Does this exist? Study of powder weight per piece?

[jmorris]

Q- can 1 kernel make a difference on paper ?

I am not sure that is the proper question. “Does 1 kernel difference in your load change POI?” Would be a better question.

Am certain I could find an instance where it could but I try and find combinations where it doesn’t.

If I had a load so picky a kernel made a measurable on target difference, I would find another combination that didn’t.

Same goes for powders that get goofy with temperature changes, I don’t use them under conditions they don’t like. Of course that requires testing and that is “work” to some, so I understand the want to just eliminate charge weight variance as a variable all together and there are ways to do that without breaking the bank.

 

[codytrucker]

I suppose a good experiment would be to load 10 rounds with exactly the same weight charge on a scale that's accurate to .02 grn . And load 10 more intentionally to the extreme widest acceptable variance { 2 at each end , 2 exactly on , and 2 each half way between perfect and the outliers }. And shoot them over a chronograph and for group , see what , if any the difference is .

 

[JFrank]

I am not sure that is the proper question. “Does 1 kernel difference in your load change POI?” Would be a better question.

Am certain I could find an instance where it could but I try and find combinations where it doesn’t.

If I had a load so picky a kernel made a measurable on target difference, I would find another combination that didn’t.

Same goes for powders that get goofy with temperature changes, I don’t use them under conditions they don’t like. Of course that requires testing and that is “work” to some, so I understand the want to just eliminate charge weight variance as a variable all together and there are ways to do that without breaking the bank.

No No
One kernel will not change the point of impact on a node three tenths wide which equals 18 kernels, if one kernels changed poi it would not be a node.

 

[LiveLife]

I suppose a good experiment would be to load 10 rounds with exactly the same weight charge on a scale that's accurate to .02 grn . And load 10 more intentionally to the extreme widest acceptable variance { 2 at each end , 2 exactly on , and 2 each half way between perfect and the outliers }. And shoot them over a chronograph and for group , see what , if any the difference is .

But you would have to keep all the other reloading and shooting variables the same to likely see the difference.

That's the rabbit hole of pursuing ever diminishing return.

After conducting numerous myth busting tests, my opinion for improving accuracy is going after the variables that overshadow other variables the most to reduce group size after accuracy nodes were identified for your barrel harmonics.

In general, I believe bullet consistency, brass prep and optimized powder charge matched to the barrel overshadow a kernel or two difference.

 

[JFrank]

I suppose a good experiment would be to load 10 rounds with exactly the same weight charge on a scale that's accurate to .02 grn . And load 10 more intentionally to the extreme widest acceptable variance { 2 at each end , 2 exactly on , and 2 each half way between perfect and the outliers }. And shoot them over a chronograph and for group , see what , if any the difference is .

People do that all the time with rcbs chargemasters

 

[Nature Boy]

I suppose a good experiment would be to load 10 rounds with exactly the same weight charge on a scale that's accurate to .02 grn . And load 10 more intentionally to the extreme widest acceptable variance { 2 at each end , 2 exactly on , and 2 each half way between perfect and the outliers }. And shoot them over a chronograph and for group , see what , if any the difference is .

I’m basically doing this when I go through load development. I can have an accuracy node in a 0.3g range, but I still measure to 0.02 of nominal.

Understand that I have equipment that makes it fast and easy to hold that level of precision.

 

[codytrucker]

I’m basically doing this when I go through load development. I can have an accuracy node in a 0.3g range, but I still measure to 0.02 of nominal.

Understand that I have equipment that makes it fast and easy to hold that level of precision.

View attachment 1063918

I use a gempro scale that is fast and accurate ,so I usually load to within .02 , too .I said suppose because I'm not concerned enough to try it myself . I only shoot for my own enjoyment , not to compete . That said , might as well be as accurate as your equipment allows .

 

[irishlad]

If I had a load so picky a kernel made a measurable on target difference, I would find another combination that didn’t.

Same goes for powders that get goofy with temperature changes, I don’t use them under conditions they don’t like. Of course that requires testing and that is “work” to some, so I understand the want to just eliminate charge weight variance as a variable all together and there are ways to do that without breaking the bank.

Well stated.

 

[buck460XVR]

If I had a load so picky a kernel made a measurable on target difference, I would find another combination that didn’t.

^^^This for sure.

Could not envision having to count kernels for every powder charge when loading hundreds of rounds. I'd go back to factory ammo before that.

 

[Seedy Character]

^^^This for sure.

Could not envision having to count kernels for every powder charge when loading hundreds of rounds. I'd go back to factory ammo before that.

I do count the pellets of 777 loaded in my .50 call.

1, 2, done.
Other powders or loadings, weighing to 0.1 gr is sufficient.

 

[Varminterror]

Q- can 1 kernel make a difference on paper ?

I am not sure that is the proper question. “Does 1 kernel difference in your load change POI?” Would be a better question.

Same question, as far as I’m concerned…

“Does 1 kernel make a difference on paper for my POI - AND/OR - my velocity stability?”

Nope. Got that particular T shirt.

I can load within the node and have a Chargemaster throwing +/-0.2grn (2 tenths, not 0.02) create ammo which is as precise and as stable as any of my ammo made with my dispensers capable of +/-0.02grn resolution. My higher grade dispensers are faster than my Chargemasters, so the extra precision is convenient.

 

[Varminterror]

Could not envision having to count kernels for every powder charge when loading hundreds of rounds. I'd go back to factory ammo before that.

I do it 150-400 rounds at a time for my PRS match and practice ammo. My dispenser throws within one to two kernels, so I scoop out those one or two, or tap in those one or two, and hit within +/-1 kernel mass in every load.

And that takes about 30 seconds per load at the long end, with the majority of loads not requiring any tweaks, which throw in about 9 seconds per load. Overall, about twice as fast as conventional powder dispensers which are also literally an order of magnitude less precise.

 

[Engineer1911]

Now I know why it takes sooooooooooooooo long to load 500 rounds of match ammo. You guys must be loading for Camp Perry 2023 National matches at this time. Ammo needs to be "seasoned" like firewood or Boston butt pork?

 

[Varminterror]

Now I know why it takes sooooooooooooooo long to load 500 rounds of match ammo.

You don’t know, because it doesn’t take long. It just takes money - then loading to within 2 kernels is faster than loading to within 20 kernels for everyone else.

 

[jmorris]

No No
One kernel will not change the point of impact on a node three tenths wide which equals 18 kernels, if one kernels changed poi it would not be a node.

I can load within the node…

Both, while true, do not answer the question of “can” it make a difference. Rather “does” it make a difference inside a known node. Because they rule out all other possibilities, by being along the right spot in the curve. You were actively in search of the particular spot in your development, through the use of the scientific method or pure luck, you found a node where it didn’t effect POI for some number of kernels.

Does that automatically rule out any possibility of a kernel of any powder, making a difference at any charge weight and distance, changing the POI any measurable amount?

How about another way of asking the same question. If you had a powder known to be erratic with small changes in charge weight. Could you get great performance using it, with more exact charge weights, than more forgiving powders require?

Not that you would want to search out a picky/finicky/sensitive powder but could charging with more precision in a less than ideal situation get you results that match those from a more forgiving powder inside the charge node for a given load combination?

If the answer is yes, one could see why some just do that vs all the testing it takes to find the most forgiving (widest node) load for a given caliber. One way you have to test to exclude all others, the other you just focus on one with greater precision.

 

[Nature Boy]

I do it 150-400 rounds at a time for my PRS match and practice ammo. My dispenser throws within one to two kernels, so I scoop out those one or two, or tap in those one or two, and hit within +/-1 kernel mass in every load.

And that takes about 30 seconds per load at the long end, with the majority of loads not requiring any tweaks, which throw in about 9 seconds per load. Overall, about twice as fast as conventional powder dispensers which are also literally an order of magnitude less precise.

Exactly my process as well

 

[Varminterror]

@jmorris - when you start talking about influences outside of nodes, it’s largely like talking about gas mileage of vehicles, except in the context of vehicles stuck in mud up to their axles.

But…

Observationally, my own data reflects the answer remains “no.” I shoot loads in my antinodes every month, during node confirmation tests - basically reshooting my load development process over and over throughout a year. Whether I do this test with +/-0.02grn equipment loaded to the exact kernel or with +/-0.2grn equipment loaded to the closest 10 kernels, my groups on target and velocity curves remain within the same statistical noise.

Recall, some of the smallest groups in the world - at every range - have been loaded with powder DROPS. I’m not sure I recall ever seeing any test results which have proven a powder drop to be as accurate as +/-0.1grn, or even 0.2grn, as typical results (my own included) show powder dispensers to be more precise than drops… but despite that error, the results on target hold…

Counting kernels is decidedly “sweating the small stuff” that only makes shooters feel better.

 

[Nature Boy]

Both, while true, do not answer the question of “can” it make a difference. Because they rule out all other possibilities, by being along the right spot in the curve. You were actively in search of the particular spot in your development.

Through the use of the scientific method or pure luck, you found a node where it didn’t effect POI for some number of kernels. Does that automatically rule out any possibility of a kernel of any powder, making a difference at any charge weight and distance, changing the POI any measurable amount?

How about another way of asking the same question. If you had a powder known to be erratic with small changes in charge weight. Could you get great performance using it, with more exact charge weights, than more forgiving powders require?

I’ll answer this for myself. I want my ammo to be in the middle of my accuracy window and any variability to fall WELL within my wind reading ability and rifle mechanics.

It all about removing the variables you can control so the only one left is your skill.

 

[jmorris]

I’ll answer this for myself. I want my ammo to be in the middle of my accuracy window and any variability to fall WELL within my wind reading ability and rifle mechanics.

I agree, like you I have the equipment to repeat charge weights to the kernel and as we expect from our chosen loads, it is not required or even make any measurable difference on target.

@jmorris - when you start talking about influences outside of nodes, it’s largely like talking about gas mileage of vehicles, except in the context of vehicles stuck in mud up to their axles.

It’s really me thinking out loud about the justification of the equipment required to have single kernel resolution. I didn’t have it until I made my own, upon testing, I found what many of you did.

@Nature Boy might be the most likely to answer the question, because he still has his, as to why spend $1000 on something that doesn’t have any positive on target effect?

More of a question as to the rising interest in such charge weight precision vs rising interest in finding the most forgiving load possible.?

Is it just a “it’s only $1000, it doesn’t do anything to improve my results but it can’t hurt, even if I can’t tell any difference.” product or has anyone proven any benefit, with any load combination at any distance by using hundredth resolution charge weights?

 

[mokin]

Interesting discussion. Beyond the ability of me and my firearms but still good stuff to know. I do try to reduce the slop where I think I can and it will make the most difference.

 

[buck460XVR]

Counting kernels is decidedly “sweating the small stuff” that only makes shooters feel better.

.....and this is why I never chastise folks for the way they reload....as long as it is safe. Like riding motorcycle, the shooting sports is highly dependent on confidence. You lose your confidence, and you are lost. Folks on reloading forums like this tend to like to criticize others because they do things differently. Doesn't matter if it's trimming handgun brass, cleaning primer pockets or just how high of shine one puts on their brass. Most of us have something that makes us feel good about OUR ammo, even tho in the long run it probably makes no difference at all on POI. Most of my reloading is done for revolvers, which are fairly short range weapons, using projectiles that are more focused on terminal performance than accuracy. I generally use powders with very small kernels. That is why I stated.....

Could not envision having to count kernels for every powder charge when loading hundreds of rounds. I'd go back to factory ammo before that.

....that does not mean, you should not.

 

[Varminterror]

@buck460XVR - my point in my previous response is that your comments paint a clear misunderstanding of the process. There’s nothing tedious about the methods we’re describing which allow us to load within 1-2 kernels, rather than more common methods which only allow within 10-20, or even 50 kernels.

You’re perceiving this as an activity like counting grains of sand on a beach, where it’s really an exceptionally fast process. The only process faster is to DROP powder, with no confirmation weighing at all. We drop and auto trickle charges to within 2-3 kernels, and can pick those out or trim those in in a matter of seconds.

It’s actually FASTER, LESS tedious, and MORE precise than common powder dispensing methods… so that’s why we do it - it’s too easy to do it to have any excuse not to do it.

 

[Nature Boy]

@Nature Boy might be the most likely to answer the question, because he still has his, as to why spend $1000 on something that doesn’t have any positive on target effect?

For me, it’s the speed, convenience AND accuracy.

The topic comes up occasionally on ASF as to whether one kernel makes a difference at distances where it might matter, and as you can imagine, it’s hotly debated.

You guys check my math on this

If my competition 308 win load is:

43.5gn of Varget yielding 2,725 fps, that is:

62 fps / 1gn
5 kernals / 1gn
1 kernal = 12 fps

Does 12 fps matter at 1,000 yards? Not if your wind reading skills suck

 

[Nature Boy]

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/a-d-scale-with-auto-trickler.846883/

Here’s why I bought the A&D FX120 and Autotrickler.

 

[jmorris]

You guys check my math on this…

Does 12 fps matter at 1,000 yards?

I don’t know what bullet we are talking about but say a Berger 168 gn classic hunter


Should make about 3.8” of difference in elevation according to their calculations. Would have certainly made a difference to the current and previous record holders, who’s 10 shot groups were both smaller in total diameter.


https://bergerbullets.com/new-1000-yard-world-record-set-with-berger-bullets/#iLightbox[gallery28293]/0

What have you measured in your testing?

1000 yards is much different than 100-200 yard benchrest, where ranges are so short, the disparity in velocity becomes much more difficult to realize. So it’s a good place to answer the question. Where a short range (100 yard) benchrest shooter can shoot volume thrown charges into 1/4 MOA or smaller groups, you are much closer to a pistol shooter shooting 25-50 yards than reaching out to 1000.