tuned scale?

[porthos]

in the forsale secton; there is a ohas 1010 scale for sale. the seller claims that it is "tuned" by -------. what does tuned mean??????? my 1010 seems to be fine without having been tuned.

[Winger Ed.]

Just a guess, but I'd think that would be it was checked out, possibly calibrated, and certified as to it's accuracy.

[salpal48]

Tuned In the scales Circle Is calibrate or re-claibrate. To calibrate by a professional lab would need a seal

[porthos]

seems that for a reloading scale it would be a waste

[abunaitoo]

I once tuned a scale that had a lost pan.
RCBS 505
Flat surface. Zero pitch, tilt.
Used a mill table.
I adjusted the body of the scale, to get the flat of the graduation scale, 90' to the surface.
My thinking is that would be the "Zero" adjustment.
Put the pan and hanger on. It was off Zero.
I then adjusted the weights on the pan to Zero on the scale.
Put the weights into the holder compartment.
Have no idea if I did it correct, but the scale worked fine.

[Ickisrulz]

Read all about it here:

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

[jmorris]

Basically just making sure everything is as good as it can be.

Mine with a photoelectric switch will detect a single kernel of powder.

[jmorris]

That said, so will my 505, at the end of this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmxBSOOL7Ks&t=54s

[1066]

You can "Blue print" a scale, much as you would a rifle action or a V8 engine. So with a standard "tune" you may need to do some fettling to get the scale performing to it's optimum. The general yardstick for a reloading beam scale, stated by most manufactures is +/- .1 grain and pretty well any beam scale "out of the box" should do that with out too much trouble. However, there are two conflicting trends over the last several years, first, the quality of beam scales has dropped considerably due to cost cutting. For the last 8-10 years all RCBS (also Dillon) beam scales have been made in China or Mexico with very variable quality. 2. We, as shooters, especially long range target shooters are demanding more and more accuracy.

Your long range accuracy nut will quite happily spend $1000+ and an AMP induction annealing machine, a 21st Century concentricity gauge for $400 and an arbour press with a seating force gauge. He will now also be spending well over $1000 on his powder weighing system. The preferred accurate system is now a AD120 digital scale coupled with a digital auto-trickler and an auto-measure for around another $1000. (I see over 5000 of these units have been sold.) You may well argue that measuring powder to the nearest kernel is pointless, but with a "V" bull of only 5" at 1,000 yards there's not a lot of room for error.

So - If you have a newer beam scale it may only just make the +/- .1 grade, that's about 9 kernels of Varget and still be considered in spec. or if you have a better quality older scale it may have seen a good bit of use and be well overdue for a service and calibration.

A good beam scale, although a very simple machine, can be very accurate and certainly capable of showing a single kernel of powder, especially if a camera system is used.

This is a nice old Redding performing well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xz2SWCjj5e4

and another Redding that needed a complete makeover.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np2XyJlN3Js&t=7s

and here's Dillon that's had a bit of work:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moCxMHM3BsM

[jmorris]

You don't need to spend well over $1000 to get +/- a kernel repeatability. This isn’t even a “tuned” scale.

[Life Member]

I feel like a reload hacker after reading this.

[1066]

You don't need to spend well over $1000 to get +/- a kernel repeatability. This isn’t even a “tuned” scale.

Interesting to see you're using a proximity sensor there rather than an optical switch - I've used both in the past, as I know you have. Have you any preference?

[jmorris]

Yes, I prefer the optical, this is the one I use now.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-OMRON-E...-/312598334737

The ones in #7&8 above.

Wired like this.

[44magLeo]

I have an older Lyman 1000 scale and a Lee Safety Scale. I was trying to determine which scale was more sensitive. Using H4831, granules large enough to pick up one at a time with tweezers, Both show a beam deflection easily seen by adding a granule of powder.
I have not tried this with other powders. This test showed me that both are sensitive enough for my uses.
I the instructions with the Lee scale they have a square of about 5/16 inch. They claim if you cut this out the Safety scale is sensitive enough to indicate this much weight. I didn't cut up my instruction sheet but did cut out a 5/16 square out of 50 lb printer paper. Both the Lee and Lyman showed a beam deflection.
This lead me to try the single granules of powder.
The Lyman scale has lines to indicate just how much deflection changes in the powder charge make. The Lee doesn't have this feature. It wouldn't be hard to add this feature to the scale. This would make it's use easier and quicker.
These scales may not be good enough to shoot at extreme ranges. But for most handloaders they will give great service.
I do like the camera to better see the beam pointer. The electronic or optical sensors is a cool idea. Camera's I have, the sensors I might buy and try out.
Leo

[1066]

The Lee scale, although bargain basement, has some very good design features and really very sensitive. I think it's been a mistake for Lee not to upgrade it over the 30-40 years it's been about. Over the years there have been a dozen different measures in one form or another but the scale has stayed the same throughout.

I would like to see a Mk. 2 introduced at a higher price point, physically about half as big again, retain the enclosed razor knife edge, the 0-100 gn range, the single point pan hanger and the approach to weight strip.

Improve damping and scrap the Vernier adjustment set-up and you would have a really good scale.

Here's a couple of Lee's:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEz4PluZy-4