The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

HALODIN wrote:I've been thinking about the process of reloading today and it seems to me the greatest room for error (or lack of non repetitiveness) is the amount of powder. Now I'm pretty sure I'm leaning towards an electronic precision scale, but I'm just wondering if anyone knows of any stand alone scale that is capable of measuring greater than .1 grain? I know it won't be cheap and it's possibly a scientific precision scale, but I'm struggling to find one...

What do you mean by a 'stand alone scale', and 'greater than .1 grain'?

Do you mean something with readability less than 0.1 grain?

If so, there are plenty. There are even some that are quite cheap. Just because they have a particular degree of readability it doesn't necessarily follow that they are any good. It also doesn't follow that you will be able to see any difference between charges dispensed to +/-0.1 grain and +/-0.01 grain. Plenty of very good ammo is made with relatively coarse charge spreads. Plenty of very experienced folk don't believe anyone can tell the difference. As I mentioned before, I have balances that read to 0.0001 grams (0.0015 grains), but I load with coarser balances than this, and I achieved some of my best performances with ammo loaded with beam balances - relatively low-end beam balances. Don't get too hung-up on charge-weights. Make sure you have a beam balance on your loading bench. If you want to explore things in more detail later then go ahead.

If you eventually do want to look into high resolution digital balances for reloading you would be better off looking to spend £500 on a better quality 0.001g balance than £1000 on a lower quality 0.0001g balance (like the one in your post). Buying the right type of sensing technology for the application will get you better response times, drift performance, linearity and stability. Learn to load with a beam balance. You will learn how powder behaves, how to control it and what you can do with it.

..

I have to admit, I thought it was < $127 as per the PW 184, but having taken another look I can see it's actually $1,499.99, the $127 price appears to be some optional extra price... :lol:

If I buy an electronic scale, I may as well buy one that goes to .1 grain, surely it's not too much extra!

Stuck wrote:Halodin,

You do not need any where near that level of accuracy or cost.

I'm being anal using the Gempro & that will only read to 0.02gn but it only costs about £100.

Save your money for something else pal, you really don't need to spend it there.

Yes I will buy both, so I can cross reference the weight periodically.

Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not challenging your wealth of experience, but how have you worked that out if you can't measure to that level of granularity? Honest question...

dromia wrote:You don't need greater accuracy than .1 of grain, most rifle cartridge loads won't notice a difference less than that and most won't even notice a couple of tenths difference.

Excuse the pun, but I'm still trying to find that balance. I don't mind spending a bit more, but as you probably expect I am looking for value on the extra cash spent. It's helpful to bounce ideas of people here.

Alpha1 wrote:No you do not need that scale save your money for powder and bullets. Buy a beam scale to start off with get a second hand one once you get a bit more knowledge you can up grade if you want keep it simple to start off with. Don't be spending buckets of money on kit until you know what you are doing.

My beam scales measure to one tenth of a grain

I just meant one that doesn't necessarily dispense powder, I'm happy to do that manually.

Yes > .1 grain resolution. OK £500 sounds more along the lines of the price I expected, I don't mind paying that if I can improve on the accuracy, the question is are we 101% sure that's the case? Again, it's not that I'm doubting anyone, but I'd just like an insight in to how that conclusion was reached.

Thanks for your help.

rox wrote:What do you mean by a 'stand alone scale', and 'greater than .1 grain'?

Do you mean something with readability less than 0.1 grain?

If so, there are plenty. There are even some that are quite cheap. Just because they have a particular degree of readability it doesn't necessarily follow that they are any good. It also doesn't follow that you will be able to see any difference between charges dispensed to +/-0.1 grain and +/-0.01 grain. Plenty of very good ammo is made with relatively coarse charge spreads. Plenty of very experienced folk don't believe anyone can tell the difference. As I mentioned before, I have balances that read to 0.0001 grams (0.0015 grains), but I load with coarser balances than this, and I achieved some of my best performances with ammo loaded with beam balances - relatively low-end beam balances. Don't get too hung-up on charge-weights. Make sure you have a beam balance on your loading bench. If you want to explore things in more detail later then go ahead.

If you eventually do want to look into high resolution digital balances for reloading you would be better off looking to spend £500 on a better quality 0.001g balance than £1000 on a lower quality 0.0001g balance (like the one in your post). Buying the right type of sensing technology for the application will get you better response times, drift performance, linearity and stability. Learn to load with a beam balance. You will learn how powder behaves, how to control it and what you can do with it.

..

Are there any published tests where loads are measured to 100th of a grain or at least a finer resolution than .1 grain?

dromia wrote:My beam scales measure to one tenth of a grain

Halodin,

I don't want to be presumptuous but have you done any reloading yet?

I am by no means an expert (in fact I'm more of a muppet) when it comes to reloading but I do load 308 & 338 ammo for target shooting out to 1000 / 1500 yards.

The reason why i ask is that when you start to weigh things to levels of accuracy <0.1gn you will find that your powder charge is probably one of the tightest variables.

HALODIN wrote:Are there any published tests where loads are measured to 100th of a grain or at least a finer resolution than .1 grain?

dromia wrote:My beam scales measure to one tenth of a grain

Many beam scales will weigh well within .1 of a grain. There are just about five single kernels of Varget to .1 grain so having a digital scale that can weigh to .001 grain is pretty academic unless you are intending to start cutting individual kernels.

No matter what you pay for digital scales they will eventually let you down. I have an old but reliable Ohaus lab scale that, when new, were an expensive item. The LCD readout is now starting to break up, Ohaus say they are obsolete and there are no spares available but are happy to give me $200 off a new $3,000 scale. I have beam scales that are 50 years old and as accurate as the day they were made.

This is one of my scales in action, a humble, bottom of the range RCBS 502.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnVOoGd1bDU

Only 18 rounds last night with 20Series, I'm very much in the novice bracket if not some what lower than that. Early days...

Interesting. So what causes the biggest variances once the brass is fire formed? I assumed because everything else is measured to 1/1000th inch that there was no room for variables in anything else other than the powder.

Don't assume I know anything.

Stuck wrote:Halodin,

I don't want to be presumptuous but have you done any reloading yet?

I am by no means an expert (in fact I'm more of a muppet) when it comes to reloading but I do load 308 & 338 ammo for target shooting out to 1000 / 1500 yards.

The reason why i ask is that when you start to weigh things to levels of accuracy <0.1gn you will find that your powder charge is probably one of the tightest variables.