|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,414
Campfire Regular
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,414 |
I have an old RCBS 10-10 scale which started sticking on me, so I honed the pivot edges, which fixed that issue. It still has a problem in that trickling powder into it to come up to charge doesn't work well. I have to bring the pointer almost up to zero and then bump the pointer to get an accurate reading, and I keep on doing that until I get a perfect zero. Slow, but it works.
Because of these problems I bought a Lee Safety Scale, which I've heard is very accurate, and some check weights.
I zeroed both scales, set check weights that were as close as possible to the load I want in the pan, and both scales were off maybe .15 grain, so they agreed with each other, but not with the check weights.
I could, at this point, leave well enough alone, and just use the 10-10 scale and not worry about it being a little off. (I set aside the Lee scale because it is fiddly, hard to set, and even though it responds well, it takes so long to settle that it isn't really any faster than the RCBS).
What I did was place the check weights in the pan and set their weight on the poise, and then used the leveling screw to get the pointer in the right place. I think that's correct but it got me thinking. If I were to take the weights out of the pan and set the poise to zero, the pointer would be off. So I'm wondering if leveling the scale and zeroing is even important when you use check weights, for that one weight.
Also, you can also adjust the pointer by changing the poise setting, although it could be confusing to have a different poise setting than the actual charge weight. But it seems to me you could actually do any combination of using the leveling screw and changing the poise position to set the pointer -- it doesn't matter --whatever you do, your charge will be accurate. But since it wouldn't be accurate with an empty pan, it obviously wouldn't be accurate at any other weight than the check weights. Is all of that correct?
Or, I could do what I've read described as a calibration where I would add or subtract weights from the pan support. But I have no idea whether that is actually making other weight points accurate, or if it is just used to allow you to establish the initial zero but doesn't change any other weight readings.
Any thoughts or suggestions?
Last edited by postoak; 06/10/23.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,276
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,276 |
I have an old RCBS 10-10 scale which started sticking on me, so I honed the pivot edges, which fixed that issue. It still has a problem in that trickling powder into it to come up to charge doesn't work well. I have to bring the pointer almost up to zero and then bump the pointer to get an accurate reading, and I keep on doing that until I get a perfect zero. Slow, but it works.
Because of these problems I bought a Lee Safety Scale, which I've heard is very accurate, and some check weights.
I zeroed both scales, set check weights that were as close to the load I want in the pan, and both scales were off maybe .15 grain, so they agreed with each other, but not with the check weights.
I could, at this point, leave well enough alone, and just use the 10-10 scale and not worry about it being a little off. (I set aside the Lee scale because it is fiddly, hard to set, and even though it responds well, it takes so long to settle that it isn't really any faster than the RCBS).
What I did was place the check weights in the pan and set their weight on the poise, and then used the leveling screw to get the pointer in the right place. I think that's correct but it got me thinking. If I were to take the weights out of the pan and set the poise to zero, the pointer would be off. So I'm wondering if leveling the scale and zeroing is even important when you use check weights, for that one weight.
Also, you can also adjust the pointer by changing the poise setting, although it could be confusing to have a different poise setting than the actual charge weight. But it seems to me you could actually do any combination of using the leveling screw and changing the poise position to set the pointer -- it doesn't matter --whatever you do, your charge will be accurate. But since it wouldn't be accurate with an empty pan, it obviously wouldn't be accurate at any other weight than the check weights. Is all of that correct? I can't figure out, however, if the scale is then accurate for all weights if I do that.
Or, I could do what I've read described as a calibration where I would add or subtract weights from the pan support. But I have no idea whether that is actually making other weight points accurate, or it is just used to allow you to establish the initial zero.
Any thoughts or suggestions? Mine did/does the same, I recently discovered that the 'stickyness' and 'trickling' works much better if my Lyman Cleaner vibrator is running in the cabinet that I reload on.... The response to trickling powder is much smoother and it reduces the beam 'swings'........... YMMV
"...A man's rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box..." Frederick Douglass, 1867
( . Y . )
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 15,666
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 15,666 |
When I last used a scale which was magnet dampened, when I thought I was very close, I would bottom the pan out with my dipper, then release the pan and watch the pointer. After watching the scale pointer a while you could tell that it would settle to the zero by where the tip of the scale went when it swung back up.
IOW, bottom out the scale’s pan and then release it. The pointer will go from its highest point, it’ll swing down and when it goes back up, watch where it peaks. Mine would peak out at about 1 1/2 graduations above “zero”. After seeing where it topped out I could tell the charge was correct without waiting for pointer to completely stop.
I found that to be a pretty good and repeatable technique.
NRA Life,Endowment,Patron or Benefactor since '72.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,207
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,207 |
I have an old RCBS 10-10 scale which started sticking on me, so I honed the pivot edges, which fixed that issue. It still has a problem in that trickling powder into it to come up to charge doesn't work well. I have to bring the pointer almost up to zero and then bump the pointer to get an accurate reading, and I keep on doing that until I get a perfect zero. Slow, but it works.
Because of these problems I bought a Lee Safety Scale, which I've heard is very accurate, and some check weights.
I zeroed both scales, set check weights that were as close to the load I want in the pan, and both scales were off maybe .15 grain, so they agreed with each other, but not with the check weights.
I could, at this point, leave well enough alone, and just use the 10-10 scale and not worry about it being a little off. (I set aside the Lee scale because it is fiddly, hard to set, and even though it responds well, it takes so long to settle that it isn't really any faster than the RCBS).
What I did was place the check weights in the pan and set their weight on the poise, and then used the leveling screw to get the pointer in the right place. I think that's correct but it got me thinking. If I were to take the weights out of the pan and set the poise to zero, the pointer would be off. So I'm wondering if leveling the scale and zeroing is even important when you use check weights, for that one weight.
Also, you can also adjust the pointer by changing the poise setting, although it could be confusing to have a different poise setting than the actual charge weight. But it seems to me you could actually do any combination of using the leveling screw and changing the poise position to set the pointer -- it doesn't matter --whatever you do, your charge will be accurate. But since it wouldn't be accurate with an empty pan, it obviously wouldn't be accurate at any other weight than the check weights. Is all of that correct? I can't figure out, however, if the scale is then accurate for all weights if I do that.
Or, I could do what I've read described as a calibration where I would add or subtract weights from the pan support. But I have no idea whether that is actually making other weight points accurate, or it is just used to allow you to establish the initial zero.
Any thoughts or suggestions? Mine did/does the same, I recently discovered that the 'stickyness' and 'trickling' works much better if my Lyman Cleaner vibrator is running in the cabinet that I reload on.... The response to trickling powder is much smoother and it reduces the beam 'swings'........... YMMV I discovered by accident last year that this helps my M5 settle down more quickly. Don't normally do it though as the noise is kind of irritating to me.
Too close for irons, switching to scope...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,850
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,850 |
Mine 10-10 does the same thing. I have a series of check weights I use. I pick the closest one to the charges I'm dropping and zero to that. I'm more concerned about consistency than precision. I'd not sweat a tenth of a grain or two - what you want is consistent weights. If absolute powder charge is that critical you can back calculate. For example, if you want 44.0 and your scale is 0.15 grain off on the heavy side, set it so zero is 43.85.
The other thing is to make sure the arm is centered between the pivots. I've seen where one side is jammed into the side of the pivot retainer and it creates drag on the scale.
Adversity doesn't build character, it reveals it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,414
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,414 |
bwinters - Yes, I, too, am more concerned about consistency, which I think the 10-10 is good at if you do the things the posters above you suggested (and I do) and your scale beam isn't sticking (which I just resolved, except for the trickling part).
I think the check weights just confused me. I'm going to continue on targeting a specific velocity and adjusting my load (according to the scale alone) until I hit that velocity. Of course, my chronograph could be off, too, but that's another rabbit-hole!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,336
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,336 |
Most scales are designed to be accurate to within 1/10 of a grain….both electronic and balance beam scales alike.
I was taught when using balance beam scales pay attention to how far the needle swings past zero on both the up and down stroke. When those two strokes are even you’re done….I’ve never waited for the needle to stop on exactly zero, that would drive me to drink!😁
Also, I’ve never found a trickle that worked better than just pinching a few grains of powder between your finger tips and carefully dropping it into the pan….much faster and less hassle.
YMMV.
Leftybolt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,998
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,998 |
While I understand loonyism and don't mean to be snarky or anything but during load development I generally shoot a ladder, the point of which is to find a velocity node where your barrel is consistently at the same point when the bullet exits. This should be at a velocity (powder charge) range that IME is large enough that a tenth of a grain in powder one way or the other is not going to make much difference. Like weighing brass, it doesn't seem like the ROI makes sense unless the application is LR or BR.
I am continually astounded at how quickly people make up their minds on little evidence or none at all.
Jack O'Connor
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 9,113
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 9,113 |
I've had a couple Ohaus and RCBS get sticky on me...20X magnifying lens suggests it's those hokeyass agate vee bearings. Shopped on Ebay and found an old Texan with what I assume to be ungodly hard steel (carbaloy?) on steel. End of inconsistency, gently blow on the pan...it returns to level every time without fail.
Well this is a fine pickle we're in, should'a listened to Joe McCarthy and George Orwell I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,414
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,414 |
Can someone with a 10-10 check something for me? My bench is level according to two different bubble levels but when I place the 10-10 on the bench and zero it, the base of the scale (in front of the beam) is no where level. So much so that the bubble is completely off to one side. I don't remember it being like that in the past. If I level the scale, then the zero is way off.
Okay, what I did was place the scale on my (almost) level bench, then place a bubble level on the platform in front of the beam and adjust the leveling screw until the bubble said it was level. At that point, the platform appeared about parallel with the bench. Then, I set the poises at zero. My pointer was off. Next, I adjusted the fine poise until my pointer matched zero. To get it there, I had to set the fine poise at 0.6 grains.
Last edited by postoak; 06/14/23.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 9,113
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 9,113 |
^^^I don't get what you are saying here at all^^^
It seems to me that level of your table and scale platform is immaterial. They incorporated the leveling screw, TO SET ZERO of the balance beam...it's all that matters. Maybe I am missing something.
Well this is a fine pickle we're in, should'a listened to Joe McCarthy and George Orwell I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 8,649
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 8,649 |
^^^I don't get what you are saying here at all^^^
It seems to me that level of your table and scale platform is immaterial. They incorporated the leveling screw, TO SET ZERO of the balance beam...it's all that matters. Maybe I am missing something. Lol, yup lost me too. I zero the beam couldn’t care less if the base is level.
Swifty
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,414
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,414 |
I'm going to quit confusing myself and just use the scale, even though it doesn't measure the check weights quite accurately.
Last edited by postoak; 06/15/23.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 8,649
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 8,649 |
Here’s what I do, pan on, fine, medium and coarse set at zero. Scale pointer off, adjust leveling screw until the pointer is at zero. Done. Never have bubble leveled the front end, but have run the check weights from a gifted RCBS scale and found I was good to go.
Swifty
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 32,083
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 32,083 |
Here’s what I do, pan on, fine, medium and coarse set at zero. Scale pointer off, adjust leveling screw until the pointer is at zero. Done. Never have bubble leveled the front end, but have run the check weights from a gifted RCBS scale and found I was good to go. Ditto, and what Blacktailer said. I posted this elsewhere recently, but here it is again. Just started back into reloading again after 15 years or more. Could not find the pan for the 5-0-5, and ordered a new one via an "inexpensive" Chinese electronic scale. I really just needed - or wanted, actually the pan, but for a few bucks more... Yeah, I cleaned and oiled the pivot points on the beamer and added enough lead shot to the pan base to get it to zero out well with the new pan. Got to working and discovered the two were consistently .5 grains off from each other. Got out an old Webster beam scale I inherited from somewhere and it matched the Ohaus perfectly- harder to work with tho, no dampening except manually. (Pan was a different shape and didn't work well with the 5-0-5 hence ordering the new pan. Then I changed the pan hangers around 180 degrees, and everything matches. I can now use any of the three with confidence. As stated by others - and have cross checks- I don't need a perfectly perfect powder charge - just consistent. I don't care if it's off from "true"- as long as it worksand is repeatable. And remember to record it.  ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/mWDd6hj.jpg)
Last edited by las; 06/16/23.
The only true cost of having a dog is its death.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2023
Posts: 73
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Apr 2023
Posts: 73 |
Have some experience in this area . 25 + years in the business. Here is my 2cents worth.
Being a low volume reloader I will always choose a beam scale over electronic. Much less interference from static electricity.
To test this lower your empty weighing container to within 1/2 inch of scale pan the scale pan should not stray from zero.
Now put a powder charge in the container and repeat the test . if you see a drift from zero that is static. air currents can
also interfere.
I might remove a beam on a mechanical scale and clean the knife edges and bearings but not hone anything. They are very precisely
positioned and honing could easily upset the geometry.
As others mentioned make sure the beam is centered to prevent it from rubbing the dampening magnets then zero the poises ( hanging weights )
and adjust the zero point on beam with the knob until marks align. ADJUSTING ZERO SHOULD NOT TAKE PLACE AFTER APPLYING TEST WEIGHTS
Set your zero then test with weights. Readjusting zero later , without test weights will normally not affect calibration.
Test weights come in different classes and with different accuracy tolerances. If you bought inexpensive test weights they could be less
accurate than your balance/ scale.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,049
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,049 |
I'm going to quit confusing myself and just use the scale, even though it doesn't measure the check weights quite accurately. Does it zero out properly??? If not, pull or put in some shot weights to make sure it's level and zeroed. I'll bet you check weights will weigh out better too.
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,049
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,049 |
Have some experience in this area . 25 + years in the business. Here is my 2cents worth.
Being a low volume reloader I will always choose a beam scale over electronic. Much less interference from static electricity.
To test this lower your empty weighing container to within 1/2 inch of scale pan the scale pan should not stray from zero.
Now put a powder charge in the container and repeat the test . if you see a drift from zero that is static. air currents can
also interfere.
I might remove a beam on a mechanical scale and clean the knife edges and bearings but not hone anything. They are very precisely
positioned and honing could easily upset the geometry.
As others mentioned make sure the beam is centered to prevent it from rubbing the dampening magnets then zero the poises ( hanging weights )
and adjust the zero point on beam with the knob until marks align. ADJUSTING ZERO SHOULD NOT TAKE PLACE AFTER APPLYING TEST WEIGHTS
Set your zero then test with weights. Readjusting zero later , without test weights will normally not affect calibration.
Test weights come in different classes and with different accuracy tolerances. If you bought inexpensive test weights they could be less
accurate than your balance/ scale. Good informative post.
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
636 members (10Glocks, 1badf350, 160user, 007FJ, 10gaugemag, 1936M71, 62 invisible),
2,372
guests, and
1,256
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,828
Posts18,477,926
Members73,948
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
