Powder Measures? Whats best.

[dsv424]

I have a Lee Classic Turret with the Lee Pro Auto-Disk Powder Measure mounted on it. Most of the time it is a good reliable powder measure but there have been times when I have said a few curse words using it. Like when it leaks with fine powders or can't get an accurate drop with certain powders. Does anyone use a different powder measure that can be mounted on this press? And has it made a conderable improvement? Or does everyone just trickle charge off the press when they have difficult time with some powders? I do have all the extra gadjets you can use with this Powder Measure ie., Adjustable Charge Bar, Micro Disc, Double Disc set. but I was just wondering if there is something better out there I can mount on this press.

[jmortimer]

I use the powder dippers with my Lee Precision Turret Press - just insert the funnel and dump. No scale necessary (assuming you checked the first couple dipper loads) and accurate enough for most any shooting except bench-rest.

[Mike / Tx]

I use the RCBS Uniflow's, and don't know if they would mount up or not.

I have both cylinders for each and they measure just about everything quite accurate. I like them due to the fact I can work loads up at the range and record the number from the stem plus any additional turns then weigh the good loads up at the house for more testing.

I have used just about all powders through it and other than the really bulky flake they give good performance.

[oneoldsap]

Lyman 55

[dsv424]

I have heard a lot of good things about the Lyman 55, but can I mount it on my Lee Classic Turret? If so is there anything different I need to be aware of?

[Lost Sheep]

Originally Posted by jmortimer

I use the powder dippers with my Lee Precision Turret Press - just insert the funnel and dump. No scale necessary (assuming you checked the first couple dipper loads) and accurate enough for most any shooting except bench-rest.

A considerable number of bench-resters swear that volumetrically measured powder charges are inherently more accurate than weighed charges - with empirical evidence to support the contention.

I still can't wrap my chemical brain around the notion, but there it is.

Lost Sheep

[oneoldsap]

The Lyman 55 comes with a 7/8x14 adapter for press mounting I run mine on my Lyman T-Mag turret press !

[johnjohn]

I also use the model 55 on a Lyman turret press.

[Sevens]

I would suggest that if you are using a Lee Classic Turret as a poor man's progressive, you aren't using it to your best advantage. You feel like you need to mount whatever powder measure you want to use to the press, but I think you are going about using your press in a manner that's not conducive to production or safety.

I'm not trying to pick on your methods, but rather offer an alternative that might speed up your operation, make your powder measure choice easier and make your loaded ammo safer and more consistent.

Instead of running pieces through your turret press like it's a progressive machine (it's not -- and can't ever be as long as each throw of the handle does only ONE thing at a time), you should be batch loading.

Take 50 pieces of brass and resize all 50. Take those 50 and prime them. Take the same 50 and flare the case mouths. Then use your new powder measure (whichever you choose... I use the Hornady) and charge 50 pieces and place them one by one in to a loading block.

Then you can closely inspect all 50 pieces and see with your own eyes that not only does each piece have powder in it (no squib) and that each piece doesn't have an accidental double charge (Titegroup or Bullseye could triple in many cases without overflowing) but you'd be able to see that all powder levels look quite similar -- nearly exactly the same, actually.

That's visual evidence of all 50 pieces that you haven't made any bombs or duds.

Then you seat 50 bullets and crimp 'em and you now have 50 rounds and full confidence of what's in 'em.

The Turret press used in this manner still makes life easier than a single stage -- you can swap turrets in a moment for a caliber change and each die is already dead set exactly the way you want it. Very handy! And if you need to do an odd step somewhere in the process, all of your dies are right there with a quick twist. It's not like you gain nothing by having a Turret press... you do.

But trying to load "progressively" with one isn't, IMO, at all the best way to use it.

At the end of my horribly long post... you are left with the option of buying any powder measure you like, to mount to the bench in a stand, not worried about whether or not it'll mate-up with your Lee Classic Turret.

As for batch loading, I used "50 pieces" just as an example. At my bench, pick a caliber and I keep large lots of it in different stages, separated by what stage it's in, but ready. One day, I may take a coffee can with a bunch of 9mm in it and just size brass for a while. The sized pieces go in to a different bowl where they wait until I feel like doing something else to them.

But if I decided right now that I wanted to make some .45 target loads, I would go to the man cave and pull out four boxes of .45 -- brass that's already been cleaned, sized, primed and flared. I'd then only need to set my powder measure for the right charge and spin a seater die in to my press. Charge 'em, then seat 'em, and walk away from the bench with 200 rounds ready for the range.

Anyhow, that got longer and more detailed than it may have needed, but I'd say you can buy any powder measure you like. The Lyman 55 does have a fine reputation. The Hornady that I use goes for something like $70-$80. The RCBS works well, but I think those guys are total d*cks for making you separately purchase the stand. Many folks have fine luck with Lee's "Perfect" powder measure and it's far cheaper than everything else out there.

[dsv424]

Sevens, thanks for the rather "long winded" explanation of my dilema! I have always been honored when you chime in with your advise. I do batch whenever I load rifle ie. 5.7x28mm, .223 and .308. But I have yet to size any pistol rounds. I do exactly as you stated with the pistol stuff "run it through like a progressive". Although I do look in each case as it is charged to be sure that it is approximately at the same level. Don't get me wrong about the Lee Pro Auto Disc Powder Measure, I love it most of the time. I guess what I was wondering is if the "grass was any greener" with a different powder measure. I will look into the Hornady powder measure and the Lyman 55 and see if either one will give me better confidence and more reliability with different powder types. Thanks again for your opinion, I really appreciate it!

[Sevens]

Hey, I'm not even a fraction of the authority that some of the fine folks that haunt this forum. I just share little nuggets as I see 'em from my bench. But thanks for the kinds words!

The Auto Disk powder measure is a fixed cavity device. It's pretty flexible considering how it works, but it's never going to be a variable cavity like any of the measures we've talked about.

The powders that give fits with an Auto Disk are likely to give fits with most any volumetric dispenser. Even a powder dipper is nothing more than a fixed volumetric dispenser. Technique means more when you use a dipper, but the idea is the same.

I don't see fine powder leaking through my Hornady, but I have heard of that exact same problem with the Lee "Perfect" powder measure. Still, for what that device costs, it might make you happy -- and I think it may even be rigged for use right on top of your turret press.

5.7x28mm

Oh, that one is a handful at the bench I've heard. Do you have any trouble with reloading it?

[MrBorland]

For the record, I have a Lee Classic Turret and reload exactly as Sevens described.

I used to use a Lee Auto dispenser, but now load previously cleaned, resized & primed case from my cache into a couple of loading trays and add powder using a Redding 10x pistol dispenser. After visual inspection, I seat the bullet and crimp with a Lee factory Crimp Die.

Reloading in batch fits my schedule better, and there's a certain reassurance I get by actually seeing the powder dropping into the case, then being able to visually inspect the cases. Maybe not the throughput many require, but it works for me.

[bkhann]

I successfully load using the Lee Classic Turret Press. I first clean, deprime, clean the primer pocket, swage any NATO cases, and prime.

I use the Lee Turret Press with the Lee Pro Auto Disk Powder Measure, substituting a Lee Adjustable Charge Bar for the Powder Disks.

The process is:
-expand the case mouth and charge the case with powder
-set the bullet on the case and seat the bullet and remove any excessive case expansion
-finish the crimp with a Lee Factory Crimp Die

I check powder charge every 20 rounds or so also check COL every 20 rounds.

There is a little powder spillage, but no great shakes. My ammunition is very consistent and without too much effort I can reload 200 pcs per hour. I used to batch load, but found it to be too much unnecessary handling.

When I am doing test loads I use a RCBS Uniflow powder dispenser. Find it to be very consistent and easy to use. Very easy to reset for different powders and loads.

[SatCong]

Sevens has described, exactly, my method. It's very reassuring to see that all charged brass has the same volume of powder when arranged in the loading block prior to seating.
I use that method on my Lee three-holer turret and have never produced a squib or overcharged round in thousands of rifle/handgun rounds in several calibers.

SatCong

[mbopp]

I picked up a used Lyman turret press for handgun loading. I tried my Redding measure on it but didn't like the idea of not being able to visually check each powder charge.
My method is tumble clean, size & deprime, rotate the turret, and expand the case. I inspect the cases and prime off the press with a Lee hand primer. I put the cases in a block, charge 50 of them, inspect the level, then put a bullet in and crimp.

[Lost Sheep]

One thing about dippers is they are least likely to damage the powder granules. Almost impossible..

Lost Sheep

[darkgael]

+1 about using the Lee Adjustable charge bar. I use it on all of my Lee pro measures (3). Works great for pistol loads (.45ACP, .44, 9mm)
Pete

[Sevens]

One thing about dippers is they are least likely to damage the powder granules. Almost impossible.

I would say that it's pretty much entirely impossible that the Lee dipper could damage any kind or style of powder granules. The extruded stick powder often used for rifle calibers is horribly difficult to break even with a measure -- don't know how you'd ever do it with a Lee dipper.

On that subject, I know I can cut them with my Hornady measure... and it's not always an easy snap, btw. The Lee "Perfect" Powder measure uses rubber "wipers" that is supposed to minimize powder cutting.

But for me, does it matter? I suppose if you cut EVERY granule of powder you would alter the burning characteristics, but realistically are we talking about something that is never going to even be noticed on-target?

This is something I just don't worry about.

[jmortimer]

Like Sevens and others - I use my Lee Presicion Turret Press as a glorified single stage - just de-activate the auto index and batch load. The beauty is that the dies are pre-set in the turret so it is really easy to move from one step to the next. I hand prime with the Auto Prime and use the powder dippers as discussed. Could not be more simple.

[Sevens]

This is why I've said many times over that if you have a good single stage, a turret press isn't a huge upgrade, but if you have NO press, a turret press is a much more flexible, easy and time-saving press to buy rather than a single stage.

The die swaps, the quick caliber change, all die settings remain and being able to do a different operation with a mere click is a heckuva nice feature.

BUT -- it's not a progressive press, can't ever be and will never offer the throughput, no matter how you try to make it work. In the end, a single stage and a turret press still do one operation with each throw of the lever while a true progressive (with a shell plate) can perform 3, 4, 5 operations simultaneously with each cycle of the lever.

For my buck, the "advancing" part of a turret press is a part that isn't really needed.

These are just my opinions.

[MrBorland]

The die swaps, the quick caliber change, all die settings remain and being able to do a different operation with a mere click is a heckuva nice feature.

As a bonus, one can also buy extra turrets for each die set, and switch between calibers by simply swapping turrets (and primer arm and shell plate). Another heckuva nice feature. I have a .357/.38 and .45acp turrets, as well as one with a single universal decapping die. Works really well.

For my buck, the "advancing" part of a turret press is a part that isn't really needed.

yep - my auto-indexing plastic thingymajig broke along time ago. I've never missed it.

[dsv424]

Thanks guys for all your advise on this. I have decided to get the Lee powder funnel and give that a try. This would give me the ability of keeping the case on the press and just measuring off the press. I can still use the Auto Disc Powder Measure with powders that I know meter well and use the funnel with powders that are inconsistent. I don't think a different powder measure would cure my problem now. Besides its a lot cheaper to get a $3.00 funnel than a $80.00 to $100.00 powder measure that probably would have the same difficulties with certain powders.

[dlb435]

I've used about every brand of powder drop on the market: Lee, RCBS, Dillon, Lyman and C-H. I've also used powder dips (Lee and home made) All of them work fine. Use what you can find or what you have.

[David Wile]

Hey Folks,

Lost Sheep stated the following:

"A considerable number of bench-resters swear that volumetrically measured powder charges are inherently more accurate than weighed charges - with empirical evidence to support the contention."

For some time now, I have seen similar statements made by quite a number of folks claiming that "bench rest" shooters use powder dispensers and even dippers to charge their loads, and somehow this is inherently more accurate than weighing your charges.

I don't know who these "bench rest" shooters are who get more accurate load using dippers instead of wrighing each charge, but I sure would like to know. I spent 25 years working almost exclusively for the DOD, and part of my job was inspecting facilities and operations for both Army and Marine long range competion shooters. These shooters were not your average soldier just qualifying for basic training; they were actually competition shooters who spent all day shooting and preparing for competition shooting events all over the world. I am sure some of these guys Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) codes included sniper duty, but these guys were not training for sniping duty - they were training to compete in world wide shooting copetitions.

Whether these guys meet some folks definition for "bench rest" shooters, I can't say, but they certainly were some of the best shooters one would ever see. I can assure you though that these folks were shooters and not reloaders. The ammunition they shot was precision made by a great number of soldiers who spent all day in nearby reloading rooms making custom ammo designed for each shooter. The GIs in the reloading rooms did not use progressive machines, and they did not use powder measures or dippers. They used electronic scales to weigh each and every charge.

Knowing what I do about GI teams of long range competition shooters and how their ammunition is custom made for them by other GIs, I would like to know exactly who the considerable number of "bench rest" shooters are who swear that volume charging is inherently more accurate than weighed charges?

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

[Unclenick]

Dsv424,

So, what powders are you measuring? Some powder grain shapes do better in some measures than in others.


Dave,

When scheutzen rifle matches were devised, it was decided to have an offhand standing phase and a bench phase. The idea was the offhand phase proved the man while the bench phase proved the gun. In position shooting competition, as your marksmanship unit members were involved in, the man's shooting ability typically has as much or more influence on shot placement than the gun or ammo. Both have to be good, but dropping points really depends most on the shooter.

With benchrest competition it is often the other way around. Their stuff is fired from benches (hence the name) resting on carefully shaped sand bags on special adjustable front rests, often using high magnification scopes on rifles too heavy for position shooting. They are much about proving where the mechanical limits of accuracy are, so equipment and load quality get a lot more emphasis. Where a position shooter can often do well with a 1/2 moa gun, the benchrest guys shoot matches that are sometimes won by groups of 10 shots that come in under 1/20 moa.

So, there is roughly an order of magnitude more mechanical precision involved in benchrest than in most position shooting. Position shooting disciplines are typically derived from military training or hunting simulation, proving what mobile men and guns can do, verses benchrest finding out what stationary guns can be made do? The extreme precision of benchrest shooting reveals effects of variables half moa match rifle and ammunition combinations will not. That's why the measuring method observation comes from the benchrest discipline and not some other. The difference could be too small to be apparent in 1/2 moa guns?

I think the reason volumetric powder charges can sometimes produce better precision than weighed charges is that bulk powder volume is inversely related to burning rate in the chamber. That is because it is largely determined by space between the grains. That, in turn, determines how easily a flame front moves between the grains. If one volume of charge is a little less dense and has more space between the grains than the next, then it lights a little more easily and burns a little more quickly. That raises pressure slightly which tends to compensate bullet acceleration for the fact the charge is light. That is because the faster burning, higher pressure charge converts powder energy to kinetic energy in the bullet with higher efficiency. Weighing ensures the same amount of energy is supplied to each cartridge, but not how efficiently it is used, which then has to depend on uniform packing.

The use of the volumetric measure may have some inherent limitations, too. The powder volume has to be the same in the case as it was in the measure cavity for my theory to hold true. That could be undone if you dispense the powder through a long drop tube that alters how the grains are packed. That could also be undone if you make loads that leave any empty space in the case, and that are subsequently carried and jostled before firing, altering the packing density. It may well be that for a benchrest shooter who loads nearby the bench, then doesn't transport the rounds far, or for shooters who uses compressed loads that don't let powder move during transport, and who didn't use a long drop tube, that volumetric measuring has the advantage? Otherwise, weighing may work out better?

The one exception I can imagine would come about if a particular powder has irregular grain shapes, as some spherical propellants do, and the differences in dispensed density are caused by random accumulation of larger or smaller or of rounder or flatter particles in one charge or another? In that instance, the volumetric measure may be superior regardless of vibration because such particle segregation can change burning rate by itself.

Nick