Electronic powder dispenser

savagelh said:
I use another digital scale to check and I use a known weight to calibrate the digital one. The beam scale is always .2-.4 gr higher.
Click to expand...
I use a Hornady beam scale as well. It has been very consistent over many years throwing the same weights time after time.

For my use, I would not worry if it was off by .2-.4gr as long as it was the same every time. As long as I use the same scale all the time, I would not have a problem. If it started throwing random weights, I would see an accuracy problem. To prove this, I don't use known weights to check it, but I do use small items that I weighed years ago and recorded those weights and kept them on my bench to use to check consistency. These items are about the same weight as what I might use for various powder charges. Sounds bush league, but it absolutely works and insures consistency which is paramount for accuracy.
 
savagelh said:
My old hornady beam scale doesn't seem overly reliable batch to batch. Ill get different fps averages every time I load a different batch. The components are all the same lot so it must be a powder charge issue. Are any of the electronic powder dispensers reliable? I don't want to spend $800 on the rcbs but is the FA intelledropper a decent one? I've read pretty mixed reviews but I've met too many people to hold much value on online reviews
Click to expand...
Give your beam scale a good cleaning where the beam pivots - and calibrate it with accurate weights before you start weighing powder. This is what I have done in the past and it works well batch to batch.
 
270WSMXBolt said:
To imply that a beam scale is more accurate is just wrong. Sorry. It just is. Come on.. They work fine for basic reloading but they are not more accurate. If they were they would still be used commercially. Go to a jeweler and insist on them using one. they will gleefully agree, if they have ever had one. The OP wants a dispenser. For whatever reason he asked about dispensers. Perhaps he's interested in actually doing things faster with a higher level of accuracy. Cheers
Click to expand...
I have been a handloader since 1970 and load for over thirty calibres, that has been my experience.
 
SuperCub said:
I use a Hornady beam scale as well. It has been very consistent over many years throwing the same weights time after time.

For my use, I would not worry if it was off by .2-.4gr as long as it was the same every time. As long as I use the same scale all the time, I would not have a problem. If it started throwing random weights, I would see an accuracy problem. To prove this, I don't use known weights to check it, but I do use small items that I weighed years ago and recorded those weights and kept them on my bench to use to check consistency. These items are about the same weight as what I might use for various powder charges. Sounds bush league, but it absolutely works and insures consistency which is paramount for accuracy.
Click to expand...
I zero mine every use with the height adjustment screw on the left side and what really bothers me is that it constantly needs adjustment. It is never just zeroed on an empty pan. I purchased the intelidropper yesterday and going to give it a good for a while. Im going to check it with my other digital as well as my 2 beam scales. It certainly won't replace my beam scale off the bench but I think it will be a good tool to have in the arsenal.
 
savagelh said:
I zero mine every use with the height adjustment screw on the left side and what really bothers me is that it constantly needs adjustment. It is never just zeroed on an empty pan.
Click to expand...
Strange as I have never had a lick of trouble with mine in over 25 years.

I'm not a big volume loader so this one is perfect for me but would get another in a second if it did go south. I hope you get it sorted out.
 
In reality , while you are worrying about getting the powder down to the last 1000th of a grain, you are more likely to muck it up by miss reading the wind by a little bit. Used to weigh all my charges down to the nats eyelash then did an experiment , same lot of brass, powder , bullets , primers, weighed a number of charges, then just threw the same number from the powder measure . When I shot the groups , there wasn’t a dimes difference between them , sometimes the weighed were better , sometimes the others were and I would say the diff was, I had a better read of the wind on the better ones. One thing to remember , when you start weighing charges, they are affected by atmospheric conditions, if it is drying out, even though the weight will be the same, you are getting more powder and if it is getting more humid , you get less powder. Weight changes, volume is always the same. I remember going to benchrest matches and rarely did you see a scale, they just set their micrometer on the powder measure to the setting they had in their records that matched to conditions of that day. And if you want to see the biggest display of wind indicators, that is the place. When the condition they had picked as the most predominate was there, they would fire rounds downrange so fast you though the guns were semiauto.
 
woodlotowner said:
I avoid electronic weigh scales completely. I have owned a few and the constant need for recalibration, and the variance in weights, even with a meticulously maintained machine, makes my RCBS beam balance a much more reliable and consistent scale. Just my experience.
Click to expand...
Same ... sort of. I never owned an electronic scale for the reason you note. However a couple of years back I got an RCBS Chargemaster Supreme and the startup process involves calibration every time.


tacoman said:
while you are worrying about getting the powder down to the last 1000th of a grain, you are more likely to muck it up by miss reading the wind by a little bit. Used to weigh all my charges down to the nats eyelash then did an experiment , same lot of brass, powder , bullets , primers, weighed a number of charges, then just threw the same number from the powder measure . When I shot the groups , there wasn’t a dimes difference between them
Click to expand...
THIS is something most shooters miss. Especially at long range, the atmosphere between the muzzle and the target is many times more variable than the cartridge and rifle.

A friend lent me a cartridge runout measuring device and I spent all kinds of time sorting loaded rounds into batches. I ended up with a bunch of culls, the worst of the worst. At the range I decided to shoot the culls because that was easier than pulling them. I was shocked when the ammo with the worst runout shot just as well as the ammo with the least runout. The gauge went back to its owner and I have never worried about bullet or case runout since. I use good quality dies and loading techniques and few that is sufficient.
 
I started reloading in '75 and something I was told waaay back then; your scale doesn't have to be "accurate"
it just has to be "repeatable". I think SuperCub hints at this very thing in post #21.

Think about it............
 
SuperCub said:
Exactly.

Here's what I use to check my scale consistency.

View attachment 1007896
Click to expand...
That’s a buck thirty five that could be invested SuperCub. I guess some have so much they can just leave it lying around. On another note, placing your scale in the exact same spot that is level alleviates many problems I have found!!
 
SuperCub said:
Exactly.

Here's what I use to check my scale consistency.

View attachment 1007896
Click to expand...
I actually have an antique set of scale weights here somewhere, Chinese by the look of them. Have used them to compare three beam scales and two digital scales I own. If I want repeatable the beam scale gets the nod over the electronic ones. The latter are faster, and I use them too. Just for different applications. - dan
 
I used an RCBS for a long time until it broke falling off the bench, replaced it with a Hornady and I liked that one a lot better. It just seemed faster and more consistent.
 
I bought a $35 digital scale off Amazon and it works great. Scale only, doesn't dispense. I use a manual RCBS powder trickler for accuracy loads and use the digital scale to verify my 45 year old Pacific beam scale which is within 1 to 2 10th's of a grain of my digital one.
 
The original fa intellidropper was starting to act up. It started making a high pitch squeal when dispensing so I figured it wasn't long for this world. I was able to go to bps and get the upgraded 2.0 model for an extra $70. It seems to be improved in almost every way. I especially like the handle on the drain spout a lot better. The hopper also fits nicer and the touch screen is more responsive. Ill throw some charges with it and check on my other scales tomorrow.
1000004126.jpg
 
kamlooky said:
Wartch the moon.
You know, high and low tides.
Gravity effect.

🫣😇😳😁
Click to expand...
I only reload within 2 hours of sunrise/sunset within 2 days of a waxing/waning half moon, within 2 months of a vernal/autumnal equinox.
Of course, there's always those neutron stars falling into black holes with their gravity waves...
:unsure:
 
Last edited:
I use the Lyman gen3 for a long time befor upgraded to the V4.

Had a cheap gem scale to cross check the lyman scale . Both worked well together when tested against the v4. Both where very close.. impressed 2 say the least
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom