Premium scales users comments, milligram vs microgram?

Kryogen said:
Ok just to add some useful info to the thread
Brian Litz in his lastest book modern advancements in lr shooting tested the ES of the chargemaster vs satorius lab scale.

ES was able to go down from around 8 to 6 with single kernel loading vs +-.1

That's just a 2-3 ES difference, so unless you are winning 1000 yards shooting, and are already getting 8 ES ammo with +-.1, it's probably not going to matter much. Look elsewhere.... switching primers got loads from 20 es to 10 es.

Should have kept my chargemaster, eh ;)
Click to expand...

Kryogen, targets and scores don't lie. Where we are now in the evolution of LR precision reloading is a byproduct of steps and tools that have improved accuracy and scores. We have all gone through various stuff and moved on to other stuff in hopes to improve our results. Some have worked, others have not.

I do not know of any shooters that prefers to spend more time and money then necessary. If we didn't need to do what we do, trust me, we wouldn't.

I really don't think any of Bryan's peers are going to be giving up their quality milligram scales any time soon.... or maybe Bryan is hoping they would :)

If the process you use gets you the results you want/need, then all is well.

But if you think there is more to be gained, welcome to the rabbit hole.

Jerry
 
J996 said:
I have contemplated back and forth about buying a digital lab scale but I have been very happy with the charges measured on my beam scale. It reacts to 1-2 kernels of powder.



Click to expand...

J996, your process, care and attention have consistently shown very good results. There is no doubt you can make superb charges with a balance beam scale. I started with a Lee balance beam and still have it as a back up should all the power go out.

If the scale you are using proves reliable and repeatable, have at it. Can you speed things up with a better digi scale? Sure but it comes with a hefty price.

Are you likely to see huge gains in your accuracy given your current rig and set up? not sure but there is only 1 way to find out.

Looking at the group, there seems to be 2 clusters of impacts. Was that the wind by any chance? Or was that how the bullets landed - left and right and left?

Jerry
 
Mystic Precision said:
Kryogen, targets and scores don't lie. Where we are now in the evolution of LR precision reloading is a byproduct of steps and tools that have improved accuracy and scores. We have all gone through various stuff and moved on to other stuff in hopes to improve our results. Some have worked, others have not.

I do not know of any shooters that prefers to spend more time and money then necessary. If we didn't need to do what we do, trust me, we wouldn't.

I really don't think any of Bryan's peers are going to be giving up their quality milligram scales any time soon.... or maybe Bryan is hoping they would :)

If the process you use gets you the results you want/need, then all is well.

But if you think there is more to be gained, welcome to the rabbit hole.

Jerry
Click to expand...

I (or Litz) didn't say that it wasn't worth it. What he said is that it will give you a difference of -3 fps SD.

This is a 30% improvement if you are at 9.

My point is that if someone is loading ammo with a 20-50 SD with +-.1, there are other things to address before you benefit from a .02 scale.

When you have a SD of 10 or below, then this other step will help you lower the SD by 3 which is a good improvement like I said.

Just pointing out some numbers, I'm not saying that this is not worth it. It depends what you want from your ammo, how far you shoot, etc.

The numbers actually point out that this IS worth it for LR competition shooters with already good ammo.
 
Mystic Precision said:
J996, your process, care and attention have consistently shown very good results. There is no doubt you can make superb charges with a balance beam scale. I started with a Lee balance beam and still have it as a back up should all the power go out.

If the scale you are using proves reliable and repeatable, have at it. Can you speed things up with a better digi scale? Sure but it comes with a hefty price.

Are you likely to see huge gains in your accuracy given your current rig and set up? not sure but there is only 1 way to find out.

Looking at the group, there seems to be 2 clusters of impacts. Was that the wind by any chance? Or was that how the bullets landed - left and right and left?

Jerry
Click to expand...

Yeah I want to try a high end digital scale but the price plus how little I would gain in score (I shoot tactical matches) keeps me from doing it.

Regarding that grouping, I frequently notice larger horizontal than vertical patterns in my 300 yard shooting. The vertical is always great. Most often there is some wind involved but another factor could be the Parker Hale bipod I am using since it does tilt and I would think it does so ever so slightly during recoil. Still I seem to have no trouble keeping things within moa most days.
 
J996 said:
Yeah I want to try a high end digital scale but the price plus how little I would gain in score (I shoot tactical matches) keeps me from doing it.

Regarding that grouping, I frequently notice larger horizontal than vertical patterns in my 300 yard shooting. The vertical is always great. Most often there is some wind involved but another factor could be the Parker Hale bipod I am using since it does tilt and I would think it does so ever so slightly during recoil. Still I seem to have no trouble keeping things within moa most days.
Click to expand...

Repeat your shooting how you do it normally, then compare to a pedestal rest or FTR type bipod where high degree of consistency is possible.

If it improves, then you have your answer. Folding, bendy bipods can be really tough to use for consistent 1/2MOA type shooting at LR. There is a reason, they just aren't used in FTR... but they work far better in a dynamic style of shooting so...

Always compromises.

wrt to the scale, where abouts are you? Maybe there is someone near by that can just load up some for you to test???

Given the set up you currently use, there is likely little to be gained but it would be nice to prove what COULD be gained. Where you really see the benefits is in rifles that can shoot sub 1/2 MOA on average at 200 and 300yds... the closer the rig can shoot 1/4min, the more dramatic precise charges will be on your group size and orientation.

The further you shoot, the more obvious the benefits, as long as everything else is capable of that level of accuracy/consistency.

Jerry
 
Kryogen said:
I (or Litz) didn't say that it wasn't worth it. What he said is that it will give you a difference of -3 fps SD.

This is a 30% improvement if you are at 9.

My point is that if someone is loading ammo with a 20-50 SD with +-.1, there are other things to address before you benefit from a .02 scale.

When you have a SD of 10 or below, then this other step will help you lower the SD by 3 which is a good improvement like I said.

Just pointing out some numbers, I'm not saying that this is not worth it. It depends what you want from your ammo, how far you shoot, etc.

The numbers actually point out that this IS worth it for LR competition shooters with already good ammo.
Click to expand...

One of the reasons LR competitors like F class shooters have gone to the expense of milligram scales was high SD/ES numbers.... which shows up as excessive vertical on target. It is not just what does 0.1gr of powder do but what does a range of variation in your ammo do. If a scale was always higher or lower then desired, you would just adjust... when it is randomly high or low and varying, that is where you get some really hair pulling results.

You are absolutely correct that charge weight is just one of a series of steps you need to see the gains BUT it is one of the most important. This became abundantly clear to me when I got into competing with the 223. The smaller the case, the more obvious charge weight affects the result. A better scale was the last place I could look to get my accuracy to a level to be competitive... and when I got my first decent scale, my groups stabilized. Then a better one which lead to smaller groups... then a better one which lead to both small groups but also very low levels of vertical... which lead to doing very well in competition.

I don't get hung up on Chronie data.... most chronies have error that exceed the single digit output shooters want to lean on. There are absolutely good ones that can read to a very low level of error but these cost alot... and if spending that much money, I would rather buy a quality milligram scale and not worry about my chronie data.

The target will tell me everything I need to know.

Jerry
 
Obviously litz measured FPS data with a very expensive lab chrono so I would trust that data.
But he also mentions that if you are using a cheap chrono, SD idnt so relevant.
 
Pretty sure he would use an Oehler 35... pretty much the industry standard and about as good as it gets especially with the proof channel and long screen spacing. He might have said what type of gear he used???

http://www.oehler-research.com/custom/specs.html

Scroll down to the section on Accuracy... Pretty darn good vs many "box" type chronies.

The values typically indicate a +/- range. Hope that makes sense.

Jerry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom