Acquired cheap, two of the really enormous CH4 Powder Measures.

One has a wide powder cavity the other a very narrow. Now , no doubt, the one is INTENDED as rifle the other pistol.

But...got me thinking...

Which for something like IMR4350 is the better hold dimension? Wide and shallow or narrow and deep?

So basically a Lyman 55 "format" cavity or a "tube" as with the old Belding and Mull or the newer Lee Perfect.

I shall set up both to throw a charge of 50.5 grains IMR4350 and see what the consistency is over ten charges.

However...does anyone already know the answer?

I never could tell from shallow to deep. I think its more about how ridged the thrower is mounted and how consistent and smooth you throw the charges and of course stick are diffrent than flakes. but with flakes I can throw pretty consistent charges but with stick
I uaually have to throw a little light and trickle.
Dave

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I too don't know.

I think that the narrow and deep will give less shearing with stick powder...except that it will maybe not fill consistently.

Either I was doing it wrong but I found that the Belding & Mull I bought off eBay wasn't as "superior" as the writings of Elmer Keith would have you believe.

But wide and shallow whilst it should fill more easily, wih stick powder, will give more shearing.

Maybe the answer is just to "convert" to ball powder and use the long and deep?

The other day I was doing some 450/400NE. Using AA5744, which is a really short stick. Thought about the Redding measure I have,nah, it's a stick powder. Too nuch hassle to set up and then I'd have to trickle it.
So, let's try out the new Chargemaster!! It was throwing .5 heavy after about 20min of screwing around with that,and waiting for it to warm up.

Ended up using the Lee spoons and the old Hornady beam scale.

A smaller diameter (within reason) deeper hole will meter more precisely than a larger diameter shallower hole.

Why?

Because the variation in fills is at the opening to the cavity, where some action tries to wipe the excess out of the cavity, with varying results. Making this area smaller will result in less variation, as it is a smaller percentage of the total volume than the same volume hole with a larger diameter and thus surface area to be "swept off".

When I say "within reason", I mean that the diameter cannot be so small that stick powders with longer grains cannot properly flow in and out of the cavity.

The Lee Perfect Powder measure metered I4895 more accurately than the Hornady Lock 'n Load measure I now use. It had a much smaller diameter metering tube. It was because of the way it integrated (or more precisely, didn't integrate) with the press that I stopped using it on the progressive. If the Hornady measure had a metering tube the diameter of the Lee, I think it would throw I4895 very accurately.

Joe