Well WP79 vet, I went out and tried my luck in seeing how my weight charges compared to those that I just used the measure on. I shot at 50 yards and there was such a little difference between the two that you really couldn't tell what was the best I actually think the measured charges were a tiny bit better. It's about the poor shooting I did for some time at 50 yards. I discovered that my patches were too thin and I was burning through them in spots and I didn't have that trouble last summer with the same charge, which is a 50 caliber percussion with 45 grains equivalent of 777. Using my powder measure that actually figures out to about 35 grain scale weight of 777, so that's what i did, was weigh them out very carefully and compare those with just throwed weights of powder. Actually this trouble with my patches which I hadn't had before, decided me that I need a different patch, so I have ordered some new patches, I did try some .016 that I had with me, and it even burnt through that on one so I ordered some .018 this morning and we'll see how that goes when the weather lets me shoot. It was really disappointing to me that the weight charges weren't better but I'm gonna try it again come spring and see if they are a little better using a different patch. The only patches I had with me that did measure .016 were lubricated with fast orange hand cleaner and the darns thing shot pretty good. I guess the only reason I keep on shooting muzzle loaders is that I can keep on experimenting period
squint
Hmmm... Looks like your shooting session brought some important things to light, even though it didn't show any difference in the performance of weighed versus measured charges.
Lots of things affect accuracy, and because random errors add in quadrature, you can completely eliminate a small source of random error, but it doesn't do much to change your overall results.
What does "add in quadrature" mean? Let's say that we have three sources of random error, one of which is +/- 7, one of which is +/- 3, and one of which is +/- 2. The total error is the square root of (7x7 + 3x3 + 2x2) = 7.87
If we completely eliminate the error which is +/- 3, the result is the square root of (7x7 + 2x2) = 7.3
To make significant progress in group sizes, then, we have to identify and reduce the biggest sources of errors. Trouble is, there are dozens of factors that affect the group size of a muzzle loader, and it's really hard to know which one or ones are the biggest. But, like you say, muzzle-loading is a fun hobby BECAUSE there are so many experiments to do - and they are at least a little different for every rifle. And, unlike meaningful experiments with cartridge rifles, most of the experiments can be done without super expensive machine tools and measurement equipment.
Sounds like patch issues are your biggest source of error at the moment. Thanks for posting - I'm eager to follow your progress in resolving the patch issues and exploring the impact of weighing versus measuring charges.
The cool thing about a forum like this is that all of us can learn from each others' experiences, and make much faster progress. That's why I'm posting Range Reports on my progress in developing an elk load for my Renegade, and why I appreciate everybody's comments and thoughts so much.
