Scale Comparison: Sartorius AY123 vs. Sartorius GD503 vs. GemPro 500 vs....

[Diamondback]

This is the Sartorius AY-123 Main menu access and settings changes for more accurate reading and trickle charging.

Thank you jaychris for the review and I did look at the GemPro 250 scale as it is a cost effective scale for what it does and
a lot more portable in size. Right now I can find the Sartorius GD503 for around $1050 online for it's lowest pricing.

http://www.septools.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_211&products_id=1151


I too had read articles that the AY-123 Sartorius scale was the best thing next to sliced bread. That's why I purchased one.
My AY-123 is set up has not given me any problems in severe drifting.
Maybe I got one of the good ones from the lot from what I have been reading here. Most people that have owned them have been frustrated with their accuracy. I made these changes to my AY-123 in th manual pics below and haven't had any problems with it drifting. I load Varget for my 308 Win and it reads it very fine.

Pics from the manual changes and menu entry method below.

 

[flatlander]

I've owned & used a DI MXX123 for several years now; bought it when DI was offering a discounted price to members of this forum. My scale is just now starting to have some drift problems - not enough to give real headache, but noticeable, nonetheless.

I've also got one of the newer RCBS Chargemasters (bought it late in 2011), but after having gotten used to the precision of the 123, can't bring myself to depend on the RCBS unit. I can usually throw charges out of an old (circa 1958) but upgraded (Sinclair baffle/bottle adapter & drop tube) Redding #3 or a Harrell's Premium meter that'll come comfortably close to what the RCBS will do, without the wait on the RCBS to slowly trickle up.

I've read through several posts covering the Sartorius GD506, and considered upgrading to one of these balances. But with my fumble fingers, I've managed to 'trip' over the DI 123's glass draft ring a few times, dumping the powder charge all over the scale. This usually happens when I'm tired or in a hurry - as is often the case when it's getting late the night before a match. So working around the 506's glass cage looks to be a real obstacle to someone as clumsy as myself.

When speed & accuracy are the overriding desired characteristics of a powder dispensing system, it still looks to me as though the Gen II Promethius is king of the hill. The only reason I don't own one is the same reason I don't own any of the $3k+ "premium" rifle scopes - I'm not that unhappy with what I've got.

Still, I very much appreciate the time & effort Jay & others have devoted to posting their results with the 506 balance - at least I've got some very solid information should I decide to upgrade from the 123.

 

[bozo699]

I realize this is an old thread but I thought I would revive it anyway.

The deviation in the Acculab 123 (now the Sartorius AY123) was only .2 grains. That is less than 8 kernels of powder. Of course that would vary somewhat with the powder but a single kernel of Varget weighs .025 - .035 grains on a GD-503. Someone would have to prove to me that 8 kernels of powder would make any noticeable difference on point of impact, even at 1000 yards for me to believe it. I mean in 41 grains is 1172 to 1640 kernels of Varget. So, 8 grains is only a .00068 variance at the most. No one can judge the wind speed to that degree of accuracy.

If you have the money and competition shooting is your thing, fine, spend the $1325.00 on the Sartorius GD-503. For the other reloaders a variation of 8 kernels of powder over all your cases, for $310.00 (price for the Sartorius AY123) is a bargain, IMO.

Bob,
I wished everybody I shoot against thought like you do, I would have it made, if you think that 8 kernals of powder doesn't make a difference at 1000 yards then that's a good thing, like I said I wished everyone thought that way, I would be world champion by now.
Wayne.

 

[bozo699]

Bob,
Just take exactly 8 kernels of Varget and put them on a sheet of print paper, are you telling me that you would feel confident that a plus or minus of 8 kernels would make no difference at all? My uncle used to load all his siblings and other family members 3006 rounds, a box of 20 had at least 5 different head stamps on them and he put his powder in a bowl and scooped the case into the powder until it was full and scraped the excess off with his finger, I guess the charges were close because every case was clear full clear to the top of the neck but I sure wouldn't have wanted to compete with them! Just saying.
Wayne.

 

[StanwoodSpartan]

BUMP ;D

 

[OregonDistance]

Hello,

First post on the Forum, so please excuse any protocol violations.

It looks like the Sartorius GB503 has been discontinued. See, e.g., http://balance.balances.com/scales/559

The sellers seem to recommend the A&D HR-100 A or AZ scales. Please see http://balance.balances.com/scales/66

Does anyone have any experience with these HR-100 models?

Thank you in advance for your consideration.

 

[Jay Christopherson]

I think a lot of guys have been buying the FX-120i as a replacement (a cheaper replacement!) for the GD-503. I think it has the same magnetic force restoration mechanism and might have a little less resolution, but no doubt it's more than adequate for precision reloading.

I have not heard anything about the HR-100 models. I don't know anything about it, but this looks interesting, if up in GD-503 cost territory:

http://www.scaledealersdirect.com/AJ-High-Precision-Laboratory-Balance-p/aj-320.htm

 

[OregonDistance]

Thank you, Jay. I appreciate the suggestion.

Best regards,

/Steve

 

[VaniB]

You guys are over my head. I must be in the midst of some very intelligent and well learned engineers on this thread.

You know how I come up with my 1/4" MOA groups? Well, I simply place two of my "chosen" beam scales that I have next to each other on a shelf, and use the two to double check each charge against each other. The result is that the variance of each charge that I put in a case is never more then 3 granules (kernals) of powder. (ie; Varget or H4350 )An errant charge also gets caught easily via this method. There are 1,575 granules (kernals) in a charge of 45 grains of H4350, and I feel comfortable enough that a variance of 1 to 3 individual granules isn't going to show on a target nearly as much as it will weigh on somebody's mind.

As for a super-duper $900 labratory scale?......Everything is relative, which to me means that even a charge coming off of this scale still needs to be compared and doublechecked against something else. I wouldn't feel safe trusting any scale, without being able to have another scale to check it against. So buy two. LOL ( but, I prefer my two $135 scales, instead of two $900 scales)

 

[Jay Christopherson]

You guys are over my head. I must be in the midst of some very intelligent and well learned engineers on this thread.

You know how I come up with my 1/4" MOA groups? Well, I simply place two of my "chosen" beam scales that I have next to each other on a shelf, and use the two to double check each charge against each other. The result is that the variance of each charge that I put in a case is never more then 3 granules (kernals) of powder. (ie; Varget or H4350 )An errant charge also gets caught easily via this method. There are 1,575 granules (kernals) in a charge of 45 grains of H4350, and I feel comfortable enough that a variance of 1 to 3 individual granules isn't going to show on a target nearly as much as it will weigh on somebody's mind.

As for a super-duper $900 labratory scale?......Everything is relative, which to me means that even a charge coming off of this scale still needs to be compared and doublechecked against something else. I wouldn't feel safe trusting any scale, without being able to have another scale to check it against. So buy two. LOL ( but, I prefer my two $135 scales, instead of two $900 scales)

That's an awesome analysis for someone who has never used a digital lab scale. I bet you shoot those 1/4" MOA groups all day long, right? :

The only time I've had to double check my charge weights was when I used a beam scale, in the same way you describe. Wanna know the easy way to verify that your digital lab scale is weighing perfect charges? Check your scale with a certified check weight, weigh out a couple of thousand rounds, and check it again with the certified check weight. I've done it. A lot.

The whole "still needs to be compared and doublechecked against something else" is a load of B.S.

I'm sure your method works great for you. I know some guys that have it down to a science with beam scales. But to disparage a tool you have clearly have no experience with (although I bet I'm about to get a big dose of "you don't know what I've tried; I tried it and it was no better" in reply) is doing a lot of disservice to people looking for useful information.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

You guys are over my head. I must be in the midst of some very intelligent and well learned engineers on this thread.

You know how I come up with my 1/4" MOA groups? Well, I simply place two of my "chosen" beam scales that I have next to each other on a shelf, and use the two to double check each charge against each other. The result is that the variance of each charge that I put in a case is never more then 3 granules (kernals) of powder. (ie; Varget or H4350 )An errant charge also gets caught easily via this method. There are 1,575 granules (kernals) in a charge of 45 grains of H4350, and I feel comfortable enough that a variance of 1 to 3 individual granules isn't going to show on a target nearly as much as it will weigh on somebody's mind.

As for a super-duper $900 labratory scale?......Everything is relative, which to me means that even a charge coming off of this scale still needs to be compared and doublechecked against something else. I wouldn't feel safe trusting any scale, without being able to have another scale to check it against. So buy two. LOL ( but, I prefer my two $135 scales, instead of two $900 scales)

If your shooting .25 moa at 1k yards I'd say your method is working.

 

[nosualc]

You guys are over my head. I must be in the midst of some very intelligent and well learned engineers on this thread.

You know how I come up with my 1/4" MOA groups? Well, I simply place two of my "chosen" beam scales that I have next to each other on a shelf, and use the two to double check each charge against each other. The result is that the variance of each charge that I put in a case is never more then 3 granules (kernals) of powder. (ie; Varget or H4350 )An errant charge also gets caught easily via this method. There are 1,575 granules (kernals) in a charge of 45 grains of H4350, and I feel comfortable enough that a variance of 1 to 3 individual granules isn't going to show on a target nearly as much as it will weigh on somebody's mind.

As for a super-duper $900 labratory scale?......Everything is relative, which to me means that even a charge coming off of this scale still needs to be compared and doublechecked against something else. I wouldn't feel safe trusting any scale, without being able to have another scale to check it against. So buy two. LOL ( but, I prefer my two $135 scales, instead of two $900 scales)

If your shooting .25 moa at 1k yards I'd say your method is working.

If you're shooting .25 moa groups at 1k yards you need to start competing. You would win.

-nosualc

 

[ridgeway]

I don't understand the outspoken opposition of lab grade scales! They are flat out superior to any beam scale out there in regard to high precision long range loading.

.25 moa at 1k is pretty darn nice...let's see your rig and targets..

 

[Erik Cortina]

I don't understand the outspoken opposition of lab grade scales! They are flat out superior to any beam scale out there in regard to high precision long range loading.

.25 moa at 1k is pretty darn nice...let's see your rig and targets..

I don't think he said 1,000 yards. I bet he is talking about 100 yards, and we all know how incredibly hard it is to shoot .25 MOA groups at 100 yards!

 

[ar15topgun]

Re: Scale Comparison: Sartorius AY123 vs. Sartorius GD503 vs. GemPro 500

I have an Acculab 123 and would like to know how you changed the parameters from fiinal to filling or from default setting of stable to unstable? Any info greatly appreciated.

I was curious about the poor performance of the Acculab 123. I have one and decided to run a quick unscientific test.

I weighted a loaded round 10 times and found that I did get different weights, similar to the spread reported earlier. Then I looked at data the Jerry Tierney did some time ago. He mentioned that the environment setting had to be changed from Stable to Very Unstable to get good results. I made that change and did the test again. Amazingly, I got completely repeatable results. The same weight within 0.02gr each time.

There is another parameter which I haven't yet experimented with. It changes the readout from Final to Filling. I'm guessing this is designed so you can trickle a charge and get an accurate reading as the 'Filling' is happening. The factory default is 'Final'

It would be interesting if someone else did this test with their Acculab 123 to get another data point.