• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

A little scale experiment

I would like to point out one thing here. Targets see ES. and that is the only number that concerns me be it velocities or charge weights. Generally sample sizes are too small for SD to have much validity, but because chronographs include that in their readouts they are referred to in shooting related posts, articles and videos all the time. I think that this has obscured rather than clarified results. When I read your post, the first thing that came to mind, after being glad that you had shared the information, was to wonder what your ES had been.

When I test a scale weighing the same object, if I have one weighing that extends the spread, I do not throw that out because I would not know that it had happened if I was weighing a series of objects or charges. Similarly it will be the extremes of velocity that would probably be my most divergent shots in a group shot at long range. There is no provision for scoring the SD of bullet impacts. Thank you for posting. I hope that my response has not offended you.
Boyd

Of course the target reflects the SD with every individual shot, the ES just happens to be the worst case. Unless something is not "normal" (pun intended) the groups will generally be 4xSD. And with limited data the SD is a better predictor of what to expect in this regard. Now the ES of the shots will be of more concern to a group shooter, but for score they all matter. Fclass scoring rings are a very good reflection of SD as shots pile up more in the center (average) and the number of shots trails off at the further rings; stacking up like the normal bell curve.
 
I come from a background of group shooting, not score. A single errant shot will ruin a group, and probably an agg, a grand, and a two or more gun. Generally speaking when shooters refer to SD and you look into their data, the number of shots taken is not large enough to have much confidence in the result. On the other hand if you have one bad shot, in good conditions then you know that something needs to be changed if you want to be competitive. It seems to me that shooters seem to have forgotten all about the importance of sample size, or they may not have had a good statistics instructor, if they had one at all.
 
I have one of those Hornady beam scales, verifyed by 2 electronic and 3 other brand beam scales and that Hornady scale of mine reads 1.2gr LIGHTER than the actual weight. Meaning that a max load is actually 1.2gr higher than what it should be. I used that scale for several years without ever check weighing it.
My bad...

Cheers.
:eek:
Try this with yours. Slide the entire beam towards the rear and then towards the front (blue arrows) of the scale. I could get 1 variation of 3/10ths. (I found several other people that experienced the exact same thing) As long as the beam remained in the same position the scale was very accurate but there was no way to tell when it moved. I tried putting spacers in the channel to center it (but still giving a little room) and it made no difference. When I would weigh I would lightly blow across the pan to allow it to float and reset. I could tell the difference in 1 kernel of Varget (.02g). But the next load may or may not be off as the pivot point could changed. You could have 3-4 rounds very close and then start getting off. If you zero the scale, then move the weights, it changes and can be off again. I could never find a reason for the scale changing and even removed the magnets with no difference. I tried putting bearings on the pivot shaft and that controlled the side to side movement but the tiny roller bearings are quite as free as a knife edge and I still couldn't get consistent weighings. I though I was loading accurate loads but after finding this and going with an FX electronic scale, I noticed a big difference in average group size.
Hornady-Scale.jpg
 
Try this with yours. Slide the entire beam towards the rear and then towards the front (blue arrows) of the scale. I could get 1 variation of 3/10ths. (I found several other people that experienced the exact same thing) As long as the beam remained in the same position the scale was very accurate but there was no way to tell when it moved. I tried putting spacers in the channel to center it (but still giving a little room) and it made no difference. When I would weigh I would lightly blow across the pan to allow it to float and reset. I could tell the difference in 1 kernel of Varget (.02g). But the next load may or may not be off as the pivot point could changed. You could have 3-4 rounds very close and then start getting off. If you zero the scale, then move the weights, it changes and can be off again. I could never find a reason for the scale changing and even removed the magnets with no difference. I tried putting bearings on the pivot shaft and that controlled the side to side movement but the tiny roller bearings are quite as free as a knife edge and I still couldn't get consistent weighings. I though I was loading accurate loads but after finding this and going with an FX electronic scale, I noticed a big difference in average group size.
View attachment 1052205

I had high hopes for the new Hornady scale. I purchased one and as soon as I took the beam out of the box, I knew it was a failure. The pivot knives were ground too short. Likewise, the length of them across the bearings allows for a substantial moment about the beam. I found no way of making it sensitive to my liking nor could I make it repeat.
 
Last edited:
Hi Scott,
If my shooting was not all short range, and even if it was, if my shooting budget was larger, I would have a magnetic force restoration scale, but since I do not, and I have a high opinion of the capability of tuned scales, I was curious about what the equipment that I have is capable of, when operated with great care. I am encouraged that people have taken the time to respond and post their own stories. The tricky part in all of this is figuring out what your limiting factor is, because that is the one that you need to put the most effort into correcting. Given that I have seen top level, short range group matches won, and world records set with thrown charges, this test is not a matter of practical necessity for me, but that has no effect on my curiosity.
Boyd

Hi Boyd, just to clarify: I was referring to my customer’s data and use of the scale, not yours.
I know you are perfectly proficient at using beams.
 
I had high hopes for the new Hornady scale. I purchased one and as soon as I took the beam out of the box, I knew it was a failure. The pivot knives were ground too short. Likewise, the length of them across the bearings allows for a substantial moment about the beam. I found no way of making it sensitive to my liking nor could I make it repeat.

I agree with that - I think Hornady missed a chance here. It could have been a good scale and filled a gap with just a little more thought. The layout and size are not bad, the two poise system and the stirrup/pan/hanger system is well tried and tested. There's no problem with the adjustable nut tare system and the damping system is again tried tested and the beam is clearly marked.

That only leaves the knife edge and the bearings. Fixed bearings shouldn't cause any problems, they work well in the Redding scales and machining them as cylindrical cotton reels makes perfect sense and theoretically better than the Redding straight cut bearing. That just leaves the knife edge, with most common scales such as the RCBS/Ohaus and Redding range the side play in the beam is limited by the knife edge butting up against the bearing end plates, the Hornady uses a different system by having shaped knife edges that should "self centre". This system worked well on the much larger old Hornady/pacific "M" scale but not so well on this scale. A great pity really, it could have been a winner.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,238
Messages
2,214,198
Members
79,464
Latest member
Big Fred
Back
Top