G
Guest
Guest
dondlhmn
XGunny Sergeant
Rating: 3.0/5 this site
631 posts this site
Loading scale recommendations?
01/07/2017
My old faithful scale is starting to show problems due to age and long/frequent use. I am wondering what scale you all have found to be best for a guy that commonly reloads thousands of rounds a year and expects most of them to be match grade consistency in all regards. So, given the following areas of concern (and that you have a degree of PERSONAL experience with this), what to you all think is the best scale (and, yes, I do realize that pretty much EVERYTHING is a compromise to SOME degree or another!)??
(1) cost
(2) Speed
(3) consistency
(4) Ease of use (not a scale that does great, but is a PITA to use!)
(5) availability
(6) sensitivity/resolution (by that, I mean gets down to a measurable, useful tenth or two of a grain)
Rate now:
fursniper
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.3/5 this site
1131 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/07/2017
Well, if you're interested in speed of loading and only weighing capability to a tenth, then you might consider the RCBS chargemaster. There's a heck of a lot of people on this site that use them and like them. Mine have been reliable and accurate. If you shoot alot it certainly speeds things up in the load room.
Rate now:
SheldonN
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.6/5 this site
1329 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
Chargemaster is probably your first/best option for speed and reasonable cost ($300ish). Probably the most commonly used option. Definitely wins on the ease of use front and is accurate to 0.1gr.
If you value sensitivity/resolution/cost more than ease of use then a GemPro 250 at around $125 gets you much more precise measuring (0.02gr resolution vs 0.1g of the Chargemaster) with some quirks and required attention to detail in order to get the most out of it. You can make it work both fast and accurate, just have to pay attention to the details and use a workflow that suits the scale.
Rate now:
Baron85XSergeant
Rating: 3.1/5 this site
492 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
I hated my gempro. I would not reccomend it. It was painfully slow and never seemed to keep zero. It always shifted and rarely was repeatable.
What is your budget?
I just upgraded from my chargemaster to an A&D fx120i and auto trickler. I upgraded for more speed. I was happy with the accuracy of the chargemaster but after buying the A&D I ran 20 charges and checked with the A&D. The chargemaster varied quite a bit, but in real world shooting I'm not sure if I will be able to see a difference since I have not shot ammo loaded with my new set up yet.
The A&D fx120 has a resolution of .02 gn which is about the weight of s stick of varget. And is + or - .04 gn I believe. I considered the satorius but decided the extra accuracy would just be more numbers that I would obsess over getting perfect and there fore slow me down without getting much benefit from in my opinion. To be clear, I have not used a satorius that is just my opinion.
Rate now:
SheldonN
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.6/5 this site
1329 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
GemPro is one of those polarizing options. Depends on your expectations I guess. I've owned two of them on different occasions (about a year apart) and both were very repeatable and did not suffer from any significant drift problems. Other peoples experiences have been different, obviously. I suspect that what drives people crazy is that once you can see 0.02gr resolution your expectations of the scale similarly increase.
Here's the quick synopsis of the GemPro quirks in my experience. It can drift, leaving it on all the time helps avoid the issues surrounding warm-up. Avoiding temperature swings helps too. I don't usually trust the first 5 or so weighings in any session, seems like it needs a bit of a "wake up" to settle into stable readings. Drift is a non-issue as long as you pay attention while loading. Know what your empty powder pan weighs, watch the negative number that comes up when you take the pan off the scale. If that number moves +/-0.02, set down the empty pan on the scale and let it re-register. It will "self zero" and remove any drift. You can hit the zero button if you want, but you don't need to since there is a hidden feature that essentially rezeros the scale when it's back at the empty pan weight. Other key thing is making a check weight that's close to your powder charge weight (stainless steel nail or screw). File it down until it reads what you want, then you can use that during reloading to make sure that your calibration hasn't gone off (different than zero drift). My current GemPro hasn't been recalibrated in a while, at least the last 5-10 loading sessions.
Other major quirk is that it does not respond to trickling powder well. You need to think of it as "static weighing only", if you add more powder then remove and replace (or bump) the pan to reweigh. This can drive you batty if you're wanting to trickle up a charge and watch the scale to know when to stop. That will also slow you down tremendously. I get around this by knowing how much powder to add to begin with... know the average kernel weight, throwing in the exact amount needed from a pile to hit target weight. You can then reweigh the pan if you feel the need, or if you have confidence that you've added the right amount you can skip reweighing. If you get a good workflow with this you can load cases just as fast as a Chargemaster.
Ultimately the scale is only rated to +/- 0.02g, you can't ask more of it than that. It's got quirks that will drive you batty if you don't know how to work around them. It's NOT anywhere near as good as a scale as the FX120i. However, it's also not $550. For me the real world next step upgrade would be from the GemPro to an FX120i + autotrickler combo. However that's going to be a jump from $125 purchase price up to $750 purchase price.
Rate now:
A1J04
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.0/5 this site
5633 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
ChargeMaster and you're in luck.....
scout.com/military/snipers-hide/forums/5556-reloading-px/15301184-rcbs-chargemaster-1500-combo-with-reducing-insert
Rate now:
padom
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.8/5 this site
3050 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
(1 vote)
Ive been loading on 2 Chargemasters for years. Have a Scott Parker Tuned Lyman M5 Ive used to check accuracy of my CH and they are very accurate.
If proper load development is done so your in the middle of a node I dont see any reason for scientific grade scales as your target wont show any difference. Now if proper load development wasnt done and your not in the center of a node than .1 or .2 g certainly could take you out of the node. My chargemaster drops charges day after day with single digit SD's and same bughole accuracy.
I can afford any scale I want. I see no reason spending that additional money if it doesnt translate to any improvements downrange.
Rate now:
OpxnvXCorporal
Rating: 3.2/5 this site
96 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
I recently bought this scale:
balance.balances.com/scales/798
I am quite happy with it. Using my procedure I believe that my powder charges range from about 99.943 % to about 100.057 % of target. In my case this corresponds to plus or minus about 1 physical kernel of powder.
My process is about the same as just using a ChargeMaster. I throw a base charge on the CM, transfer the base charge to a second pan in the Sart, trickle to final number, pour into the case, put the second pan back into the Sart, pick up the now-completed pan on the CM and repeat. Normally the CM finishes a pan while I am pouring into the case.
I tried using a powder thrower to make the base charge, but I gave up - way too much variation with this powder. My CM varies too much for precision ammo but is really good in this application - fast and accurate enough. In most cases, in order to reach my target weight I am trickling from 5 to 10 physical grains of powder. You may find my procedure to be too much trouble. YMMV, I am good with it.
My scale is accurate to about 1 milligram. There are scales available that are accurate to one tenth of a milligram. That would be useful if I was willing to cut individual grains of powder - alas, I am not willing to do that so this is a good choice for me.
I also own two other excellent load cell scales and a cheesy load cell. Of the quality ones, one of them is very good but old and needs to have its display refreshed. The other one is of similar quality but it won't hold a zero and I am unwilling to fiddle with it. As another poster said, they don't track single kernels of powder and that is a big deal for me.
Rate now:
padom
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.8/5 this site
3050 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017 Last edited 01/08/2017 by padom
(1 vote)
With proper load development Ive never seen a kernel or 3 change anything on target downrange. Thats the whole point of finding your Optimum charge weight in the center of a node so lot to lot powder variations or dropping charges 0.1-0.2 high or low doesnt push you out of a node.
Making ammo that shoots 0.5moa or better on a Chargemaster is easy. When I do OCW load development I drop within 0.2g of my target load and trickle up with a Dandy trickler to my desired charge weight.
To stress proper load development even more, I loaded up 50rd each of my go to 77smk/8208XBR load on my Co-Ax/ Chargemaster setup and 50rd of the exact same load on my XL650 using the Dillon Powder dispenser and Forster Ultra seating die and tested them side by side at 500m (546yd). Same exact chrono numbers and SD's, same sub 0.5moa accuracy ( 5shot groups measured in the 2.2-2.5" range) and same consistent and repeated hits on steel.
Expensive scales are unnessesary when you put the time, effort and testing into load development for each rifle/bullet/powder combo you shoot...
Rate now:
SigMarineXSergeant
Rating: 3.2/5 this site
436 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
I just completed a test of ammunition with powder measured three different ways using H4350. First I dropped the entire powder load of 40.8 grains using JUST the Chargemaster with the double inserts from MDM12 here on the "Hide". Then I dropped the weight to 40.6 grains on the Chargemaster, left the powder in the pan on the Chargemaster and trickled up to 40.8 and third I dropped 40.6 grains into my pan, transferred it to my beam scale and then trickled it up to 40.8. The results:
Chargemaster ONLY, full charge 15 rounds - ES 18, SD 5.8
Dropped light and trickled on Chargemaster 10 rounds - ES 23, SD 8.2
Dropped light and trickled on beam scale 10 rounds- ES 15, SD 5.4
Dropping light and trickling on the beam scale has been by normal procedure and the numbers are in line with other batches I've run over the chronograph. While these numbers may not be adequate for Benchrest or F-Class shooters, they are certainly capable enough for steel. My initial goal for this test was to compare the loads directly from the Chargemaster with ones trickled on a beam scale but decided to go ahead and try trickling on the Chargemaster's digital scale to see what effect it would have. The time saved between loading straight from the Chargemaster and trickling is measurable and considering the SD from just the CM, worth consideration. YMMV.
Rate now:
dondlhmn
XGunny Sergeant
Rating: 3.0/5 this site
631 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/09/2017 Last edited 01/09/2017 by dondlhmn
I found the RCBS Chargemaster setup on sale at Natchez for $276 and change shipped to my door. Ordered it. Also looked at some low-buck ways to improve the consistency and the resolution if I decide that is necessary. Couldn't pass up the whole RCBS Chargemaster setup for that kind of money, though!!
Don't know for sure if I really need better than .1 grain resolution/consistency for the shooting I do, as the guys I shoot with are all of the opinion (and I have read it elsewhere that other considerations make more difference) that such tiny differences (In powder charge and therefore velocity) don't really make all that much POI difference at the short ranges we shoot in our matches (330, 420, 550 and 850 yds...the 850 is my cold bore shot in Master class.)
Rate now:
Jimgal62X30 MONTHS
Premium Member
Sergeant
Rating: 3.0/5 this site
99 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/11/2017
I always load to +|- 0.03 grains using RCBS (3.0 grains under), then trickle using a Sartorius scale.
My RCBS usually drops H4350 within +|-0.2 grains with some overfills. I remove the excess from the pan with tweezers.
Rate now:
BrettdecXSergeant
Rating: 3.1/5 this site
114 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/11/2017
Rate now:
SigMarineXSergeant
Rating: 3.2/5 this site
436 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/11/2017
Muzzle Velocities from the tests above were; Chargemaster only - 2802 fps, trickle onto the Chargemaster - 2799 and trickle onto the beam scale (my normal method) - 2805.
To give a comparison and help with understanding the information from the above test, I went back through my log and looked at the last test I did with this rifle and load, which was last summer using the trickling on the beam scale method, and it shows 10 shots with a MV of 2804, a SD of 5.2 and ES of 13. Pretty close to what this last test gave me.
Again, the purpose of this test was to see how well the Chargemaster would do when compared to the beam scale trickle method. While not as accurate, I think it's good enough for the beginning or average shooter banging steel.
Rate now:
sig2009XSergeant
Rating: 2.9/5 this site
143 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/12/2017
PACT!
Rate now:
TripleBullX8 MONTHS
Premium Member
Sergeant
Rating: 3.4/5 this site
257 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/12/2017
Rate now:
ZmechanicXPrivate
Rating: 3.1/5 this site
42 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/13/2017 Last edited 01/13/2017 by Zmechanic
That is absolutely my experience. Beam scales are insanely sensitive if you get a good one, but require just the right conditions. Still air and a good eye. You can augment the "eye" part with a webcam pointed right at it filling up a whole laptop screen or the like.
I have a GemPro 250. It is okay. Twice I have had it completely flip out. Like the measurements would never stop moving. Both times I'm pretty sure the pedestal the platform is mounted to inside was rubbing internally, or I got a piece of powder in there. A little jostling got it back in shape. But I had to go back and re-check a bunch of loaded ammo because it did it right in the middle of a run, and I was worried I hadn't noticed it for awhile. You absolutely must let it warm up, no question. It will drift for the first 5-15min depending on conditions. I usually turn mine on and let it sit the day I know I'm going to load some rounds. Their sensitivity at such a low price comes at the cost of being VERY SLOW. It can detect just a few kernels of powder, but expect it to take 2-3 seconds to do it. That doesn't sound like much, but it slows down the "trickling up" style of loading a LOT. If you watch one of the very nice force restoration scales, they use a fundamentally different measurement technique and can settle almost as fast as you can add the powder in.
I don't have a chargemaster, but they are pretty highly recommended, and there are lots of publicly posted tweaks people have come up with to improve their repeatability.
XGunny Sergeant
Rating: 3.0/5 this site
631 posts this site
Loading scale recommendations?
01/07/2017
My old faithful scale is starting to show problems due to age and long/frequent use. I am wondering what scale you all have found to be best for a guy that commonly reloads thousands of rounds a year and expects most of them to be match grade consistency in all regards. So, given the following areas of concern (and that you have a degree of PERSONAL experience with this), what to you all think is the best scale (and, yes, I do realize that pretty much EVERYTHING is a compromise to SOME degree or another!)??
(1) cost
(2) Speed
(3) consistency
(4) Ease of use (not a scale that does great, but is a PITA to use!)
(5) availability
(6) sensitivity/resolution (by that, I mean gets down to a measurable, useful tenth or two of a grain)
Rate now:
fursniper
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.3/5 this site
1131 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/07/2017
Well, if you're interested in speed of loading and only weighing capability to a tenth, then you might consider the RCBS chargemaster. There's a heck of a lot of people on this site that use them and like them. Mine have been reliable and accurate. If you shoot alot it certainly speeds things up in the load room.
Rate now:
SheldonN
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.6/5 this site
1329 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
Chargemaster is probably your first/best option for speed and reasonable cost ($300ish). Probably the most commonly used option. Definitely wins on the ease of use front and is accurate to 0.1gr.
If you value sensitivity/resolution/cost more than ease of use then a GemPro 250 at around $125 gets you much more precise measuring (0.02gr resolution vs 0.1g of the Chargemaster) with some quirks and required attention to detail in order to get the most out of it. You can make it work both fast and accurate, just have to pay attention to the details and use a workflow that suits the scale.
Rate now:
Baron85XSergeant
Rating: 3.1/5 this site
492 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
I hated my gempro. I would not reccomend it. It was painfully slow and never seemed to keep zero. It always shifted and rarely was repeatable.
What is your budget?
I just upgraded from my chargemaster to an A&D fx120i and auto trickler. I upgraded for more speed. I was happy with the accuracy of the chargemaster but after buying the A&D I ran 20 charges and checked with the A&D. The chargemaster varied quite a bit, but in real world shooting I'm not sure if I will be able to see a difference since I have not shot ammo loaded with my new set up yet.
The A&D fx120 has a resolution of .02 gn which is about the weight of s stick of varget. And is + or - .04 gn I believe. I considered the satorius but decided the extra accuracy would just be more numbers that I would obsess over getting perfect and there fore slow me down without getting much benefit from in my opinion. To be clear, I have not used a satorius that is just my opinion.
Rate now:
SheldonN
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.6/5 this site
1329 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
GemPro is one of those polarizing options. Depends on your expectations I guess. I've owned two of them on different occasions (about a year apart) and both were very repeatable and did not suffer from any significant drift problems. Other peoples experiences have been different, obviously. I suspect that what drives people crazy is that once you can see 0.02gr resolution your expectations of the scale similarly increase.
Here's the quick synopsis of the GemPro quirks in my experience. It can drift, leaving it on all the time helps avoid the issues surrounding warm-up. Avoiding temperature swings helps too. I don't usually trust the first 5 or so weighings in any session, seems like it needs a bit of a "wake up" to settle into stable readings. Drift is a non-issue as long as you pay attention while loading. Know what your empty powder pan weighs, watch the negative number that comes up when you take the pan off the scale. If that number moves +/-0.02, set down the empty pan on the scale and let it re-register. It will "self zero" and remove any drift. You can hit the zero button if you want, but you don't need to since there is a hidden feature that essentially rezeros the scale when it's back at the empty pan weight. Other key thing is making a check weight that's close to your powder charge weight (stainless steel nail or screw). File it down until it reads what you want, then you can use that during reloading to make sure that your calibration hasn't gone off (different than zero drift). My current GemPro hasn't been recalibrated in a while, at least the last 5-10 loading sessions.
Other major quirk is that it does not respond to trickling powder well. You need to think of it as "static weighing only", if you add more powder then remove and replace (or bump) the pan to reweigh. This can drive you batty if you're wanting to trickle up a charge and watch the scale to know when to stop. That will also slow you down tremendously. I get around this by knowing how much powder to add to begin with... know the average kernel weight, throwing in the exact amount needed from a pile to hit target weight. You can then reweigh the pan if you feel the need, or if you have confidence that you've added the right amount you can skip reweighing. If you get a good workflow with this you can load cases just as fast as a Chargemaster.
Ultimately the scale is only rated to +/- 0.02g, you can't ask more of it than that. It's got quirks that will drive you batty if you don't know how to work around them. It's NOT anywhere near as good as a scale as the FX120i. However, it's also not $550. For me the real world next step upgrade would be from the GemPro to an FX120i + autotrickler combo. However that's going to be a jump from $125 purchase price up to $750 purchase price.
Rate now:
A1J04
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.0/5 this site
5633 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
ChargeMaster and you're in luck.....
scout.com/military/snipers-hide/forums/5556-reloading-px/15301184-rcbs-chargemaster-1500-combo-with-reducing-insert
Rate now:
padom
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.8/5 this site
3050 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
(1 vote)
Ive been loading on 2 Chargemasters for years. Have a Scott Parker Tuned Lyman M5 Ive used to check accuracy of my CH and they are very accurate.
If proper load development is done so your in the middle of a node I dont see any reason for scientific grade scales as your target wont show any difference. Now if proper load development wasnt done and your not in the center of a node than .1 or .2 g certainly could take you out of the node. My chargemaster drops charges day after day with single digit SD's and same bughole accuracy.
I can afford any scale I want. I see no reason spending that additional money if it doesnt translate to any improvements downrange.
Rate now:
OpxnvXCorporal
Rating: 3.2/5 this site
96 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
I recently bought this scale:
balance.balances.com/scales/798
I am quite happy with it. Using my procedure I believe that my powder charges range from about 99.943 % to about 100.057 % of target. In my case this corresponds to plus or minus about 1 physical kernel of powder.
My process is about the same as just using a ChargeMaster. I throw a base charge on the CM, transfer the base charge to a second pan in the Sart, trickle to final number, pour into the case, put the second pan back into the Sart, pick up the now-completed pan on the CM and repeat. Normally the CM finishes a pan while I am pouring into the case.
I tried using a powder thrower to make the base charge, but I gave up - way too much variation with this powder. My CM varies too much for precision ammo but is really good in this application - fast and accurate enough. In most cases, in order to reach my target weight I am trickling from 5 to 10 physical grains of powder. You may find my procedure to be too much trouble. YMMV, I am good with it.
My scale is accurate to about 1 milligram. There are scales available that are accurate to one tenth of a milligram. That would be useful if I was willing to cut individual grains of powder - alas, I am not willing to do that so this is a good choice for me.
I also own two other excellent load cell scales and a cheesy load cell. Of the quality ones, one of them is very good but old and needs to have its display refreshed. The other one is of similar quality but it won't hold a zero and I am unwilling to fiddle with it. As another poster said, they don't track single kernels of powder and that is a big deal for me.
Rate now:
padom
XFirst Sergeant
Rating: 3.8/5 this site
3050 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017 Last edited 01/08/2017 by padom
(1 vote)
With proper load development Ive never seen a kernel or 3 change anything on target downrange. Thats the whole point of finding your Optimum charge weight in the center of a node so lot to lot powder variations or dropping charges 0.1-0.2 high or low doesnt push you out of a node.
Making ammo that shoots 0.5moa or better on a Chargemaster is easy. When I do OCW load development I drop within 0.2g of my target load and trickle up with a Dandy trickler to my desired charge weight.
To stress proper load development even more, I loaded up 50rd each of my go to 77smk/8208XBR load on my Co-Ax/ Chargemaster setup and 50rd of the exact same load on my XL650 using the Dillon Powder dispenser and Forster Ultra seating die and tested them side by side at 500m (546yd). Same exact chrono numbers and SD's, same sub 0.5moa accuracy ( 5shot groups measured in the 2.2-2.5" range) and same consistent and repeated hits on steel.
Expensive scales are unnessesary when you put the time, effort and testing into load development for each rifle/bullet/powder combo you shoot...
Rate now:
SigMarineXSergeant
Rating: 3.2/5 this site
436 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/08/2017
I just completed a test of ammunition with powder measured three different ways using H4350. First I dropped the entire powder load of 40.8 grains using JUST the Chargemaster with the double inserts from MDM12 here on the "Hide". Then I dropped the weight to 40.6 grains on the Chargemaster, left the powder in the pan on the Chargemaster and trickled up to 40.8 and third I dropped 40.6 grains into my pan, transferred it to my beam scale and then trickled it up to 40.8. The results:
Chargemaster ONLY, full charge 15 rounds - ES 18, SD 5.8
Dropped light and trickled on Chargemaster 10 rounds - ES 23, SD 8.2
Dropped light and trickled on beam scale 10 rounds- ES 15, SD 5.4
Dropping light and trickling on the beam scale has been by normal procedure and the numbers are in line with other batches I've run over the chronograph. While these numbers may not be adequate for Benchrest or F-Class shooters, they are certainly capable enough for steel. My initial goal for this test was to compare the loads directly from the Chargemaster with ones trickled on a beam scale but decided to go ahead and try trickling on the Chargemaster's digital scale to see what effect it would have. The time saved between loading straight from the Chargemaster and trickling is measurable and considering the SD from just the CM, worth consideration. YMMV.
Rate now:
dondlhmn
XGunny Sergeant
Rating: 3.0/5 this site
631 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/09/2017 Last edited 01/09/2017 by dondlhmn
I found the RCBS Chargemaster setup on sale at Natchez for $276 and change shipped to my door. Ordered it. Also looked at some low-buck ways to improve the consistency and the resolution if I decide that is necessary. Couldn't pass up the whole RCBS Chargemaster setup for that kind of money, though!!
Don't know for sure if I really need better than .1 grain resolution/consistency for the shooting I do, as the guys I shoot with are all of the opinion (and I have read it elsewhere that other considerations make more difference) that such tiny differences (In powder charge and therefore velocity) don't really make all that much POI difference at the short ranges we shoot in our matches (330, 420, 550 and 850 yds...the 850 is my cold bore shot in Master class.)
Rate now:
Jimgal62X30 MONTHS
Premium Member
Sergeant
Rating: 3.0/5 this site
99 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/11/2017
I always load to +|- 0.03 grains using RCBS (3.0 grains under), then trickle using a Sartorius scale.
My RCBS usually drops H4350 within +|-0.2 grains with some overfills. I remove the excess from the pan with tweezers.
Rate now:
BrettdecXSergeant
Rating: 3.1/5 this site
114 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/11/2017
SigMarine wrote: I just completed a test of ammunition with powder measured three different ways using H4350. First I dropped the entire powder load of 40.8 grains using JUST the Chargemaster with the double inserts from MDM12 here on the "Hide". Then I dropped the weight to 40.6 grains on the Chargemaster, left the powder in the pan on the Chargemaster and trickled up to 40.8 and third I dropped 40.6 grains into my pan, transferred it to my beam scale and then trickled it up to 40.8. The results:
Chargemaster ONLY, full charge 15 rounds - ES 18, SD 5.8
Dropped light and trickled on Chargemaster 10 rounds - ES 23, SD 8.2
Dropped light and trickled on beam scale 10 rounds- ES 15, SD 5.4
Dropping light and trickling on the beam scale has been by normal procedure and the numbers are in line with other batches I've run over the chronograph. While these numbers may not be adequate for Benchrest or F-Class shooters, they are certainly capable enough for steel. My initial goal for this test was to compare the loads directly from the Chargemaster with ones trickled on a beam scale but decided to go ahead and try trickling on the Chargemaster's digital scale to see what effect it would have. The time saved between loading straight from the Chargemaster and trickling is measurable and considering the SD from just the CM, worth consideration. YMMV.
Great post. I noticed that the Chargemaster only data is from a 15 shot sample and the others are 10. If you delete the last 5 shots from the CM only batch, what happens to the ES and SD?Chargemaster ONLY, full charge 15 rounds - ES 18, SD 5.8
Dropped light and trickled on Chargemaster 10 rounds - ES 23, SD 8.2
Dropped light and trickled on beam scale 10 rounds- ES 15, SD 5.4
Dropping light and trickling on the beam scale has been by normal procedure and the numbers are in line with other batches I've run over the chronograph. While these numbers may not be adequate for Benchrest or F-Class shooters, they are certainly capable enough for steel. My initial goal for this test was to compare the loads directly from the Chargemaster with ones trickled on a beam scale but decided to go ahead and try trickling on the Chargemaster's digital scale to see what effect it would have. The time saved between loading straight from the Chargemaster and trickling is measurable and considering the SD from just the CM, worth consideration. YMMV.
Rate now:
SigMarineXSergeant
Rating: 3.2/5 this site
436 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/11/2017
Brettdec wrote:
The last 5 shots nor the first 5 shots had little effect on the results. As mentioned, my normal reloading process is to drop light and trickle up using a beam scale. Using this method, I have done tests with 5 rounds, 10 rounds, 15 rounds and 20 rounds and have never found any significant differences. The SD might move up/down a .1 or two or the ES might change by 2 or 3 fps, but nothing that made a drastic change. Actually, the larger sampling is more representative of the load than a small sampling but for my type of shooting, the numbers I get from a 10 shot sampling are adequate for ballistic program input.SigMarine wrote: I just completed a test of ammunition with powder measured three different ways using H4350. First I dropped the entire powder load of 40.8 grains using JUST the Chargemaster with the double inserts from MDM12 here on the "Hide". Then I dropped the weight to 40.6 grains on the Chargemaster, left the powder in the pan on the Chargemaster and trickled up to 40.8 and third I dropped 40.6 grains into my pan, transferred it to my beam scale and then trickled it up to 40.8. The results:
Chargemaster ONLY, full charge 15 rounds - ES 18, SD 5.8
Dropped light and trickled on Chargemaster 10 rounds - ES 23, SD 8.2
Dropped light and trickled on beam scale 10 rounds- ES 15, SD 5.4
Dropping light and trickling on the beam scale has been by normal procedure and the numbers are in line with other batches I've run over the chronograph. While these numbers may not be adequate for Benchrest or F-Class shooters, they are certainly capable enough for steel. My initial goal for this test was to compare the loads directly from the Chargemaster with ones trickled on a beam scale but decided to go ahead and try trickling on the Chargemaster's digital scale to see what effect it would have. The time saved between loading straight from the Chargemaster and trickling is measurable and considering the SD from just the CM, worth consideration. YMMV.
Great post. I noticed that the Chargemaster only data is from a 15 shot sample and the others are 10. If you delete the last 5 shots from the CM only batch, what happens to the ES and SD?Chargemaster ONLY, full charge 15 rounds - ES 18, SD 5.8
Dropped light and trickled on Chargemaster 10 rounds - ES 23, SD 8.2
Dropped light and trickled on beam scale 10 rounds- ES 15, SD 5.4
Dropping light and trickling on the beam scale has been by normal procedure and the numbers are in line with other batches I've run over the chronograph. While these numbers may not be adequate for Benchrest or F-Class shooters, they are certainly capable enough for steel. My initial goal for this test was to compare the loads directly from the Chargemaster with ones trickled on a beam scale but decided to go ahead and try trickling on the Chargemaster's digital scale to see what effect it would have. The time saved between loading straight from the Chargemaster and trickling is measurable and considering the SD from just the CM, worth consideration. YMMV.
Muzzle Velocities from the tests above were; Chargemaster only - 2802 fps, trickle onto the Chargemaster - 2799 and trickle onto the beam scale (my normal method) - 2805.
To give a comparison and help with understanding the information from the above test, I went back through my log and looked at the last test I did with this rifle and load, which was last summer using the trickling on the beam scale method, and it shows 10 shots with a MV of 2804, a SD of 5.2 and ES of 13. Pretty close to what this last test gave me.
Again, the purpose of this test was to see how well the Chargemaster would do when compared to the beam scale trickle method. While not as accurate, I think it's good enough for the beginning or average shooter banging steel.
Rate now:
sig2009XSergeant
Rating: 2.9/5 this site
143 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/12/2017
PACT!
Rate now:
TripleBullX8 MONTHS
Premium Member
Sergeant
Rating: 3.4/5 this site
257 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/12/2017
SigMarine wrote:
ES should be dependent on sample size and should grow as you do more. That's just a consequence of sampling stats. In the big picture your results show how well a beam scale can work if you know how to use it.Rate now:
ZmechanicXPrivate
Rating: 3.1/5 this site
42 posts this site
Re: Loading scale recommendations?
01/13/2017 Last edited 01/13/2017 by Zmechanic
That is absolutely my experience. Beam scales are insanely sensitive if you get a good one, but require just the right conditions. Still air and a good eye. You can augment the "eye" part with a webcam pointed right at it filling up a whole laptop screen or the like.
I have a GemPro 250. It is okay. Twice I have had it completely flip out. Like the measurements would never stop moving. Both times I'm pretty sure the pedestal the platform is mounted to inside was rubbing internally, or I got a piece of powder in there. A little jostling got it back in shape. But I had to go back and re-check a bunch of loaded ammo because it did it right in the middle of a run, and I was worried I hadn't noticed it for awhile. You absolutely must let it warm up, no question. It will drift for the first 5-15min depending on conditions. I usually turn mine on and let it sit the day I know I'm going to load some rounds. Their sensitivity at such a low price comes at the cost of being VERY SLOW. It can detect just a few kernels of powder, but expect it to take 2-3 seconds to do it. That doesn't sound like much, but it slows down the "trickling up" style of loading a LOT. If you watch one of the very nice force restoration scales, they use a fundamentally different measurement technique and can settle almost as fast as you can add the powder in.
I don't have a chargemaster, but they are pretty highly recommended, and there are lots of publicly posted tweaks people have come up with to improve their repeatability.
