The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 6, 2012, 12:17 PM   #26
tkglazie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 3, 2011
Posts: 558
agreed, scottriqui.

I am just trying to figure out why I havent been using a check weight all along.....
tkglazie is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 06:20 AM   #27
mohr308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 15, 2012
Location: Western New York
Posts: 423
I bought this one, seems to be accurate most of the time. I always double check (tap the scale) if I'm trying to weigh within .1 grains

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/175...grain-capacity
mohr308 is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 08:40 AM   #28
hooligan1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2010
Location: Independence Missouri
Posts: 3,230
We picked up one of those Lyman 1000 digital scale, and for the most part it was nice, but it gave a .002 grain higher reading than my 5.0.5. RCBS, which I solely use now,and it would have to be zeroed frequently, 60 or 70 bucks IIRC.
__________________
Thanks for coming!
hooligan1 is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 12:01 PM   #29
mikld
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2009
Location: Southern Oregon!
Posts: 1,014
The reason I didn't go with the inexpensive digital scale is there have been many problems with them reported on several different forums; EMF interference (flourescent lights), wandering zero, quick auto-shut off, power needs (eating batteries, need smooth power supply), and some disruption of measurements when switching from frams to grains). I did a lot of reading before I purchased a Jennings Mack 20, with none of the above problems (about $75.00)...
__________________
My Anchor is holding fast!
mikld is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 04:02 PM   #30
lee n. field
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 12, 2002
Location: The same state as Mordor.
Posts: 3,128
Quote:
I need a new powder scale. Who makes a good scale for a reasonable price. I am sort of a tightwad. I don't want to spend any more than I have to, but I want a scale I can trust. Electronic would be okay.
The cheap Lee Safety scale works. When I finally got around to getting a check weight set, I found it was dead on accurate.

It has a 100 grain limit. That would be a problem weighing unknown bullets, but shouldn't be a problem weighing out powder.
__________________
"As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. "
lee n. field is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 09:26 PM   #31
Elkins45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2010
Posts: 357
Quote:
I think what is happening with electronic scales is what happened to hand held calculators years ago. I remember my first hand held/pocket calculator was the size of a package on Benson & Hedges cigs. Its functions were add, substract, multiply and division, and simple memory. It cost me close to $300 bucks. Now these simple calculators are much smaller and cost 1 to 2 bucks.

I believe the same is whats happening to scales. Course we all know the big market is not for weighing powder charges.
You're a handful of years older than me. My first one had square and square root, and had the fancy GREEN LED display. I remember it was marketed as a big deal that it had an EIGHT DIGIT DISPLAY!

Actually, my first calculator was given to me by my Dad and it looked like this:



About the primary marked for scales (or balances, to be technically accurate): for a country that hasn't otherwise embraced the metric system we sure do seem to have a fondness for weighing stuff in grams!

I still think if I only owned one scale that it would be a mechanical one, even with all the recent improvements in quality. I'm still using the same RCBS 5-0-5 that I started with in 1980, and unless I decided to buy a powder dispenser it's probably be the one I will end with.

Last edited by Elkins45; July 7, 2012 at 09:35 PM.
Elkins45 is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 09:27 PM   #32
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by daboon
Wouldn't humidity absorption make a difference?
It does, but you'll probably have noticed the minimums and maximums listed in your load manuals don't offer humidity compensation. The assumption is you will keep your powder dry and, these days, probably store it in air conditioning so it doesn't really fluctuate a lot. You can always resort to sealing it in Tupperware with a desiccant if need be.

Anyway you've tumbled into the great weight vs. volume debate. In the beginning it doesn't matter too much because you're going to work your load up from a starting weight, regardless of the powder's water content. The trick will just be to keep the water content from changing significantly until your load is established. This usually entails just keeping the lid on the cannister tight. If your powder storage is subject to large humidity fluctuations, you can check for a change by weighing and averaging, say, 15 scoops with a Lee powder scoop when the powder is new, then repeat to see if it changes enough to be greater than your normal shot-to-shot dispensing variance. If it does, note the percentage, and check that your volumetric measure is throwing that same percent increase above or below the weight of your stainless wire.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Patron Member
Unclenick is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 11:09 PM   #33
NWPilgrim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,141
I gave used an RCBS 10-10 scale for near 25 yrs and it has been terrific. Costs now about double what I paid. Electronic scales are much better for weighing lots of cases and bullets, very quick. I tried a Frankford DS750 for $20 and it has been perfect. I double check often with check weights and specific items on the 10-10 and it always within 0.1 grain. I use it in the garage with fluorescent lights and open door no problems. Amazing capability in small cheap package.

Like others said about calculators. I bought the first TI top of line in 1973 (TI 30?) for $300 for engineering class, now they (or much better) are bubble wrapped at checkout aisles for $7.
NWPilgrim is offline  
Old July 8, 2012, 06:11 AM   #34
KMAX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,053
True about calculators.

It is true about calculator technology being so inexpensive compared to what it was in the beginning. To bad the same principle doesn't apply to much of anything else, like cars or firearms. Wouldn't mind buying a good Sig Saur for $20. I'd even give $50. Haha.
__________________
This is my gun. There are many like her, but this one is mine.

I'm not old. I'm CLASSIC!
KMAX is offline  
Old July 8, 2012, 07:13 AM   #35
jcwit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2007
Location: Upper Indiana
Posts: 593
Quote:
It is true about calculator technology being so inexpensive compared to what it was in the beginning. To bad the same principle doesn't apply to much of anything else, like cars or firearms. Wouldn't mind buying a good Sig Saur for $20. I'd even give $50. Haha.
It is true about firearms, Compare what a handmade firearm cost in manhours worked back in the 17/1800's to what one cose today. It's my understanding a Hawkin Rifle from tyhe Hawkin Shop went out the door for what back then was a years wages, and that was a workings man's firearm.

Now cars are a different animal as they are still to this day elvolving and adding more and more options to them.
jcwit is offline  
Old July 8, 2012, 09:12 AM   #36
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,109
no arguing

RCBS 505 or Dillon Eliminator offer the best scale at the lowest cost.

Include a Lyman or RCBS Scale weight Check Set. Use it every single time you set up your scale, without exception.



"Zeroing" weighs nothing, ay?
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old July 8, 2012, 10:09 AM   #37
browninghunter86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 14, 2011
Posts: 524
My Franford Arsenal digi scale is off by 0.2 gr vs my RCBS 505 scale FWIW
browninghunter86 is offline  
Old July 8, 2012, 03:53 PM   #38
KMAX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,053
jcwit: I guess you are right about the cost of firearms. I wasn't really thinking in terms of the 1700/1800 time period. I was thinking more of the $450 I paid for a Browning HiPower in 1979 and the $900+ one cost now. That, I suppose is probably less expensive considering the difference in wages between now and then. $450 for me back then was about a month's wages. Now $900 is about a week's wages. Wow, I have about convinced myself to buy a new BHP.

Sorry, got way off topic there.
__________________
This is my gun. There are many like her, but this one is mine.

I'm not old. I'm CLASSIC!
KMAX is offline  
Old July 8, 2012, 04:11 PM   #39
wncchester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 1, 2002
Posts: 2,832
"... it gave a .002 grain higher reading than my 5.0.5. RCBS,.."

I suspect that should say .2 gr. ??

I've been doing this since '65 and have ONE test weight that came with my original scale, the scale reads exactly the same today as it did when new. For the life of me I can't see how any clean and undamaged beam scale could possibly change no matter how old it is. Meaning I have no use for a 'weight test/check set' but I do understand how the makers will gladly sell them to anyone willing to shuck out the money. Anyone wanting to confirm his scale is being consistant over time only needs a bit of something with the weight on it. Even a good grade bullet will confirm a scale is plenty accurate enough for our needs.

Last edited by wncchester; July 8, 2012 at 04:20 PM.
wncchester is offline  
Old July 8, 2012, 10:54 PM   #40
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,177
I don't recall if that scale can be selected to read out in grams or ounces as well as in grains. If so, he might have had the scale set for grams instead of grains and meant 0.02 gm, or about 0.3 grains. If it could be set for ounces, then 0.002 ounces would be 0.875 grains. Aren't electronics convenient?
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Patron Member
Unclenick is offline  
Old July 9, 2012, 01:31 AM   #41
pastortim
Junior Member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2012
Posts: 14
I have a Hornady electronic scale and it works great, very accurate, easy to use, and still on the original battery after alot of use over an 8 month period

i think it cost me about 35.00
pastortim is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09946 seconds with 7 queries