Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Electronic scale tips to ensure accuracy
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Muddyboots" data-source="post: 1504886" data-attributes="member: 63925"><p>I know a lot of discussion has been offered here but throwing in my $.02. I know a lot of folks don't like the RCBS Rangemaster 2000 but I have been getting good results for over a year with it. I load in my basement like a lot of folks where temp is pretty stable at 60 degrees except during really cold spells in the winter. It is definitely very temperature sensitive. One really cold winter spell, my basement dropped few degrees such that I have a small ceramic heater I use next to my reloading bench. It was immediately apparent the scale doesn't like temperature swings caused by the heater. It would not hold calibration nor consistent zero. I shut the heater off and in a few minutes the scale was dead on again.</p><p></p><p>I always turn it on for 30 minutes prior to calibration. Always have something to work on while it is getting room acclimated. I haven't seen any fluorescent lighting impact but I also have a 100W LED bulb nearby so not sure what that is doing for light.</p><p></p><p>Calibration holds through 50 rounds without any problem at all. I was checking every 10 rounds with RCBS balance beam and was dead on every single time just to be sure. I also would weigh calibration weights close to the powder weight I was using and they were also dead on every single time. One way to monitor the calibration was to observe the minus tare weight of the pan that shows when you remove the pan. If it returned same minus number, you are essentially still calibrated to the zero of the pan.</p><p></p><p>Like everyone else, I know it is not a balance beam for response and you cannot expect to see the same response BUT you can get faster results if you develop your own methodology to see the trickle powder changes. Some may think tedious but once I started to get accustom to how I was using it, the process became easier and faster. </p><p></p><p>Here's the rub to get accurate final powder weights that I came up with that works for me. Once I trickled in powder to be around couple tenths below the desired weight, I would remove the pan to allow the scale to cycle back to the minus tare weight of the pan which is instantaneous and return pan to scale. This assures you have the correct final weight on the scale so you can trickle in the remaining tenths for final weight. After each trickle, remove pan as above and return to scale which will immediately record the slightest powder change. If you don't remove scale, it takes forever to see a change and in fact you will likely blow by your final desired weight. Once you get knack for the added slight trickle powder change, the process speeds up immensely. You actually develop a sense for how much you need to add to get to final weight so the time gets shorter each time you use the scale. </p><p></p><p>For those who really want a laugh, I wanted to really get the most accurate weight possible so I weighed the charge to 0.1 below the desired weight and then started to drop one extruded granule at a time into the pan with a tweezer, raising the pan and resetting after each added granule. I could actually see the change from the 0.1 weight below the desired weight change to the weight by one granule added. OK, how many are laughing? I went to range and the results were interesting to say the least. The average velocity was consistent and the ES was generally 10 or less and the SD was 5 or less. This test was done with RL-16 load for .270. Tedious is understatement but it works well for me. I actually started to laugh at this when I was loading my .243 and it was ball powder. Yep, passed on trying it there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Muddyboots, post: 1504886, member: 63925"] I know a lot of discussion has been offered here but throwing in my $.02. I know a lot of folks don’t like the RCBS Rangemaster 2000 but I have been getting good results for over a year with it. I load in my basement like a lot of folks where temp is pretty stable at 60 degrees except during really cold spells in the winter. It is definitely very temperature sensitive. One really cold winter spell, my basement dropped few degrees such that I have a small ceramic heater I use next to my reloading bench. It was immediately apparent the scale doesn't like temperature swings caused by the heater. It would not hold calibration nor consistent zero. I shut the heater off and in a few minutes the scale was dead on again. I always turn it on for 30 minutes prior to calibration. Always have something to work on while it is getting room acclimated. I haven’t seen any fluorescent lighting impact but I also have a 100W LED bulb nearby so not sure what that is doing for light. Calibration holds through 50 rounds without any problem at all. I was checking every 10 rounds with RCBS balance beam and was dead on every single time just to be sure. I also would weigh calibration weights close to the powder weight I was using and they were also dead on every single time. One way to monitor the calibration was to observe the minus tare weight of the pan that shows when you remove the pan. If it returned same minus number, you are essentially still calibrated to the zero of the pan. Like everyone else, I know it is not a balance beam for response and you cannot expect to see the same response BUT you can get faster results if you develop your own methodology to see the trickle powder changes. Some may think tedious but once I started to get accustom to how I was using it, the process became easier and faster. Here's the rub to get accurate final powder weights that I came up with that works for me. Once I trickled in powder to be around couple tenths below the desired weight, I would remove the pan to allow the scale to cycle back to the minus tare weight of the pan which is instantaneous and return pan to scale. This assures you have the correct final weight on the scale so you can trickle in the remaining tenths for final weight. After each trickle, remove pan as above and return to scale which will immediately record the slightest powder change. If you don't remove scale, it takes forever to see a change and in fact you will likely blow by your final desired weight. Once you get knack for the added slight trickle powder change, the process speeds up immensely. You actually develop a sense for how much you need to add to get to final weight so the time gets shorter each time you use the scale. For those who really want a laugh, I wanted to really get the most accurate weight possible so I weighed the charge to 0.1 below the desired weight and then started to drop one extruded granule at a time into the pan with a tweezer, raising the pan and resetting after each added granule. I could actually see the change from the 0.1 weight below the desired weight change to the weight by one granule added. OK, how many are laughing? I went to range and the results were interesting to say the least. The average velocity was consistent and the ES was generally 10 or less and the SD was 5 or less. This test was done with RL-16 load for .270. Tedious is understatement but it works well for me. I actually started to laugh at this when I was loading my .243 and it was ball powder. Yep, passed on trying it there. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Electronic scale tips to ensure accuracy
Top