Bullseye, the powder and game

[saltydog452]

Yesterday the nice USPS Carrier left me with an 8 lb jug of Bullseye and 5,000 primers.

After getting about 20 years of dust off the Progressive and running a few rounds and measuring powder drop, I found that either my charge holes have grown of the new batch of BE powder is a tad heavier.

Charge bar that used to throw 4.0 BE now throws 4.6. The old short line charge of 3.7 now throws 4.2.

Has anyone else noticed a long term fluctuation?

Thanks,

salty

 

[WESHOOT2]

ensure-ance (sp BFD)

Of your scale? (I mean, you broke out your 20-yr-old scale weight check set, ay?)


(yes re heavier)

 

[saltydog452]

Yes I did.

The calibration weight remained the same and the balance beam did 'balance' at the calibration check points.

Took extra care to insure that the counter weights were positioned in the correct 'notchs' on the beam. Even used two pairs of reading glasses to get up close and make sure I read the 'notchs' correctly.

My older BE powder can't be retrivedto use as a comparison.

I just thought a long-time reloader who used fixed powder charge bars may have noticed a difference over time.

Sleeping has occured in the last twenty years, not all of the twenty 'tho.

Thnaks,

salty

A Quick EDIT: If the powder itself is heavier these days, and the charge bars were machined pre last Ice Age, would you make your todays powder choices by volume (existing charge bars)?... or weight (somehow modify the charge bar)?

I don't have access to a chronograph.

tnx,

sd.

 

[zippy13]

Let's not forget, back in the day, we were loading with Hercules' Bullseye, and now it's ATK's Alliant Bullseye. Life is full of changes: some good, others not so good.

 

[Lemmon]

Old is good.

I recently started reloading again after 20 plus years and I pulled out my old scale to use again. It was dusty and I had to clean it and contact good to make it more sensitive. Some reason I think it is an O'haus 5-10-10??. Works great and it is more consistently accurate than my brand new RCBS electric scale. Yes I have calibrated weights to check the accuracy. It works great on my old 25 plus year old powder just as it does the recent purchased powder. The RCBS scale is faster to work with though.

Lemmon

 

[WESHOOT2]

I personally would START with volume.

 

[Powderman]

I personally would START with volume.

Not with smokeless powder!

The charges of Bullseye commonly used in Conventional Pistol shooting look like a tiny bit in the bottom of a .45 ACP case. Use the published data in reliable reloading manuals.

 

[WESHOOT2]

all very density-suspect

I mean because the powder volume measure did not change, the OP should begin current testing WITHOUT CHANGING the measure.
First.

 

[spacecoast]

I would definitely go by weight, it's a much more reliable and objective measure of how much powder is there. Start at minimimum loads and work up.

 

[saltydog452]

Got it. I think. We'll see.

My bathroom weight scale reads heavy also.

Thanks,

salty

 

[Slamfire]

Powder manufacturer's have to blend stocks because their production processes are not that precise.

They blend to meet pressure by weight. Not volume.


I had several cans of old bullseye. The difference was not that much

[SIZE="3"]

Kimber Custom Classic


230 gr LRN Valiant 4.5 grs Bullseye lot BE532 (80's mfgr)  Mixed Brass WLP (brass)  OAL 1.250"	taper crimp .469"

16-May-09	 high 83  °F
		
Ave Vel =	782.7				
Std Dev =	13.41				
ES =	52.05				
High = 	815.5				
Low =	763.4				
N =	28				
					
230 gr LRN Valiant 4.5 grs Bullseye 99' & 2005 mixed lot Mixed Brass WLP (brass) OAL 1.250"	taper crimp .469"

16-May-09	 high 83  °F

Ave Vel =	805.2				
Std Dev =	38.07				
ES =	136.9				
High = 	912.4				
Low =	775.5				
N =	24				
				
230 gr LRN Valiant 4.5 grs Bullseye lot 827 (60's/70's powder) Mixed Brass WLP (brass)  OAL 1.250"	taper crimp .469"

16-May-09	 high 83  °F
					
Ave Vel =	822.9				
Std Dev =	14.14				
ES =	55.24				
High = 	853.7				
Low =	798.4				
N =	26
[/SIZE]