Powder Measure Differences

Status
Not open for further replies.

rodwha

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Messages
4,044
Location
Texas
I dropped my adjustable rifle powder measure last night, and because the sliding funnel attachment is plastic it broke. So I went to Dixie Gun Works and looked over what they have and wondered if anyone knew what any defining differences were, why I’d want to spend more for the other models.

The cheaper Traditions model:

https://www.dixiegunworks.com/index...1204+TRADITIONS+ADJUST+POWDER+MEASURE+W+SPOUT

And the other two options:

https://www.dixiegunworks.com/index...product_name/QA0405+Powder+Measure+with+Spout

And:

https://www.dixiegunworks.com/index...roduct_name/QA0402+Powder+Measure+with+Funnel

Doubt I’d need more than 120 grns of powder...
 
The cheapest one is fine. They're all brass and the pouring funnel would just get in the way. I can't tell, but the cheap one looks to have a brass nut and screw and I'd like that better than the second one with a metal machine screw. Just my take on it.
 
Was your plastic measure one of the Thompson Center ones?

here's a little lesson on measures and up front to the "weighing" people I'm not comparing weight vs volume. I am comparing volume between two powder measures. It has nothing to do with Pyrodex vs Goex or Swiss, only the volume between two different measures.
In this picture you will see my clear plastic TC measure showing a little under 45 grains (by volume) of powder that was measured out of the brass measure set at 50 grains. I did this picture after a friend told me he was putting 50 grains under a RB in an 1858 Uberti Remington. It might work if you have a measure like this brass one.......View media item 1921
 
Was your plastic measure one of the Thompson Center ones?

here's a little lesson on measures and up front to the "weighing" people I'm not comparing weight vs volume. I am comparing volume between two powder measures. It has nothing to do with Pyrodex vs Goex or Swiss, only the volume between two different measures.
In this picture you will see my clear plastic TC measure showing a little under 45 grains (by volume) of powder that was measured out of the brass measure set at 50 grains. I did this picture after a friend told me he was putting 50 grains under a RB in an 1858 Uberti Remington. It might work if you have a measure like this brass one.......View media item 1921

No. It doesn’t have markings but is a brass measure with a plastic funnel that slides along the top.

The silly pistol measure that came with my starter pack from Cabelas also throws a different charge compared to the one my father gave me (the one I broke).
 
Guys, why don't you just measure your beloved powder measure with a cheap syringe filled with water? That way you will know for sure what is the actual volume of the chosen setting. As most syringes are in ml here's a neat conversion chart from cc (cubic centimeters) to grains. A hint - 1 ml equals 1 cc by volume. http://www.curtrich.com/BPConversionSheet.htm
 
I've been using one like the cheapest version for years. Does the job and seems to be accurate. I find the funnel helps, especially with smaller calibers.
 
To think the mountain men and those before them used horn tips.

I’ve actually pondered something along those lines once I get my accurate loads dialed in. But I’d want a “slide” on my fixed measures were I to do so. Something to help funnel the powder.

Having a modern funnel afixed seems to help, especially when it’s breezy, which is why I wouldn’t want a measure without one.

And I have a cut .270 Win brass that I use on my revolvers to further help get the powder in the hole. Apparently some of us could use help finding it... :what:
 
You've demonstrated that the two don't throw and equal volume. I trust you determined that the TC measure wasn't over-the-proper volume, instead of the brass measure being under? :confused: You didn't mention how you know the TC is the "accurate" one of the pair. ;)

LD
 
You've demonstrated that the two don't throw and equal volume. I trust you determined that the TC measure wasn't over-the-proper volume, instead of the brass measure being under? :confused: You didn't mention how you know the TC is the "accurate" one of the pair. ;)

LD
Actually I had 3 other measures that agreed with the TC one and weighing the 3F powder and comparing it with other shooters pretty much made me think that the little cheapo was off. Of course 1 F would weigh less than 3F but I wasn't getting that picky. I also had an issue once with a claim of............ but, I promised to not tell about that one! :) Or were you just trying to stir the stuff? :neener:
 
No I just try to remember that a lot of the folks that read "our" discussions need to know the "how" behind our claims...., in truth I figured you had done some cross checking with a scale or two and simply wanted you to add that tid bit, but four x four by different makers is a pretty good litmus test.

NOW IF I was going to stir the pot...., I'd ask how you know that all four of your measures were not simply, equally inaccurate (perhaps all four were based on a single, inaccurate source :what:) .... compared to the "cheapo" measure, right? :rofl:

Cheers!

LD
 
No I just try to remember that a lot of the folks that read "our" discussions need to know the "how" behind our claims...., in truth I figured you had done some cross checking with a scale or two and simply wanted you to add that tid bit, but four x four by different makers is a pretty good litmus test.

NOW IF I was going to stir the pot...., I'd ask how you know that all four of your measures were not simply, equally inaccurate (perhaps all four were based on a single, inaccurate source :what:) .... compared to the "cheapo" measure, right? :rofl:

Cheers!

LD


Curses.......................Foiled Again!!!!!:rofl:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top