Original Homer Culver Powder Measure

I

idaho bruce

Guest
I have an original Homer Culver powder measure (orange in color, not black) that my brother gave me. I would like to sell it but do not know what they are worth/what to ask. (He originally gave me two of these powder measures. One will be mounted on a perpetual trophy that will be awarded in his name the other I am willing to sell) Any help would be appreciated.
thanks Bruce
 
original Homer Culver Powder Measure

I guess you might say what ever you can get for it, More then likely it's a Lyman 55 converted by Homer.
New Harrels are going for about 200 and up. I would say on my best guess about $125 to $150 to the right person
 
Not sure....

I have an original Homer Culver powder measure (orange in color, not black) that my brother gave me. I would like to sell it but do not know what they are worth/what to ask. (He originally gave me two of these powder measures. One will be mounted on a perpetual trophy that will be awarded in his name the other I am willing to sell) Any help would be appreciated.
thanks Bruce

Not sure you would get it, but because of the historical value of the Lyman/Culver original measure, I wouldn't take less than $400 for it. I know that's a lot for a powder measure, but that measure combo set a new standard for powder measures. A lot of modern powder measures are copies of the same design of that measure. And, I bet it's just as accurate as most measures on the market today.
 
Bruce - my dad helped Homer machine and assemble the last couple hundred he did (1980's - early 1990's). I'm pretty sure he worked on the one Denny got. Like Virg, I wouldn't let any of mine go cheap. Yes, a Harrells or Jones are just as good, but the old Culvers hold sentimental value for some of us. That said, they're tough to price. But I wouldn't price it less than $250.

-Lee
www.singleactions.com
 
I bought consecutively seriall numbered, both were fitted on the Lyman 55 by Homer. I would not sell mine. Still using the first one, I gave the second one to Bill Wylde, the same person who came up with the Wylde chamber. He fitted his in non magnetic SS body that he machined himself. He won a couple of Canadian F Class Championship dropping powder out of his Culver measure.

In 97 last minute I decided to shoot in the State 1000 Yard Championship with my 223, did not have time to load at home, so grabbed my old range loading ammo can and loaded the ammo in the hotel. My trusty Culver meaure did not fail me. The 223 with Culver dropped powder charge shooting against magnums and Palma guns took home a piece of wood that says - Winner 1000 Yards Iron Sight.

The measure, through my years of experience with it since the 80s, will drop charges that I am confident with.
 
I would like to thank all for there response to my inquiry on the powder measure. Denny always spoke fondly of Homer. I decided to go ahead and list the powder measure for $200.00, awaiting administrative approval for the add. Thanks again.
Bruce
 
I knew Homer and my first 2 measures were Culver's and I always said that when the day comes that I outshoot the powder measure, that is the day I quit.
 
well in truth, unless you are a very poor shooter, it is more
likely that thrown powder is holding you back.
all depends on the powder of choice.

I knew Homer and my first 2 measures were Culver's and I always said that when the day comes that I outshoot the powder measure, that is the day I quit.
 
well in truth, unless you are a very poor shooter, it is more
likely that thrown powder is holding you back.
all depends on the powder of choice.

I believe Bill could give you a lot of shooting lessons. His equipment is not holding him back!
 
The whole issue of thrown vs. weighed charges for short range benchrest is, I believe, the result of VV133 coming into common use in the sport. Other powders do not present the problems that it does as far as being thrown to +- .1 grain. You can take that as a hard data point based on a lot of testing. My point is that making disparaging remarks about those that continue to throw without knowing what powder they are using, or what their particular results have been if they are using 133 seems to be more than a bit condescending. I see no harm in using weighed charges of any powder, neither do I see any problems using thrown, if accuracy of charge requirements are met that way. The old T powder and the other batches of surplus 8208 were very fine grained, and because of that, much easier to throw to tight tolerances than 133. The same can be said of recent 2015, LT32, and LT30. With a little practice and a good technique, staying inside of +-.1 gr. is relatively easy. The one point that throwing naysayers may have is that shooters may not have verified the consistency of their throws, and that doing so could be advantageous, particularly if they are not getting the results that they assumed that they were. Recently I read that someone had discovered that his results throwing ball powder were not what he expected. My initial reaction was extreme skepticism, but rather than shooting from the hip, I did a test, and found that indeed when using the worst of my measures with rather casual choice of technique, the results were consistent with what he had written. Then, I changed to one of my best measures, and did a little experimenting with technique, and was able to get the results that I had expected, extremely close throw weights. The other thing that I pay attention to is the results that others are getting. If one has been aware of NBRSA records for some time, the name of Gary Ocock will be familiar. Typically, Gary does not use 133 (although he has, somewhat infrequently) preferring other powders that are finer grained. All of his loads are done with thrown charges.
 
Back
Top