Which Powder Dispenser/Scale combo to get?

[OldmanFCSA]

[quote="Rodentman"
................................... the powder falls through the drop tube.

Takes a bit of time for 34g of H110 to drain our for the .50 case....
[/quote]

Unscrew the bushing on the end or get one of a larger bore for dropping the powder charge.
Rapping the handle a second time is to try to prevent the powder from "bridging" across the small discharge bushing, ensuring a proper powder dump.

[Bulldawg]

Bulldog - What have you learned about this topic ???????

Well, I am less enthused about the purchase of a dispenser/scale combo. I have taken a look at the Gempro 250 and am seriously considering that now.

[promod1385]

Dont let our resident reloading troll mess with your head too much. You asked about a powder dispenser/scale combo and he twisted this thread in to yet another discussion on how all digital reloading scales are junk and how you should buy a jewelers scale. Sam talks all the time about being a research type for 3M but I am really starting to wonder if he isn't working for a scale company.

If you are looking to streamline the reloading process and want a powder dispenser then get one! Companies like Hornady, RCBS, etc... are not going to put out a product that is a complete POS. Get whichever one tickles your fancy the most. Buy from a major name and plan on there customer service to keep you happy should you have a problem. I have no experience with Hornady but RCBS has been very good to deal with IMHO.

[JJ]

I recently sold my older RCBS thrower. Not because it didn't work, but because of my particular circumsatnces, I have a couple guns that have little to no data out there. So most of my load development on these cartridges is only given via a starting point and go up until pressure signs warrant me stopping. The scale combo gave me a consistent +/- .2g variance. With some powders it was a bit better (+/- .01g).

I picked up a Mettler lab scale that measures in .001gram resolution. Before I sold the dispenser, i checked the combo against the Mettler, and got a pretty consistent .2g variance, and by checking against the Mettler it was very apparent where the scale "cliipping" came into effect.

End result? My groups have not gotten any smaller by having a resolution so small. But my anal retentive mind tells me when I blow a primer out of the case, that it's my pushing of the limits, and not the dispenser throwing too heavy of a charge.

I really did like that RCBS unit (now sold as a PACT) and I would not hesitate using it if I wasn't loading where no data is present. I just could not justify having it sitting there taking up space, and not getting used.

[Snowgun]

Bulldog - What have you learned about this topic ???????

Well, I am less enthused about the purchase of a dispenser/scale combo. I have taken a look at the Gempro 250 and am seriously considering that now.

I'm new at this, (but not at sciency stuff in general) and I'm loading on a progressive, but I bought the gempro 250 because I was irritated that my previous scale had a resolution of only about 0.1 grain.

How the hell do you dial in a handgun load when your charge could be 3.25 to 3.349 and your scale essentually reads the same thing? My load ups are essentually 3.0 to 3.3g, so a 0.1 g is a big deal. Even though my powder thrower will probably be quite variable, if I'm not even sure of the average I want to hit I might as well manually eyeball charges.

Even though the Gempro was twice what the other scale I was using cost, it is essentually 5 times the scale. I would venture that for the one critical component in reloading (powder charge), it would be nice to have equipment that can measure it.

I am trying to make repeatable handgun cartridges at an exact and consistent powerfactor. Whatever you are doing might necessitate different equipment, so YMMV.

[Seismic Sam]

Than you, snowgun. If you didn't look at the tables I posted earlier in the thread, you should. The math is simple: .01 gram equals .1543 grains, so as you go up in .01 gram increments the listed grain weight will leapfrong around between 0.1 grain increments and 0.2 grain increments provided everything else is perfect. (Which it generally isn't!) Now, one of the previous posters makes a good point. If you're loading up a couple of hundred rounds of rifle ammo that are ALL the same powder weight, the inherent numerical error should remain the same, so you MIGHT come out with some pretty consistent ammo. The problem, however, is when you are trying to work up a perfect load like Snowgun over a narrow powder range, you are pretty much screwed from the get-go, because those numerical errors and other glitches in the scale are going to guarantee that your load strings are NOT 0.1 grains apart!! So your chrono data is going to look like crap, and good luck interpolating the curve with those random variances thrown in. And just how do you get to a perfect load in the first place? well, you load up different grain weights in a string and see what the most consistent load is! Only problem is, with this unit mismatch, your data is screwed to begin with.

And JJ's comments are also relevant: He's totally off the map developing some new load with NO extant data, and he's smart enough to realize that if you're manufacturing devices that can generate 55,000 PSI or more, starting out with a measurement system that has been proven inherently faulty is REALLY, REALLY bad science. It's not like adding too much or too little sugar to the Kool-Aid. Most of the time, nothing bad will happen. But, with INHERENTLY faulty manufacturing processes, there will be cases where something bad will happen, and then you are going to have injuries per million users or in worst cases, injuries per thousand users. THAT's data you can't run away from - you can poo-poo it, but you have entered a lottery with faulty measuring techniques where a small number of you will wind up with 00 on the wheel of chance and pay the price.