Digital scales

After reading the below you will want a higher end scale.

Graciously provided my Monte from the US F Class Team


Here's a little bit from my experiences with the Acculab VIC-123 scale (since sold and I'm now a happy user of a Sartorious GD-503 analytical lab scale - when I feel my Chargemaster 1500 isn't enough). He asked that I put this out on some of the gun/reloading forums to answer some of the questions he gets...

Having finally had about a gut full of my Acculab VIC-123 and its flaky behavior, I’m starting looking for something better, realizing full well that that ‘something’ is probably going to cost dearly. I’m not a 100% sure that a true milligram scale is really necessary for our applications (powder charges), but I like the idea of ‘knowing’ that my charges are exact. Plus, if I get around to doing some of the experiments I want to do, it’ll be helpful to actually *have* a good reliable lab scale.

In the past I’ve done a lot of ‘window shopping’ @ balances.com. The site is fairly well organized, has what appear to be reasonable prices, and a pretty extensive selection. As an added plus, the owner (Gary Shane) will usually answer most questions related to sales of items he carries. Sometimes in an abrupt manner, but I think fairly and honestly as well, which means more to me.

I started asking Gary some questions concerning a few blurbs I saw on his site regarding the Acculab VIC-123 scales (which he does sell) and the strain gauges used in them. His responses were fairly educational for me. I added some emphasis to some key elements below:

I'll make it clear. Strain gauge is only good for the very best 15,000 divisions http://balances.com/applications/glossary.html#strain. The Acculab VIC-123 has 120,000 division which is total impossible using a strain gauge. They make these divisions using software but as you experienced the software doesn't cut it.

A strain gauge is a scale and applying a load results in the deformation of the load cell. Over a point of time the load cell loses it's elasticity resulting in greater hystersis http://balances.com/applications/glo...html#hystersis

Bottom line stain gauge is good only for a kitchen scale 3000 division (3000g x 1g) or 5000 divisions (5000g x 1g)

If you want repeatable results you need to go with a magnetic force restoration balance. Visit http://balances.com/applications/glossary.html and learn about balance terminology. Visit http://scientech.balances.com/scientech/forcemotor.html to better understand a force motor.

If you want the best review http://balance.balances.com/scales/559 GD503 - 1545.955 GN x 0.005 GN

If this is too pricey then you'll have to buy the ALC-320.3 at http://balance.balances.com/scales/171


The next round of Q&A was similarly interesting…

(me) Would that also be the reason that occasionally my VIC-123 indicates an odd last digit i.e. 46.79gr instead of the 'usual' 46.78 or 46.80gr (normally everything increments in 0.02gr, but every once in a while it'll indicate an odd number last digit)? Some sort of glitch in the software rounding?

(Gary) The software is all algorithm based and the algorithm wasn't something they spent a million dollars on. What the scale reads one day verses the next is why I tell people it is more of a novelty or joke scale. Anything with a strain gauge more than 12,000 division is a joke scale.

(me) Do you happen to know what kind of load cell is used in most common 'reloading' scales such as those sold by Lyman, RCBS, Dillon, and others?

(Gary) These scales have lower quality load cells and the algorithm is worse. Ohaus Corp built some of these scales for Lyman, RCBS and Dillion from what i heard but I don't have any direct proof so this is only hear say.

(me) I think what people would be most interested in seeing is in realistic terms, how much more accurate is the VIC-123 than a common reloading scale that is commonly advertised as +/- 0.1gn? If they both use the same strain gauge technology and it is so limited in terms of divisions... is the +/- 0.02gn readability just smoke-n-mirrors?

(Gary) If you look at the specs at http://balance.balances.com/scales/906 you need to look at "Linearity ± 0.004 g" Since the scale reads 0.001g that means the linearity (aka accuracy) +/- 4 divisions.

Now in grains the scale increments in 0.02 gn divisions so the linearity is 0.08 grains (0.02 x 4)

Remember this is in ideal environmental conditions and testing on a cherry picked scale built perfectly.

If you ask me you would be lucky to have even 0.8 grain accuracy.

I had to ask for a bit of clarification on that last point…

(me) Is that last section supposed to be '0.08gn'? Otherwise I don't follow the leap from 0.02gn x 4 = 0.08gn to 0.8gn.

(Gary) Again that is my opinion on the accuracy is like 0.8 grains but according to the manufacturer spec it is 0.08 gn.

An alternative and the one I currently use until I can get funds for a high end digital, is the video beam scale method posted in the reloading section.
 
0.02 grain precision. 0.002 precision is in grams.

What is more important than the precision is the repeatability and drift.

My scale specs states +/- 0.04gr so the extreme spread (worst error) in two loads is 0.08gr.

As a point of reference, on my scale 0.04gr is 1 kernel of H4831SC or 2 kernels of Varget.

My goal was to have my charges to the same 0.1gr so I needed a scale that the error was less.

The Jennings MACK20 fits the bill at a very affordable price.

My groups have shown that even at 200yds, 0.1gr can affect not just the orientation but also the group size.

Small cases like the 223 are very sensitive to small powder variations.

Jerry
 
For now, there are already large mail order stores selling digi scales to the public. I think my shooting customers are best served through them at this time.

google Jennings digi scale and look for a dealer in Canada.

Jerry
 
I'd recommend the RCBS Chargemaster 1500 scale. It works well and can later be upgraded with the dispenser if you want. I have the combo and am very happy with it. Charges are +/- .1gr as advertised.

As for scale accuracy affecting group size I've seen others above mention that .4gr won't make a difference. That was not true in my case. Loading for .204 Ruger I have a sweet spot of about .2gr and outside of that the groups open up markedly. .6gr difference adds 1" to group size. That won't matter much on a deer rifle but for a .204 Ruger shooting gophers it is a massive difference.
 
As for scale accuracy affecting group size I've seen others above mention that .4gr won't make a difference. That was not true in my case. Loading for .204 Ruger I have a sweet spot of about .2gr and outside of that the groups open up markedly. .6gr difference adds 1" to group size. That won't matter much on a deer rifle but for a .204 Ruger shooting gophers it is a massive difference.

If I find a load that sensitive which developing loads,I abandon the load altogether,since such loads are often unstable in changing temperature conditions.
 
I'd recommend the RCBS Chargemaster 1500 scale. It works well and can later be upgraded with the dispenser if you want. I have the combo and am very happy with it. Charges are +/- .1gr as advertised.

As for scale accuracy affecting group size I've seen others above mention that .4gr won't make a difference. That was not true in my case. Loading for .204 Ruger I have a sweet spot of about .2gr and outside of that the groups open up markedly. .6gr difference adds 1" to group size. That won't matter much on a deer rifle but for a .204 Ruger shooting gophers it is a massive difference.

Maybe it's not the powder charge at all...

if you get one good group when load testing, hey what a great load!
Gotta use it right?
10 great groups, makes a great load.

The hard part about load development is isolating the root variables.
Neck tension
seating depth
bullet weight
bullet type
barrel twist rate
barrel quality
Number of rifling grooves
altitude-yes altitude
bedding
trigger
barrel length
barrel weight
action stiffness
primer
powder burn rate
powder weight
powder wieght consistancy
temperature
shooting stability
paralax
scope magnifification
fire formed brass
brass weight variation
brass hardness variation
round count on brass
brand of brass
scope quality
scope mounting hardware
oil between action and bedding
barrel cleaning routine
barrel cleaning hardware and chemicals
rounds since barrel cleaning
mirage
lock time
lapped lugs
reloading equipment
firing pin hole clearance
load documentation quality
dont forget good old fasion lucky shots

I could go on here boys, but I think we get the point. There's lots of things that can come together to get a good result once in a while, but you need to be honest about the results over time.

Make small changes and see if it is statistically better over time.

Just because you are looking for changes from your powder load does not mean it's just the powder load that is the reason for the results you found.
 
Last edited:
Quoting fclassguy;"You need to take the "1/4 minute challenge" by maynard then..
Check out his thread.

And RUN...
Dont walk...
to the Iowa 1000 yd Bench Rest Club - you will teach those boys a few things!!!!
They use $$$ custom BAT Actions and 40 pound guns to come up with groups bigger than that.
In front of "Witnesses" that is
>
>
>
I just shot 25 rounds all touching at 1000 yards!
>
>
>
(They were all touching the paper)
:)

Anyway without playing the BS card, that is about the best group anyone could possibly shoot with the scale you have at that distance even with a very good 1000 yd bench rest rifle. See results here http://www.iowa1000ydbenchrest.com/

If you had a miligram scale, it would be theoretically possible to reduce your group size to about 2.5 inches of vertical at 1 k. Wind drift variation not included.

Reducing your groups below 6-8" at 1000 is impossible without a miligram scale. And really good shooters have trouble consitantly doing that with them.
$h!t luck just does not count. Witnesses or not."


Oh well, opinions vary. Phone numbers of people available on request
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom