Need to buy new scale

[flinginammo]

I also ordered the gem pro 250 yesterday.. they were on sale for one day. i hope we are both satified

 

[bozo699]

I personally believe that both types of scales are good to have on the bench. (electronic and a Parker beam). I use my Parker for throwing powder charges, and that won't change.

However, a beam scale is terrible for weight sorting cases, bullets, or anything else for that matter. Maybe not terrible, but not nearly as efficient as using an electronic scale for weight sorting.

Walt,
Your spot on my friend, but if I could only have one scale it would be a tuned beam scale! I agree with BigDMT, that other nice reloading stuff is nice to have but most of us that has been into it for very long at all already have all that stuff,..I do anyway, I have 4 digital scales and 6 balance scales and I might buy another tomorrow,...who knows! you can never have to much stuff IMO,...A tuned balance and a good digital is definitely not to much and very handy to say the least.
Wayne.

 

[TimP]

I am in agreement with the if you can afford both do it group. If not I would start with one of Scott's tuned beam scales and add a good digital scale when the time is right.

Tim

 

[jlow]

Not being rude here but if the GenPro is good and reliable, what purpose would the beam balance serve? Just interested in hearing the rationale.

 

[BigDMT]

I suppose a good beam scale can almost NEVER fail without hard physical abuse like dropping it off the bench.

It would be disappointing if a person was limited for time to reload for a competition shoot or big upcoming hunt and their digital scale decided to start kickin' up daisies. A good back-up beam scale would be a good piece of "insurance".

Normally I sell old stuff on ebay to get new stuff, but when I ordered my GemPro 250, I held on to my RBCS digital scale for back-up. Just like when I went to a digital caliper, I kept my old RCBS dial caliper for a back-up. Cuz although electronics are great and make life very comfortable and convenient, none of them are 100% reliable. Even though RCBS and GemPro supposedly have awesome customer service, the down time to get a scale fixed or replaced would be annoying to say the least.
I speak about electronics reliability not only from experience with personal "knick-knacks", but also from over 11 years as an electrician : )

Now you guys got me thinkin' bout buyin' one of those Parker's : )

 

[bozo699]

Not being rude here but if the GenPro is good and reliable, what purpose would the beam balance serve? Just interested in hearing the rationale.

jlow,
As Brandon just mentioned because all electronic equipment was built to fail and fail it will eventually so having some analog equipment is nice for backup. A Walt said beam scales are a PITA for sorting brass and bullets, the digital are much faster, however I don't think for weighing powder they are any faster and for some reason there is a myth that beam scales are not as accurate as say a Gempro,...BS,... I can repeatably way single kernels of Varget with my Balance is a gempro anymore accurate then that,NO!! and here is why,......when was the last time you shaved off a quarter of a stick of Varget to make weigh or looked for a smaller piece of powder to make weigh??.....NEVER so how could the electronic be any better?....it's not!! What it is, it's much easier on the eyes, also it is easier for the human brain to compute 34.6 rather then watch a pointer line up with a line so the electronic scales are nice for sure in that regard, but in no way shape or form is a $150 electronic scale hands down more accurate for weighing 34.6 grains of Varget then a good balance because they both will detect a single kernel of powder, the electronic gives you a reading and the balance you have to pay attention to detail and most people won't or don't, then blame the balance for being inaccurate when in all reality you as the operator is what is inaccurate and not the balance!
Wayne.

 

[BigDMT]

Right wayne. Good points, but human error is the cause of most inaccuracies in reloading and shooting. So if an electronic scale is accurate enough to eliminate one more human factor, a person is that much better off IMO. In this scenario the factor would be human eyesight and consistently viewing the balance scale pointer from the same exact angle for perfect accuracy.

Electronic scales are definitely not a total fail-safe for consistency error, but with regular calibration, they are extremely accurate and consistent. The best part is that electronics are not subject to change because your phone rang or your wife was yelling at you to take out the trash which hurried you to finish weighing a charge : )

 

[wmdron]

Well, I'm certainly convinced. In addition to the Gempro a quality balance beam is in my future. Thanks folks, Ron

 

[jlow]

I can certainly buy into the idea of a backup, as mentioned in my original post, no electronic scale or beam balance for that matter is fail proof, I mean you could always drop it by accident. But the question is why one would buy a beam balance to back up an electronic balance?

The electronic scale will accurately and precisely measure down to the 0.04gr level and if it breaks, I would be back to the 0.1 gr level with the beam balance. Now certainly if I had a beam balance already, I would not throw it away and it could serve as a backup, but if I set out in the beginning to buy a second balance to back up my electronic balance, would it not make more sense for it to be another electronic balance? This is why the logic of buying a beam balance to back up an electronic balance escapes me.

 

[FroggyOne2]

I really love my TP-153, it is consistant and accurate as far as I can tell, I can stand over it with the phone and it don't move. Though I would love to have one of the GD503's .. I am happy for the moment.. for the moment I said.. I used to have a Redding beam scale, till it would not zero anymore.. I ended up breaking that scale.. Anyhow.. I love the ability to measure down .02 grains.. All my loadings will either have the spot on number or .02 over.. and that is it..

 

[bozo699]

I can certainly buy into the idea of a backup, as mentioned in my original post, no electronic scale or beam balance for that matter is fail proof, I mean you could always drop it by accident. But the question is why one would buy a beam balance to back up an electronic balance?

The electronic scale will accurately and precisely measure down to the 0.04gr level and if it breaks, I would be back to the 0.1 gr level with the beam balance. Now certainly if I had a beam balance already, I would not throw it away and it could serve as a backup, but if I set out in the beginning to buy a second balance to back up my electronic balance, would it not make more sense for it to be another electronic balance? This is why the logic of buying a beam balance to back up an electronic balance escapes me.

As I said my balance will weigh as accurately as you electronic scale will, yours will weigh one kernel and mine will weigh one kernel??
Wayne.

 

[jlow]

I am interested in what beam scale will accurately measure on kernel (for example 1 Varget kernel = 0.02gr). Yes, you can reproducibly see a one kernel drop in the GemPro.

 

[bozo699]

I am interested in what beam scale will accurately measure on kernel (for example 1 Varget kernel = 0.02gr). Yes, you can reproducibly see a one kernel drop in the GemPro.

Anyone of the 1/2 dozen I own, take your pick, 304 Ohaus, 1010, 5/10 5/05 5/02 Redding, Look I am not going to argue with you! If you don't understand how to use a beam scale, I can teach you, if your uninterested that is fine too but you can ask anybody out here that has been loading very long at all that a properly tuned scale will read as accurately as a electronic, does the beam read 34.002 NO!! but do you work up a load that needs to be 34.002 to be accurate,....NO and if you do you are the only one that does that I have ever heard of! You measure 34.2 and if you have a Gd503 you read 34.200 and if you have a CHEAP gem pro 250 which I do you read 34.20 and if you have a beam scale you look for -- not -_ if it is -_ you add until it is-- then it is 34.20000000000000000 if it is_- then you remove powder until it is -- then it is 34.200000000000000000000000000000 if you live in a digital age and do not understand analog then use the digital but please do not knock what you do not understand!!....That's All! Have a nice day.
Wayne.

 

[bozo699]

I apologize to all for blowing off but this is about the fifteenth thread this year alone that we have had this discussion and because people do not understand or do not want to get down to where they can read a balance scale or glue a needle on the beam and use a camera and lap top so you can accurately read the scale don't assume the balance is not accurate!! These new $500-$1000 dollar scales are VERY VERY accurate and so is the Cheap 250's and I use digital scales and like them, I understand there strong points and there weak points, and the same with the balance scales. I would say I use the electronic scales more then the balance, I wear trifocals glasses and it really strains the eyes when I am loading for three rifles before a match. So if you do not like a balance for that reason or because your young and they stopped teaching kids how to read a watch and other analog systems years ago and you simply do not understand then that's fine to but to make bold statements that a precision tune balance is so unreliable you couldn't load accurate shot gun shell is ridiculous! Please don't ridicule what you do not understand!
Wayne.

 

[1066]

I am interested in what beam scale will accurately measure on kernel (for example 1 Varget kernel = 0.02gr). Yes, you can reproducibly see a one kernel drop in the GemPro.

I have around 25 beam scales and 3 digital. I use a beam scale to weigh my powder and digital for cases and bullets.

I'm quite happy my beam scales will weigh to a single kernel of Varget and with around 4-5 kernels to 10th a grain I feel my scales (and many others) are way better than the regular .1 grain often quoted for beam scales.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnVOoGd1bDU&feature=player_detailpage[/youtube]

 

[BoydAllen]

Some time back I read, on this site, about tuning scales. By repeatedly weighing the same thing I had figured out that my 10-10 was not doing a good job for me, and the electronic reloading scales that were being marketed at the time did not seem to be any better.

After talking with the fellow that does the tuning (Scott Hunter) my curiosity got the better of me, and being a bit of a tinkerer, I decided to very carefully attempt to make my scale work better. I am not in Scott's league, but the results have been gratifying. It works much better, good enough for me. I say this with the qualification that I do not shoot long range.

Reading this, you might logically question how I would know that my scale was working so well. The answer is that I have a friend who has a decent (.02 gr.) electronic scale, and I have used it to weigh specific coins that I keep handy as non standard check weights. I also find that repeated weighing of the same thing gives me a good indication that all is well. Balance scales are setup sensitive. There are tricks to getting their best out of them, but nothing difficult.

A number of years ago, I had the chance to try some of the electronic scales that were being sold for reloading, the results were not satisfactory. I think that this is the reason for some shooters wanting to have a good balance scale just to keep their electronic scale honest, and in case it decides to stop working.

Let me add one more thing. I have seen lots of shooters become way too distracted by the whole issue of tuning to a small increment of powder weight, when there were much bigger issues that were affecting the accuracy of their loads. Unless you are shooting at long ranges, very small powder changes are probably not the answer to why you rifle is not shooting as well as you would like it to. And if you are doing your "testing" without wind flags, small differences in accuracy that you think are caused by loads, cannot be reliably attributed.

I do most of my loading at the range, and because of that, and the fact that all of the powders that I shoot may, with practice, and good technique, be thrown with satisfactory results, I don't use my scales as often as someone who is working with coarser powders, and/or shooting at longer ranges.

For those times when I am helping a friend work up loads (always at the range) I have designed, and a friend has built, a glass fronted box to shelter my scale from the wind. It works perfectly. The trickler is inside with the scale, with its handle protruding through a close fitting hole in the side of the box. Construction details are simple. With this, there is absolutely no need to wast time loading test loads at home. One can get the whole thing done in a day at the range, a morning, if the rifle is in good shape.

 

[queen_stick]

I am interested in what beam scale will accurately measure on kernel (for example 1 Varget kernel = 0.02gr). Yes, you can reproducibly see a one kernel drop in the GemPro.

I have around 25 beam scales and 3 digital. I use a beam scale to weigh my powder and digital for cases and bullets.

I'm quite happy my beam scales will weigh to a single kernel of Varget and with around 4-5 kernels to 10th a grain I feel my scales (and many others) are way better than the regular .1 grain often quoted for beam scales.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnVOoGd1bDU&feature=player_detailpage[/youtube]

I just bought a targetmaster trickler. It's the best investment I've made for my reloading setup in a long time. That trickler combined with my Parker tuned beam scale, and my Point-2-View document camera, the process of throwing/trickling very accurate charges is very fast.

Boyd:
that post is a book compared to your norm
By the way, that TargetMaster trickler is battery powered.... it could be integrated into your "boxed-in" beam scale, and still be used at the range (without a power outlet). I'd highly recommend it to anyone using a beam scale!

Do you mind sharing the "tricks" you have for optimizing the setup of the beam scale? To be honest, I just slap mine on the bench, get it zeroed, and start throwing charges. If there's a better/more precise way, then I'd like to hear it.

Walt

 

[BoydAllen]

Off the top of my head, I make sure that the main knife edges are not rubbing on their ends, and I pick up the whole pan, and hanger assembly from their knife edges, with a thumb and finger under the loops that make contact with the edges, and set them back down, so that I am sure that the contact is centered on the wire loops. I also recheck these details if I get sloppy handling the pan, and put side pressure on the system. None of this takes any time. If I am throwing short and trickling a large number of charges that are the same, I make up a test weight that has a wire handle, that weighs the same as my charge. That way if I question the reading that I am getting, I can test the scale with a "charge" that I know is correct. Another detail that is a good idea, but which I have yet to implement, it to tune two scale pans so that they are identical in weight, on a more sensitive scale than my 10-10. I also like to be careful about setting the pan on its support in a consistent manner.

 

[queen_stick]

Thanks Boyd... I'll start putting all that into practice. Love the idea of the 'custom' check weight too. I'll have to make a couple of those!

Just curious... why do you need two scale pans?

 

[BoydAllen]

If a quantity of powder has been weighed and the weight indicated is suspect, with an identical pan and the test weight, you can lift one off the other scale and put the other on, rather than having to dump the charge into a container to use the test weight. I suppose that with an electronic scale you could simply note what twice the charge weight was, and set a test weight on the powder to see if the combined weight is correct.

With a Chargemaster, the advantage would be being able to simply switch pans when a charge is finished and save the time that you would spend putting it down the funnel. This is more of an issue if you are near maximum case capacity, and having to do something slower than just dump the powder in the funnel.