Al,
I believe that I can throw as well as I said, not just one time, like a wallet group. It has taken me some time to understand all of the factors that are involved, and as I said, my methods are mostly self developed, and not the result of something that I read, or somthing that I was told. I like to say that if TV was less boring, that I would never have done this, but it is a challenge that I had all the equipment for, and it was not easy. For short range benchrest, to 200 yards, I think that +-.1 is entirely adequate, and 133 is the limit for throwing for me. Anything coarser gets thrown light and trickled using a tuned balance scale, and if I really want to wring the most out of that, I view the end of the beam with a web cam so that the image is much enlarged, and there is no possibility of parallax error. Most of the time, for more casual loading, I use one of these
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U57jnitmLP8
which allows me to leave the scale on my desktop and still view it as if it was at eye level. I take the additional precaution of setting it up so that the edge of the beam is in alignment with the bottom of what I see in the prism, as a head position reference.
The real motivation for starting on this was that I take my whole kit for reloading and cleaning to the range, every time that I go, and I was at the upper limit of what I wanted to take with me. I was right at the point of buying a Chargemaster, when I gave it one more try with a measure, trying something that was entirely off the wall, and it worked so well that I felt that I could proceed without getting one. Since then, I have come up with something that is simpler, and learned a couple of more things that help.
On which powders throw easiest, for me ball follows the rule that finer works better. In the line of the usual 6PPC powders, I find that 322 is easier than 133 and LT and the Canadian 322, which is of identical size and shape in the samples that I have, is very easy, but I did have to make some adjustment in technique from what I was using with 133.
As I have written before, different measures, require variations in technique, as do different powders.....for me.
None of this will make up for a misread of the flags, or any of the other many other things that can mess up a group.
Recently, taking note of the effect that exposure to different levels of humidity can have on 133 in particular, I have started keeping my powder bottle closed most of the time, and am using an insulated sleeve around it when loading at the range.
One time, years ago, I had dumped the contents of a inertial bullet puller into the plexiglass hopper of a Hollywood measure that I was using at the range, on warm and sunny day, and when I fished the bullet out of the powder, I took note that the powder was warmer than I might have expected. Thinking about that, I came to the conclusion that dark powder in a clear somewhat insulated container was a solar head collector, even in the open shade of the firing line cover. A couple of years back, there was a very good study, published in Precision Shooting, that documented the effect of powder dryness on its burning rate. 133 was used, and the difference between bone dry and fully humidified, was over 300 FPS, enough to warrant some adaptation of methods. Over the years there has been some discussion of this, but that was the first time that I had seen a formal test.
Some time ago, I read an article on the internet, about extensive work that a fellow had done to improve the performance of his RCBS measure. One of the things that I took note of was that he found that the typical measure stand was too flimsy for the best results, and made a stand of stout tubing and plate that he screwed to his bench. While I cannot use that method loading at the range, I have found that if I avoid having my measure mounted high up with a Sinclair clamp on stand, that it is more consistent. For benches that are thicker than my Harrell measure can clamp directly to, I carry a four inch long piece of 1" square aluminum bar and a C clamp, and clamp the bar to the bench and the measure to it. If you let a measure vibrate too much as you operate it, it has to vibrate the same every time, and generally it will not. One time I did a test with one of my SAECO measures where I grasped the measure body with my left hand while I operated the measure with my right, and the damping improved its performance. I have not figured out an efficient way to do this all the time, but it did demonstrate the principle. Also, I have two pieces of tape on my powder bottle, finding that if I keep the fill between them that this works better than any baffle that I have tried, and improves performance.
Boyd
