Dillon Electronic Scale: 50 gr calibration weight [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Dillon Electronic Scale: 50 gr calibration weight


Kwesi
10-30-2010, 10:43
Just curious if anyone has checked the accuracy of their calibration weight? While I check the calibration regularly, last night was the first time I actually weighed the weight.

Mine reads between 50.02 - 50.04 on AC power, no fan or A/C running and inside the home. I called Dillon and was told that is not a problem and basically in spec. Unfortunately I do not have any match weight tips to check it against. I did check a few PD 115gr tips and they varied as well 115.02 - 115.04.

I'm assuming this is not an issue that I should be concerned about since in the end my loaded charge will be .02 - .04 light. I'm loading near the upper end of the load range.

ron59
10-30-2010, 12:09
Most scale manufacturers advertise that their scale is with in .1gr accuracy (1 tenth grain).

Yours in within .04gr accuracy (4 1/100s?). Pretty damn accurate.

fredj338
10-30-2010, 12:14
You can never use bullets as check wts, they can vary quite a lot. My Dillon check wt weighs right on at 50gr. I have cross checked it w/ a set of Lyman check wts, within the 0.1gr tolerance.

tac_driver
10-30-2010, 12:42
Mine is 50.00 grams. When you measured it did you put the wind screen on? It has a metal strip that is suppose to cancel out any static charges.

Kwesi
10-30-2010, 14:12
Mine is 50.00 grams. When you measured it did you put the wind screen on? It has a metal strip that is suppose to cancel out any static charges.

I put the wind screen on and it settled at 50.03! My neighbor has the same scale so I'll weight it on his.

Colorado4Wheel
10-30-2010, 17:56
How can you check the weight? If you calibrate the scale the scale assumes that weight is 50.00 so then it's not going to show the weight as anything other then what it was calibrated too. If you don't calibrate the scale then it's not as accurate.

Kwesi
10-31-2010, 04:52
How can you check the weight? If you calibrate the scale the scale assumes that weight is 50.00 so then it's not going to show the weight as anything other then what it was calibrated too. If you don't calibrate the scale then it's not as accurate.

First I calibrated per the manual = Cal F then put the 50gr weight back on & it 's +.03. I was thinking that I could possibly verify by checking by using my friends scale with my 50gr then vice versa.

From your reply it appears I'm overlooking something?

Colorado4Wheel
10-31-2010, 07:15
First I calibrated per the manual = Cal F then put the 50gr weight back on & it 's +.03. I was thinking that I could possibly verify by checking by using my friends scale with my 50gr then vice versa.

From your reply it appears I'm overlooking something?

From my understanding of how they are supposed to work.....

If you calibrate a scale with the weight then it should read that weight. So if the weight is 49.8 grams but the scale thinks the weight is 50gr it's going to adjust that calibration up to 50gr and the scale would be off.

Glocks&Ducs
10-31-2010, 09:41
I'm not sure if your scale is different than mine. I have the older model with the 700 grain calibration weight. But if those are the only steps you are taking, it sounds like you are just using the weight as a check weight, instead of a calibration weight.

My manual says

1. Without the powder pan, zero the scale
2. Press and hold the grains/Grams key for four seconds until the display indicates "700 grains" blinking
3. Press the off key once, the display will show "Cal 0"
4. Gently place the calibration weight on the platform and wait until "Cal F" is displayed

The scale is now ready to use.

Again, the newer scale may be calibrated differently, but that is how mine works.

Kwesi
10-31-2010, 10:45
I'm not sure if your scale is different than mine. I have the older model with the 700 grain calibration weight. But if those are the only steps you are taking, it sounds like you are just using the weight as a check weight, instead of a calibration weight.

My manual says

1. Without the powder pan, zero the scale
2. Press and hold the grains/Grams key for four seconds until the display indicates "700 grains" blinking
3. Press the off key once, the display will show "Cal 0"
4. Gently place the calibration weight on the platform and wait until "Cal F" is displayed

The scale is now ready to use.

Again, the newer scale may be calibrated differently, but that is how mine works.

That's exactly what mine states except is blinks 50.00. The manual goes on to state "if you would like to check the calibration, replace the 50 gram weight on the platform and the display should read 50.00". I'm then at 50.03.

Glocks&Ducs
10-31-2010, 11:06
I think there is nothing wrong with your scale. The cal weight probably simply weighs 50.03 and that is what the scale is calibrating to. That is most likely well within design range, as Dillon stated, or you would get the error message instead of the actual weight display.

If you think about it, the manual states that the resolution is .01 Grams, and 0.1 grains. If you are getting a .03 figure on the cal weight, that should be increasing your confidence in the machine even more because you know it can read that low. The machine is doing what it is claimed to be able to do.

As long as it states 50.03 during cal, and when you are simply checking the cal weight, with some degree of repeatability, you are golden.

If it said 50.03 during cal, and 49 or 51 when you just weight check, I would be worried.

Homechicken
10-31-2010, 11:37
0.03 is a minute error, and not worth any concern. If it were reading 50.3 I would be concerned. 49.9 to 50.1 is within specs. Buy a set of check weights. I have check weights ranging from 0.5 to 20.0 grains. Since I load only pistol calibers at the moment, I use 0.5 to 5.0 grain weights after I calibrate to be sure the scale is reading accurately. Taking into account the +/- 0.1 grain specs, I never load to minimum or maximum. Always 0.1 grain over min or under max just to be safe. But then I usually find charges somewhere on the low side of half way in between min and max work best.

Kwesi
10-31-2010, 11:57
Ok. It's just that I've only been reloading for about 8 months and I'm really trying hard to be accurate and safe, especially when I'm close to a max. weight.

WiskyT
10-31-2010, 12:05
All these people using "grains" and "grams" interchangeably and someone's going to be so "calibrated" they are going to blow something up. Oh well, if they do, they can always blame it on an unsupported chamber.

Colorado4Wheel
10-31-2010, 12:44
.o2 Grams is .46 Grains

Thats not a insignificant mount depending on how that translates down to the lower part of the scale we use for pistol.

You guys need REAL check weights in the grains that you actually are using. Before I bought some I made a 5gr weight. I would zero the beam scale and then check it at 5 grains. That gave me some confidence in the scale. It doesn't matter if its dead freaking on. It just needs to be consistent.

Sonnytoo
10-31-2010, 14:04
My RCBS RangeMaster 750 uses a 30g weight to calibrate the 50 gram section. This 30g (462.96grains) is right on..., well within 0.1 grain on my 50yr-old Ohaus 505 balance beam scale.

Note this: 1 gram = 15.4323584 grains
Also, your one pound of "any" powder contains 7000 grains, so you can easily calculate how many cartridges you can load from that pound of powder. With our handgun ammo... we can approximate that 7000/5 grains = 1400.

As mentioned previously, some folks say grams when they mean grains. Obviosly, not a good idea.

Sonnytoo

Glocks&Ducs
10-31-2010, 17:23
All these people using "grains" and "grams" interchangeably and someone's going to be so "calibrated" they are going to blow something up. Oh well, if they do, they can always blame it on an unsupported chamber.

I looked over the entire thread again. I still don't see a single person using grains and grams interchangeably. The scales being discussed can weigh in grains and grams, and are calibrated in grams.

WiskyT
10-31-2010, 18:05
I looked over the entire thread again. I still don't see a single person using grains and grams interchangeably. The scales being discussed can weigh in grains and grams, and are calibrated in grams.

People are posting about how the OP's scale is accurate to X.XXg so that it must be accurate enough since it only is supposed to be accurate to X.Xg. So he's talking grams, they are talking grains, everybody is switching back and forth, and for what?

The more people dick around with trying to split atoms with their powder charges, the more they seem to post pictures of blown up guns. The powder itself varries more than the scale or the measure that dumps it. So maybe everyone should start doing their own mass spectroanalysis or whatever it is and waste even more time and blow up more guns.

People would be better served by having a better understanding of why powder scales are calibrated in tenths of a grain. It's because that's all that matters. Do carpenters send their tape measure to the Bureau
of Standards to be calibrated to the thousandth of an inch?

Furthermore, that check weight so many people spend all day trying to get their scale to match to the seventh significant digit, changes too. Do you touch it with your fingers? Does it oxidise? The oil on your fingertips and the oxygen in the air will change the weight of that check weight.

I don't know why the checkweight would be in grams when the scale is being used for grains. It's just asking for trouble. Lyman and others sell checkweights in grains, which is what matters. 50 grams is 771 grains. Why is the scale being checked for accuracy at 771 grains unless y'all are weighing 50BMG bullets?

Kwesi
10-31-2010, 18:32
Actually 50 grams = 771.616 grains ;-)

Colorado4Wheel
10-31-2010, 18:37
People are posting about how the OP's scale is accurate to X.XXg so that it must be accurate enough since it only is supposed to be accurate to X.Xg. So he's talking grams, they are talking grains, everybody is switching back and forth, and for what?

The more people dick around with trying to split atoms with their powder charges, the more they seem to post pictures of blown up guns. The powder itself varries more than the scale or the measure that dumps it. So maybe everyone should start doing their own mass spectroanalysis or whatever it is and waste even more time and blow up more guns.

People would be better served by having a better understanding of why powder scales are calibrated in tenths of a grain. It's because that's all that matters. Do carpenters send their tape measure to the Bureau
of Standards to be calibrated to the thousandth of an inch?

Furthermore, that check weight so many people spend all day trying to get their scale to match to the seventh significant digit, changes too. Do you touch it with your fingers? Does it oxidise? The oil on your fingertips and the oxygen in the air will change the weight of that check weight.

I don't know why the checkweight would be in grams when the scale is being used for grains. It's just asking for trouble. Lyman and others sell checkweights in grains, which is what matters. 50 grams is 771 grains. Why is the scale being checked for accuracy at 771 grains unless y'all are weighing 50BMG bullets?

Exactly. Thats why I suggest just making your own test weight in the area you use the most. For me I just used a blue tip from the primer tube of my 550. It was 5grs on my scale and it never changed so that was good enough for me. I now have real check weights. I can use them to zero the beam at 3grs and know that I have 3 grs. In the end the beam is balanced at 3grs and zero grains so it makes zero real difference.

WiskyT
10-31-2010, 18:38
Actually 50 grams = 771.616 grains ;-)

You're right, and about more than the exact weight, the smilie too. I've done a complete 180 at this point and am now warm and fuzzy. What happened between my posts? 41 and 43 took the mound while every pot smoking pinko hippie in SanFran had to watch. 43 had a completely smug look on his face and he was completely emtitled to it. Then 43 completely at ease with himself, threw a nice toss for the opening pitch. 41 looked good to, but I think his son was a btter President, so I like 43 more.

GioaJack
10-31-2010, 18:40
You're right, and about more than the exact weight, the smilie too. I've done a complete 180 at this point and am now warm and fuzzy. What happened between my posts? 41 and 43 took the mound while every pot smoking pinko hippie in SanFran had to watch. 43 had a completely smug look on his face and he was completely emtitled to it. Then 43 completely at ease with himself, threw a nice toss for the opening pitch. 41 looked good to, but I think his son was a btter President, so I like 43 more.



AAARRRGGGHHH!!!


There, I feel better.


Jack

Glocks&Ducs
10-31-2010, 19:35
People are posting about how the OP's scale is accurate to X.XXg so that it must be accurate enough since it only is supposed to be accurate to X.Xg. So he's talking grams, they are talking grains, everybody is switching back and forth, and for what?

The more people dick around with trying to split atoms with their powder charges, the more they seem to post pictures of blown up guns. The powder itself varries more than the scale or the measure that dumps it. So maybe everyone should start doing their own mass spectroanalysis or whatever it is and waste even more time and blow up more guns.

People would be better served by having a better understanding of why powder scales are calibrated in tenths of a grain. It's because that's all that matters. Do carpenters send their tape measure to the Bureau
of Standards to be calibrated to the thousandth of an inch?

Furthermore, that check weight so many people spend all day trying to get their scale to match to the seventh significant digit, changes too. Do you touch it with your fingers? Does it oxidise? The oil on your fingertips and the oxygen in the air will change the weight of that check weight.

I don't know why the checkweight would be in grams when the scale is being used for grains. It's just asking for trouble. Lyman and others sell checkweights in grains, which is what matters. 50 grams is 771 grains. Why is the scale being checked for accuracy at 771 grains unless y'all are weighing 50BMG bullets?

We aren't talking about check weights, although the included weight can and should be used as one. It isn't being checked for accuracy at 50 grams. It is being calibrated using the 50 gram calibration weight. That is how the electronics were designed, and that is the size weight that was provided by the manufacturer. When you run through the calibration procedure, it automatically goes to grams. Even if it was done in grams, it wouldn't matter because it would still only display to the tenth in that setting. I'm not sure who or why you are trying to prove wrong. But you are barking up the wrong tree here.

I use my check weights before I start loading. If they are off at close to what I will be loading at, I recalibrate with the manufacturer provided 700 grain calibration weight. I have only had to that once since I bought the scale used sometime in '04 or '05. But using that big huge weight, relatively speaking, brought the scale right on using my RCBS (grains) check weights for verification.

Apparently, someone a lot smarter than either of us decided that calibrating the machine to 1/100 of a gram, and using it for 1/10 of a grain was plenty enough accurate for them to accept the liability of selling those machines with that capability.

Colorado4Wheel
10-31-2010, 19:39
Apparently, someone a lot smarter than either of us decided that calibrating the machine to 1/100 of a gram, and using it for 1/10 of a grain was plenty enough accurate for them to accept the liability of selling those machines with that capability.

It's the same thing. It's like measuring in feet, inch's or cm's. In the end it's still X units long. Whatever you want to call it and however many decimels you want to stick behind it.

WiskyT
10-31-2010, 19:48
We aren't talking about check weights, although the included weight can and should be used as one. It isn't being checked for accuracy at 50 grams. It is being calibrated using the 50 gram calibration weight. That is how the electronics were designed, and that is the size weight that was provided by the manufacturer. When you run through the calibration procedure, it automatically goes to grams. Even if it was done in grams, it wouldn't matter because it would still only display to the tenth in that setting. I'm not sure who or why you are trying to prove wrong. But you are barking up the wrong tree here.

I use my check weights before I start loading. If they are off at close to what I will be loading at, I recalibrate with the manufacturer provided 700 grain calibration weight. I have only had to that once since I bought the scale used sometime in '04 or '05. But using that big huge weight, relatively speaking, brought the scale right on using my RCBS (grains) check weights for verification.

Apparently, someone a lot smarter than either of us decided that calibrating the machine to 1/100 of a gram, and using it for 1/10 of a grain was plenty enough accurate for them to accept the liability of selling those machines with that capability.

Okay, so his 50 gram weight that his scale should be calibrated to is or is not 50 grams? His cale should be reading 50.00 and it's reading 50.02 and 50.04 alternately. So is his scale calibrated or not?

Does he adjust the scale somehow to read 50.00 with that weight? What if the weight is really 50.50, then what? How can you calibrate the scale?

GioaJack
10-31-2010, 19:56
You guys have me so worried that I no longer trust my scales, so I went out and bought a new one.

http://cdn.explainthatstuff.com/train-station-weighing-scales.jpg

Now I gotta build a bigger bench.


Jack

WiskyT
10-31-2010, 20:05
This is the one I worry about being calibrated:

http://www.roanoke.com/multimedia/81/images/81_truckinspex.jpg

Glocks&Ducs
10-31-2010, 20:08
Okay, so his 50 gram weight that his scale should be calibrated to is or is not 50 grams? His cale should be reading 50.00 and it's reading 50.02 and 50.04 alternately. So is his scale calibrated or not?

Does he adjust the scale somehow to read 50.00 with that weight? What if the weight is really 50.50, then what? How can you calibrate the scale?

I don't know what the limit for deviation is. But obviously, his weight actually weights 50.03 and that is what the scale is calibrating to, and Dillon stated to him that is within specs. There is no way to adjust the scale to 50.00. It should be 50.00, it prompts for 50.00, but if it is calibrating (on its own) to 50.03 because that is actually what the weight weighs, then so what?

The weight could actually weigh 5000.53 and as long as the scale is capable of calibrating that far off from 50.00, it doesn't matter as long as the scale says 5000.53 when you use the weight as a check weight instead of as a calibration weight.

Colorado4Wheel
10-31-2010, 20:08
No, his scale is drifting. It's not calibrated precisely. BUT, does it matter? Basically it's drifting and it's off by .02%. At 50 grams thats .6 grains at that part of the scales range. In the 5 grain range that should be very little.

WiskyT
10-31-2010, 20:12
I don't know what the limit for deviation is. But obviously, his weight actually weights 50.03 and that is what the scale is calibrating to, and Dillon stated to him that is within specs. There is no way to adjust the scale to 50.00. It should be 50.00, it prompts for 50.00, but if it is calibrating (on its own) to 50.03 because that is actually what the weight weighs, then so what?

The weight could actually weigh 5000.53 and as long as the scale is capable of calibrating that far off from 50.00, it doesn't matter as long as the scale says 5000.53 when you use the weight as a check weight instead of as a calibration weight.

If all that was true, then there would be no need to calibrate it. You're basically saying it's calibrated because it says it's calibrated. You have no way of actually knowing. For all we know, that weight could weigh 49.50 grams and the scale thinks it's 50.02 and 50.04.

Glocks&Ducs
10-31-2010, 20:23
If all that was true, then there would be no need to calibrate it. You're basically saying it's calibrated because it says it's calibrated. You have no way of actually knowing. For all we know, that weight could weigh 49.50 grams and the scale thinks it's 50.02 and 50.04.

Well, the same can be said of all of your check weights. Just because you are adjusting your beam scale to your Lyman or whatever brand of check weights you own, it doesn't mean anything. It just means you are adjusting your scale to whatever they weigh.

Colorado4Wheel
10-31-2010, 20:25
Aaaarrrrggggghhhhhh.

WiskyT
10-31-2010, 20:32
Well, the same can be said of all of your check weights. Just because you are adjusting your beam scale to your Lyman or whatever brand of check weights you own, it doesn't mean anything. It just means you are adjusting your scale to whatever they weigh.

That would actually be calibrating. You can adjust a beam scale to calibrate it to your check weights. Now that might change the zero, so you would have to choose which you want to go with. Zero is truly zero, so that's what I do. I zero my beam scale and I don't even have check weights.


If the elctronic scale has a user servicable adjustment, then you could calibrate it to your weights, but since it doesn't, or at least this one apparently doesn't, it's just a check weight.

It seems to me that digital scale is calibrated at the factory (hopefully) and you just have to accept it as accurate. The ckeck weights can give you piece of mind by showing that nothing changes. The 50 gram weight gives him 50.02-.04. Next month it still gives him that, and hopefully that means it's all copesedic. If he ever gets the same 50 gram weight to give him a big deviation, and his dog hasn't been chewing on the weight, than something is wrong with the scale.

One theoretical advantage of the Lee scale is that it can't come out of calibration because the beam can't be bent. It can be broken, but it can't be bent.:whistling:

Colorado4Wheel
10-31-2010, 20:38
The calibration weight is supposed to sync the scale to the weight of the weight. So if the weight is 50grams and you sync it to that weight it will think 50 grams is 50 grams. If you weight is actually 50.02 grams then it will think 50.02 grams is actually 50.00 grams because you just told it so by syncing it to the 50.02 gram weight.

Glocks&Ducs
10-31-2010, 20:42
That would actually be calibrating. You can adjust a beam scale to calibrate it to your check weights. Now that might change the zero, so you would have to choose which you want to go with. Zero is truly zero, so that's what I do. I zero my beam scale and I don't even have check weights.


If the elctronic scale has a user servicable adjustment, then you could calibrate it to your weights, but since it doesn't, or at least this one apparently doesn't, it's just a check weight.

It seems to me that digital scale is calibrated at the factory (hopefully) and you just have to accept it as accurate. The ckeck weights can give you piece of mind by showing that nothing changes. The 50 gram weight gives him 50.02-.04. Next month it still gives him that, and hopefully that means it's all copesedic. If he ever gets the same 50 gram weight to give him a big deviation, and his dog hasn't been chewing on the weight, than something is wrong with the scale.

One theoretical advantage of the Lee scale is that it can't come out of calibration because the beam can't be bent. It can be broken, but it can't be bent.:whistling:


The machine has a separate zero feature. The machine is calibrating itself to the calibration weight. I don't get what you don't understand about that.

When you go through the proper and somewhat elaborate calibration process, it asks for the 50 gram calibration weight. If the weight weighs more or less, it calibrates to that more or less weight. It is calibrating to the provided calibration weight. The fact that the calibration weight weighs a little more or a little less has no bearing on the fact that the scale is calibrating to it.

Is it true that the calibration weight does not necessarily weigh exactly 50.00 grams anymore, if it ever did? Sure. But at this point, you are not calibrating the scale to 50.00. You are calibrating it to about 50 grains and whatever hundredths the weight happens to weigh at that point in time.

WiskyT
10-31-2010, 20:42
The calibration weight is supposed to sync the scale to the weight of the weight. So if the weight is 50grams and you sync it to that weight it will think 50 grams is 50 grams. If you weight is actually 50.02 grams then it will think 50.02 grams is actually 50.00 grams because you just told it so by syncing it to the 50.02 gram weight.

Okay. That makes sense. But it still meas things could be off by more than that. What if the weight truly weighs 50.00 and the scale thinks it weighs 50.04?


























Arg...

Glocks&Ducs
10-31-2010, 20:46
The calibration weight is supposed to sync the scale to the weight of the weight. So if the weight is 50grams and you sync it to that weight it will think 50 grams is 50 grams. If you weight is actually 50.02 grams then it will think 50.02 grams is actually 50.00 grams because you just told it so by syncing it to the 50.02 gram weight.

No. That is only true if it shows that the weight weighs 50.02 then sets itself to 50.00. That is not what the machine does. It asks for the 50.00 weight, it then shows how much the "50.00" gram weight actually weighs, then that is its calibration point. So if the weight weighs, 50.03, it is calibrated to 50.03. So now, if you put a 50.00 weight on the machine, it will read 50.00 because that other weight does not weigh 50.03. It weighs 50.00.

Colorado4Wheel
11-01-2010, 05:21
I don't have time to retype this crap but re-read what I wrote. Machine thinks it's 50grams all the time. You calibrate with a weight that is 50.03. It's going to think 50.03 is now 50 grams.

Kwesi
11-01-2010, 08:43
Thanks to all for your respones and sorry to have opened a can or worms but I love Jack's scale...priceless!

I called Dillon back and this is what I was told. All the 50g weights provided with the scale very well do vary. He said it does not matter at all what the actuaal weight is. I said so even if it were say 51 grams it would not matter? He said no. The scales calibrates to zero from it as long as the steps of the calibration test are confirmed.

Still doesn't seem logical to me though!

Glocks&Ducs
11-01-2010, 13:40
I don't have time to retype this crap but re-read what I wrote. Machine thinks it's 50grams all the time. You calibrate with a weight that is 50.03. It's going to think 50.03 is now 50 grams.

I checked my scale and you are correct. I zeroed my scale with the supplied 700 grain calibration weight plus the 2 grain weight out of the RCBS check weights kit. The scale then read 698 when I checked the 700 grain calibration weight(as a check weight). That confirms that the scale is accepting the calibration weight as exactly 700.00. So even though I had 702 grains on the scale during calibration, the scales was reading at 700 grains once I exited from the calibration procedure.

Glocks&Ducs
11-01-2010, 13:51
BUT!!! Here is the kicker. Even with the 700 grain calibration truly at 702, both of the 2 grain, the 5 grain, both of the 20 grain, and the 50 grain check weights are dead on. When I check the 100 grain, it weighs in at 99.8. I put the 700 grain on there one last time and it was reading 698 again.

Kwesi
11-01-2010, 16:01
Would a visual test be a confirmation here? What if you used something significantly higher or lower than 50 gr like 30 or 70. Then do your normal powder drop and see if it is way light or overflowing. Thoughts?

GioaJack
11-01-2010, 16:13
I must say that I find this thread interesting, in a quirky kind of way, and recognize that it takes someone a whole lot smarter than me to come up with a definitive answer.

I wonder however if it might not place a newb into a situation of 'paralysis through analysis'. After all, how many loaders have really experienced a Kaboom, or even a serious situation because of a 'industry standard operating scale'?

Not an error in dialing in a wrong charge, using the incorrect powder, etc. but rather just using a digital scale out of the box. I suppose it may of happened, I've never heard of it.

Now that I've injected my worthless two cents I'll be quiet and continue to watch the thread. I actually do find it quite informative.


Jack

dudel
11-01-2010, 17:06
Thanks to all for your respones and sorry to have opened a can or worms but I love Jack's scale...priceless!

I called Dillon back and this is what I was told. All the 50g weights provided with the scale very well do vary. He said it does not matter at all what the actuaal weight is. I said so even if it were say 51 grams it would not matter? He said no. The scales calibrates to zero from it as long as the steps of the calibration test are confirmed.

Still doesn't seem logical to me though!

Something screwy there. Say you put your check weight on and some dirt/wind on the scale makes the 50gr check weight register as 50. Would that mean that the scale would now think that 55gr of powder is 50? It can't be that messed up. :wow:

Of course, check weights are only supposed to be handled with the little tongs they ship with. You're never supposed to touch the weights with your bare hands. Finger oil can cause them to corrode and change weight, etc, etc, etc. Too much mystery for me. I think I'll just stick with the beam scale. No mystery there.

WiskyT
11-01-2010, 17:07
Thanks to all for your respones and sorry to have opened a can or worms but I love Jack's scale...priceless!

I called Dillon back and this is what I was told. All the 50g weights provided with the scale very well do vary. He said it does not matter at all what the actuaal weight is. I said so even if it were say 51 grams it would not matter? He said no. The scales calibrates to zero from it as long as the steps of the calibration test are confirmed.

Still doesn't seem logical to me though!

When my five year old asks me where babies come from, I give her an answer about the same as Dillon gave you.

dudel
11-01-2010, 17:09
You guys have me so worried that I no longer trust my scales, so I went out and bought a new one.

http://cdn.explainthatstuff.com/train-station-weighing-scales.jpg

Now I gotta build a bigger bench.


Jack


Must come in handy when charging the cannon....:whistling:

WiskyT
11-01-2010, 17:11
I'm going to put this whole thing to rest once and for all. I have a very close friend who knows Dr. Emilio Lizardo personally. I'm going to have him calibrate my Lee Safety Scale at the Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems Lab.

Colorado4Wheel
11-01-2010, 17:12
BUT!!! Here is the kicker. Even with the 700 grain calibration truly at 702, both of the 2 grain, the 5 grain, both of the 20 grain, and the 50 grain check weights are dead on. When I check the 100 grain, it weighs in at 99.8. I put the 700 grain on there one last time and it was reading 698 again.

Thats what I have been saying. It doesn't matter. It's a .04% change. No big deal. What matters is "is your scale consistent"? Make your own check weight close to what you load and use it as a reference to confirm your scale is reading the same as last time and the time before, ....... Thats what matters.

jeremiahjj
11-07-2010, 20:42
I agree with whoever said scales should read in grains, not grams. Safer that way, particularly for newbies who look at "g" and think it means grains. I can tell you without equivocation that a Glock G-20 won't like it much if you shoot 9.4 grams of HS-6.

Glocks&Ducs
11-07-2010, 21:08
I agree with whoever said scales should read in grains, not grams. Safer that way, particularly for newbies who look at "g" and think it means grains. I can tell you without equivocation that a Glock G-20 won't like it much if you shoot 9.4 grams of HS-6.

Nobody was ever talking about using the scale while reading it in grams. On that scale, you have to calibrate it using the gram marked calibration weight. When you go to use the scale, you set it to grains. There is a relatively huge arrow showing if you are in the grains or grams setting. Besides that, I hardly think anybody would honestly be able to confuse 9.4 grams of powder for 9.4 grains, much less fit that much into a case without spilling it all over the place.

jeremiahjj
11-08-2010, 07:45
Nobody was ever talking about using the scale while reading it in grams. On that scale, you have to calibrate it using the gram marked calibration weight. When you go to use the scale, you set it to grains. There is a relatively huge arrow showing if you are in the grains or grams setting. Besides that, I hardly think anybody would honestly be able to confuse 9.4 grams of powder for 9.4 grains, much less fit that much into a case without spilling it all over the place.

It isn't a question of honesty, but I can tell you that 9.4 grams of powder will definitely go in a 10mm case without spilling over. It translates into slightly more than 15 grains and it's easy to do when you aren't used to comparing grams and grains visually.

You'd be surprised at the mistakes people can make -- or maybe you wouldn't. All it takes is for one newbie to be working in conjunction with someone who knows a lot about setting up and adjusting a press. Throw in a third person monitoring what's going on and mistakes can happen.

I made that mistake. The person helping me set up the press was a "do-er" and not a teacher. Whip-wham, thank you, ma'am, and it's done, all set up and ready to go, including measuring out the charge. He was also a cowboy shooter and I'm sure the size of the powder load, visually, wasn't remarkable to him. The issue was an unfamiliar scale and too much speed. Newbies need to go slow and at their own speed until they know what they're doing.

grenadier
11-08-2010, 09:05
Here's my opinion, as a research chemist who routinely works with microgram quantities of proteins...

For reloading purposes, if your scale is reading at 50.03 grains, when measuring 50 grains of mass, then you're well within safe, and acceptable specs for a fairly high precision scale. You're not going to see any noticeable deviations from your powder charges, due to the scale's measurements.

If anything, you're going to see more deviations coming from the reloading components.

For all intents and purposes, your accuracy and precision is going to be plenty "good enough" for reloading. Just as an example, I routinely use 6.3 grains of Alliant Power Pistol in my 9 mm loads (124 grain bullet). There won't be any noticeable difference in pressure or velocity, if it were 6.27 grains vs. 6.33 grains.

Colorado4Wheel
11-08-2010, 09:12
It isn't a question of honesty, but I can tell you that 9.4 grams of powder will definitely go in a 10mm case without spilling over.

9.4 grs of powder X will be very different then 9.4 grs of powder Y. You can't just assume that every powders volume is going to be the same. They can vary a HUGE amount (look at Trail Boss) but even common powders could vary 50% in volume.

IndyGunFreak
11-08-2010, 09:13
Besides that, I hardly think anybody would honestly be able to confuse 9.4 grams of powder for 9.4 grains, much less fit that much into a case without spilling it all over the place.

Exactly... IIRC, 1gram = 15grains. I can't imagine a load out there that wouldn't put powder everywhere if you were to accidentally substitute grams for grains...

IGF

GioaJack
11-08-2010, 10:31
Here's my opinion, as a research chemist who routinely works with microgram quantities of proteins...

For reloading purposes, if your scale is reading at 50.03 grains, when measuring 50 grains of mass, then you're well within safe, and acceptable specs for a fairly high precision scale. You're not going to see any noticeable deviations from your powder charges, due to the scale's measurements.

If anything, you're going to see more deviations coming from the reloading components.

For all intents and purposes, your accuracy and precision is going to be plenty "good enough" for reloading. Just as an example, I routinely use 6.3 grains of Alliant Power Pistol in my 9 mm loads (124 grain bullet). There won't be any noticeable difference in pressure or velocity, if it were 6.27 grains vs. 6.33 grains.


HA! Finally a real life scientist, (I assume he went to some sort of school) that agrees with what I've been saying, and viciously mocked for I might add.

See, that .02 grain variance in your Unique throws make as much difference in piddling in the ocean... you simply can not, and will never notice it. (Again, we're not talking about loads that already exceed published max velocities and pressures. That's why the invented the phrase, 'the stray that breaks the camel's back.)

I feel so vindicated I'm gonna go make a bagel... damn the carbohydrates! :banana: :banana:


Jack

Glocks&Ducs
11-08-2010, 13:14
It isn't a question of honesty, but I can tell you that 9.4 grams of powder will definitely go in a 10mm case without spilling over. It translates into slightly more than 15 grains and it's easy to do when you aren't used to comparing grams and grains visually.
...


You know, I will never claim to be a math expert. But I am looking at an on-line calculator that says 9.4 grams equals more like 145 grains.

http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_converter/weight.html

WiskyT
11-08-2010, 17:54
Here's my opinion, as a research chemist who routinely works with microgram quantities of proteins...

For reloading purposes, if your scale is reading at 50.03 grains, when measuring 50 grains of mass, then you're well within safe, and acceptable specs for a fairly high precision scale. You're not going to see any noticeable deviations from your powder charges, due to the scale's measurements.

If anything, you're going to see more deviations coming from the reloading components.

For all intents and purposes, your accuracy and precision is going to be plenty "good enough" for reloading. Just as an example, I routinely use 6.3 grains of Alliant Power Pistol in my 9 mm loads (124 grain bullet). There won't be any noticeable difference in pressure or velocity, if it were 6.27 grains vs. 6.33 grains.

Is that you Bigbootie? When is my scale going to be calibrated?:supergrin:

grenadier
11-09-2010, 08:23
Is that you Bigbootie? When is my scale going to be calibrated?:supergrin:

Not Bigbootie. :)

Just a guy in Alabama, doing nuclear magnetic resonance-based research on proteins and other biological macromolecules.

On another note, in terms of doing scale calibrations, I calibrate my own using Millipored water, but once every few years, I get the pros to come and do it, since they take time to do detailed cleanings that I'm frankly too darn scared to try on my 0.0001 gram balance!

GioaJack
11-09-2010, 08:40
Not Bigbootie. :)

Just a guy in Alabama, doing nuclear magnetic resonance-based research on proteins and other biological macromolecules.

On another note, in terms of doing scale calibrations, I calibrate my own using Millipored water, but once every few years, I get the pros to come and do it, since they take time to do detailed cleanings that I'm frankly too darn scared to try on my 0.0001 gram balance!


This stuff is getting way too complicated. Just cram a case full of black powder... 'if it fits, it ships'.


Jack

ron59
11-09-2010, 09:02
This stuff is getting way too complicated. Just cram a case full of black powder... 'if it fits, it ships'.


Jack

And I think you're making it too complicated.... *specifying* a powder.:whistling:

EVERYBODY knows you just cram the case with WTF and go shoot it ! :rofl:

Of course... how many fingers you bring home is another story.