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
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Load Development Ruger Precision Rifle .243
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="buckfvr" data-source="post: 1319992" data-attributes="member: 43353"><p>So.....Like Joe says, I bought a used RCBS 10-10. I dont know if it was made in Mexico or not because it had no box, but it did say all the OHaus stuff alll over it. It is in very good condition and I spent a few hours making sure knive edges were clean and sharp and agates were clean and relatively alighned. I played with the ballast in the sub pan and got it to repeatably read zero while perfectly level. I tested it against known weights and verified it against the GemPro.</p><p></p><p>So, in a never ending quest to achieve greater results, my research led me to a great deal about the accuracy of the older beam scales being notably better than the digital scales. Both instruments in the same price range seem to boast .10 grain accuracy. However.......there is a lot of meaningful research done to indicate the balance beam scales are more precise than the digitals and its pretty convincing. Me being me, I had to make an effort to convince myself I was doing it as well as I could with what I had, or needed to change to an old balance beam. Next came paragraph one...........</p><p></p><p>So I decided on a simple quick test that would give me a clue to base any further actions on. 5 rounds with the beam scale and 5 rounds with the GemPro 250. All shot under the same load development protocal as we always use, and from the relatively controlled environ of my shop. Basically rifle and ammo out of direct sunlight and at the same temperature with the same amount of timed intervals for relative cool down. Not overly scientific at all but some sense of uniformity. A magneto Sport was used to conduct the test.</p><p></p><p>So I was convinced I was doing a great job with the beam scale, as it approached desired charge weight the sensitivity was good enough to show movement for each of the last few kernels of powder. That led me to think I was on to something......Well as I usually do if necessary, I use the tweazers to add or subtract a kernel or two to get the lines to match up to what appears to be perfect to me. Same as adding one more kernel to the pan with the digital. I did what I could to be as exacting as possible with both scales.</p><p></p><p>So for results, the beam scale netted me an ES of 29, not so good, but if you took away the cold shot it was 15. Now the GemPro, for the 5 shots, gave me an ES of 17, much better, and if you take away the hot shot, it was 8. Not iron clad convincing, but for me, the results will keep me on course with the digital, maybe some day stepping up to a serious scale.</p><p></p><p>I will add that my opinion is certainly a guy can do better with the beam than I did because I honestly believe there is a small amount of learned skill in using them. Constant and continued use will have the user seeing them more precisely and allow for him to be more in tune with any nuances of a particular scale. I will opt to read the screen on a digital for the forseeable. Now I will point out there is much difference in the low end digitals and the 150$ digitals. 50 dollar digitals wont make the team. So thats about it on another small scale simple test that may or may not make a person do something differently.....for the time being I wont. R</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="buckfvr, post: 1319992, member: 43353"] So.....Like Joe says, I bought a used RCBS 10-10. I dont know if it was made in Mexico or not because it had no box, but it did say all the OHaus stuff alll over it. It is in very good condition and I spent a few hours making sure knive edges were clean and sharp and agates were clean and relatively alighned. I played with the ballast in the sub pan and got it to repeatably read zero while perfectly level. I tested it against known weights and verified it against the GemPro. So, in a never ending quest to achieve greater results, my research led me to a great deal about the accuracy of the older beam scales being notably better than the digital scales. Both instruments in the same price range seem to boast .10 grain accuracy. However.......there is a lot of meaningful research done to indicate the balance beam scales are more precise than the digitals and its pretty convincing. Me being me, I had to make an effort to convince myself I was doing it as well as I could with what I had, or needed to change to an old balance beam. Next came paragraph one........... So I decided on a simple quick test that would give me a clue to base any further actions on. 5 rounds with the beam scale and 5 rounds with the GemPro 250. All shot under the same load development protocal as we always use, and from the relatively controlled environ of my shop. Basically rifle and ammo out of direct sunlight and at the same temperature with the same amount of timed intervals for relative cool down. Not overly scientific at all but some sense of uniformity. A magneto Sport was used to conduct the test. So I was convinced I was doing a great job with the beam scale, as it approached desired charge weight the sensitivity was good enough to show movement for each of the last few kernels of powder. That led me to think I was on to something......Well as I usually do if necessary, I use the tweazers to add or subtract a kernel or two to get the lines to match up to what appears to be perfect to me. Same as adding one more kernel to the pan with the digital. I did what I could to be as exacting as possible with both scales. So for results, the beam scale netted me an ES of 29, not so good, but if you took away the cold shot it was 15. Now the GemPro, for the 5 shots, gave me an ES of 17, much better, and if you take away the hot shot, it was 8. Not iron clad convincing, but for me, the results will keep me on course with the digital, maybe some day stepping up to a serious scale. I will add that my opinion is certainly a guy can do better with the beam than I did because I honestly believe there is a small amount of learned skill in using them. Constant and continued use will have the user seeing them more precisely and allow for him to be more in tune with any nuances of a particular scale. I will opt to read the screen on a digital for the forseeable. Now I will point out there is much difference in the low end digitals and the 150$ digitals. 50 dollar digitals wont make the team. So thats about it on another small scale simple test that may or may not make a person do something differently.....for the time being I wont. R [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Load Development Ruger Precision Rifle .243
Top