Weight-Sorting Cases: Is it Worthwhile?

Scales are basically sold according to the metric system with a coversion to other units of measurement.

So they come in different levels of "readability" 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, 0.0001, or they may confuse things by specking it out as 0.1mg, 0.001 mg etc

So a milligram balance will read in grains increments of 0.02 grains, An analytical balance will read in increments of 0.002 grains.

Accuracy is usually but not always about plus or minus twice the readability. So a miligram scale that reads in 0.02 grains is accurate to 0.08 grains. an analytical balance will read 0.002 grains is generally accurate to 0.008 grains.

Obviously cost will affect this. You can get $40 scales on Amazon that displays to 0.02 grains but they are fake posers. I'm really talking about the better scales that will generally cost upwards of $600 for a milligram balance and upwards of $100 for an analytical balance.

Basically an analytical balance is ten times more accurate than a milligram balance. For primers you truly need analytical balance accuracy.

OK. Thanks for the explanation. I was confused by the term "analytical," as it denotes a qualitative, rather than quantitative, distinction between the two types you mention. I'm guessing that you got the costs backwards in your explanation--i.e., that the "analytical" balance costs upwards of $600, whereas the milligram balance costs upwards of $100. Can you give us an example of a commercial "analytical" balance that is available to us handloaders?
 
And now we have chronographs with an accuracy of +/- 0.5 FPS... and we need scales that measure to what again????

posts like this just make me smile....

I cried 'good enough' a while back... but what do I know.

Jerry
 
OK. Thanks for the explanation. I was confused by the term "analytical," as it denotes a qualitative, rather than quantitative, distinction between the two types you mention. I'm guessing that you got the costs backwards in your explanation--i.e., that the "analytical" balance costs upwards of $600, whereas the milligram balance costs upwards of $1000. Can you give us an example of a commercial "analytical" balance that is available to us handloaders?

Sorry I was in a rush and made a typo... A decent analytical balance will cost upwards of $1000, not $100.

I've been using a Vibra HT220 with internal calibration for 15 or 20 years now. There's a vitamin plant here in town that uses Vibra so the rep comes around quite a bit to service that account. Real nice guy, brought it to my door.

This is my scale in action.


Just try and be sure that the sacle you are looking at does measure in grains. You don't want to spend that much money and get stuck measuring in grams or something normal people don't use for reloading.

Vibra Canada: https://www.vibracanada.com/products/analytical/ht_htr/index.html This looks like the closest one to mine.

https://www.nevadaweighing.com/products/vibra-ht-224r-analytical-balance This is the new version of the one I have. I do recommend internal calibration.

Amazon Canada: https://www.amazon.ca/Hanchen-Analytical-Electronic-Pharmacy-Chemical/dp/B01MU940MZ/ref=sr_1_2_sspa?crid=2IVE4ON6SORJM&keywords=analytical+balance&qid=1651095929&sprefix=analytical+balance%2Caps%2C92&sr=8-2-spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUFPRllVT0MzUVVaUEYmZ W5jcnlwdGVkSWQ9QTA1MDg0MjlJUkszOUNWTjhNU1UmZW5jcnl wdGVkQWRJZD1BMDI0Mjc0MjFLTkdXRFk4UTFHSSZ3aWRnZXROY W1lPXNwX2F0ZiZhY3Rpb249Y2xpY2tSZWRpcmVjdCZkb05vdEx vZ0NsaWNrPXRydWU= This one is a bit lower priced, and I'm not sure if it converts to grains... but remember you get what you pay for.

Never mind Jerry above... He still seems to think a less accurate scale is more accurate somehow... go figure.
 
Last edited:
Sorry I was in a rush and made a typo... A decent analytical balance will cost upwards of $1000, not $100.

That's helpful. A scale that I've seen discussed on reloading forums is the A&D FX-120i. Does it qualify as an "analytical" scale by your standards?
 
Last edited:
And now we have chronographs with an accuracy of +/- 0.5 FPS... and we need scales that measure to what again????

All so we can shoot them at electronic targets with an accuracy of plus or minus nobody even knows what. :) I was thinking about that while laying at the 1000 yard mark spinning a Mark 4 windage knob like an aboriginie trying to start a fire, but finishing with a max of 17 MOA left wind with drops to 10 one shot to the next. I got my first Lieutenant Governor's medal that weekend but my real takeaway is that its a sport for lunatics. Once you cross that line, which way one's personal insanity goes is just a detail. ;)
 
Yes, I only care about 1 kernel of Varget.... damn sloppy isn't it :)

But then maybe it is 2 kernels of Varget... Oh, the HORROR!!!!

How many kernels of powder in that FTR load?... nah, that doesn't matter... if I just had that 1 kernel right, I would be the National Champion

Some posts just make me laugh out loud.... If winning is a mental game, I know who I don't have to worry about.

Jerry
 
Yes, I only care about 1 kernel of Varget.... damn sloppy isn't it :)

But then maybe it is 2 kernels of Varget... Oh, the HORROR!!!!

How many kernels of powder in that FTR load?... nah, that doesn't matter... if I just had that 1 kernel right, I would be the National Champion

Some posts just make me laugh out loud.... If winning is a mental game, I know who I don't have to worry about.

Jerry

So Jerry, I gather you are an experienced competitive shooter. What components do you weigh? Powder charges? Brass? I know some competitive shooters just throw charges and don't weigh them. Is that sufficient for competitive success?
 
Maple57. I can't see myself weighing primers. For the more-usual weighing of powder charges, do you think a milligram balance capable of .02 grains increments is sufficiently accurate for your purposes?
 
So Jerry, I gather you are an experienced competitive shooter. What components do you weigh? Powder charges? Brass? I know some competitive shooters just throw charges and don't weigh them. Is that sufficient for competitive success?

Yes, I would fit in that description - I have competed in F Class at a very high level. I have also done well in PRS. Years of LR and ELR shooting.

I weigh my powder on an FX120i - I competed in both Open and FTR and have loaded for a wide range of cartridges. I would definitely not use a powder measure for this game or any time you want very good LR accuracy.

I do proper brass prep which includes outside neck turning, annealing, and correct sizing.

Weighing powder charges to sub 0.1gr consistency is very helpful in load development. a single kernel of Varget is 0.02gr on my scale... +/- 1 kernel is more then anal enough for my needs. If it works for a 223, it is way good enough for the "massive" 308win. For best results, you really need to know that your ammo is all within that 0.1gr when working with small to mid sized cases. For big ole magnums, +/- 0.1gr is unlikely to make a difference but let the target tell you what is going on.

so if you are loading for a 6.5 Creedmoor and use "40gr" of H4350..... I want to ensure that ALL my charges are 39.95gr to 40.05gr actual or within 2 kernels of H4350. If your rifle and your set up is consistent enough, you should be able to see changes on target at the 0.1gr range... at distance (200yds and beyond).

I don't weigh primers, or brass, or bullets... I run stuff that has the QC dealt with and my targets tell me I am not wrong. If not, I get rid of that batch of whatever and move to something that works.

But then, my accuracy needs AT 1000yds is 1/3 MOA average.... if you need more then that, maybe that kernel of whatever will matter. Not good enough to see the difference

There are much bigger fish to deal with then a kernel of powder.

Jerry
 
I weigh my powder on an FX120i - I competed in both Open and FTR and have loaded for a wide range of cartridges. I would definitely not use a powder measure for this game or any time you want very good LR accuracy.

That's interesting, Jerry, and it sounds as though your level of load-development precision is consistent with a high level of shooting success. You mention the FX-120i. After reading up a little about this scale today, it appears that it weighs in .02 grain increments (actually .015 grain or .001 gram increments). This appears to be entirely accurate enough for the level of precision needed in weighing powder charges. Perhaps not accurate enough, though, for weighing primers (not something I can see myself ever doing), as it would appear to qualify as a "milligram" balance, rather than an "analytical" balance by Maple57's characterization.
 
Jerry, do you measure bullet base to ogive and sort? ( pretty sure yes ) and do you bullet tip?

no, nope, nada, Nine... run them out the box. I pay for match bullets... they better be match bullets... or I use something else. For my current 308 and 22 CM, I am running Sierra bullets.

They are very well made... cause that is what my target tells me

Jerry
 
That's interesting, Jerry, and it sounds as though your level of load-development precision is consistent with a high level of shooting success. You mention the FX-120i. After reading up a little about this scale today, it appears that it weighs in .02 grain increments (actually .015 grain or .001 gram increments). This appears to be entirely accurate enough for the level of precision needed in weighing powder charges. Perhaps not accurate enough, though, for weighing primers (not something I can see myself ever doing), as it would appear to qualify as a "milligram" balance, rather than an "analytical" balance by Maple57's characterization.

IMG_2008.jpg

And there was a slight increase in mirage speed from right to left. I kept the same hold. This is 250yds. I am not good enough to see any more "precision" .

308Win FTR rifle, MPOD bipod

Jerry

McGowen22CMHB.jpg

For a PRS rifle, good enough.... [no idea why the image is upside down???]
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2008.jpg
    IMG_2008.jpg
    67.7 KB · Views: 70
  • McGowen22CMHB.jpg
    McGowen22CMHB.jpg
    65.3 KB · Views: 68
Last edited:
no, nope, nada, Nine... run them out the box. I pay for match bullets... they better be match bullets... or I use something else. For my current 308 and 22 CM, I am running Sierra bullets.

They are very well made... cause that is what my target tells me

Jerry

Interesting thanks.
I measure my Berger and Hornady bullets and group them by ogive. If nothing else, it aids in my bullet seating.
 
Yes, I only care about 1 kernel of Varget.... damn sloppy isn't it :)

But then maybe it is 2 kernels of Varget... Oh, the HORROR!!!!

How many kernels of powder in that FTR load?... nah, that doesn't matter... if I just had that 1 kernel right, I would be the National Champion

Some posts just make me laugh out loud.... If winning is a mental game, I know who I don't have to worry about.

Jerry

Jerry, in case you missed it, we were discussing primer sorting not powder. The FX120 is good to about 4 kernels of Varget.... not 1 or 2.

But that weight variance is a mile when it comes to sorting primers.

If you have an FX120, you might consider using primers to calibrate your scale, but not use the scale to weight sort your primers. LOL

Guys who try weight sorting primers with crappy scales will never find value in sorting primers.... Wonder why? Duhh... obvious.
 
Jerry, in case you missed it, we were discussing primer sorting not powder. The FX120 is good to about 4 kernels of Varget.... not 1 or 2.

But that weight variance is a mile when it comes to sorting primers.

If you have an FX120, you might consider using primers to calibrate your scale, but not use the scale to weight sort your primers. LOL

Guys who try weight sorting primers with crappy scales will never find value in sorting primers.... Wonder why? Duhh... obvious.

I use an analytical balance. Question is do you have any reason to think primer weight relates to the amount of lead styphnate?
 
I use an analytical balance. Question is do you have any reason to think primer weight relates to the amount of lead styphnate?

I think it depends on the brand of primers. I've seen primers with wild weight spreads, that don't shoot well unless they have been weight sorted. (Winchester)

On the other hand, I've seen primers with a low weight variance that shoot well all the time. (Federal GMM)

By shoot well, I'm speaking about velocity spreads. Primers don't cause accuracy, they cause velocity, which may affect accuracy.

In any event, if you weight sort a box of 1000 primers into lots of 100 closest in weight, it cant hurt. It would make for an interesting YouTube video though wouldn't it? Testing the mins against the maxes. (Assuming the Labradar would pick up on the difference.)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom