• 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.

Need to buy new scale

Walt,
Boyd and I have discussed balance scales at some length, I have been able to two fold advance my skills by following some of his suggestions on balance scales, I actually did implement his idea on two identical pans and I am very please, it comes in handy for several reasons, one I use a chargemaster to throw close to desired weight and trickle in my balance I run two pans to keep a steady flow going. Also having something your exact powder weigh I implemented also and it was one of the best ideas I got from Boyd on the subject as no matter what or whos scale I use as long as I zero the scale and charge to my charge weight check weight I always have the correct chg. for my rifle, I keep this check weight in my die box for that particular cartridge, there are other things but these two are very beneficial to my way of reloading.
Wayne.
 
1066,
That camera on the needle is the ticket for weighing charges accurately. You can see just how easy it would be to get off by .05gr +/- by just looking at it with your eyes. Especially if you accidentally viewed your needle from a different angle. With the camera viewing the needle, that angle will never change. Great video. Really shows the sensitivity of the Parker tuned scale. Can't imagine that setup came cheap though : )
 
BigDMT said:
1066,
That camera on the needle is the ticket for weighing charges accurately. You can see just how easy it would be to get off by .05gr +/- by just looking at it with your eyes. Especially if you accidentally viewed your needle from a different angle. Great video. Really shows the sensitivity of the Parker tuned scale. Can't imagine that setup came cheap though : )
Brandon,
Your running a VIC 123 aren't you?
Wayne.
 
I found a manual focus web cam(usb) for $35. If you are working at home it works slick. Also, you can position your scale so that it is at a right angle to the front of the table, with the pan on the near end, and put the powder measure on a stand right next to it, with the trickler on the other side...fast.
 
BigDMT said:
VIC 123??? Not sure what you mean Wayne...
I thought in a previous p.m we had talked scales and you mentioned you was using a Sartorius Vic 123 scale, I must have been wrong. What type of scale are you using?
Wayne.
 
No not me Wayne : )
I'm a digital guy. Picked up a GemPro 250 a couple months ago and it really made a positive difference in my groups at long range with various rifles. Until then I used my RCBS rangemaster. But as I found out last summer, the RCBS just wasn't what I'd call "good enough for competition" : )

Might pick up one of those Parker's as well. We'll see how the GemPro 250 does for accuracy in my 6.5x47 Lap before I buy another scale... if I ever get that rifle done of course : )
 
BigDMT said:
No not me Wayne : )
I'm a digital guy. Picked up a GemPro 250 a couple months ago and it really made a positive difference in my groups at long range with various rifles. Until then I used my RCBS rangemaster. But as I found out last summer, the RCBS just wasn't what I'd call "good enough for competition" : )

Might pick up one of those Parker's as well. We'll see how the GemPro 250 does for accuracy in my 6.5x47 Lap before I buy another scale... if I ever get that rifle done of course : )
Brandon,
I knew you were a digital guy, nothing wrong with that I really like my GP-250 scale, the VIC 123 is just a more expensive version, it is what Dennis P is using, you have probably seen it set up in his trailer, he loads at night between matches with it.
Wayne.
 
BigDMT said:
1066,
That camera on the needle is the ticket for weighing charges accurately. You can see just how easy it would be to get off by .05gr +/- by just looking at it with your eyes. Especially if you accidentally viewed your needle from a different angle. With the camera viewing the needle, that angle will never change. Great video. Really shows the sensitivity of the Parker tuned scale. Can't imagine that setup came cheap though : )

Thanks the comments - Yes the extended needle and the camera certainly make it clear and eliminate any possibility of parallax error - The set-up was not expensive and not one of Scott Parkers scales - This is one I did myself.

Here is a short video I made a couple of years ago of how I did it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=gTElTMWgc3Q

And here is another about fixing a problem with a 10/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=HOKJxe0FUTk
 
Sorry for the slow response but had to run an IDPA practice this afternoon and so was gone for most of the day. First, no offense taken, I see this as an open exchange of ideas and info. I understand that there might be some strong feelings that I am running into but I am new to the board and so did not witness any of the previous thread where this was hashed out but I do understand that how this could be frustrating.

Before I begin, I would like to point out that there are actually three issues being discussed here but unfortunately being lumped into one. The first issue is a purely a technical one and relates to the ability of a weighing instrument to distinguish between a 0.02 gr weight. The second issue is also a technical issue and relates to the question of whether this small change in powder weight matters in reloading and makes a difference in accuracy/precision. The third one is more of a subjective call and that is whether digital balance are reliable and better than the traditional beam balance.

The first question I think I can answer. A beam balance which is highly calibrated may be able to approach the sensitivity of a good electronic balance but you are pushing the very limit of its ability.

I won’t attempt to answer the second question as it was not the question I was originally trying to answer and I frankly don’t consider myself enough of an experience shooter to answer this question.

The third question is actually the meat of the problem. This is the classical case of “resistance to change” which we have all run into. I still remember talking to my thesis adviser in the 1970 and telling him how I had program my pocket HP-41C calculator to compute the number of tumor cells, a task that was previously done by a large desktop computer. His answer was simple “I don’t trust electronic calculators”. Now I am not making fun of anyone here but just trying to show what seems ridicules now may be more difficult for some to accept back then.

We all have things and routine that we have used for many years that we feel work well and do the job and it is unsettling to have new things that shows up and claim that they can do it better and cheaper and how many times have we found that those claims are totally empty. However, it is also true that progress are sometimes mad and there are times that newer devices do come along that in fact help us to do our job better and we owe it to ourselves to keep our mind open.

With electronic balances, I do in fact know that many cheap ones have been offered in the past that are basically junk. However, the basic technology is completely sound, as it should be since people have been using them for important research since the 1980s. What was missing until now is the technology to make them cheap enough for everyday consumption but at the same time being reliable, accurate, and precise.

I understand that as with any change, there is always a huge inertia to overcome and many people are reluctant to change, that is understandable. However, this is a technical column and so it behooves us to keep an open mind and even if we are not convinced to allow other people to explore new options. Without this, there will never be any progress.
 
Of all the affordable electronic scales that I have tried, given that I am not willing to spend over $300 on something that I have so little use for, I found the GemPro 250 to be a good value, but would caution potential purchasers that the details of its construction are far from commercial quality. If you get one, handle with care. I have no place to conveniently shoot over 200 yd., so jumping through a lot of hoops that should only come into play at longer distances seems to me to be a waste of resources. On the other hand, if there was a 600 yd range close at hand, I would probably have a Dasher barrel for one of my bench rifles, and weigh charges. For the little bit of weighing that I do, my tuned 10-10 does just fine.
 
Agreed! The GemPro does not have super heavy duty construction but the fact is nothing that delicate and can accurately measure 0.04gr can be thrown around and needs to be handled with kid’s gloves. Used mine for 2 years and it is still going strong (knock on wood). I do shoot 600 and so not so much of a thrill.
 
I think the GP 250 is a great value as well. I just leave mine on all the time so it's always warmed up.

I'd love to have a $1000 top of the line scale and all the other best gear out there for shooting, but I have way too many hobbies in the sporting world and I have to pick and choose my battles for where I spend my money.

I have to have top notch optics for hunting trophy mule deer and elk in the mountains of Montana, so no pennies can be spared there.

Gotta have a top notch bow and equipment for archery season so that nothing fails when, or "if", I get close enough to an animal for a shot.

I do a lot of fishing for species like Northern Pike, all types of trout, bass, walleye, catfish, perch, blue gill, etc...so good rods, reels, and appropriate tackle have to be purchased for all the various needs.

But shooting takes the most money. Especially now that I want to compete with the big dogs in 1000 yard BR : ) Plus I am a huge varmint hunter and I also love weapons for tactical home defense and plinking. Then there's the custom rifles for hunting big game and all the camo clothing, packs, calls, survival gear, and the best boots money can buy that will allow you to keep your footing in the high country.

You add it all up and it gets really expensive. One time I was hiking back from a hunt by myself and to stave off the boredom I began adding up how much it cost for all the gear, clothing, boots, optics and weapons I currently had on my person during this outing. The total dollar amount for me to be walking with the things on my body was over $6000!!! That's just my normal hunting gear on my body! That's ridiculous! But it is needed to be successful when you are inflicted with the trophy mule deer bug like I am.


My love for the sporting world seems to be endless and continually growing. And as it grows, my bank account seems to shrink a bit, along with my wife's tolerance for it all : ) hahaha!

Anyhow, my point is that when I can find a really good product for a fair price that will be adequate for the task which it is intended, I am more than happy to save a few dollars. The GemPro 250 gives me the quality that I need at a price that is very reasonable and I am very happy so far.
 
LOL! Amen on the cost of shooting! It is the biggest money sucking hobby I have and I also have a lot being a retiree.

Don’t really dare to add it up though but as my wife sees it – being challenged and happy at my age is money in the bank! Besides, you can’t take it with you and wow it is even still legal! Who can complain? LOL! It is as you say a good product for a fair price and that sums it up perfectly.
 
jlow said:
Sorry for the slow response but had to run an IDPA practice this afternoon and so was gone for most of the day. First, no offense taken, I see this as an open exchange of ideas and info. I understand that there might be some strong feelings that I am running into but I am new to the board and so did not witness any of the previous thread where this was hashed out but I do understand that how this could be frustrating.

Before I begin, I would like to point out that there are actually three issues being discussed here but unfortunately being lumped into one. The first issue is a purely a technical one and relates to the ability of a weighing instrument to distinguish between a 0.02 gr weight. The second issue is also a technical issue and relates to the question of whether this small change in powder weight matters in reloading and makes a difference in accuracy/precision. The third one is more of a subjective call and that is whether digital balance are reliable and better than the traditional beam balance.

The first question I think I can answer. A beam balance which is highly calibrated may be able to approach the sensitivity of a good electronic balance but you are pushing the very limit of its ability.

I won't attempt to answer the second question as it was not the question I was originally trying to answer and I frankly don't consider myself enough of an experience shooter to answer this question.

The third question is actually the meat of the problem. This is the classical case of Resistance to change which we have all run into. I still remember talking to my thesis adviser in the 1970 and telling him how I had program my pocket HP-41C calculator to compute the number of tumor cells, a task that was previously done by a large desktop computer. His answer was simple “I don't trust electronic calculator's. Now I am not making fun of anyone here but just trying to show what seems ridicules now may be more difficult for some to accept back then.

We all have things and routine that we have used for many years that we feel work well and do the job and it is unsettling to have new things that shows up and claim that they can do it better and cheaper and how many times have we found that those claims are totally empty. However, it is also true that progress are sometimes mad and there are times that newer devices do come along that in fact help us to do our job better and we owe it to ourselves to keep our mind open.

With electronic balances, I do in fact know that many cheap ones have been offered in the past that are basically junk. However, the basic technology is completely sound, as it should be since people have been using them for important research since the 1980s. What was missing until now is the technology to make them cheap enough for everyday consumption but at the same time being reliable, accurate, and precise.

I understand that as with any change, there is always a huge inertia to overcome and many people are reluctant to change, that is understandable. However, this is a technical column and so it behooves us to keep an open mind and even if we are not convinced to allow other people to explore new options. Without this, there will never be any progress.
Good post jlow. I have said it before and I will say it again, I am not against electronic scales or any other new gadget that comes along, hell I own two of everything. I believe a properly set up balance will read single kernel which is all your doing with the gempro, no the beam doesn't say 34.239 what it does is the needle isn't perfectly lined up so add a kernel or two and it will be at 35.000 or whatever, I shoot 1K bench rest, that is my hobby, every foot per second matters so if it took $10000 to buy a scale to be competitive I would not bat a eye, just write the check, however that isn't the case, I believe my balance and gempro 250 is accurate enough although after talking to jaychris and the forum boss I think I am going to spring for a GD503 just because I can and if it dropped my group size by a 1/2" at 1000 I would have a permanent smile on my face and it would be worth the money to me,...to each his own though.

Brandon,
Nice post as well, and every word is true and other then the fishing a perfect clone of myself ;)
Wayne.
 
bozo699 said:
1066,
Can you elaborate a little more on the paper clip on the back of the scale?
Wayne.

The paperclip is a new idea of mine, it pivots on a small stud screwed into the scale body and is free to swing, pendulum fashion. It is bent so that when the beam is down at rest it just contacts the damper blade.

The beam normally lifts off the bottom stop about 1.5 grains before zero but with the assist of gravity acting on the paperclip the beam starts to lift off the bottom stop at about 2.5 grains ( or whatever you want) before zero.
By the time the beam has lifted about 1/8 inch it leaves the paperclip behind and continues to rise as normal.

The 10/10 and the 5-10 scale (and the Lee) have a spring operated approach to weight idicator but there is nothing as reliable as gravity.

This idea just makes the scale sweeter to use and is a real help if you are using something like the Omega, Targetmaster or Jiffy power trickler.
 
Wow, I sure learned a lot from this post. Perhaps by applying some of the tricks and hints I learned here I can resurrect my old Lyman 500 and save it from the dumpster. I had been using a magnifying glass to watch the needle on my scale but the camera is nicer. I am glad to see so many positive comments about the Gempro, makes me feel better about spending the money for it. I intend to buy a tuned balance beam in the future for no other reason than to have an accurate scale that doesn't require a power source. I feel I must apologize for bringing this topic up again, I must have missed the original. Thanks again for bearing with me on this and for everyones good advice and tips. Ron...
 
Ron,
Not to worry, every topic on here has been ask many times before and like this one many new things are learned or hashed out. GREAT thread my friend and if no one but you learned something then it was well worth the bandwidth for sure, take care and best of luck :)
Wayne.
 

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
166,810
Messages
2,223,531
Members
79,917
Latest member
Joe The Licensed Plumber
Back
Top