Witch Doctor: Manual vs Electronic Powder Dispenser at Short Range?

The thumbnail image is a 10-shot group at 200 yards shot by Bryan Zolnikov to win the 2020 Sniper King Award (oldest trophy in bench rest history). Bryan shot this 10-shot group while using an electronic powder dispenser.

Introduction
In some shooting sports, the use of manual powder throwers is prevalent especially short-range bench rest matches where shooters who do not preload for the match will utilize manual powder dispensers due to their expediency. With how fast a manual powder thrower can throw a powder charge, their use enables a shooter to do other things such as clean their barrel, grab a refreshment, chat about how the match is going, examine their last group, etc. Many records have been made and matches won with the use of manual powder dispensers. However, with the advent of electronic powder dispensers, there is another option now available. Previous testing by Bryan Litz showed that for long range applications, electronic dispensers that measure to the kernel do provide an advantage under long range circumstances (see reference below). The purpose of this test is to examine whether the use of manual or an electronic thrower is advantageous to precision in short range, i.e., 100 and 200 yards.
Method
The BAT Neuvo rifle used in previous tests was utilized for this test. There were two loads developed: one for 100 yards (29.6gr of N133 and Paull Parosky’s Patriot bullet seated .013” off lands) and another for 200 yards (29.7gr of N133 and Paull Parosky’s Patriot bullet seated .011” off lands). Both of these loads showed effectiveness from the test barrel used for their respective yardages. The Frankford Arsenal Intellidropper was used as the electronic powder dispenser and a custom made manual thrower of very high quality was used as the manual. The electronic throws powder by weight and the manual throws by volume. To rectify this difference, I calibrated the manual to throw the same weight as the electronic by measuring several manual throws and finding the setting that matched the weight on the Intellidropper’s scale. After this, I charged 50 rounds for the 100 yard test (25 manual and 25 electronic) and 40 for the 200 yard test (20 manual and 20 electronic). I conducted all shooting on one day to control for atmospherics.
Results
For 100 yards, the differences between the electronic and manual were not statistically significantly different:
Method Velocity (p=.57) SD (p=.634) Group (p=.331)
Electronic 3372.2 11.22 .2682
Manual 3374.6 9.56 .3356

There was one flier out of all the groups and it was from the third 5-shot group using the manual dispenser. If we remove that flier from the data, the manual’s aggregate group size would be .2658 which is almost identical to the electronic.
 
For 200 yards, the only statistically significant variable was group size:
Method Velocity (p=.31) SD (p=.647) Group (p=.0469)
Electronic 3382.8 12.93 .2913
Manual 3388.3 13.68 .4955

Conclusions and Recommendations
AT 100 yards, the use of a high quality manual thrower is likely to produce the same outcomes as an electronic thrower, therefore, it is recommended that either of those methods are used. However, at 200 yards, the electronic powder dispenser is likely to outperform the manual thrower and, therefore, an electronic dispenser is recommended.

Sample electronic powder dispensers:
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/101...
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/102...

Bryan Litz reference:
https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Advance...