Lee's Classic Powder Measure

This forum is for Lee Precision equipment that does not fit in the other forums

Moderator: darwin

User avatar
daboone
Posts: 928
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:09 pm

Lee's Classic Powder Measure

Postby daboone » Fri Mar 06, 2015 10:11 am

Titan Reloading has the new Classic PM in stock. I just ordered one. :D

john127
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:44 am

Postby john127 » Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:33 am

How is the Classic PM any better than the Perfect PM?

User avatar
daboone
Posts: 928
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:09 pm

Postby daboone » Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:45 pm

Hand on review of the Lee Classic Powder Measure

Before starting this evaluation of the Lee Classic Powder Measure (CPM) I took this new PM totally apart and thoroughly washed, dried (including the hopper) and pre-lubed it with graphite. The Hopper was rubbed down with a dryer sheet. Then a full hopper full of Bullseye thru it before evaluating. There's no question that this Classic Powder Measure (CPM) is stouter. There is at the very top and very bottom of the stroke a little bit of looseness. This allows you, if you want, to rap the the crank handle/metering drum into into the housing. (kinda like the knocker idea). This isn't documented as a technique however it is possible. I did try it but thus far found it unnecessary. There is on this remake of the PPM a knob to adjust the tension of the chamber rather than a screw. It could be nice to easly adjust this tension for different types of powder however I didn't find it necessary for the evaluations of the listed powders.

Unfortunately I have run out of IMR4350 and don't have any fine ball powders like H110/296 so I can't tell how it will dispense at those extremes. I expect powders like IMR 4350 will still be inconsistant.

First up was Bullseye. Now admittedly Bullseye is an excellent metering powder. There was no tapping or snapping the measure or handle just a full and complete stroke from top to bottom giving it a couple of seconds on the fill side. The first 10 drops of Bullseye set at 4.1g were all separated by a mere .01g. Second powder tested was HS-6. The results were the same as Bullseye with a .01g difference in only 2 out of the 10 drops. I did no further testing of Bullseye or HS-6.


The following results are grouped by the specific powder for 10 individual weights and then by a 10 consecutive dispensing to check the average dispensing weight.

Unique Data:
Measure adjusted for 3.5g of Unique with approximately 2 second fill time. Individual weights as listed for each dispensing.
1- 3.5g
2- 3.6g
3- 3.6g
4- 3.6g
5- 3.6g
6- 3.5g
7- 3.6g
8- 3.6g
9- 3.6g
10-3.5g

Then 10 drops of 3.5g of Unique were performed with approximately 2 second fill times and measure in bulk for a total of 36.8g or 3.68g average.


Measure set for 10g of Unique. Individual weights as listed for each dispensing.
1- 10g
2- 10.1g
3- 10g
4- 10.1g
5- 10.1g
6- 10.1g
7- 10.1g
8- 10g
9- 10g
10- 10g

Then 10 drops of the 10g of Unique were performed with approximately 2 second fill times and measure in bulk for a total of 100.5g or 10.05 average.


2400 Data:
Measure adjusted for 6.1g of 2400 with approximately 2 second fill time. Individual weights as listed for each dispensing.
1- 6.1g
2- 6.1g
3- 6.2g
4- 6.1g
5- 6.1g
6- 6.2g
7- 6.1g
8- 6.1g
9- 6.1g
10-6.2g

Then 10 drops of the 6.1g of 2400 were performed with approximately 2 second fill times and measure in bulk for a total of 62.2g for a 6.22g average.


Measure adjusted for 13g of 2400 with approximately 2 second fill time. Individual weights as listed for each dispensing.
1- 13g
2- 12.9g
3- 12.9g
4- 12.9g
5- 12.8g
6- 12.8g
7- 12.8g
8- 12.9g
9- 12.9g
10- 12.8g

Then 10 drops of the 13g of 2400 were performed with approximately 2 second fill times and measure in bulk for a total of 129.6g for a 12.96g average.

H4895 Data:
Measure adjusted for 44.8g of H4895 with approximately 2 second fill time. Individual weights as listed for each dispensing.
1- 44.8g
2- 44.8g
3- 44.9g
4- 44.9g
5- 45.0g
6- 44.8g
7- 45.1g
8- 45.2g
9- 45.1g
10- 44.9g

Then 10 drops of the 44.8g of H4895 were performed with approximately 2 second fill times and measure in bulk for a total of 451.3g or a 45.13g average.

Trail Boss Data:
Measure adjusted for 14.6g with approximately 2 second fill time. Individual weights as listed for each dispensing.
1- 14.6g
2- 14.4g
3- 14.6g
4- 14.6g
5- 14.5g
6- 14.4g
7- 14.6g
8- 14.8g
9- 14.6g
10- 14.5g

Then 5 drops of the Trail Boss 14.6g were performed with approximately 2 second fill times and measure in bulk for a total of 73.3g or a 14.66gg average.

Measure adjusted for 4.5g with approximately 2 second fill time. Individual weights as listed for each dispensing.
1- 4.5g
2- 4.4g
3- 4.3g
4- 4.4g
5- 4.4g
6- 4.4g
7- 4.4g
8- 4.2g
9- 4.3g
10- 4.4g


Certainly the values listed above speak for themselves as to the performance with various powders. This is the new CPM's best virtue, it is as consistent with flake powder as it is with stick tested.
daboone is online now Report Post

john127
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:44 am

Postby john127 » Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:45 am

Nice report daboone. Thanks for the review. Sounds like this PM may be worth the extra cost over the old one.

User avatar
daboone
Posts: 928
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:09 pm

Postby daboone » Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:04 pm

daboone wrote:Hand on review of the Lee Classic Powder Measure

The results were the same as Bullseye with a .01g difference in only 2 out of the 10 drops. I did no further testing of Bullseye or HS-6.
daboone is online now Report Post


Please note this correction to the above. It .1g not .01g. also note that "g" indicates grain not grams. Technically grams are abbreviated as "g" and grains as "gr"

User avatar
Hawkmoon
Posts: 391
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:35 am

Postby Hawkmoon » Sun Mar 29, 2015 11:33 am

Wow!

$95 for the measure, and $35 for the mount. $130 for the whole enchilada, compared to $31 for the PPM, which includes the mounting bracket. That's MORE THAN four times the cost of the PPM. I guess it might be worth the extra cost to a bullseye or benchrest shooter, but not to a handgun shooter like me. I load ammo to practice for self defense carry, and that's about it. The PPM was more than consistent enough for my purposes until I changed over to using the Pro Autodisk on the press. I still use the PPM for small runs of "calibers" I don't often load.


Return to “All other Lee Equipment discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests