Am I More Accurate than My Uniflow? Nope!

[CQB45ACP]

On another thread regarding Lee dippers, I made the claim/assertion I was as accurate using a Lee dipper as was my Uniflow throwing charges.

I meant what I said, but then thought to myself “that’s a pretty bold statement for a one-eyed fat man.”

I was confident in making it because my recollection was the Uniflow wasn’t all that great and that’s one reason I no longer used it.

Well boy was I wrong. I just tested the Uniflow throwing 4.5gr of Bullseye.

After practicing getting my up thunk, down thunk technique consistent, I threw 10 charges—eight were 4.5gr two 4.4gr. (I prefer my “bad” charges to be under v. over cause it’s hard to trickle down so this was good.)

I knew I couldn’t dip that consistently, so I ended the test, conceded the contest, emptied and cleaned out the Uniflow, put it back on the shelf, and put away the powder. That’s when I recalled a significant reason I no longer used the Uniflow. Relative to putting away a dipper, it’s a PIA. Especially if I was going to change powders.

And, since I’m after 10/10 identical charges not 8/10 and thus would have to weigh & prepare to trickle up each throw anyway, there’s no advantage for me to use the Uniflow over the dippers.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

Well, you admitted you were wrong. That's something too many of us men don't do enough probably. lol

8/10 would be fine with me for range plinking loads in standard cartridges.
When I'm loading full house magnum loads for hunting, I trickle as well. It may not make any difference, but it makes me feel better.

 

[Varminterror]

A subjective decision that a bit of kit isn’t worth using within an individual’s preferred process is - exactly that - subjective.

I appreciate that you took the time to prove to yourself the OTHER claim that you could dip more accurately than you could drop was incorrect.

In fairness, you’re not the first to do this test - and I wasn’t first to do it 20+ years ago when one of my reloading mentors taught me this same info. I was loading with dippers and trusted them more than I wanted to spend money for a powder drop, and one of my mentors, in his late 70’s at the time, pointed out the inherent error in human hands. Both are volumetric processes, but ONE is mechanical, ONE is human dependent, and the math proves it out every time. I’ve seen a lot of this kind of thread since I started using forums like this in the mid-1990’s… lots of folks do these comparisons. I’m quite certain my mentor wasn’t the first one to do this test either.

Emptying powder drops does take a little time, certainly. If you’re only loading a few rounds, then filling, tuning, and emptying may not be time efficient compared to the increased time and hand moving to dip. There are logistical risks in dipping which don’t befall dropping (greater powder exposure for offgassing, greater risk of spilling, etc), and yes, dropping does end up faster than dipping if you set your drop on a stand to feed directly into your pan on the scale, but it does incur cost and setup/takedown time. But if you’re just loading a handful of rounds at a time, you can tolerate slower processes without as much penalty.

 

[Kaldor]

I think with a standard ball powder or a short cut extruded you would see better accuracy. Bullseye isnt a great powder for pure accuracy due to it being a flake. I dont have any Bullseye, but I should round up a bottle and give it a test.
Ive tested my Hornady rotary drop, which has been polished and waxed, uses a baffle, against my FX120i scale to see how accurately I could throw different powders mostly because Im trying to automate some of my ammo production on my progressive where powder is always the biggest variable.
I found with ball powders like W296 (extremely fine) CFE-Pistol, TiteGroup, AA2230, TAC, etc (flattened ball) the rotary drop was dead on in a 20 drop test. We are talking +/- .02 which is what I use as a benchmark for my long range handloads.
Testing with a short extruded like 8208 yielded a +/- .04gr variance in a 20 drop test. With 8208 thats only 3-4 grains of powder as Ive found 8208 to weigh about .01gr per kernel.
Long kernel stuff? Yeah, while they can be thrown reasonably accurately, probably +/- .08ish, I just find that trying to run it thru my progressive causes alot of drama when youre cutting kernels.

 

[FROGO207]

In most instances wether I scoop or throw charges the variation in velocities has never made a difference on my target. I do not however shoot matches at over 300 YDS for rifle and usually at 50 feet for handgun. I tried trickling up to the exact weight and shootimg those as well and I could not shoot the difference so back to scoops or a measure and seat a bullet.

Diminishing returns VS expectations.

 

[WeekendReloader]

I'm not very consistent with the scoop either. I'll usually scoop, dump most of it in the pan, then trickle up by tapping the scoop with my finger.

Plinking ammo, I'm fine with the +/-0.1 gn from the powder measure. I make mid-charged loads for punching holes in paper.

 

[AJC1]

On another thread regarding Lee dippers, I made the claim/assertion I was as accurate using a Lee dipper as was my Uniflow throwing charges.

I meant what I said, but then thought to myself “that’s a pretty bold statement for a one-eyed fat man.”

I was confident in making it because my recollection was the Uniflow wasn’t all that great and that’s one reason I no longer used it.

Well boy was I wrong. I just tested the Uniflow throwing 4.5gr of Bullseye.

After practicing getting my up thunk, down thunk technique consistent, I threw 10 charges—eight were 4.5gr two 4.4gr. (I prefer my “bad” charges to be under v. over cause it’s hard to trickle down so this was good.)

I knew I couldn’t dip that consistently, so I ended the test, conceded the contest, emptied and cleaned out the Uniflow, put it back on the shelf, and put away the powder. That’s when I recalled a significant reason I no longer used the Uniflow. Relative to putting away a dipper, it’s a PIA. Especially if I was going to change powders.

And, since I’m after 10/10 identical charges not 8/10 and thus would have to weigh & prepare to trickle up each throw anyway, there’s no advantage for me to use the Uniflow over the dippers.

If the scale is the standard then how you get it to the scale is meaningless. The fastest easiest is the winner. If your trusting the scoop or the powder drop that's an entirely different game.

 

[Smokin Gator]

I use the dippers for loading black powder. I've got a Uniflow and a Harrels powder measure for smokeless.

 

[lightman]

I throw nearly all of my pistol loads plus 223. 1/10th mostly doesn't bother me but much more will make me do something different. I've never checked the weight difference with my dippers because I have always used them to throw under and trickle up.

 

[Varminterror]

@Kaldor - he’s talking about volumetric dipping with scoops versus volumetric dropping with a powder drop. In the other thread, specifically, the claim was made that HEAPING dippers could be measured by eye more accurately than dropping with a powder measure.

Side by side, dippers and drops are both volumetric methods. Void fraction variability and fill ratio variability for uncompressed, bulk material won’t change, so it’s really a comparison whether there is any truth to a human eyeball being able to count kernels in a heap above the dipper more accurately than the dipper or drop would fill itself when scooped and scraped.

Scales obviously will always offer more consistent weight measurement.

 

[Kaldor]

@Kaldor - he’s talking about volumetric dipping with scoops versus volumetric dropping with a powder drop. In the other thread, specifically, the claim was made that HEAPING dippers could be measured by eye more accurately than dropping with a powder measure.

Side by side, dippers and drops are both volumetric methods. Void fraction variability and fill ratio variability for uncompressed, bulk material won’t change, so it’s really a comparison whether there is any truth to a human eyeball being able to count kernels in a heap above the dipper more accurately than the dipper or drop would fill itself when scooped and scraped.

Scales obviously will always offer more consistent weight measurement.

I know, and I agree with you. I see alot of people banging on rotary drops like they are inaccurate. Even the lowly Lee AutoDrum is more accurate than a dipper over the long haul. A mechanical device with precise movement will always been more accurate than a non mechanical device with precise movement.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

On another thread regarding Lee dippers, I made the claim/assertion I was as accurate using a Lee dipper as was my Uniflow throwing charges.

I meant what I said, but then thought to myself “that’s a pretty bold statement for a one-eyed fat man.”

I was confident in making it because my recollection was the Uniflow wasn’t all that great and that’s one reason I no longer used it.

Well boy was I wrong. I just tested the Uniflow throwing 4.5gr of Bullseye.

After practicing getting my up thunk, down thunk technique consistent, I threw 10 charges—eight were 4.5gr two 4.4gr. (I prefer my “bad” charges to be under v. over cause it’s hard to trickle down so this was good.)

I knew I couldn’t dip that consistently, so I ended the test, conceded the contest, emptied and cleaned out the Uniflow, put it back on the shelf, and put away the powder. That’s when I recalled a significant reason I no longer used the Uniflow. Relative to putting away a dipper, it’s a PIA. Especially if I was going to change powders.

And, since I’m after 10/10 identical charges not 8/10 and thus would have to weigh & prepare to trickle up each throw anyway, there’s no advantage for me to use the Uniflow over the dippers.

Pretty cool!

I ran a similar experiment when I got the Uniflow this past summer. With all of the Accurate/Ramshot powders - Enforcer, True Blue, No.’s 2/5/7/9, 4100 and Competition - and Allianz 2400, it was pretty much a dead heat between the dippers+trickler and the Uniflow, with a slight edge to the Uniflow. Speed-wise the dipppers win just because I’ve been doing those same motions for so long it’s second nature whereas I have to stop and think about what I’m doing with the Uniflow. With Unique, Red Dot, Blue Dot and the IMR Lincoln-log rifle powders, the dippers+trickler were again a dead heat for accuracy, a little faster for me, but the Uniflow was a bit “crunchy” to operate. No problems really, just a bit crunchy. I try to avoid using it now because it’s just not as efficient for my workflow. I like my freedom and mobility. For various reasons I’ll not bother explaining, I don’t like being tied to a bench or desk. I can take a hand press and dippers with me anywhere and load up. It’s why I like netbooks, laptops, iPads, and such - When I HAVE to work in an office - like today - it brings me down and makes me “grumpy”.

The world is my reloading room.

 

[CQB45ACP]

Pretty cool!

I ran a similar experiment when I got the Uniflow this past summer. With all of the Accurate/Ramshot powders - Enforcer, True Blue, No.’s 2/5/7/9, 4100 and Competition - and Allianz 2400, it was pretty much a dead heat between the dippers+trickler and the Uniflow, with a slight edge to the Uniflow. Speed-wise the dipppers win just because I’ve been doing those same motions for so long it’s second nature whereas I have to stop and think about what I’m doing with the Uniflow. With Unique, Red Dot, Blue Dot and the IMR Lincoln-log rifle powders, the dippers+trickler were again a dead heat for accuracy, a little faster for me, but the Uniflow was a bit “crunchy” to operate. No problems really, just a bit crunchy. I try to avoid using it now because it’s just not as efficient for my workflow. I like my freedom and mobility. For various reasons I’ll not bother explaining, I don’t like being tied to a bench or desk. I can take a hand press and dippers with me anywhere and load up. It’s why I like netbooks, laptops, iPads, and such - When I HAVE to work in an office - like today - it brings me down and makes me “grumpy”.

The world is my reloading room.

Dang! I know I’d love the weather down there, but the only critter I have to worry about up here is the copperhead and they’re more shy than I was in HS.

So, here is my view after mowing this AM.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Dang! I know I’d love the weather down there, but the only critter I have to worry about up here is the copperhead and they’re more shy than I was in HS.

So, here is my view after mowing this AM.

View attachment 1112581

You mean little Bertie there? Aw, shucks, he’s no bother. He eats frogs and minnows out of the stream and minds his own business. He don’t even bother the Herons when they come to visit. Now, if some clumsy squirrel were to fall off that oak twig onto his head he might snap at it but, then again might not. Gators aren’t a problem. Those dang water moccasins are a real problem! They’re aggressive little cusses and sneaky to boot.

The spiders and wasps can be annoying if you don’t mind your path on the way to a good sitting spot. Dang gnats and skeeters are super annoying but I got some spray for them.

 

[CQB45ACP]

You mean little Bertie there? Aw, shucks, he’s no bother. He eats frogs and minnows out of the stream and minds his own business. He don’t even bother the Herons when they come to visit. Now, if some clumsy squirrel were to fall off that oak twig onto his head he might snap at it but, then again might not. Gators aren’t a problem. Those dang water moccasins are a real problem! They’re aggressive little cusses and sneaky to boot.

The spiders and wasps can be annoying if you don’t mind your path on the way to a good sitting spot. Dang gnats and skeeters are super annoying but I got some spray for them.

Bertie?

We’re about 150 miles too far north for water moccasins. 75 miles too far east for timber rattlers. But less than 10 to the Potomac which is full of vipers.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I've got a Uniflow and a Harrels powder measure for smokeless.

I've considered a Harrels measure, but then my wife got me a Hornady automatic powder machine thingy for Christmas a couple years back that you just enter how many grains you want and it dispenses it. So I never got around to the Harrels. I've heard they're awesome.

 

[Varminterror]

I never got around to the Harrels. I've heard they're awesome.

If you’re into dropping charges, there is no equal.

 

[Yankee1986]

You mean little Bertie there? Aw, shucks, he’s no bother. He eats frogs and minnows out of the stream and minds his own business. He don’t even bother the Herons when they come to visit. Now, if some clumsy squirrel were to fall off that oak twig onto his head he might snap at it but, then again might not. Gators aren’t a problem. Those dang water moccasins are a real problem! They’re aggressive little cusses and sneaky to boot.

The spiders and wasps can be annoying if you don’t mind your path on the way to a good sitting spot. Dang gnats and skeeters are super annoying but I got some spray for them.

You forgot fire ants! I'll take a bee/wasp sting anyday over a fire ant sting. Little bastards!

 

[ballman6711]

Virginia has some interesting critters too, I know, because I've seen them.

I worked at the Lowe's next to Cabela's in Gainesville for several years. We had a guy that worked there that had a brain tumor, and was basically in the final stages of his life. Great guy, strong and smart, but slow because of the tumor. One night he asked if I could identify a snake that he had caught in the store, because he wanted to give it to his kids as a pet and wanted to be able to tell them all about it. He had reached down and grabbed it with a gloved hand and put it in a water bottle, and punched holes in the bottle so it wouldn't suffocate. When I looked at the snake it was a baby rattler, with just a button on the tail, maybe 8 inches long or so. I don't know where it came from or how it got into the store, but it was a rattler. Diamond/triangular shaped head with diamond markings on the body, gray in color, and a button on the tail.

We also used to find Black Widow spiders all the time. I almost grabbed one when I picked up a board one day. I know that their fangs are too short to penetrate a healthy adults skin (usually) but didn't want to be a test subject. And all those little spider webs you see covered in dew on the grass in the morning? Those are Black Widow webs.

Sorry for the Hijack, but when it went off topic and the OP responded, I thought I would chime in.

chris

 

[CQB45ACP]

@Kaldor - he’s talking about volumetric dipping with scoops versus volumetric dropping with a powder drop. In the other thread, specifically, the claim was made that HEAPING dippers could be measured by eye more accurately than dropping with a powder measure.

Side by side, dippers and drops are both volumetric methods. Void fraction variability and fill ratio variability for uncompressed, bulk material won’t change, so it’s really a comparison whether there is any truth to a human eyeball being able to count kernels in a heap above the dipper more accurately than the dipper or drop would fill itself when scooped and scraped.

Scales obviously will always offer more consistent weight measurement.

Actually I didn’t say “heaping” nor imply it. But it wasn’t unreasonable to infer it.

I simply use the Lee .5 dipper to move the powder from a dish to my scale. Any other dipper size would work but I use the .5 because it’s easier for me to see inside it and estimate.

What I do is dip and try to get as close to my target load without going over. So for my test example the target was 4.5gr of Bullseye.

A full, level scoop would get me 5.0gr—too much.

So, I want to go under by a fair amount. And again UNDER is better than OVER because I have my trickler right there ready to go. Trying to scoop out a grain or two or four to reduce back down is a PIA.

New tests

I just practiced a bunch of dips into my scale shooting for 4.5gr or under and my final ten were five 4.5gr, three 4.4gr, one 4.6gr, and one 4.7gr.

I tried hard to be no more “careful” than I would normally be, but human nature being what it is, that was difficult. I believe I “normally” would’ve had several more lower than 4.5, maybe none right on, and none over.

As an associated test, I just timed loading eight cartridges—pulling out powder & equipment, setting up, dipping/weighing/filling, seating bullet, measuring COL, crimping, and dropping in gauge, then putting everything away—12:05. This is NOT rushing at all but it isn’t lolly gagging either. (I typically have 100 or so primed cases standing by so that isn’t part of time.)

Putting everything away is significant to me since my bench isn’t solely dedicated to reloading…it’s my workbench too.

BTW, all eight cases were filled in the first 5:52. (Why eight? 1911 mags I use are eight.)

None of this means anything to any of you (other than I have too much time on my hands) and means little to me but I am curious.

 

[CQB45ACP]

If the scale is the standard then how you get it to the scale is meaningless. The fastest easiest is the winner. If your trusting the scoop or the powder drop that's an entirely different game.

Maybe in a purely objective way it’s meaningless, but to me, the entire process is important for any number of reasons including available physical space, time, enjoyment. I get your point though.

 

[CQB45ACP]

If you’re into dropping charges, there is no equal.

If I had the dedicated space, I’d build a reloading bench around one and to he** with the dippers!

 

[CQB45ACP]

Virginia has some interesting critters too, I know, because I've seen them.

I worked at the Lowe's next to Cabela's in Gainesville for several years. We had a guy that worked there that had a brain tumor, and was basically in the final stages of his life. Great guy, strong and smart, but slow because of the tumor. One night he asked if I could identify a snake that he had caught in the store, because he wanted to give it to his kids as a pet and wanted to be able to tell them all about it. He had reached down and grabbed it with a gloved hand and put it in a water bottle, and punched holes in the bottle so it wouldn't suffocate. When I looked at the snake it was a baby rattler, with just a button on the tail, maybe 8 inches long or so. I don't know where it came from or how it got into the store, but it was a rattler. Diamond/triangular shaped head with diamond markings on the body, gray in color, and a button on the tail.

We also used to find Black Widow spiders all the time. I almost grabbed one when I picked up a board one day. I know that their fangs are too short to penetrate a healthy adults skin (usually) but didn't want to be a test subject. And all those little spider webs you see covered in dew on the grass in the morning? Those are Black Widow webs.

Sorry for the Hijack, but when it went off topic and the OP responded, I thought I would chime in.

chris

Go back to WV and take your critters with you

Not sure you’re correct on the morning web thing but no problem, God created shoes to step on spiders.

 

[CQB45ACP]

I'm not very consistent with the scoop either. I'll usually scoop, dump most of it in the pan, then trickle up by tapping the scoop with my finger.

Plinking ammo, I'm fine with the +/-0.1 gn from the powder measure. I make mid-charged loads for punching holes in paper.

I’m pretty consistent and frequently do like you and tap, tap, tap. I only go for a precise amount though at least in part because I’m going through the same amount of effort anyway.

 

[entropy]

On another thread regarding Lee dippers, I made the claim/assertion I was as accurate using a Lee dipper as was my Uniflow throwing charges.

I meant what I said, but then thought to myself “that’s a pretty bold statement for a one-eyed fat man.”

I was confident in making it because my recollection was the Uniflow wasn’t all that great and that’s one reason I no longer used it.

Well boy was I wrong. I just tested the Uniflow throwing 4.5gr of Bullseye.

After practicing getting my up thunk, down thunk technique consistent, I threw 10 charges—eight were 4.5gr two 4.4gr. (I prefer my “bad” charges to be under v. over cause it’s hard to trickle down so this was good.)

I knew I couldn’t dip that consistently, so I ended the test, conceded the contest, emptied and cleaned out the Uniflow, put it back on the shelf, and put away the powder. That’s when I recalled a significant reason I no longer used the Uniflow. Relative to putting away a dipper, it’s a PIA. Especially if I was going to change powders.

And, since I’m after 10/10 identical charges not 8/10 and thus would have to weigh & prepare to trickle up each throw anyway, there’s no advantage for me to use the Uniflow over the dippers.

Try this; instead of relying on the dipper to be perfectly on charge, use the dipper that is one below your charge weight. Have the scale set to the desired charge weight. Throw one full dipper in the pan. Refill the dipper. Slowly trickle in (kind of like salting food with a spoon, but more gently) the amount needed to zero out the scale. If you go over, scoop a bit out and repeat the process until the scale zeros.
If you can't beat any mechanical powder measure using this method, that's on you.
Is it fast? No. But it is the most accurate method I know of, and with practice, speed can improve.