reloading by grams?


PDA






Eric F
September 1, 2007, 06:43 PM
I have this great electronic scale that has grains grams and ounces. the grains only go to the tenth but the grams go to the thousandth. I am thinking that measuring in grams might be more accurate. anybody have some thoughts on this?

If you enjoyed reading about "reloading by grams?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
koja48
September 1, 2007, 06:55 PM
Charges would definitely be accurate to the umpteenth degree, but I've never seen where +/- 0.10 grain of powder made a significant difference in POI with anything for which I handload (and I'm reloading die-poor).

steveno
September 1, 2007, 06:56 PM
grams is metric.

Vern Humphrey
September 1, 2007, 07:08 PM
The scale doesn't know what units you're using -- it sends out a signal, and the computer chip converts that to grams, ounces, or grains. You can't increase accuracy by changing the units of measure.

Eric F
September 1, 2007, 07:22 PM
Well I had this whole arguement lined up then I did the math again and grams would only be marginaly better measured to the 1000th. .1 grains is .006 grams thanks for the thoughts folks.

Vern Humphrey
September 1, 2007, 07:24 PM
A wise man once said to me, you can't solve every problem with math, but it sure clears out the underbrush.:D

scrat
September 1, 2007, 08:28 PM
Save this link it will help you in converting grams to grains or anything else.

http://www.easysurf.cc/cnver8.htm#gtop2

the above link

Thirties
September 2, 2007, 10:14 AM
Since you asked . . . for reloading ammo, I recommend you put aside your metric digital scale and buy a balance beam scale calibrated in grains. It will make your life much easier. Reloading metallic cartridges is not rocket science, but is something you should not try to do with the wrong tools.

Digital scales are not necessarily better than balance beams. In either case you should get a set of check weights . . .

http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/item.asp?sku=0004498992


Here's a good scale (what I use) . . .

http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/item.asp?sku=0007602000
http://www.redding-reloading.com/pages/model2scale.html

and another . . .

http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/item.asp?sku=000449071

more . . .
http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/department.asp?dept=%52%45%4C%4F%41%44%49%4E%47&dept2=%50%4F%57%44%45%52%20%53%43%41%4C%45%53

. . . and before everyone dumps on my for recommending MidSouth vs another retailer, I just had the link at my fingertips -- of course, you should shop for your stuff wherever you want. Use my links for illustration and comparison only.

Mal H
September 2, 2007, 12:09 PM
What Vern said.

If I may use an even grosser analogy than comparing grains and grams. Which is more accurate - measuring in tenths of a grain or in 10 millionths of a ton?

The quality of the load cell in your scale is the deciding factor on how much accuracy you can expect from it, not the units that you are measuring.

Walkalong
September 2, 2007, 12:13 PM
and before everyone dumps on my for recommending MidSouth vs another retailer

I won't. I have had good luck with them when using them. As always, shop around. :)

snuffy
September 2, 2007, 01:07 PM
Since you asked . . . for reloading ammo, I recommend you put aside your metric digital scale and buy a balance beam scale calibrated in grains. It will make your life much easier. Reloading metallic cartridges is not rocket science, but is something you should not try to do with the wrong tools.

Sezz you! And he didn't ask. You obviously don't like digital scales, but don't say not to use them. They work quite well, they're much faster to use, especially when weighing something of unknown weight. Like bullets, brass, and shot charges.

The check weights are a good idea, I would go as far as saying indispensable. I don't mean the calibration weights that come with the scale. Here's the ones I use with my RCBS digital.
http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=212586&t=11082005
About half the cost of the one thirties linked to.

My powder pro is linked to a pact dispenser to dispense each charge to the tenth of a grain. No rifle or handgun will ever know the difference of a powder charge off by more than a tenth of a grain. And has been doing so for over 11 years!

oldgold
September 3, 2007, 11:08 PM
One pound is equal to 453.5924 grams
One pound is equal to 7000 grains
One grain is equal to 0.0648 grams

Using a Gram scale means difficult conversions to grains. A simple error in math might get you a kaboom. Keep it simple, go with a proper scale.

KI.W.
September 4, 2007, 06:55 AM
I count always 1 gram = 15,432 grains.



[Edit for North America ;) ]
I count always 1 gram = 15.432 grains.

Europeans use the comma as a decimal point instead of a period.

[Mal H]

BigMikeUSMC
September 4, 2007, 09:06 AM
The last time I checked, there were ~7,000 grains in a pound, so either you are using some special REALLY BIG grams or your math needs some work!

The correct conversion is:
1 grains = 0.06479891 grams

Mike

caz223
September 4, 2007, 03:44 PM
Time has taught me to use balance beam scales, and to weigh in grains. Minimize the possibility for errors. The exception is if your load data is ALREADY in grams. Screw the metric system.

KI.W.
September 6, 2007, 06:21 AM
When You are reading, this " ." takes two time so much time than " , " . So we in Europe use " , " .:D

Bad Flynch
September 6, 2007, 04:20 PM
Take this from a pharmacist who has dealt with this all of his working life:

Yes, 1 Lb (Avoir.) = 7000 grains

Yes 1 Gram = 15.432 grains

Yes 1 grain = 64.8 mg (rounded)

The grain is the same for Avoirdupois, Apothecaries', and Troy systems.

An excessive number of decimal places is an exercise in pedantry because the reloading scales (or unequal-arm balances) are only accurate and repeatable to three significant figures, usually. Careless operators may not realize that from them.

Eagle103
September 6, 2007, 04:33 PM
I think using a scale that measures in grams would be a bad idea. You probably wouldn't save much time over a balance beam scale that measures in grains after you go through converting your measurements. It would also create another variable that could lead to a serious error which could lead to a blown up gun and possible hospital visit.

CMcDermott
September 7, 2007, 02:25 PM
European reloading is done by grams, bullet weights, powder weights, all that we do in the US with grains they use grams. If you are using European reloading data, then use grams. If you are using US reloading data, use grains. You are much more likely to make a mistake trying to convert your reloading data from one system to another than get any extra accuracy from using either weight system.

Navy_Guns
September 7, 2007, 04:17 PM
Too bad Grams' hands were shaking so bad (she's 92 and has a touch o'the palsy...) she got more powder on the floor than in the cases and then started talking to my MEC Jr. press like it was Albert, her deceased husband. Senile old poop! :cuss:

bender
September 7, 2007, 04:48 PM
http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpag...586&t=11082005

I need a check weight set. What's with the oddball shapes of these pieces? why can't the smaller pieces be shaped like the 10 & 20 grain pieces?

I know Europeans use commas for decimal points, but... do they write "fifteen thousand four hundred and thirty-two" like this: 15,432 ? And do they write "fifteen point four three two" like this: 15,432 ?

very weird... they look they same... and yet... one number is a thousand times bigger than the other... :uhoh: :confused:

Mal H
September 7, 2007, 05:12 PM
I know Europeans use commas for decimal points, but... do they write "fifteen thousand four hundred and thirty-two" like this: 15,432 ?No, in continental Europe the thousands separator would usually be represented by a space or a period (the UK writes numbers pretty much like we do here and in Canada). So it would be "15 432" or "15.432". There are variations on this in a few select countries, but all of them would understand what number is represented if you stick to those examples.


Navy Guns - now that's funny! I can see it now: at the next gun show, a booth with a big sign saying "Reloading by Grams - They were good enough for Gramps, they're good enough for you!" :)

kungfuhippie
September 7, 2007, 05:53 PM
Something to think about. Balance scales wear out, the pivot point(s) can wear and bind and cause in accuracy. We used balance scales in one of my labs that were up to 1/2 a gram off due to their age and maintenance (or lack of)
So get the proof weight set and check you scale from time to time. Some scales are as cheap as $25.00 If my scale grows in accurate, if I even doubt it slightly, I'll get a new one. $25 every few years is better than one kaboom. Though I haven't had a scale get out of calibration except for the high mileage ones at school.

KI.W.
September 7, 2007, 07:01 PM
Because I am old person: fiftiin entire fourhundretthirtytwo thusendparts. It says nowdays: 15 432 fifteenthousend.fourhundertthirtytwo.( no "and" ) 15,432 fifteen comma fourhunrethirtytwo or fifteen comma fourhundretthirtytwo. It is never mind grams or grains because I know 1g = 15,432gr

CZ57
September 8, 2007, 12:34 AM
And, if we had accepted the metric sytem as we were supposed to, fractions would be extinct since everything in the metric system is a multiple of 10! Not to mention our increased strength in foreign markets. The only volumetric density figures for gunpowder I ever see are listed as grams/cc or grams/liter and personally, I like knowing. SI units are used in science and medicine, and sometimes by American handloaders! If the scale fits, use it!;)

woodfiler
September 8, 2007, 08:48 AM
I strongly agree with using the check weights. I have a set. Its well worth the
money.==== less headaches.

wood

If you enjoyed reading about "reloading by grams?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!