Which Auto Powder Thrower/Scale to buy?

[Trickymissfit]

I have used the PACT and the RCBS. The RCBS is hands down better, quicker, less overthrows and accurate. There is a ton of information here and on Accurate Shooter on tips and tricks that really work. I have not had any issues with accurate measures and follow the direction to zero frequently and let the unit "warm up" 20 minutes prior to use. Of course if accuracy is only good to +/- .1 grain.

I bought a Pact with plans on having it upgraded. One afternoon a few months back a friend asked me what it was, and I set it up. There was a slight learning curve, and once we got past that (I had to make a phone call to Pact to see what was wrong). Then we just dumped a bottle of 2015 in it as set the zeros. One tenth of a grain everytime. Then changed powders to H414, and recalibrated it. One tenth of a grain everytime. To set there and watch it measure powder, it was a tad slow. But when you intergrate a press in there it wasn't bad at all, and was usually waiting on me. Now with ball powders, I see no advantage. I can throw ball powder to one tenth of a grain everytime in my two throwers. But with 2015 it was much quicker and easier. I have not tried 4350 in it yet, but will one of these days if I don't send it back and have it upgraded. One thing I do like about it is the ease of changing powders and cleaning all the old left over powder out of it. The RCBS is probably better, but not $270 better. I picked mine up used for $65 with out a scale, and I already had a couple that would work with it. Plus it's got a made in USA sticker on it unlike the Chinese built ones.
gary

 

[turbines]

I was put off by the price of the RCBS until I checked it at Natchez. I pulled the trigger on it. They have a $50 rebate going now also.
One thing I added to it was a weight pan with a funnel on it. This has made my use of it even easier.

 

[Mikecr]

There are a lot of good tips & tweaks for the CM.
People have used lab scales to really dial in CM performance, and with this they can be more accurate than advertised.
Mine is.

 

[frequent misser]

I have had the rcbs for over 4 years now and have been happy with it. Lately my scale is starting to give the occasional crazy reading and some of the buttons on the dispenser are working part of the time. I can say that this thing has loaded a rediculous number of rounds and I have gotten my moneys worth. I am thinking about going back to a quality powder thrower and a sartorius scale. I don't think throwing a charge and trickling up would take any more time than the dispenser. I will probably add the new scale first until the dispenser completely gives up the ghost then add the thrower. How long have your dispensers lasted? I'm wondering if my experience is about what one can expect.

Sartorius Scale 110V - Sinclair Intl

here is a link to the scale I am referring to. Anyone have any experience with one of these?

 

[joe0121]

I have the Hornady one and it works really well. Every say 10 rounds or so it will throw a heavy charge but it is still almost twice as fast as measuring each by hand. Accuracy is within .1 grain. This is using h1000 the only powder I currently use. It is also 1/2 the cost of the RCBS. As I use only one powder and dump 80GR per pill I don't much have to worry about emptying the powder tube.

I like how it is super easy to calibrate and the auto function is real nice. A buddy in church has the RCBS and LOVES it. I have used it and for twice the money cant really recommend it. It does work nice and does handle flake powder like a dream.

The Hornady did have some QC issues but Mine has loaded some 300 rounds without fault.

 

[Mikecr]

I used a Sartorius to dial in my CM. This was a pain.
While acculabs are super accurate, they're NOT good reloading scales. A fly farting in another room throws em all over the place!
And since they never really settle out, you're constantly left wondering just what the weight really is..

The best reloading scales update quickly, and settle well on a bench, while being 'accurate enough'. More accurate is usually too accurate, and completely impractical..
What's best about a tweaked CM is that it IS completely practical.

You can go manual thrower/trickler for the same result. You can box mount a super scale and attend every charge. But you don't have to anymore.
Consider the ease of auto headlights once set to operate properly. It's seems a pain to mind the lights like this, after having used auto mode for a while.

The problem with Hornady Joe is that Hornady did not earn it. They flat out reverse engineered the RCBS, colored their copy of it red, undermined RCBS pricing, and divided what they could from the market.
This is unethical, it should not be rewarded, and it is very bad for us.
Other product inventor/developers see this, and are forced to reconsider the viability in bringing new toys to market, even if greatly needed.
Caldwell is another who should not be rewarded for undermining the innovators of several products(like Harris & Farley).
It is on us to make the right choices -sometimes beyond simple cost.

 

[joe0121]

I used a Sartorius to dial in my CM. This was a pain.
While acculabs are super accurate, they're NOT good reloading scales. A fly farting in another room throws em all over the place!
And since they never really settle out, you're constantly left wondering just what the weight really is..

The best reloading scales update quickly, and settle well on a bench, while being 'accurate enough'. More accurate is usually too accurate, and completely impractical..
What's best about a tweaked CM is that it IS completely practical.

You can go manual thrower/trickler for the same result. You can box mount a super scale and attend every charge. But you don't have to anymore.
Consider the ease of auto headlights once set to operate properly. It's seems a pain to mind the lights like this, after having used auto mode for a while.

The problem with Hornady Joe is that Hornady did not earn it. They flat out reverse engineered the RCBS, colored their copy of it red, undermined RCBS pricing, and divided what they could from the market.
This is unethical, it should not be rewarded, and it is very bad for us.
Other product inventor/developers see this, and are forced to reconsider the viability in bringing new toys to market, even if greatly needed.
Caldwell is another who should not be rewarded for undermining the innovators of several products(like Harris & Farley).
It is on us to make the right choices -sometimes beyond simple cost.

Mike I wasnt aware of that

 

[dig]

The problem with Hornady Joe is that Hornady did not earn it. They flat out reverse engineered the RCBS, colored their copy of it red, undermined RCBS pricing, and divided what they could from the market.
This is unethical, it should not be rewarded, and it is very bad for us.
Other product inventor/developers see this, and are forced to reconsider the viability in bringing new toys to market, even if greatly needed.
Caldwell is another who should not be rewarded for undermining the innovators of several products(like Harris & Farley).
It is on us to make the right choices -sometimes beyond simple cost.


Reverse Engineering? Changing Colors? Marketing a Product? My god I hope the auto makers, home builders, tool manufactures and help us all electronics manufactures don't catch wind of this new fangled ploy. I would hate to see capitalism, competition and a benefit to the consumer with more products and price elasticity in the United States of America.

 

[Mikecr]

Joe, maybe my perspectives are all askew, but I can't help but to see it as I do.
Dig, what all the US manufactures are getting wind of today is red communist Chinese *** in their faces.

Like Clint said, it's half-time folks.
It's time to think about what we've done, and about what we're doing to ourselves.

 

[joe0121]

Joe, maybe my perspectives are all askew, but I can't help but to see it as I do.
Dig, what all the US manufactures are getting wind of today is red communist Chinese *** in their faces.

Like Clint said, it's half-time folks.
It's time to think about what we've done, and about what we're doing to ourselves.

Competition good for both consumer and producer. I don't see Hornady realizing the RCBS was a great idea and making their own as a bad thing. Now making an exact copy would be wrong. Whether or not that is what happened here who knows.

 

[TimeOnTarget]

I have a Chargemaster combo and it works great.

Agree 100%. Never used anything but the chargemaster but ive never felt the need either.

 

[Trickymissfit]

Mike I wasnt aware of that

not wanting to start a fight, but it seems to me that in the shooting world everybody is stealling intellectual property from each other.

* Redding stole the Forster design for dies

* I think it was Niel Jones (may have been Fred Sinclair) that made the first seriously precision powder measuerer. Then Harrel and a couple others pretty much copied the design.

* the Remington 700 rifle is the most copied design in the shooting world.

* some folks say that Fred Sinclair stole te K&M design and upgraded it, and others say different when it comes to priming tools. Your call!

* who invented the "C frame" press? Who invented the
"O frame" press?

* Did MEC or Belding & Mull invent the sliding bar for charging cases, or did they simply steal it from P&W?

* did Winchester steal Paul Mauser's basic design?

* did Winchester and Sako steal the Savage 99 design? (I don't knoe but they all look alike)

this list could go one for several pages. The RCBS Chargemaster and the Hornaday clone are probably made by the same Chinamen in the same factory in red China when it's all said & done.
gary

 

[Trickymissfit]

The problem with Hornady Joe is that Hornady did not earn it. They flat out reverse engineered the RCBS, colored their copy of it red, undermined RCBS pricing, and divided what they could from the market.
This is unethical, it should not be rewarded, and it is very bad for us.
Other product inventor/developers see this, and are forced to reconsider the viability in bringing new toys to market, even if greatly needed.
Caldwell is another who should not be rewarded for undermining the innovators of several products(like Harris & Farley).
It is on us to make the right choices -sometimes beyond simple cost.


Reverse Engineering? Changing Colors? Marketing a Product? My god I hope the auto makers, home builders, tool manufactures and help us all electronics manufactures don't catch wind of this new fangled ploy. I would hate to see capitalism, competition and a benefit to the consumer with more products and price elasticity in the United States of America.

when you take yourself out to dinner you will probably see at least a dozen autos with stolen intellectual property. Specially if they happen to be a hybrid. Was it good to do this? NO! it wasn't. You see the very samething in machinery that come out of Asia. Even audio equipment. When you buy it you simply reward the manufacturer for theft of intellectuall property.
gary