How much does 90 grains FFF weigh?

[paulvallandigham]

Stumpkiller is right. I suspected that 454 "Grains" was actually the GRAM weight for a pound of anything, and that you were simply misreading the label. Gram is often abbreviated as "Gr" or "gr", the same as we abbreviate "Grains-grs. It rarely is also abbreviated as seen here, with a simple "G". after the numbered weight. ( ie. 454 G.)

 

[longcruise]

Hey Snow, without getting into the "454" question, I'll just address the question you posed below.

I like to make my own powder measures from horn, antler etc... Recently I checked the volume of one, using a commercially produced brass measure, at 90 grains volume. With a second brass measure it read 80 grains . Obviously there is some inconsistancy in measures.

First off, I'll address the question of the numeric volume of powder versus the numeric weight of powder. Below is a bench experiment I did using my RCBS bench mounted powder measure. I set the rcbs measure to an arbitray setting. The idea with this experiment was to compare the actual weight of powders that originated from an identical volume setting. So here are the weights of some various powders and granulations all thrown from that exact same setting and then weighed on a balance beam reloading scale. I threw and weighed four charges and then averaged them.

Graf 3f
55.9
55.5
55.5
55.3
-------
55.55

Goex 2f
51.1
51.7
51.3
51.4
-------
51.37

Goex 3f
52.2
52.1
52.5
52.2
--------
52.25

Elephant 2f
60.2
60.4
60.4
60.1
---------
60.27

Swiss 1.5f
55.9
56.1
56.4
56.2
------
56.15

Swiss 2f
57.4
57.2
57.2
57.4
-------
57.30

Pyrodex RS
37.0
37.1
37.5
36.8
-------
37.10

This is the Joe Friday version ("just give me the facts, sir") :haha: I assure you this is accurate data, and as you can see there is clearly not a reliable relationship between the volume of a powder and it's weight! :shocked2:

The nice thing is, there does not have to be a reliable relationship! Most of us go to the range and pour powder into a measure and then into the barrel. We do it by volume. If we use the same brand and granulation of powder all the time, the charges will be reasonably the same.

I have not compared the weights of various lots of the same brand and granulation powder and wonder how they would compare. Needs more experimentation. Any volunteers?

BTW, I shot the same exact powders over a chronograph and also found that there is no relationship between the actual weight of powder and it's velocity. The heaviest powder above (elephant) shot the slowest.

Now, another bit of "Joe Friday" fact finding (for those with the tenacity to read this entire post! :haha: )

First off, I have one adjustable powder measure that I have used for years as my "standard". It is used to test for the best load for any rifle. I rarely use this measure in the field, even though it would be perfectly reliable in repeating actual charges. Usually I make a fixed measure for that rifle and powder (absolutely necessary, see above averages).

Here is the most important thing I have to say on this: You can't make a fixed measure by gradually increasing it's volume and testing by pouring powder from your "standard" measure into your under construction fixed measure! Read that over again cause it is absolutely a fact! The newly made measure will hold much more powder than the standard measure that you used to arrive at the new fixed measure's volume. Read that one over again too cause it's a fact!

You can test this bit of blasphemy with a simple experiment; you will need an accurate balance beam scale, powder to be poured from whatever container you use when actually shooting, and two adjustable powder measures. Next, set one of the adjustable measures to any arbitrary point, fill it from your horn or flask or whatever you use, doing it exactly as you would do when loading your rifle. Weigh that charge. Next, take your other adjustable measure and fiddle with the adjustment until it also throws the exact same weight of powder per your balance beam scale. Now you should have two volumetric measures that throw the exact same amount of powder by wieght.

Now, here's another "Joe Friday" fact; If you fill one of those measures exactly as you would to load your rifle and then pour it into the other identical measure, it will overflow by a good bit.

The lesson is obvious; If you want to create a measure that throws the exact same amount of powder as another measure, you will need to weigh the powder thrown by the original and then gradually increase the volume of the new measure until it throws the same weight of powder per a scale.

Some may contest my "Joe Friday facts", but I will give you my response here and now. "Try it yourself".

Other's may wonder "who is Joe Friday?". I refer you to google. :rotf:

 

[David W.]

Wouldn't it be easier to make a measure that throws more powder and then whittle (file) it down?

 

[roundball]

Thanks for posting the test results / variations...they are the reason I posted my opinion that no generic, industry wide, across the board statement can be made that "powder volume equals powder weight".

IMO, the only way such a statement can be made is when using the same granulation size of a particular brand of powder.
ie: if 100 measured grains of Goex 2F happened to equal 100 grns weight, that's great.

But as soon as we switch to measuring 100 grns volume of Goex 1F/3F/4F/5F/7F from that measure...or switch to another brand of powder all-together, then all bets are off...no guarantees.

In fact, using the same measure but switching powders is analagous to using the same 1+1/4oz 'shot bushing' for reloading but:
Use lead shot one time and get one weight;
Use steel shot the next time and get a different weight;
Use tungsten shot the next time and get a different weight;

 

[hanshi]

Good point. A while back I tested some screw-in tube measures that fit my flask. The one marked 60grns threw a charge weighing 53grns. I had used this measure for decades as that charge was virtually always very accurate in all my .45s and up. The 75grn spout threw a weighed charge of 68grns. The 20grn and 30grn spout charges weighed, are you ready, 20 and 30grns.

Regardless, I'll use measures based on what charge is claimed for them. This includes numerous antler and bamboo measures. They didn't have scales handy at all times 200 years plus ago. They just used a volume of powder that was accurate/killed game, etc. Consistency is the key to measuring, not actual weight.

 

[George]

Its still not quite that simple to make an across the board statement that Weight & Volume are the same.

I can see that we are all talking past each other and wasting our time.

Everyone seems to be fixated on the idea that it's impossible to measure exactly X grains with any volume measure so that it equals X grains when weighed. I concede the point, never said otherwise. That's not the conversation I'm having.

The original poster said: "In other words Grains by volume is NOT equal to Grains by weight. In other words 90 grains by weight is a mighty stout load as oppossed to 90 grains by volume." That shows a mistaken understanding of the meaning of "measuring by volume", I was attempting to explain the basic relationship between volume measure and weight measure. I failed, and I now limp from the field. bowed but not defeated.

Once again a mistaken old greybeard dogma gets perpetuated, ready for the next crop of newbies.. "volume is a new unit of weight, beyond understanding, don't ask, just do as I say".

Spence

 

[tg]

"I still don't think weight gr is equal to vol grains."
Technicaly there is no volume grains as grains is not a unit of volumetric measurement, we are discussing the limited world of ML here ans a simplified method of using two meauring systems and their comparative values.

 

[Billnpatti]

The easiest way to make an accurate powder measure is to use a powder scale to weigh the amount of powder in your measure. Make the measure deeper than you know you will need and then keep filling it, weighing the amount of powder it contains and then trimming the measure until it is throwing the exact weight of powder you want. Because different granulations and different brands will have different bulk densities, your measure will be accurate only for the powder brand and granulation you use to calibrate it.

 

[HOGGHEAD]

Guys I think we can all agree that consistency is the most important thing to do when measuring powder?? I think that is what the OP is after. The most consistent way to measure powder?? Does that not sound correct??

I believe powder is measured more consistently when measured by volume instead of by weight. For a couple of reasons.

First it is easier to measure by volume. It is simple and fast. And you know you are not going to overcharge!!

The problem with weighing is powder density when it comes to moisture. Moisture will effect the weight of the powder.

So I believe volume measuring is more consistent as long as you work up a proper cadence for pouring and measuring your powder. We all know we can effect the amount of powder in the measure by how we pour the powder into the measure.

So I worked up a cadence for pouring powder(just like my cadence for casting projectiles). The more consistent your cadence is, the more consistent your charge is going to be. Weighing powder will at times give you different volumes because of humidity.

I think the actual amount of powder(volume) is better to be consistent than the weight. Because of the burning characteristics of Black Powder.

People have been charging MZ's for years by powder volume for very good reason. Too many years of wisdom for me to question!! Tom.

 

[Rifleman1776]

Wouldn't it be easier to make a measure that throws more powder and then whittle (file) it down?

We are having fun here. Don't go ruining things with common sense. :nono:
'scuse me now while I go out and bang my head against a rock. :surrender:

 

[Zonie]

I'll admit I didn't read every line in every post but I did notice that several of you folks took the time and trouble to use a fixed sized device to measure out a quantity of powder and to record the findings.

The original question of this topic was aimed on how much VOLUME does a grain's weight of powder occupy.

If some of you folks who did all of that weighing could measure the size of the powder measure you used and tell us what its dimensions are along with the average weight of the powder it "threw" I can calculate the volume of the measure and calculate the grains/cc or grains/cu. in.

This would answer the question for us all.

Oh, knowing there were some differences between the 2Fg and 3Fg powders weights when thrown from the same powder measure I can give the "actual average weight" per cubic inch for each granulation of powder.

How's that sound? :grin:

 

[David W.]

Wouldn't it be easier to make a measure that throws more powder and then whittle (file) it down?

We are having fun here. Don't go ruining things with common sense. :nono:
'scuse me now while I go out and bang my head against a rock. :surrender:

:rotf:

All the technical data is great, but I don't really care how much powder I'm shooting, I care about the accuracy with a given charge. One should shoot different amounts until they find what their rifle likes and set the measure to that amount no matter how many grains is used.

My adjustable measure is set for what I thought would be 76 gr. I didn't know for about two years when I put it on a scale that the real measurement is 74.2 gr. I measured it for fun, not to make sure I was chunking exactly 76 gr.

Given that, I do tap the side of my measure so the powder settles down, making the charge more consistent.

 

[Otter]

I'll take you up on that, Zonie. The measure I used gives a powder column that is 0.437 inches in diameter and 1.347 inches high. If my math is correct, that is 0.20203 cubic inches. Convert to cc, cf, cy or whatever, as you wish :thumbsup: .

Goex 3f AVG weight of 5 samples = 49.42 gr
Goex 1f AVG weight of 5 samples = 49.1 gr

Just for clarification for all - I have only used volumetric measure for my muzzleloading firearms. Never weighed any of the volumes to see how many grains (by weight) my charges were. When discussing muzzleloader charges with someone, and they say they use "X grains of 3f" in their rifle, I don't ask if that is by volume or weight, I just know they mean volume. I also know that volume yielded by the "X" line on my measuring device probably is not identical to the "X" line on their measuring device. It is a point of reference for conversation and possible additional load development. I may have mis-interpreted the OP's query to begin with and embarked on a misguided journey, but it was at least somewhat enlightening for me.

 

[necchi]

OK, I helped a guy on the forum here once that didn't have a measure or scale and wanted to create a useable volume measure with common household items
I found out a level measuring teaspoon held 9 grns by weight of Goex 2F.
Will that help?

Spence is actually right, The volume measures where at one time for someone ment to hold lets say 10grns of weight at the "10" mark on the graduation scale.
Problem is industry wide nobody cared to make a graduated scale the same as the other guy.

It all really moot when it comes to graduated or fixed volume measure, just set it to what you have found to be the best charge with that measure for your gun and your good to go.

The same thing happens with modern powders, I could send someone a charge of 44.2 grns of Varget from my scale and his scale might show that it's 44.0,, and it doesn't matter the 44.2 off my scale works best for me.
It just needs to be repeatable.

 

[Snow on the Roof]

Well it appears "Old Dogs" can indeed learn new tricks. I was taught, as a very young boy, never measure blackpowder by weight but by volume. I made the assumption that grains by weight and grains by volume where diffrent measurments. Nothing mystical about it just different based on an old standard, much like the afore mentioned "bushel of peaches vs bushel of corn". Well I was wrong. Wrong because my assumption was incorrect and wrong because I never thought to question it . Lesson learned. Now I wonder what other black powder "facts" are really myths or false assumptions...but it is good to grow.

Again this whole thing started because I wanted to produce an accurate measure so a friend could reproduce known shooting results using one of my measures. In the future I will weigh the charge my client's individual measure throws and make a new measure based on the weight of the charge.

Snow

 

[Stumpkiller]

Bingo!

Before Zonie gets out his slide rule to figure out the conic volume of a tapered antler powder measure. (V = 1/3(3.1415)*r^2*h, where r = 1/2 the width at the mouth of the measure).

But it would still be a volume measure and not weight. :haha:

 

[roundball]

In the future I will weigh the charge my client's individual measure throws and make a new measure based on the weight of the charge.

If you truly want to make an identical BP volume measure, use water as your standard.
Fill the reference measure with water, then adjust your new measure until it holds the same amount.
Zero worries about different powder weights, different granulations, settling, compaction, "fines", etc.

Just pure simple identical volume of water.

 

[longcruise]

flintlock62 Said:Wouldn't it be easier to make a measure that throws more powder and then whittle (file) it down?




We are having fun here. Don't go ruining things with common sense.
'scuse me now while I go out and bang my head against a rock.

Can be done either way. Last time I made measures, one was an antler with a hole drilled in it, plain and simple. The other was an antler with a brass tube glued into a pre-drilled hole. I drilled the antler with hole only a bit at a time till I had the exact weight desired. On the one with the brass tube I made an initial cut with a saw and then filed till it was perfect.

"common sense" Is kinda like "conventional wisdom". The one does not always make sense and the other often offers no wisdom whatsoever.

For example, it makes perfect sense to me that you should go bang your head on a rock. Might not make so much sense to you after the first few thumps! :shocked2: :rotf:

 

[Zonie]

Your math is right on the button.

Based on your calculation for the volume of your measure it is throwing 244.62 grains of 3Fg powder per cubic inch of volume. That's pretty close to 245 grains per cu/in.

Putting this into something folks can use is a bit harder because a lot of people aren't good at figuring out how many cubic inches some measure has in it.

Figuring that a lot of folks like to use about 80 grains of powder they would need something that had 0.327 cubic inches of space in it.

If they used a 3/8" diameter drill (ignoring the drill point which will add a little more powder) they would need a hole that was 2.96" deep. If they used a 7/16" drill the hole needs to be 2.175" deep.
The volume of both of these is very close to 0.327 cubic inches which will measure out 80 grains of Otters powder.

 

[Dphar]

I like to make my own powder measures from horn, antler etc... Recently I checked the volume of one, using a commercially produced brass measure, at 90 grains volume. With a second brass measure it read 80 grains . Obviously there is some inconsistancy in measures. If I knew the weight of powder as in 90 grains volume = X weight I would be able to produce a measure with an accurate volume.
A can of GOEX FFF stated 454 grains I assume this is weight NOT volume. So is there a conversion chart available or a formula to convert volume to weight?

Snow

GRAINS is a measure of WEIGHT not volume.
So you need a scale to make a 90 gr measure.
Calibrated measures are approximate and will vary considerably depending on the density of the powder. I.E. Swiss is denser than the other powders so 90 gr vol of Swiss may produce 95 or more grains of Goex and even more of the really cheap stuff, again depending on the density the powder is pressed to when made.
Dan