GunTalk-Online.com

I think it's finally time for me to get an electronic scale for reloading. I need a scale that is capable of accurately weigh bullets/cases to within 4 grains of each other. I don't want to spend more than $150 for a good scale, but if it will get the consistent results I want, I'd be reluctantly willing to up my price range by $100 or so.

I appreciate any advice. Thanks!

You can do that with the $30 Frankford. Have one and it has 0.1 grain resolution and will handle .45 ACP shell, powder and bullet. The higher priced ones are probably better.

http://www.midwayusa.com/Search/Default ... -4_8-16-32

greener wrote:You can do that with the $30 Frankford. Have one and it has 0.1 grain resolution and will handle .45 ACP shell, powder and bullet. The higher priced ones are probably better.

http://www.midwayusa.com/Search/Default ... -4_8-16-32

I have one of those also and have for a couple of years now and it gets the job done just fine. You can pay four times the price but will it be four times as accurate, plus how much accuracy do you really, and practically need?

I suppose it depends on what you are doing. If I were shooting competition, trying to squeeze the last bit of accuracy out of a firearm, competitive bench rest or long guns at 200-600 yards I'd want a better balance. With my shooting, assurance that I'm not severely under or overloading is plenty good. I just need to know that the autodisk setting is in the ballpark for that powder.

The little Frankford seems to hit the check weights, calibrates and has a tare function.

I also use the electronic scale to also check and categorize my cast bullets into (+/-).1 grain weight lots. This type of scale is much faster than the magnetic balance beam style reloading scale. I use a Lyman LE500 that I bought many years ago.

R,
Bullseye

Thanks for the info guys! In my original post I meant to say check the bullet weight within .4 grains, forgot the pesky decimal...

I notice some of the electronic scales say they are "powder scales", most of them have some sort of dimple in the middle to hold powder or some sort of pan which the powder goes in. Would this style work for weighing the cases/bullet?

Georgezilla wrote:Thanks for the info guys! In my original post I meant to say check the bullet weight within .4 grains, forgot the pesky decimal...

I notice some of the electronic scales say they are "powder scales", most of them have some sort of dimple in the middle to hold powder or some sort of pan which the powder goes in. Would this style work for weighing the cases/bullet?

That Frankford Arsenal low priced one from Midway will do the job for you,
I use it when reloading pistol cartridges, you can set the case on and hit the tare button and it weighs th case, then put in the powder and set it on again and it gives you the powder weight,

I use the RCBS Range Master 750 for several years now with no problems. I can leave a charge on the scales and do not have a drift like some report. But any electronic scale have a warm up period. Mine is 5-10 min before it stabilizes.

Now some back ground on electronic scales. Most have an accuracy of +-0.1gr. Since these are strain gauge scales hystresis can be an issue. This means the lower and bottom 10% of full scale can be mushy. Will have a different reading going different directions. Electronics these day take care of most of it.

I do recommend when ever measuring very low powder drops you need to really test the powder drop. What I do is this.
tare scales (zero)
powder drop weight, record.
tare
powder drop weight, record....... do this for 10 drops.
tare, dump pan, should have 10x -x.x gr.

at any time you diviate more than .1 grain on a powder drop you have a dispenser issue.

The 10x reduces your error for setting up you dispenser. With electronic scale any measurement 0.05 is rounded up.

so if you have a .2 dev in 4 gr charge, you have a 5% deviation. Lower the gr charge the greater change of noticeable error.

Sounds like you've done a bit of QC, David.

The 10x reduces your error for setting up you dispenser. With electronic scale any measurement 0.05 is rounded up

You can test the precision of the balance by making multiple weighings of the same object and looking at the average of the weights. Accuracy is how well it returns the weight of a known object. If you are looking for better precision then the balance needs to be isolated from vibration and air currents as much as possible.

The larger the weight by difference the less small errors in the dispenser and balance show up. The measurement error is both the balance and the dispenser. The dispenser will not deliver the same volume every time. If it is good the overs will equal the unders. The balance will not will not give the same weight every time if you look at enough decimal places. The bigger the weight measured the more the small errors are swamped out.

I've always used the odd-even rule for rounding something ending in 5. If the preceding number is 0 or even, round down. If it is odd, round up. 0.15 is 0.2; 0.45 is .4 and 0.25 is .2.

All that is for your folks who can do that kind of shooting. I'd really like to believe that I could see the difference made by +/- 0.1 grain. It would give me a whole new set of excuses to try out.

Greener,

I use to have to build my own load cells, for special service. So I kind of have a inner knowledge of there workings.

The RCBS is very sensitive to wind currents. I have mine on a seperate shelf under my bench to shield it from winds currents.

There is a mfg that make a set of digital scales that have a 0.02gr accuracy for just over $200 if I recall. If I need to replace mine it will be the next scales.

I used to work in a R&D center and some very nice lab equipment. Our high end scales were Metlers if I recall. They had their on granit tables, weighted ~500 lbs. These were balance beams where you shifted weights by knobs, 0.0001gram certified accuracy, checked annually. Were not cheap $3k.

Some of the lower end scales and early models will drift all the way down to Zero if you left the weight on the scales. Apparently the firmware kept compensating for drift and rounded down, till it hit zero. Some users found this out just by leaving the wight on the scale for 5-10 min and watch it drift lower. Some were so bad that they would reach zero on 6 gr in 4 hr.

What ever you get test throughly for this. For most dig scales carry a short warranty.

Is the super accuracy really required? The low cost one seems to work fine for my purpose. Just like the extra expensive target ammo, does 4 times the cost make the round 4 times as accurate? Just the same with cars, guns cameras etc, does the extra cost return its worth? I use what I can afford and what is required to meet my needs, I don't need extra expensive anything as I have no desire to impress anyone other than myself.

David, I figured you had done something like that. I spent from '65 to 2000 in chem labs or had them reporting to me. I paid for the sin of not running fast enough when my graduate committee decided I really needed a second graduate minor and that it ought to be in analytical chemistry.

For me shooting handguns, I don't need all that precision in bullet weights or powder weight. There is more error going on than bullet and powder. If I were doing longer range precision or competitive shooting, my reloading equipment would be significantly different. I'd even try to maintain the ammo at a constant temperature until I loaded the rifle.

Thanks for all the insight guys! I had no idea using an electronic scale would be so involved.

bearandoldman wrote:Is the super accuracy really required? The low cost one seems s to work fine for my purpose. Just like the extra expensive target ammo, does 4 times the cost make the round 4 times as accurate? Just the same with cars, guns cameras etc, does the extra cost return its worth? I use what I can afford and what is requird to meet my needs, I don't need axtra expensive anything as I have no desire to impress anyone othe than myself.

I want to employ an electronic scale to make ammo for the 50yrd course of a bullseye match. I will be trying to shoot 10 shot 3" groups at 50yrds; in order to achieve this, having your magazine filled with consistent ammo is a must. To get the ammo needed to perform at such a level, you first weigh the bullets to within .2 grains, then divide those groups into .05grain sub-lots. One needs to weigh cases also, but only to within about .2grains -- case length is important too-- usually one would measure the cases to within .002" of each other. Case age/usage are important as well.(All this is only necessary for long line match ammo, for the short line far less precision [when plinking one does really need precision at all] is needed when making your ammo)

Confidence is a must as well. Come match day, If I'm confident my scale was able to accurately weigh my bullets and cases, that's one less thing on my mind.

Georgezilla wrote:Thanks for all the insight guys! I had no idea using an electronic scale would be so involved.

bearandoldman wrote:Is the super accuracy really required? The low cost one seems s to work fine for my purpose. Just like the extra expensive target ammo, does 4 times the cost make the round 4 times as accurate? Just the same with cars, guns cameras etc, does the extra cost return its worth? I use what I can afford and what is requird to meet my needs, I don't need axtra expensive anything as I have no desire to impress anyone othe than myself.

I want to employ an electronic scale to make ammo for the 50yrd course of a bullseye match. I will be trying to shoot 10 shot 3" groups at 50yrds; in order to achieve this, having your magazine filled with consistent ammo is a must. To get the ammo needed to perform at such a level, you first weigh the bullets to within .2 grains, then divide those groups into .05grain sub-lots. One needs to weigh cases also, but only to within about .2grains -- case length is important too-- usually one would measure the cases to within .002" of each other. Case age/usage are important as well.(All this is only necessary for long line match ammo, for the short line far less precision [when plinking one does really need precision at all] is needed when making your ammo)

Confidence is a must as well. Come match day, If I'm confident my scale was able to accurately weigh my bullets and cases, that's one less thing on my mind.

Like I said, whatever is required to fit your needs. Confidence is a very strong ally to have on your side. Whatever is required to give you the confidence is the proper way to go.

Don't underestimate the 'mental' factor. Confidence is the key to good performance, "If you believe then you can achieve." Having faith in your equipment and ammo is key to good performance. As the others have said their are a lot of variables in shooting, tolerances don't have to be highly exacting to be good at normal pistol ranges.

R,
Bullseye