Powder measure...old school.

A

Al Nyhus

"It'll never work!"
Spent a couple of hours this morning with an old school powder measure. Thrown weights were verified by two digital scales and a known accurate balance beam.

Old school, baby.........:cool: ;)

bm1.jpg


bm2.jpg


bm3.jpg
 
Looks to me as if it's working about like any measure would...??

Love the pix Al!! You're a budding artiste :)

al
 
Al, I cut my reloading teeth on a Belding Mull. Other than calibrating the thrown charge,I found it to be very accurate albeit slow. The only mistake I made was giving it back to my brother-in-law.

Geary Koglin
 
Al,
Surely you jest. He threw a dozen charges +- .05 gr. Look at the note on the pad as to what the powder being measured was, and take a look at the aspect ration of the grains. This stuff is harder to throw than 133. (which is harder to throw than 322, Benchmark, and 8208)
 
I had a chance to pick up a B&M measure maybe 15 or 20 years ago and passed it up. Considering some of the other stuff I've coughed up bucks for it was a major stupid decision in a lifetime of less than stellar decision making.
 
After posting this, the light bulb came on (dimly) that many people may have never seen one of these before. So, here's how they work:

Powder is poured into the hopper:
bm1-1.jpg


The powder then fills the lower reservoir by gravity:
bm2-1.jpg


The drop tube has an adjustable slide that locks into place with the thumb screw. The threaded nut and thumb screw keeps the slide in place. The slide determines how much powder is in the drop tube:
bm3-1.jpg


The drop tube is then offered up :eek: to the powder measure. Normally, I'd say you just "...stick it up there". But "offered up" sounds pretty classy...kinda' British. ;) Actually, I rebuilt some SU carbs for an MG in the past and the manual said that you "..offered up" the float bowls to the main body of the carb. And I've been waiting all these years to use that term.... :D
bm4.jpg


The handle is pushed back and the lower reservoir slides to the right...which uncovers the hole over the drop tube.
bm5.jpg


The drop tube is removed:
bm6.jpg


The power is dumped into the case:
bm7.jpg
 
There is no doubt in my mind that the Belding & Mull is the best volumetric measure ever made. They are just too hard on battries to use in a 2 day shoot!!
 
And to think I threw out my BM a few months ago. But then again, I usually throw them out. You can kick me again tonight over chicken and Chardonay if you like.:D

BTW it's a good chardonay that I'm "offering up" so please don't "stick it".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Boyd..... no, I don't jest.

I'm just a mathematical idiot. I somehow read that as plus/minus a tenth of a grain when in reality it's a total spread of about a tenth and a half, with a very long grained powder.

That is pretty impressive.

al
 
Talked my son into a Belding & Mull. He now look's on his high dollar custom's as a novelty. Next thing, someone is going to rediscover the old Seaco rotory.
 
Boyd Allen said:
Good Evening Al,
Highest 34.05
Lowest 33.95
ES .1
Variance +- .05
Did I do it right?
Click to expand...

Well, yes and no........ ;)

I 'strapolated a liddle further.

Two items that leapt to the fore of my math-challenged but problem-solving odds-figgering brain;
-#1, I made the (possibly illogical) leap based on the size of the scale and the readings presented that the 100ths place on this scale is just for show, that it rounds to the nearest 1/2 tenth kinda' like the ".0005 indicators" that I so detest. In other words the 33.95 COULD actually be a 33.93 and the 34.05 COULD be a 34.07 for a possible ES of .14 or even .15
-#2, I made the FURTHERmore leap that based NOT on probability as presented but on real-world experience, This ES would grow by a factor of 50% over time and a larger sampling.

None of this changes the fact that this small sample does indicate superior accuracy, that while any measure I've tested would produce somewhere around .3gr total variance, this unit may well cut that nearly in half.

At least on a given day and with a full hopper.

al
 
Looks like the one I sold to Shooters corner some years ago, even had the glass cracked like yours does. Bought mine new in the 60's and if I remember right, the price on the box was $16.95. Personnaly, In some ways it was ahead of it's time, in other ways it was a pain. Try throwing some 3031 and you'll see what I mean. Other thing is, removing the tube and transfer it to your funnel. Never cared for that either..
 
First one I have ever seen.

Looks like it works kind of like a Lee scoop (although adjustable) the handle just wipes the powder off the top instead of your finger. :eek:

Gary
 
glbreil said:
First one I have ever seen.

Looks like it works kind of like a Lee scoop (although adjustable) the handle just wipes the powder off the top instead of your finger. :eek:

Gary
Click to expand...
Not exactly. If you could see the functioning of this measure, it has a "pre-drop" chamber that keeps an even load against the measuring chamber, A regular measure, Jones, Culver, Redding, RCBS, etc have a variable load against the drop chamber as the powder in the hopper goes from full to empty. Some folks try to compensate for this problem in the more modern measures by installing a baffle.
 
Al,
I would agree with both of your points. Typically, powder scales that have two decimal places in their readouts only specify accuracy to .02 grain, not .01, and it has been my experience that larger samples have greater extreme spreads. I was just working with the numbers as they were shown.
Boyd
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top