Month: September 2021

This update is coming on a Tuesday, instead of the usual Monday. Life just got a bit busy. I do not have very much in the way of firearm news to cover so I wanted to take a moment and share some data I was given. This was supplied to me to take a look at and pass some judgment on. The question on hand was whether or not the powder thrower was functioning as advertised.

Before I get into the data, here is a little preface. It is important for everyone, including precision hand loaders, to not only understand there is variation but to embrace a certain level of variation. Otherwise, you can spend a lot of time and money trying to solve a problem that is very likely a perceived issue rather than a significant or practical issue. We see these problems a lot in the manufacturing and engineering world. A considerable amount of time, effort, and money are spent chasing issues that are later determined to be of little consequence.

Handloaders focused on precision can often be swallowed by the “No Variation Monster” and it’s partly the industry’s fault. We sell people on the idea that absolutely no variation leads to winning matches. Like all good lies, there is a bit of truth to it, it is “A Factor” but not “The Factor”. Plenty of matches have been won with ammunition assembled hastily, sporting all sorts of grievous sins. It turns out, ammunition and rifles tend to outperform shooters, even competitive shooters, and the deciding factor between wins and loses comes down more to raw ability rather than equipment.

When it comes to handloading, I have set my own rules on dealing with variations that I follow. I share these because they keep me from going insane, and they have worked well for me. Keep in mind, that sometimes adjust the rules for specific loads, and that I base the powder measurement rules on using a powder measure that measures powder volumetrically.

Jay’s Rules for Handloading Sanity:

1. Charge weight
   1. +/- 3% if less then 25gn of target or +/- .2gn which ever is greater
   2. +/- 1% if greater then 25gn but less then 50gr
   3. +/- .5% if greater then 50gr
2.  Case Length +/- .005in
3. Cartridge Overal Length (COAL) Base to Meplate +/-.005in
4. Cartrdige Overal Length (COAL) Base to Ogive +/- .002in
5. Bullet Weight Variation for Pistol +/- 1.5gr for rifle +/-0.5gr

There are a few reasons why I allow greater variation for small charges, and it deals with how volumetric throwers can sometimes struggle to throw small charges accurately, and that most scales are not very accurate at the lower end of the weight range. I also am not shooting these cartridges extremely long distances where I would expect to see the point of impact shifts from velocity variation.

So let’s dig into the data a bit. I’ve run some quality control charts for the sample set, to illustrate how this thrower is performing and to quantify how many “bad rounds” I would expect to have. The below chart is based on the thrower being set to 42.0cc, with a sample size of 10 throws.

Based on these results, my +/- 1% rule allows for +/- .265 grain of variation. This sets the acceptable upper charge weight of 28.86 grain and the acceptable lower charge weight of 26.33gr. The performance of the powder thrower was well within the upper and lower spec limits that I set. If I was consistent in my throwers, I would expect that there would be very few “bad charges” thrown. Because the sample size is so small, and there are no sub lots it is very hard to say if this is sustainable. (It likely is not) However, based on these results, I see no issue with this powder throwing a ball propellant. In my opinion, there are likely other significant sources of variation that I should spend my time on.

Let’s take a look at an extruded powder. The sample size here is even smaller at 7 throws, which is less than ideal, but we will do what we can.

Ok, this is a bit more interesting. At 58 grains we are close to cut off for 1%. We applied the tighter 0.5% spec and it would seem that this spec is a bit too tight for this powder in this thrower. About one-fifth of the rounds loaded would have a charge weight that was either too heavy or too light as we have it currently spec’d. Now that is not to say there is a problem and that I should completely scrap the process. Only to say we probably should dig into this a bit deeper. Statistically, this is a significant variation, but we have yet to determine if the variation is practical. If it is, then I am going to have to throw a charge light and trickle in the last few grains. Doable, but that takes more time. Let’s run the ballistics through QuickLoad and get an idea of what the difference might be.

Shown above is the QuickLoad Set up for the nominal Charge of 58.54gr. This charge is a little light for the 300 Win Mag, but for comparative purposes it is fine. Notice the velocity and pressure, 2,440fps and 45,086psi respectively. That is the nominal load.

Increasing the charge to 58.83 grains yields 45,660psi and 2450, while decreasing the charge to 58.25 grains results in 44,524psi and 2,429fps. In velocity that is roughly a difference of +/- 0.4%. Pressure is about the same. So a .5% tolerance in powder weight in this load yields approximately the same difference in pressure and velocity according to Quick Load. Again, you may look at this and say, that could be significant. So there is one more step we need to take to properly display the practical effects of this. That is to run the ballistics on each load based on predicted muzzle velocity.

This is where we begin to see the actual difference that .5% charge weight makes in this particular load. Notice the drop at 1000 yards, it is basically within 1 MOA at 1000 yards. That is 10.47 inches difference in impact from the highest shot to the lowest shot. Keep in mind we are looking at a singular factor. There are many variables that impact where the shot ultimately will land. These variables can cancel each other out or can stack and magnify one another resulting in a flier that is greater than 1 MOA from the center of the group.

So, after doing all this work, what have we learned, and are we going to change our process? Velocity variation that results from the .5% tolerance does not become a significant factor until we reach ranges beyond about 600 yards. Beyond that, it is application-specific, keep in mind premier factory ammunition is almost always +/- .5 to 1.0gr at these charge weights. If I was shooting 1000 yard bench rest or F-Class, I might say this is not acceptable, but if constrained on time, and did not want to weight every charge, then I would probably let it slide.

Was the unit defective? What sort of consistency should we expect from our powder throwers? Honestly, this is the consistency I would expect in a powder thrower. The next level is throwing charges light and trickling in the last grain on the scale. As previously mentioned factory ammunition uses volumetric throwers. Even on “Top of the line” premier products, the machines just are not capable of consistently holding tighter than +/- 0.5 grains of powder over a given run. Especially when throwing charges over 50 grains. Thrower performance varies with brand, quality, and user.

Anyway, that is what I have for this week. As always if you are looking to get in touch, the best way is to send me an email at jay@theballisticassistant.com. You may check us out on Parler, Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit. If you’d like to submit a load to our load database, the instructions are here.

As always, shoot straight and stay safe!

The Ballistic Assistant

Good Monday Evening! It’s been an interesting week, for the firearms community and the nation at large. Before I touch on a few of the current events I’d like to roll out a new webpage that I’ve been wanting to do. It is a product highlight page, it is a way I can bring attention to some new products that catch my eye. Sometimes it will be new products that I have a hand in developing, or it may be something that I am able to work on within the course of my job and want to spread the word. The new product page can be found here: Product Highlight Page.

At this time, unless it is linked to Amazon, I am not getting any sort of commission or free product. It is just stuff I’d like to draw attention to because either I had a hand in its development or I think it’s a neat thing and would like to get the word out. The first of these products is something I had a hand in designing and bringing to market. It is called The Puck, and it started as a handy multi-tool for Case Prep, but we found out it had a lot of utility beyond that.

If you’d like to read more about it here is a write-up I did on it The Puck. I talk a bit more about the inspiration and how we have found it to be useful. I know it’s a dead-simple tool, but it’s really proven to be pretty handy both on the reloading bench as an addition to a field cleaning kit.

Moving on to current events. When it comes to what is going on in the firearms community the big news is that David Chipman’s nomination to head the ATF has been pulled. Basically, the Senate did not have the votes to confirm him as head of the ATF. While this is a significant win for the firearms community, I am a bit pessimistic that it is going to do anything more than delay the inevitable. Look for another nomination, who is just as anti-gun, but has a less overt history.

We should be wary of anything coming out of this administration at this point. Especially given the pattern of flagrant disregard for the Constitution. If recent events are any indication, it would not surprise me if we see more Executive Orders that come out of the Oval Office which on their face are blatantly unconstitutional, but will issue anyway. The strategy seems to be, that try and force everything you can through and let the Courts figure it out. Right now COVID is being used as the blanket justification, but I suspect the recent rule changes being proposed by the ATF may also be part of that same strategy.

While I do not mean to be all doom and gloom there is a bit more bad news to share. It does not look like this component shortage we have been dealing with will be relaxing any time soon. Many powder suppliers have begun to announce that they will not be accepting new orders for powders from many medium to small ammunition plants. They are likely concerned that they will be struggling to keep up with the current contractual obligations they have with large OEM and Military contracts. This also means we are likely to see price increases in the coming year on powder, so when it is available it is likely to be anywhere from 5% to 10% higher.

The shortages are not unique to Ammunition and Ammunition Components. Pretty much every supply chain, from raw materials like steel and copper to semi-finished good like computer chips are facing major slowdowns. The cost of a standard shipping container has gone from $2,500 to over $20,000 in some cases. This has been going on for many months now, so it is not new. However, we thought maybe the market for ammunition and related components was beginning to ease, but that seems to be reversing right now.

The industry is at mercy of the State Department. Given the recent moves from the State Department to clamp down on Russian Ammunition imports, many are wondering if there might be more clamping down on importation which will future starve the industry of much-needed components. That could really have a disastrous impact on many small to midsize ammunition and firearm retailers.

That’s all I have for this week. As always if you are looking to get in touch, the best way is to send me an email at jay@theballisticassistant.com. You may check us out on Parler, Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit. If you’d like to submit a load to our load database, the instructions are here.

As always, shoot straight and stay safe!

The Ballistic Assistant

It’s been about two years since the website has launched. Being that I launched it around Labor Day 2019, I have been happy with how things have progressed. Careerwise I could not have forseen all of the changes that would happen over the last two years. I know I have mentioned that I have returned to the shooting industry but I was purposefully not specific about where I took a job.

As it relates to some of the new product spotlights I’ll be doing in the coming weeks and months it is important to me to disclose where I am so people are aware there is a bit of a bias. I am currently working for Creedmoor Sports located in Anniston, Alabama as a Senior Technical Product Expert. A lot of my time is spent on new product creation, but also as a technical resource for customers who might need a bit of help when it comes to reloading, and general shooting questions.

This website was created while I was working in the mining industry as a way to fill my time during a period of care and maintenance where the mine was shut down. We still had to be on-site to make sure the equipment did not walk off, but I had so much free time that I built a website that would help share my passion with the rest of the world. Now that I work in the industry, I am able to share that passion with like-minded folks every day. This is not a declaration that the website will go away, rather it is to expose the bias you are likely to see. I am likely to review many new Creedmoor products as many of them are of my design or came out as a combined effort between myself and other members of our team at Creedmoor. Since I had a hand in their creation they are my “babies” and I am anxious to both get the word out and also to solicit discussion and reviews of these new products from everyday people.

This is likely the only post you will see about it, though I will be updating the “About” page. I do not like to “toot my own horn” but I also want to be honest and forthright about any perceived bias. That may come across in my future posts. I have been working at Creedmoor since February 2021, but somewhat worried about conflicts of interest and wanting to get settled into the new position prior to making any announcements I opted to wait. Anyway, this website will continue to grow independent of my employment, and I’ll do have plans for new projects and finishing old ones all in due time. Meanwhile, if you have new ideas for reloading equipment, shooting equipment, or anything related to that, my ears are always open.

There are a few other industry news segments that are worth touching on. Those who do a lot of online reading on Firearm Blogs and Websites will be saddened to hear that Chuck Hawks has passed. His website, ChuckHawks.com, founded in 1997 was one of the first online gun rags out there and many of us perused his pages. It is sad to see another industry influencer go. The official announcement on his website can be found here. Thanks, Don for bringing this to my attention.

As far as new firearms go, the most notable firearm I have seen announced is Smith and Wesson’s M&P 12 which many will point out is very, very similar at least in form of the KSG 12 that Kel-Tec has been making for some time now.

Smith and Wesson claim this shotgun has basically been designed from the ground up to operate the new 1 3/4 long 12 gauge shells that were first made popular by Aguila and have since been standardized by SAAMI. At the time I note that we very likely see new shotguns that were designed around this “Mini” shotshell now that it had been adopted by SAAMI. We did not have the wait long.

As I have not handled one, I really cannot give much beyond my first visual impression. I think it looks very tactical, and I can see where it would have some real-world application but it is really not the sort of gun that really appeals much to me. I am too much of a traditionalist, for the most part, I tend to buy with my eyes, and I like traditional-looking shotguns and rifles. Also, it is of note that it would seem that Smith and Wesson really took a stab at Kel-Tec, which would not be the first time a Kel-Tec design was more or less imitated. Ruger did it with the LCP about a decade prior.

I am still waiting for the ammo maker to come out with an all brass shotshell about the same length as the 1 3/4 but can handle pressures of around 21,000 to 36,000psi. You would truly have close to a 2 3/4 shell performance out of a much smaller shell. Likely the best of both worlds. When that does happen, I’d like to convert my Benelli over to feed them.

There is one last thing I might touch on for a moment. We often think of things in isolation. Meaning what happens to one thing, or in the case of one issue, does not bleed over into other things. For example, what might happen in an Abortion Rights Case, will never bleed over to anything related to firearms. After all what could the two issues possibly have in common? Again, to be clear in my bias here, I am ardently pro-life, so I approach things through that lens.

If you have been following the news, Texas has pulled an interesting trick to try and get around many of the legal barriers to restricting abortion rights. Regardless of how you feel about the issue, it is worth understanding how this law was set up. Basically, it allows for individuals to civilly sue abortion providers if abortion is allowed to take place prior to 6 weeks. The Supreme Court upheld the law, but only because the plaintiffs lacked standing. This law made it so that the State was not enforcing the law, but it was enforced by citizens through the use of civil courts.

How does this relate to firearms? Well, again, the legal world does not live in isolation. What happens on one issue, may have some carry over to other. There has already been talking of trying to hold firearm holders legally responsible for crimes if their firearm is used. I believe in some jurisdictions you can be held legally responsible, which may include doing time if you are in violation of reporting a missing firearm, and it gets used in a crime. While this Texas law still has to work through the courts and is not in the clear just yet, I would be wary of similar proposed laws being put on the books regarding firearm owners.

How hard would it be for an FFL to get liability insurance if the State in which he/she resides has a similar law? Something that says in essence, that if an FFL sells a firearm and then that firearm is later used in a crime then a civil suit can be filed against the FFL and monetary fines can be assessed. Then it is not the State that is enforcing or infringing on the Right, at least not directly. While we think we would always win the favor of the courts, this has not always been true. I think FFL’s would find it impossible to operate in states where such laws were in place.

Yes, right now this is speculation, but I would not be at all surprised to see this trick pulled in States where the Firearm Laws are already quite strict. Pay attention, not saying that we should oppose or support the law in Texas, just saying keep your eyes open. If I was on the other side of the debate, my first response to this law would be “Huh, neat…”

That’s all I have for this week. As always if you are looking to get in touch, the best way is to send me an email at jay@theballisticassistant.com. You may check us out on Parler, Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit. If you’d like to submit a load to our load database, the instructions are here.

As always, shoot straight and stay safe!

The Ballistic Assistant