Boyd, with these close numbers you would be saddled with the accuracy of the scale....lets assume + or - .1 gr so the loads could be off up to .2 gr, unless Al's scale has a higher extreme spread resolution? --Greg
Powder measure...old school.
- Thread starter Al Nyhus
- Start date
Boyd Allen
Active member
Greg,
With no data, I find it better not to guess. If the scale is not accurate, then the results are probably not. I do not know one way or the other. IMO, speculation is just that, and is better off as a "may be" until testing gives enough information to substantiate "is". Is there any basis for your assumption?
Boyd
With no data, I find it better not to guess. If the scale is not accurate, then the results are probably not. I do not know one way or the other. IMO, speculation is just that, and is better off as a "may be" until testing gives enough information to substantiate "is". Is there any basis for your assumption?
Boyd
J
jdjframes
Guest
Powder meaure - old school
Been using a B&M measure for about 30-35 years. I removed the return spring so I get a smoother operation by pushing & pulling the handle.
I use ball powders as much as possible. My weight doesn't vary by much, the last charge will weigh exactly the same as the first. But then I don't have a super accurate lab scale either.
It is important to keep a reasonable "head" of powder in the measure just like any other.
Some of the old ideas weren't all bad. This is one that was down right good!
Keep your powder dry.
Jim
Been using a B&M measure for about 30-35 years. I removed the return spring so I get a smoother operation by pushing & pulling the handle.
I use ball powders as much as possible. My weight doesn't vary by much, the last charge will weigh exactly the same as the first. But then I don't have a super accurate lab scale either.
It is important to keep a reasonable "head" of powder in the measure just like any other.
Some of the old ideas weren't all bad. This is one that was down right good!
Keep your powder dry.
Jim
Last edited by a moderator:
Boyd Allen
Active member
I have two SAECO Micro-Measures. Recently I loaned one to a friend who was having trouble getting his Culver Conversion style measure to deliver the consistency that he wanted, when charging a very small case with stick powder. As he was leaving, he asked me what he should do if he fell in love with my measure. I told him that he should plan on spending a lot of time looking on Ebay, because it is not for sale. A while back, I was lucky enough to find one, with stand that looked like it had never been used. BTW, when he tested my measure, it was able to comfortably meet his measuring accuracy goal.
I guess it could be looked at this way: 
-The target weight was 34.0 gr.
- 34.0 X 12 = 408.0 gr.
- Total wt. of all charges thrown = 408.5 gr
- Total variance by percentage of total = darn small.
I can't say how accurate my electronic scales are. Certainly they're no AccuLab-ish analytical stuff. And my old balance beam isn't a double throwdown setup that can weight the dot on the end of this sentence.
Frankly, I was pretty skeptical of the numbers that kept coming up, so did the a-b-a test against my favorite measure. I started my accuracy loading by working with a pals B&M measure and it seemed like the weights were always dead on when we checked it on his scale. I finally found one of these measures, gave a good cleanup and common sense 'blueprint' job, and went from there.
I don't know if this is representative of the majority of B&M measures, or not.
Heck, I'm not sure if this type of accuracy is even relevant....
-The target weight was 34.0 gr.
- 34.0 X 12 = 408.0 gr.
- Total wt. of all charges thrown = 408.5 gr
- Total variance by percentage of total = darn small.
I can't say how accurate my electronic scales are. Certainly they're no AccuLab-ish analytical stuff. And my old balance beam isn't a double throwdown setup that can weight the dot on the end of this sentence.
Frankly, I was pretty skeptical of the numbers that kept coming up, so did the a-b-a test against my favorite measure. I started my accuracy loading by working with a pals B&M measure and it seemed like the weights were always dead on when we checked it on his scale. I finally found one of these measures, gave a good cleanup and common sense 'blueprint' job, and went from there.
I don't know if this is representative of the majority of B&M measures, or not.
Heck, I'm not sure if this type of accuracy is even relevant....
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Now I understand why the Lee Perfect is so accurate; coppied their tube from the B&M. Too bad they are made of plastic. Actually, Lee has some things that are designed very well. Why they make them out of plastic and Potmetal is beyond me. People would pay more if they were better constructed. Stupid is as Stupid does, eh?
J
jdjframes
Guest
Powder Measure - Old School
Me thinks Montana Vintage Arms makes a measure much like the B&M. They advertise it for black powder, but I don't think the measure would mind if one used it for smokeless. Smokeless measures are not cool for black powder.
They claim it is very accurate.
http://www.montanavintagearms.com/powder_meaure_support.html
Keep your powder dry.
Jim
Me thinks Montana Vintage Arms makes a measure much like the B&M. They advertise it for black powder, but I don't think the measure would mind if one used it for smokeless. Smokeless measures are not cool for black powder.
They claim it is very accurate.
http://www.montanavintagearms.com/powder_meaure_support.html
Keep your powder dry.
Jim
Boyd Allen
Active member
Pete,
It's not the shape of the tube, but the sliding chamber of the B&M, that makes it different from every other design, including the Lee.
Boyd
It's not the shape of the tube, but the sliding chamber of the B&M, that makes it different from every other design, including the Lee.
Boyd
Well....Looks to me as if it's working about like any measure would...??
Love the pix Al!! You're a budding artiste
al
I can say with all honesty mine doesn't work that well.
Ted
Here is another measure that uses a tube system, but it is not that easy to use.
http://www.quick-measure.com/
http://www.quick-measure.com/
Neither the quick-measure nor the Lee use an auxilliary chamber of the B-M to keep the weight constant on the measuring chamber. It's hard to see how to add this feature to any measure that uses a rotary action, such as a Culver, Lyman, RCBS, etc.
The B-M is unique, but you have to deal with the separate measuring chamber & a funnel. On the other hand, extra measuring chambers are very handy for reloading different charges/powders/cartridges.
Regards, Ron
The B-M is unique, but you have to deal with the separate measuring chamber & a funnel. On the other hand, extra measuring chambers are very handy for reloading different charges/powders/cartridges.
Regards, Ron
M
mike in co
Guest
its is the sensitivity of the scale along with its accuracy that counts.
if you look at the numbers...all of the readings are .05....there are no .02.04...just .05.
tends to make me think the scales plus or minus .05 with a sensitivity of .05....so basically a plus or minus ..09 scale.
this means any reading can be plus or minus .04
so a 34.00 is actually 33.96 to 34.04
a 33.95 is 33.91 to 33.99
a 34.05 is 34.01 to 34.09
the bottom line is it is just slightly better than a typicall balance beam...maybe...
so the spread is 33.91 to 34.09........for a 0.18 spread......
is it good yes is it consistant..yes is it plus or minus .05..NO
IT IS PLUS OR MINUS .09...... for a .18 spread......
and as some have noted very good for a thrower with a long grain powder.
( it could be worse..i gave it the benefit of the doubt that its sensitivity is .04...it might be more with the .05 readout)
mike in co
if you look at the numbers...all of the readings are .05....there are no .02.04...just .05.
tends to make me think the scales plus or minus .05 with a sensitivity of .05....so basically a plus or minus ..09 scale.
this means any reading can be plus or minus .04
so a 34.00 is actually 33.96 to 34.04
a 33.95 is 33.91 to 33.99
a 34.05 is 34.01 to 34.09
the bottom line is it is just slightly better than a typicall balance beam...maybe...
so the spread is 33.91 to 34.09........for a 0.18 spread......
is it good yes is it consistant..yes is it plus or minus .05..NO
IT IS PLUS OR MINUS .09...... for a .18 spread......
and as some have noted very good for a thrower with a long grain powder.
( it could be worse..i gave it the benefit of the doubt that its sensitivity is .04...it might be more with the .05 readout)
mike in co
D
Dan Conzo
Guest
Powder Measure
Al Nyhus
I still use the B&M measure. There is quite a few around here in Pa. I bought one of them at Belding & Mull years ago. I make a aluminum handle for them that utilizes a bushing in the rear pivot--works real smooth and consistent. The MVA is also very consistent.
Dan
Al Nyhus
I still use the B&M measure. There is quite a few around here in Pa. I bought one of them at Belding & Mull years ago. I make a aluminum handle for them that utilizes a bushing in the rear pivot--works real smooth and consistent. The MVA is also very consistent.
Dan
D
Dan Conzo
Guest
The Saeco is also a very good measure, I tried them also. You can also purchase the drop tubes from MVA ($50) or buy a black powder adjustable powder tube (for muzzleloaders) the right size for $15-$20.
Dan, I thought about fitting a flanged Oilite bushing to the handle. If you make the alum handles to sell, please let me know.
Thanks! -Al
D
Dan Conzo
Guest
Powder Measure
Al Nyhus
I can send you a drawing or explain it to you in a email. The hardest part of it is the exterior shape of the handle if you want it to look nice, however the most important part is the position of the pivot screw hole and the lever pin hole in relation to the center line of the handle, I concluded this by trail and error; drilling the two holes that connect to the measure isn't hard. You can drill a thru hole for the elongated push-pull knob which your hand rests on or drill and tap it (optional). You could use an oilite flanged bushing but that would require a longer than the original pivot shoulder screw.
Dan
Al Nyhus
I can send you a drawing or explain it to you in a email. The hardest part of it is the exterior shape of the handle if you want it to look nice, however the most important part is the position of the pivot screw hole and the lever pin hole in relation to the center line of the handle, I concluded this by trail and error; drilling the two holes that connect to the measure isn't hard. You can drill a thru hole for the elongated push-pull knob which your hand rests on or drill and tap it (optional). You could use an oilite flanged bushing but that would require a longer than the original pivot shoulder screw.
Dan
T
twentytwoguy
Guest
Regarding the removable tube on the B&M measure do you have to remove it for each throw and if so how is it reinstalled?
Does it work fairly quick in practice or do you find it tedious. I throw Varget and if the results are half as good as yours I would probably buy one.
Does it work fairly quick in practice or do you find it tedious. I throw Varget and if the results are half as good as yours I would probably buy one.
Dan: Sketched up a handle yesterday..will see how it turns out. Thanks for the tips.
Twentytwoguy: The drop tube needs to be removed each time. It's a slip fit into a machined recess and you just hold it in place each time. Yes, it's slow. Keep in mind the accuracy of the scale when looking at things like this.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, here's hoping at least some found this mildly interesting. I suppose buying a $1,000 analytical grade scale and satisfying the Scale Police would have been the ultimate, but I used what I have on hand....and what I use when loading at the range.
Twentytwoguy: The drop tube needs to be removed each time. It's a slip fit into a machined recess and you just hold it in place each time. Yes, it's slow. Keep in mind the accuracy of the scale when looking at things like this.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, here's hoping at least some found this mildly interesting. I suppose buying a $1,000 analytical grade scale and satisfying the Scale Police would have been the ultimate, but I used what I have on hand....and what I use when loading at the range.
John Kielly
Shari's fan club
It works sort of the same as a shotgun reloading press. When you throw the lever, it carries a fixed amount that has dropped down from the main hopper across to where you're holding the adjustable container (the brass thing), Then the powder drops to fill the container & when you throw the lever back, it wipes across taking the surplus with it.
You just empty the tube into your case & start again by sliding it up though that guide cast into the bottom of the unit.
I haven't used one for maybe 20 years, & can't remember how well it managed larger kernel powder but mine loved BLC-2.
John