Harrel powder measures.

[menial 1]

Do Harrel powder measures dispense powder as accurately as their prices would imply? I throw a low measure at the moment with a couple of old Lee measures and top up with a trickler for every round, they throw up to .4 of a grain variation, quite time consuming, it would be nice if I could trust a meaqsure that would allow me to put a case under the measure and have it dispense consistently to .1 of a grain.

This question is directed at those who use or have used these measures extensively.

Thank you in advance.

Pete

[6ppc]

I find with powders such as N133 they are pretty much bang on and accurate.Once you start moving up to N140 etc they are not quite as accurate and tend to chop and bridge a bit.I always think it is better to throw a little short and trickle up.Very nice bit of kit though.

[menial 1]

I find the same problem with the Lee measures, as I move up to coarser powders such 140 and 160 the weights thrown varies more.

Guess I''ll save myself a disappointment if I stick with what I have.

Thanks.

Pete.

[1967spud]

in conclusion are they as good as the price says?

[Millwall Paul]

One of my shooting buddies uses a Harrel and he swears blind by it. He uses VW N150, N160 and I believe N133 through it as well. He says that the drops are always bang on and keeps telling me to buy one to reload with, but I use the DPS1200 instead. He definately thinks they are well worth the money.

[Ronin]

I have Harrel BR powder measure, a Lyman DPS with updgraded parts and also several Dillon powder dispensers for my RL550b.

 

I shoot calibres from 22-250 AI thru to 338 so my charges range from 39g to nearly 100!

 

I bought the Harrel as I wanted a quick fix - throw and load rather than throw and trickle, but during many 100's of reloads (with the Harrel) and many 1000's with the Dillon and Lyman kit have come to the opinion that its best and most accurate to throw light - weigh and trickle up.

 

 

I trickle up over an acculab scale that measures grains to two decimal places.

 

 

I don't think I would be comfortable relying soley on the harrels reputation, because so far, although its "quite accurate", it still doesn't give me 100% accuracy on my charge weights.

 

 

Yes they are good, but with the above caveat.

 

 

I wont be selling the Harrel though - or the Lyman DPS

[Guest Coltauto]

Do Harrel powder measures dispense powder as accurately as their prices would imply? I throw a low measure at the moment with a couple of old Lee measures and top up with a trickler for every round, they throw up to .4 of a grain variation, quite time consuming, it would be nice if I could trust a meaqsure that would allow me to put a case under the measure and have it dispense consistently to .1 of a grain.

This question is directed at those who use or have used these measures extensively.

Thank you in advance.

Pete

 

A culver type measure is a culver type measure and one decent product throws charges as accurately as the most expensive. The Harrel is a beautifully machined piece of equipment and aesthetically head and shoulders above other leading brands, but it still is an attempt to measure by volume rather than weight. Just banging the measures handle to cut through extruded powder is like tapping the side of a hopper and the effect will be greater flow into the cavity and greater density charges. Small charges of ball powder can be within 0.1 grain, larger rifle charges double to three times that amount. Thowing large charges of extruded powders can show variances of 1.5 grains.

 

I think part of the reason people who own them lavish compliments on them is because it's tough to say an expensive product performs no better than a good product. I have two. I buy them because I like to have good looking machinery on the loading bench. I use a charge master dispenser and scale for critical work.

 

If you'd like to see a more quantified comparison of the Harrel -

 

http://www.realguns.com/Commentary/comar63.htm

[Ronin]

Quite true

 

the Harrel is no better than any of the three Dillon powder dispensers I have

 

 

and no better than the Lyman DPS either....

 

 

Still rely on electonic lab scales for end trickling

[menial 1]

Thanks for your thoughts gents, the test on the realgun site would appear to be as conclusive as you could wish for, trickling each load it is then.

Pete.

[Alycidon]

Well yes but I trickled a batch of experimental loads using N150 recently, 3 grains difference between top and bottom ends, yet all loads would have gone into a single .7moa group so for sub 300 yard work I suspect it is mainly a confidence thing.

 

A

[Guest Kenneth]

Well yes but I trickled a batch of experimental loads using N150 recently, 3 grains difference between top and bottom ends, yet all loads would have gone into a single .7moa group so for sub 300 yard work I suspect it is mainly a confidence thing.

 

A

 

As with all things where a variety of components are used to make the end product. Consistency is only achieved by the reducing of the variables.

 

I've used a Harrel for the last 10 years, and have found its consistent metering capabilities exceptional. As Alycidon has already mentioned minor variances make very little difference to where the bullet does under normal shooting conditions and distances.

 

Just how accurate you really need to be is a whole debate in its own right, and one that has rumbled around the tinternet repeatedly.

[Ronin]

It may be a moot point regarding how consistant the charges are, but, if one is shooting at say 500 or 1000 yds any differences in powder charge becomes noticable in vertical dispertion.

 

A 50 fps change in velocity (1 grain extra or less in a 50 grain capacity case for example) will give you 2 inch difference at 500 and 4 inches dispertion at 1000.

 

I am using a 6.5x284 and 140g VLD as example here.

 

Granted such consistancy is not really warranted on a deer rifle, at moderate ranges, but the farther out one goes be that on paper, fur or feather, the greater the need for absolute accuracy with charge weights.

[menial 1]

Looking at the variations found in the realgun test, where I would imagine the results weren't fudged for any particular reason, when I'm loading generally with Viht 133 and Viht 140, the variations of .1-.2gr are unlikely to be noticed shot to shot when I'm shooting in the field, or to put it simply they'll still be more accurate than I can be, given the various positions I have to take shots from when stalking or foxing.

Another way of putting it is, would the ordinary shooter have the ability to discern any noticeable difference shot to shot whether from a bench position or the usual make do position of the field shooter.

My rifles are all no neck turn builds to keep loading time down to sensible time useage.

I use a Redding no.2 scale and I suppose in all honesty I may already be putting these weight variations into my loads given the many factors that probably affect balance scales from day to day.

Pete.

[Guest Coltauto]

Looking at the variations found in the realgun test, where I would imagine the results weren't fudged for any particular reason, when I'm loading generally with Viht 133 and Viht 140, the variations of .1-.2gr are unlikely to be noticed shot to shot when I'm shooting in the field, or to put it simply they'll still be more accurate than I can be, given the various positions I have to take shots from when stalking or foxing.

Another way of putting it is, would the ordinary shooter have the ability to discern any noticeable difference shot to shot whether from a bench position or the usual make do position of the field shooter.

My rifles are all no neck turn builds to keep loading time down to sensible time useage.

I use a Redding no.2 scale and I suppose in all honesty I may already be putting these weight variations into my loads given the many factors that probably affect balance scales from day to day.

Pete.

 

0.1-0.2 grain variations are probably of little consequence. Close to 0.5 can get to be a problem, particularly with light weight firearms where barrel harmonics may place a greater demand on consistent pressure and velocity for consistent shot pressure. One of my very thin profile barrel .25-06 Remington Mountain rifle tends to put shots all over the place unless I am careful with handloads.

 

Excessive pressure can become an issue with half grain charge variations in conjunction with top loads. Generally, changes in bore friction with temp changes from shooting and variations in bullet seating depth have a greater effect than 0.1 - 0.2 grain powder variations. Of course throwing consistent charges is particularly an issue with rifle and handgun cartridges of small capacity when loading some of the faster powders. The final issue with minimizing charge variation is control of accumulative error; powder, case capacity, seating depth, etc. I suppose consistency of preciseness of assembly can be more philosophical than anything else. Handloaders tend to work as though they are preparing for bench rest competition even when shooting at a target with a 6" kill zone

 

Apologize for going on. I just really like firearms and associated topics.

[1967spud]

0.1-0.2 grain variations are probably of little consequence. Close to 0.5 can get to be a problem, particularly with light weight firearms where barrel harmonics may place a greater demand on consistent pressure and velocity for consistent shot pressure. One of my very thin profile barrel .25-06 Remington Mountain rifle tends to put shots all over the place unless I am careful with handloads.

 

Excessive pressure can become an issue with half grain charge variations in conjunction with top loads. Generally, changes in bore friction with temp changes from shooting and variations in bullet seating depth have a greater effect than 0.1 - 0.2 grain powder variations. Of course throwing consistent charges is particularly an issue with rifle and handgun cartridges of small capacity when loading some of the faster powders. The final issue with minimizing charge variation is control of accumulative error; powder, case capacity, seating depth, etc. I suppose consistency of preciseness of assembly can be more philosophical than anything else. Handloaders tend to work as though they are preparing for bench rest competition even when shooting at a target with a 6" kill zone

 

Apologize for going on. I just really like firearms and associated topics.

carry on mate its nice to see different veiws and by the way welcome to the forum

[Elwood]

I think part of the reason people who own them lavish compliments on them is because it's tough to say an expensive product performs no better than a good product. I have two. I buy them because I like to have good looking machinery on the loading bench. I use a charge master dispenser and scale for critical work.

 

If you'd like to see a more quantified comparison of the Harrel -

 

http://www.realguns.com/Commentary/comar63.htm

 

I applaud you for your straight up honesty.

[Guest Kenneth]

Granted such consistancy is not really warranted on a deer rifle, at moderate ranges, but the farther out one goes be that on paper, fur or feather, the greater the need for absolute accuracy with charge weights.

 

I would say the nut behind the butt and the climatic conditions have a far greater effect upon the eventual bullet placement than minor variances in powder charges.