Beam scale is off

I have both Dillon scale types. They read maybe .1 difference at most. I use the beam scale because it reacts faster then the digital one.

I guess I should have read post 9 better as it gave the clue of what scale you have. That is the best scale Hornady ever made in my opinion. That is the one I've been looking for a long time. The new LNL beam scales don't even come close to being the same.

How long have you had that scale?

I wouldn't send it to Hornady anymore. I don't have his information but he tunes those scales up, Scott Parker I think is his name maybe someone like 1066 knows.
Have you had it since new or buy it used?

I ordered a scale from Scott recently. If you buy new from him he provides a Redding scale. He felt my Lyman was a manufacturing error and not something that he could fix with tuning.

I haven't received the scale yet so I can't say anything about his work.

ETA: Scale showed up in todays mail. He sent me a Lyman D5 scale all cleaned up, in original box with original instructions, and a check weight (a bullet) and a weight it should be at.

I have not compared it to my other beam scale or my electronic scale.

Ahh! I had the wrong end of the stick there. I assumed we were talking about the new Hornady beam scale.

That's the excellent old "M" type - a better scale all round than the current one. There's nothing that cant be fixed on that scale and it would be well worth doing.

Yes, Scott Parker's the man you're looking for, I'm sure a search will find him.

Here's an "M" type I tuned up some time ago.

1066 ,
I knew the scale had to have a way to calibrate it . Thanks for the info. and video .
I can see how the two brass nuts might easily be moved or turned if you were not aware of their function. Learned something new today.
Gary

Scott Parker
[email protected]

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/tag/scott-parker/

The video above, created by British shooter Mark (aka 1967spud), shows a 10-10 beam scale that has been “tuned” by Scott Parker. In the video, you can see that the 10-10 scale is now sensitive to one (1) kernel of powder. Mark also demonstrates the’s scale’s repeatability by lifting and replacing a pan multiple times. You can contact Mark via his website, www.1967spud.com. To enquire about balance-beam scale tuning, call Scott Parker at (661) 364-1199, or send email to: vld223 [at] Yahoo.com.

Click to expand...

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=778104

Now what a minute Grubby this has all been a misunderstanding and ignore everything that has been said. That scale is just no good and you should just send it to me so it doesn't cause you anymore issues.

grubbylabs said:

So a Hornady 200 grain ELDX Bullet weighs 199.9-199.8 on my Charge master and my wife's scale at work. On my beam scale it weighs 200.6-200.8. So to me that's a pretty big swing.

Click to expand...

Assuming the scale at your wife's work is accurate, your scale is off 0.4% at a weight double or triple where it'll actually be used for powder. That doesn't strike me as a unreasonable for an inexpensive scale. Most labs I've worked in have a good quality "beater" set of calibration weights we'd loan out to other groups in the company. These are weights that were certified/traceable at one time but got relegated to loaner duty for some reason. Maybe your wife could bring them home and you could check your scale at a weight closer to where you'll be using the scale.

Buy your own set of weight standards (a.k.a. "check" weights). I have a set of brass standards made by OHAUS (R) which includes eight weights ranging from 1 gram to 50 grams. It also contains several smaller, milligram standards. The conversion factor is one grain troy (powder) = grams x 15.432.

It's silly to have your old lady haul your beam balance to work just to use their "check" weights. There's the possibility of balance damage in-transit. Secondly, it introduces another variable--having unseen people operate your instrument.

I quite agree, a set of check weight is the answer, but why not get a set in grains.
RCBS and Lyman both do check weight sets in grains and not that expensive.

Converting grams to grains is just somewhere else where a mistake can be made.

I agree, it's not idea, it should be a lot closer than that. I would expect a Hornady "M" type to be within around .2 grains even well up the scale.

Just to compare, this is an old scale I worked on just a couple of days ago - this is an old 10/10, over forty years old with a bit of wear on the beam - It still stays within three kernels of Varget powder to above 200 grains.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/35mrha4kd4bf5u0/DSCN6429.MOV?dl=0

I would be uncomfortable with accuracy swing of .6 - .8 gr of any scale. That's more than start/max charges of some pistol loads.

I would be comfortable with .2 gr variance for general purpose/plinking rounds at mid-to-high range load data but would prefer .1 gr variance for more accurate match grade loads or near max/max loads.

Looking at the pic in 1066's post then comparing it to the OP's scale did anyone notice the screw at the front that's used for zeroing and how much different they are between the two scales. I know...a screw is a screw, but 1066's pic shows the base inclined upward pretty much while the OP's scale looks to be level or even down. This angle could be affecting the accuracy.

If you'd raise the pointer end of the scale to match the incline of 1066's (which is very close to what my old 10-10 needs to zero so I think this is something built in to them) then adjust the correction nuts you might get it closer to correct. Give it a try!!

I think the camera angle exaggerates it to some extent, however the beam really needs to be level when it's zeroed - this is where the tare nuts are used.

To get the beam level and on zero the adjusting screw does need to be well screwed in.

I just ran a quick check on the scale I received from Scott Parker. This is a Lyman D5 scale that he tuned.

I have check weights in grains - not expensive lab grade weights - I don't recall their certification level. These weights are weights either from a Lyman check weight kit or purchased individually from old will knott scales.

I tested the scale against my digital scale, and I tested the to a limited degree the large poise against the small poise. i.e. for example the 100 gr weight I weighed using both 95 on the large poise & 5 on the small poise, and 100 gr. on the large poise alone. My Lyman D700 scale is off and won't read correctly doing this.

I tested 100 gr, 50 gr, 20 gr, 10 gr, 5 gr, 2 gr, and 1 gr weights. It seemed to read about .05 gr high across the board - but it was very consistent. The D5 scale has the +/- 0.1 gr marks on the frame so its easy to read how far off of zero you are. Even the large poise and the large poise plus 5 on the small poise were very consistent. My digital only reads to .1, but it always settled to and read the ratings on the weight.

The scale from Scott was fairly expensive, but I like having a beam scale around, especially one I can trust.

My Redding #2 scale I bought from Scott Parker. Later I bought the Chargemaster and 60 grains on the Redding beam scale read 60.2 grains on the Chargemaster. I ran multiple tests and all came back .2 grains off. The problem as I see it, I have a couple loads that are at or near max. I didn't feel comfortable with the scale .2 grain more than what the weight I was trying to obtain.
After doing some weight adjustments to the weight box, now it reads 1/2 of .1 grain lite. If I trickle 4.7 grains into the Redding pan, it still reads 4.7 grains on the Chargemaster scale. Depending on the powder used, this is about 2 kernels difference. I can live with that.
Here is a video of what you can do to change your scale if it is not reading as close as you would like.

https://youtu.be/GHSduhaK2c8

If your scale does not have a weight box, you will need to add or subtract weight from the pan or whatever your pan rests on.