Are check weights needed for a balance beam scale?

[Bill Daniel]

I have always assumed my RCBS 505 was accurate as my SMK 168 and 175's weighed out at there advertised weight. Are check weights of benefit for a balance beam scale or only electronic scales?
Thanks, Bill Daniel

[farmerboy]

If you check them with weights and theyre on or off then what? Whatever they are as long as they are consistent that's what you want. If the book says 26.0 and scales say 26.0 but really true is 26.7 and you experiment and find 28.2 to be most accurate. Just keep loading there as long as it's accurate. As long as scale is very accurate everytime you're good!

[jepp2]

I have a set that I use occasionally with my balance beam scale. But I can't argue with farmerboy's logic. But I also store my scale in a very protected fashion and no one else is ever even close to them.

I also check every 10'th load on the scale, but that's just me.

[Para Cassatt]

I like to use them to check mine before making up any precision rifle loads. Most of the bullets I have checked showed about a 1gr. weight variance, sometimes more.

[Edward429451]

Check weights are good for any type of scale. They prove repeatability of the scale and allow a check of calibration. You do not really need the magic check weights though. You can use the 175 gr Match bullets as a check weight as you already know.

[armoredman]

Check weights are good to have.

[darkroommike]

The US Mint can provide you with perfect checkweights for the face value of the coins. The one I use most is the lowly nickel, new nickels weigh 5 grams each EXACTLY and Google can translate that into any other unit you need. 6 nickels is 30 grams which equals 462.970752 grains Call it 463 grains. I've know this since the 6th grade when I built a two pan balance. A new composition penny weighs 2.5 grams. (Copper and zinc, keep them out of the lead pot!)

[Brian Pfleuger]

Contrary to popular belief, coins are not consistent enough to use as check weights for reloading purposes. A single coin that has been verified is fine but when you're talking 0.1 grain (.00647 grams), they're no where close to good enough.

[zxcvbob]

I wrote "35" on a dime with a Sharpie and decreed it to be exactly 35 grains. I don't know what the actually weight is, other than it's pretty close to 35 grains, but the point is I use the same dime every time I check my scales. That's good enough for me.

You can do the same thing with a US nickel -- it's 5 grams.

[Jim Watson]

I have a nominal 45 grain bullet that weighs out at 44.9 on the freshly calibrated digital and an old beam; also a fired primer that weighs 4.2 grains.
Those are close enough to typical rifle and pistol powder charges that I am confident in them.

[dmazur]

I believe someone came up with the idea of using stainless or monel wire to create your own check weights.

Obviously, these self-made "standards" aren't for calibration, but if they are trimmed to show a desired weight (such as 5.0gr or 46.5gr) and kept in a divided, labeled box, they can serve as check weights.

The stainless or monel wire should resist oxidation enough to remain useful even with handling, but using tweezers or hemostats to handle them would be more in line with lab procedures.

Not really different from using "special coins", except that the wire can be trimmed to make weights very close to the powder charge weights you usually work with.

[SL1]

are a good idea for a balance beam scale. I was lucky enough to have access to a lab scale, and made myself a set of check weights that can take me from 0.1 grains to 75 grains in 0.1 grain increments, using various combinations.

When weighing charges, I put-together a group of weights that are exactly what I want the powder to weigh, and use them to check the scale before, at intervals during and after all weighing is done.

The advantage of using a check weight that is the same as the desired powder weight on a balance beam scale is that it doesn't require you to adjust anything to check the scale. If you have to change the weights on the beam of a scale to use the checkweight, then you are NOT checking that those weights on the beam are going back where they should be for the proper powder weight. Errors in repositioning beam weights are more likely than getting something in the knife-edge to set the zero-off during powder weighing. (The beam-weight shifting issue is not a problem on an electronic scale, but they have their own unique issues.

If I did not have my nice set of fine-increment check weights, I would make a few that concided exactly with powder weights that I use frequently. It would be nice to have a friend with access to a lab balance, perhaps in a high school science lab or commercial facility. But, once you know that a load is safe and optimum in your gun, all you really need to do is to have a piece of non-corroding, non-water-absorbing material that you can file to the same weight as the powder charge, so that it reads what you want on YOUR scale. Then, you are consistent, and that is what counts. Being traceable to NIST standards is not really that useful, because knowing EXACTLY what that powder charge is won't help you load another guy's gun any better, or even another one of your own guns.

By the way, the problems I encounter most often with beam scales are related to not getting the beam weights into their grooves, exactly. Dust in the knife-edge area is something that WOULD be an issue if I did not clean them well before each session, but not something that seems to happen often DURING a session.

SL1

[mikld]

I've seen this subject on several forums over the years. None of my scales are damaged, none varies month to month, and all are nearly perfect repeatability wise (if a bullet weighs 150.5 gr. on Dec 10, 1998, it will still weigh 150.5 gr. on Jan. 1 2011, if that makes sense). I used new coins to check my scales and found them to be pretty accurate. But, my question is; so what is supposed to be done if the scale doesn't match the check weights? How do you "calibrate" a beam scale? I have three beam scales and the only adjustment is for zeroing the scale (leveling). Lee Perfect, Lyman/Ohaus D5, RCBS 5-0-5 all weighing within less than 1/2 a tenth of a grain of each other, and am I to believe the check weights are that precise? The ones I've seen are mass produced lengths of metal rod..

[buck460XVR]

I wrote "35" on a dime with a Sharpie and decreed it to be exactly 35 grains. I don't know what the actually weight is, other than it's pretty close to 35 grains, but the point is I use the same dime every time I check my scales. That's good enough for me.

I've done the same thing for years myself. Even if it's off a tenth of a grain, as long as one starts low and works their way up for their gun, even with low volume powders, it's close and accurate enough. This is the same thing we should do even if we know our scales are dead on to within .001gr. Many scales appropriate for reloading are only accurate within .1 of a grain anyway. What I have done lately is to buy a small digital scale when I saw it come on sale. I now use this to verify my balance beam. They are within .1 of a grain between the two and not only does the small inexpensive scale verify my balance beam, it also digitally verifies my load and my setting on the balance beam. I consider it cheap insurance.

[SL1]

But, my question is; so what is supposed to be done if the scale doesn't match the check weights? How do you "calibrate" a beam scale?

The first thing you find out is NOT to use the scale until you firgure-out WHY it is not giving the correct weight.

Usually, it is just a matter of cleaning to get it to work accurately. But, something may get bent or go missing that would affect accuracy or consistency.

As for "calibrating" a beam balance, it would take a lot of accuately-known check weights to figure out how the scale reads for actual weights in the pan. Then, you could make a table of those values to interpret scale readings in actual grains. Or, you could use those readings to figure-out what is mechanically wrong with the scale and fix that. Perhaps something like one of the 2 or 3 sliding weights not being correct in weight could be fixed with a new slider or some weight addition or filing. On the other hand, incorrectly spaced notches on the beam for the sliding weights would probably require a new beam. There are other possibilities, but these should give you the basic ideas.

On the other hand, electronic scales are usually not "fixable" if they are incorrect and don't automatically calibrate electonically with the weights and procedures provided with the scale.

And, I find that inexpensive digital scales are not really repeatable within 0.1 grain unless the mass to be measured is place in the same location each time. Also, they tend to not change readings when very small weight additions are made, so they don't really work well enough with powder tricklers.

SL1

[BDS-THR]

Originally Posted by farmerboy

If you check them with weights and theyre on or off then what? Whatever they are as long as they are consistent that's what you want. If the book says 26.0 and scales say 26.0 but really true is 26.7 and you experiment and find 28.2 to be most accurate. Just keep loading there as long as it's accurate. As long as scale is very accurate everytime you're good!

I find this post disturbing and hope some new reloader do not misread/misinterpret what was posted.

I highly recommend the use of check weights. At $26, I consider it cheap insurance QC for any scale.

If your beam scale readings are different than the check weights, I would clean the scale and make adjustments to zero reading according to the manual until the scale reading matched the check weights (if not, I would contact the manufacturer customer service).

Somebody correct me if I am off - TIA.

[mikld]

Well, in my opinion only, if the beam scale is not damaged, using check weights is of little or no practical value or meaning. The scale is "set" by it's design, it is not adjustable (other than zero)...

[wncchester]

"Originally Posted by farmerboy -- If you check them with weights and theyre on or off then what? Whatever they are as long as they are consistent that's what you want. If the book says 26.0 and scales say 26.0 but really true is 26.7 and you experiment and find 28.2 to be most accurate. Just keep loading there as long as it's accurate. As long as scale is very accurate everytime you're good!" (Underline added)

"I find this post disturbing and hope some new reloader do not misread/misinterpret what was posted."

It shouldn't be disturbing; the Farmboy is correct and he can't fairly be misread or misinterpreted. Consider, IF check weights were necessary for safe reloading they would be included with every scale sold; fact is, they are not sold with ANY beam scale! That's because Farmboy is exactly right, what we really need is consistancy/repeatability over any amount of time and all reloading beam scales are quite good for that.

I stated reloading in '65. Lyman marketed the first check-weight set I ever heard of in the late 70s, IIRC. That means a LOT of reloading was done before anyone had a check set. I doubt that more than one in twenty reloaders have check weights even today (I still don't) and few of those are likely to be used more than very occasionally - at least for beam scales. Digitals are horses of a very different color but I wouln't have a digital scale for weighing my powder on a bet, much to flakey for my taste.

[rclark]

I've been reloading coming up on 30 years. This year I finally bought a set of check weights. My beam scale is still reading perfectly after all these years... Did bring peace of mind though. It's those 'fancy' 'digital' scales that you have to watch . So much for technology .

[BerettaPx4]

wncchester"It shouldn't be disturbing; the Farmboy is correct and he can't fairly be misread or misinterpreted. Consider, IF check weights were necessary for safe reloading they would be included with every scale sold; fact is, they are not sold with ANY beam scale! That's because Farmboy is exactly right, what we really need is consistancy/repeatability over any amount of time and all reloading beam scales are quite good for that."

What you are saying then is, it's alright to use a scale without checking it with weights because it didn't come with test weights? What if the scale developers a problem and it's reading a grain off.If you're loading max loads,
going over that much with some powders is down right dangerous. I wouldnt want to load a normal 5 grain load of Bullseye one grain over. All the major reloading books make a point about the importance of checking your scale. I don't understand the big deal about buying a cheap set of test weights, when we don't bat an eye about spending big bucks on presses, dies, and components. It's cheap insurance in my book.

[Sport45]

But, my question is; so what is supposed to be done if the scale doesn't match the check weights? How do you "calibrate" a beam scale?

This is easy with a set of check weights. You just ignore the numbers on the scale beam and simply use it as a balance.

You want to load 49.5 gr of H4895? Just put two 20gr, one 5gr, two 2gr, and one .5gr weight in the pan and slide the beam weights around until the pointer is centered. Remove the check weights and add powder. When the pointer is centered you have 49.5gr of powder.

You want to know how much powder is in a surplus cartridge? Put the powder in the pan and adjust the beam weights until the pointer is centered. Dump the powder and start adding or removing check weights until the pointer centers again. Add up the check weights in the pan and you know exactly what the powder weighed.

Heck, it might be the easiest way to use the Lee balance.

[floydster]

Have been reloading for 59 years, have a redding scale I bought in 1959, also a 505 I bought 30 years ago, I have been using the same dime ( 35 gr.) for my check weight for a long time, it's all BS anyway---zero the scale and go.

[brickeyee]

it would take a lot of accuately-known check weights to figure out how the scale reads for actual weights in the pan

Not all that many.

you use more than one check weight at a time to get to larger values.

You do not need a desperate weight of every value.

1,1,3,5,10,20 (7 weights) wil get you every value form 0 to 40.

this is on of the reasons real check weights are held to very tight tolerance.
It allows you to use multiple weights and still have an accurate number.

The same reason gauge blocks are held to multiple decimal places past their actual size.
You might need to wring up multiple blocks to get the desired length.

[darkroommike]

Check weights are not used to calibrate a scale to obtain an absolute weight but to check the consistency of the scale. My 6 nickel check weight will do that if you always use the same set of nickels.

[Don P]

YES they are needed.

If you check them with weights and theyre on or off then what? Whatever they are as long as they are consistent that's what you want. If the book says 26.0 and scales say 26.0 but really true is 26.7 and you experiment and find 28.2 to be most accurate. Just keep loading there as long as it's accurate. As long as scale is very accurate everytime you're good!

If the scale is off then you adjust to correct zero. Your statement of accuracy is OK I'm over-weighing buy 3 grains its accurate so just keep loading. The check weights are certified and used to check and if need be adjust zero.