FWIW:
Back in the 1960's / 70's it was quite common to see some nimrod pouring powder over a ball in the palm of his hand...not that we lacked the learning, we already had a book, maybe even two, for reference at the time, and that was exactly what they said to do, so we had to be doing it right.
Then another nimrod comes along and tells us we should be pan-weighing, off of a balanced beam scale, if we wanted real accuracy, and that is when we discovered weight by volume is a bit different than weight by scale, and we also discovered something else, something entirely new to argue about, because we also discovered that Volume Measurements in that day varied a bit between manufacturers when it came to actual scale weights.
Yep, the good old days, indeed!
Quite a few of us survived the good old days with all the never ending advise from the subject matter experts, because we were hungry for information, but few of us were astute enough to notice a great deal of improvement when it came to accuracy from the ol' riflegun, no matter what the technique used in loading.
In fact, given a .54 cal ball, in the cup of my hand, then covered in FFg powder, weighs by scale or volume, right at 60 grains, a 'recommended' load back in the day. I know because I have measured them.....many times.
Now, 60gr of FFg is by means my favorite load in my .54 as I prefer 75gr FFFg...but you get the picture.
I have always thought, in the back of my mind, that I could manage fairly well without a powder measure.
I prefer a volume type measure, but I could probably get along well enough without one.
Every reason in the world to believe a lot of the old writings and sayings did have merit.
Uncle Russ...
Topic: Early 1800's loading procedure (Read 1079 times)