So, I'm still far from you number of .01 Gn per kernel for LT-30. At this point I guess I'll have to be satisfied if I'm within +-.02 gn of my desired weight.
Last edited:
bill larson
Member
Kernel weights
This is the exact point I was trying to bring out in earlier posts.........when people proclaim they have "data that shows exact velocity/kernel" ...... I question that statement.....
are particular kernel sizes all exact diameter and length.....???
at what humidity level was powder at....????
with other factors included such as lot numbers of powder, ambient temps.... to name a few...... I feel the velocity/kernel data quite a variable number..........
bill larson
This is the exact point I was trying to bring out in earlier posts.........when people proclaim they have "data that shows exact velocity/kernel" ...... I question that statement.....
are particular kernel sizes all exact diameter and length.....???
at what humidity level was powder at....????
with other factors included such as lot numbers of powder, ambient temps.... to name a few...... I feel the velocity/kernel data quite a variable number..........
bill larson
adamsgt
Jerry Adams
Michael, I had just parted out 30 kernels of LT-30 and put them on my scale, A&D FX 120i, and it showed .2 gn. Now as the scale is only .02 resolution that means that those 30 kernels could have been .018 or .22. So a larger number of kernels would give a better number. I'll do that today just for grins. The weather has turned cool here and I won't have to worry about the temp.
Was discussing this subject yesterday at my Friday lunch meeting with local shooters and someone pointed out something interesting. Does this concept assume that all kernels of powder have been consumed and contributed their energy before the bullet leaves the barrel? If that's not true, then all this is for naught. Also, is there anyway to verify that? I can't remember if Quickload provides that data. Something else to do this weekend. I know I've had unburnt powder even from .22 LR. I even see a few flakes of Bullseye when I'm shooting my .45 ACP.
And THIS is why humans have politics......
Uhh, no, it's not....."exact" means something. This is another variant of your decidedly IN-exact questions/assertions/assumptions
Uhh, NO, "people" didn't and don't "proclaim" to know "exact velocity/kernel"......because that would be silly.
And this is why we'll probably not soon share viewpoints. IMO Your world of absolutes simply does not exist...You say "Black" and I say "WHAT?"
I grew up with fundamentalists constantly defining and redefining "truth(s)" in their unending search for "enlightenment" and "certain knowledge"
I used squirrels before, didn't work, so I'll try fish.......on a given day of fishing I'll generally catch fish. They'll vary in size and number, sometimes they'll wiggle some, and always they'll defy perfect characterization. There is no "data" on these fish, no absolutes, but if I'm asked to supply 50lb of fish for the church social I CAN DO THAT!
Because I know how to.
See here's the thing.....
To RE-state an earlier post of mine from this thread, ALL THIS SPECULATION GOES AWAY WHEN YOU ACTUALLY GET LOW ES!
I went to gunsmithing school, I remodified RemSavWins to make them "accurate" back in the day and I shot MOUNTAINS of targets. Which targets I kept and collected and collated and conjugated endlessly in an attempt to define "accuracy" using means and averages and creative financing to adjudicated group sizes and placements...
And then I bought a BR rifle that shot liddle round dots AND ALL THIS SPECULATION AND NUMBER CRUNCHING WENT AWAY!!!
It's a whole new world, a whole new view.
I haven't saved a target in YEARS....I'll sometimes shoot a pic thru the scope and I'll ALWAYS note in my daily log, maybe even diagram some groups I'm wondering about but it's a whole new ballgame. Round holes is round holes....and anything else ain't....ANYTHING ELSE, ain't.
Lately I've done something I NEVER DO. I've thrown stuff away. I've needed another notebook or folder and I've pulled down old "data folders" and with a wry grin thrown the contents in the garbage because it wasn't "data" it was just piles of bad groups covered with scrawled attempts at misguided quantification...Ohh I don't regret one second of this "data collection" as it was all very important to me at one time and very important to my learning. But it's no longer of any USE to me.
NO, not all loads burn all the powder. But neither do these loads show single digit velocity spreads.
When one DOES, I'll have to hare off exploring the compensatory mechanism responsible!
lol
al
C
CMaier
Guest
yes quckload shows % burned total.
not sure on the time to bullet left the bbl.
but it is small round groups with small es's for a goal.
and as some have discovered a precise scale works wonders
in achieving that goal.
lost of little things matter.
not sure on the time to bullet left the bbl.
but it is small round groups with small es's for a goal.
and as some have discovered a precise scale works wonders
in achieving that goal.
lost of little things matter.
See here's the thing.....
NO, not all loads burn all the powder. But neither do these loads show single digit velocity spreads.
When one DOES, I'll have to hare off exploring the compensatory mechanism responsible!
lol
al
I almost detect a slight inkling on your part that powder characteristics may possibly be responsible for some of this shot to shot variation?
Ken
No.
Well, not really......I've managed low ES with a variety of powders, acros't the spectrum.
IMO a load that spews unburnt powder is simply a poor load. Something is WRONG with it regardless the powder type or the chambering/usage. And that a load this poorly balanced will not (cannot) possibly show low velocity variation.
adamsgt
Jerry Adams
Al, I've seen discussion on this site about using long drop tubes and other methods to cram as much powder as possible into a 6 PPC case. Would you say that those loads would probably spew unburnt powder? Even one kernel?
C
CMaier
Guest
you appear to be trying to construct a case to support
a case for un-burnt powder. that is not the discussion.
you have gone off on a tangent.
properly weighed powder in a proper load with proper development
will CONSISTENTLY produce small groups and small es's.
a case for un-burnt powder. that is not the discussion.
you have gone off on a tangent.
properly weighed powder in a proper load with proper development
will CONSISTENTLY produce small groups and small es's.
"Objection y'eronner, leading the witness. Bootless speculation y'eronner"
LOL
Just, NO!
I have loaded rounds that, if you pulled the bullet and tipped them into a fresh case would roll over the neck and spread a pool on the table. Kernels STACKED in like cordwood, like the dumpmonkey can BARELY crawl out he's so tired from stomping kernels.....
I've got short barreled 338 Lapua loads and 338-378 loads that don't spew...... not even "ONE KERNEL!"
A hunnerd grains and more, like 3 6PPC's all dumped together, and not even ONE KERNEL......
Well maybe ONE kernel.....
LOL
adamsgt
Jerry Adams
No, I became a headless vector, all speed and no direction. I agree with all you say. That said, I can't believe that one kernel of LT-30 difference between two rounds is going to produce any difference that would have any measurable affect on a target at 100 yds. But that's beating a dead horse, so I'm going to shut up about it.
So there.
C
CMaier
Guest
since you have pulled in a specific case..
it would depend on how big the tune window is, wouldn't it ?
if you were at the very top, and there was one extra grain,
did you just leave the tune window ?
yes in the middle maybe no issue.
it does not mean it cannot be noticed.
it would depend on how big the tune window is, wouldn't it ?
if you were at the very top, and there was one extra grain,
did you just leave the tune window ?
yes in the middle maybe no issue.
it does not mean it cannot be noticed.
Bill
I don't care to make a statement that would bother you, but you keep using the word exact, while I keep saying average weight per kernel, and average velocity per kernel. I explained in some detail in an earlier post how velocity per kernel is calculated. Now when I said that I don't know the average weight per kernel of LT30, I also said that I had guessed, not that I had weighed it. I can weigh it anytime I desire to do so, and my scales have a resolution of .002gr. That means that if I weigh a sample of let's say 100 kernels of LT30, and I weigh that sample to within a few thousandths of a grain. I will be able to tell you the average weight per kernel way closer than I could ever guess. Me saying that I don't know the actual weight per kernel of LT30 doesn't prove a point at all, unless the point you're trying to prove is that I haven't actually weighed it. You keep mentioning variables like humidity, kernel size variations, and all of these variations have been addressed. They are addressed by average weight per kernel, and average velocity change per kernel. Average simply means that the variables have been considered in the calculations. Here's an example, let's say the velocity per kernel at 30% humidity is 3 fps, and the velocity per kernel at 70% humidity is 2.8 fps. Then the average velocity per kernel of those two test is 2.9 fps. But the point I have made over and over is this. I don't care if it is 5 fps or 10 fps per kernel. I just know for a fact that the lowest ES is a result of weighing a powder charge as close as possible. Another example is how our groups are averaged to get an agg. you can't determine if you have made an accuracy improvement by shooting one group, but if I take my agg. from a .225" down to a .175" , then I know I have made an actual improvement. There is no need to keep splitting hairs. This is just simple elementary math, and it's proven. If you can see the velocity you get from 60gr of powder, then you can calculate the velocity per kernel. Again, just remember we are talking average. If we don't talk average, then I can't even tell you the velocity of anything at any time or place, because last time I checked the velocity of the 6PPC was 3200 fps on one day, then 3300 fps, then 3400 fps, then 3500 fps. Just remember the average velocity for the 6PPC falls between 3380 and 3450 fps. It's all just numbers that don't matter much. The target is more important than the chronograph.
I'm not trying to brag, but rather just state the facts. The company that my brother and I own is very high tech, and our company has been called on many times when other companies have failed. We have worked with aircraft companies, military contract companies like L3 Combat Propulsion Systems, and developed electronics and software for many companies.
Michael
I don't care to make a statement that would bother you, but you keep using the word exact, while I keep saying average weight per kernel, and average velocity per kernel. I explained in some detail in an earlier post how velocity per kernel is calculated. Now when I said that I don't know the average weight per kernel of LT30, I also said that I had guessed, not that I had weighed it. I can weigh it anytime I desire to do so, and my scales have a resolution of .002gr. That means that if I weigh a sample of let's say 100 kernels of LT30, and I weigh that sample to within a few thousandths of a grain. I will be able to tell you the average weight per kernel way closer than I could ever guess. Me saying that I don't know the actual weight per kernel of LT30 doesn't prove a point at all, unless the point you're trying to prove is that I haven't actually weighed it. You keep mentioning variables like humidity, kernel size variations, and all of these variations have been addressed. They are addressed by average weight per kernel, and average velocity change per kernel. Average simply means that the variables have been considered in the calculations. Here's an example, let's say the velocity per kernel at 30% humidity is 3 fps, and the velocity per kernel at 70% humidity is 2.8 fps. Then the average velocity per kernel of those two test is 2.9 fps. But the point I have made over and over is this. I don't care if it is 5 fps or 10 fps per kernel. I just know for a fact that the lowest ES is a result of weighing a powder charge as close as possible. Another example is how our groups are averaged to get an agg. you can't determine if you have made an accuracy improvement by shooting one group, but if I take my agg. from a .225" down to a .175" , then I know I have made an actual improvement. There is no need to keep splitting hairs. This is just simple elementary math, and it's proven. If you can see the velocity you get from 60gr of powder, then you can calculate the velocity per kernel. Again, just remember we are talking average. If we don't talk average, then I can't even tell you the velocity of anything at any time or place, because last time I checked the velocity of the 6PPC was 3200 fps on one day, then 3300 fps, then 3400 fps, then 3500 fps. Just remember the average velocity for the 6PPC falls between 3380 and 3450 fps. It's all just numbers that don't matter much. The target is more important than the chronograph.
I'm not trying to brag, but rather just state the facts. The company that my brother and I own is very high tech, and our company has been called on many times when other companies have failed. We have worked with aircraft companies, military contract companies like L3 Combat Propulsion Systems, and developed electronics and software for many companies.
Michael
Last edited:
Is "headless vector" proprietary? Is it your intellectual property or is it in the public domain? Cuz I've never heard it and I WANNA USE IT!!
I'll be waiting for my chance now......like a good punchline......it SO describes a large portion of my life.....
Ahh screw it, I'ma' use it...
"headless vector"
THERE, I feel much better now that it's mine
(wish't I'da' said it first.....)
I'll be waiting for my chance now......like a good punchline......it SO describes a large portion of my life.....
Ahh screw it, I'ma' use it...
"headless vector"
THERE, I feel much better now that it's mine
(wish't I'da' said it first.....)
bill larson
Member
Thank You Mike for kind reply...... and you do not bother me as you are stating facts...... I use the word exact as I too worked in the industry in R&D....... compiling facts and solving problems......
The statement I keep quoting is...
alinwa said in a previous post
"I can actually show you in real time how much velocity a SINGLE KERNEL of various powders is worth"........
bill
adamsgt
Jerry Adams
Yeah, I've been using that phrase for at least 40 years. And that's what this thread has become, all speed and no direction.
We are probably all in violent agreement that we need to make our loads as precise and consistent as we can within the limits of the equipment we have to do the job. Where we may disagree is which of the elements that contribute to the end result have the most effect on the end result. My fat fingering a trigger can most likely introduce more error than a difference of 10 kernels of powder.
adamsgt
Jerry Adams
I first heard that phrase millions of years ago when I was navigator in B-52"s. A similar joke from that time goes: "Nav this is Pilot, where are we?" And the Nav responds " I'm not really sure sir, but we're making great time".