<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Weighing Cases</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/</link>
	<description>Sinclair International Precision Shooting Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:58:22 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Long</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-16450</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Long</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 04:25:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-16450</guid>
		<description>If 1.5% +/- is acceptable, why sort by tenths?  Why not grains?  Also, I bought a batch of Rem 300 win mag brass from a friend.  I discarded 6 out of the 160 brass.  The others were all within 6 grains (237.5 - 243.5) of which I split into two groups.  There was a 1 grain group missing in the center of the lot.  Both groups were within 3 grains (high weight to low weight).  Are there other significant reasons not to use Rem or Win brass than brass weight deviation?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If 1.5% +/- is acceptable, why sort by tenths?  Why not grains?  Also, I bought a batch of Rem 300 win mag brass from a friend.  I discarded 6 out of the 160 brass.  The others were all within 6 grains (237.5 &#8211; 243.5) of which I split into two groups.  There was a 1 grain group missing in the center of the lot.  Both groups were within 3 grains (high weight to low weight).  Are there other significant reasons not to use Rem or Win brass than brass weight deviation?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vince Morgillo</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-1136</link>
		<dc:creator>Vince Morgillo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:14:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-1136</guid>
		<description>When preparing to reloading some 223 rounds my brother and I decided to sort the cases by weight after all case preparation was finished.  
We started off with a Lyman DPS 1200 and when I rechecked some of the readings were up to .4 grains different than what the cases checked a few minutes earlier.  Thinking it was the scale I got my RCBS Rangemaster and sorted them again, similar results !!

We tried it zeroing on a case then sorting by weight difference and by zeroing the scale and separating by actual weight.  We compared between scales and found they often differed by .2 and once in a while .3 grains.My brothers reloading room is draft free with a very solid and level bench. 

After contacting Lyman, RCBS and Ohaus I have gathered the following information:
Most of these scales use strain gauge technology. . Learn more on strain gauges at http://www.sensorland.com/HowPage002.html 

The strain gauge can give you good weighing results for static loads, but can drift much more due to temperature variations which may occur by just by using the scale. Especially those with the feed motor (like the DPS 1200) which will generate heat just from being used. Zero often, and calibrate when suggested by the system. Any voltage fluctuation may confuse the electronics into thinking the load has changed.

These scales are VERY sensitive and will detect any movement which could cause the strain gauge to flex at all under it’s load (including the empty pan). Light drafts can be caused by the movement of your hand while loading the scale and will affect the reading, but should stabilize once the &#039;breeze&#039; subsides. Test it – it’s cool!

Any vibration of the scale will affect the reading if it causes the scale to move at all. Another fun test.

AC Line noise will affect the scales, a line conditioner is an excellent investment.
Fluorescent lights are not a problem unless they are close to the scale, in the 2 to 3&#039; range. 
Cell phones can cause interference with electronics, all recommend that they be turned off if near the scale (10ft).  My scales went crazy whenever my cell was in use (dialing - talking - etc.) and did &#039;wander&#039; more when it was just in my pocket turned on.  We had to move it 10 ft away before it stopped bothering the scales.

Both RCBS and Lyman offered to evaluate the scales for me, I paid shipping, which I will do, and am grateful for since they are not brand new. Both then replied that the scales were out of warranty and they only offered to sell me new scales - I took the offer and got a new DPS 1200.

You&#039;ll see get better performance, linearity and repeatability with an electromagnetic weigh sensor which cost a whole lot more, and takes us back to the “Does it really make a difference?”

I have received a lot of feedback asking “What am I thinking and why worry about it so much?”. Well the answers are simple in my mind. The pursuit of perfection is why I got into the hobby of shooting, smithing and reloading. It’s fun to be able to make one hole. When I screw up and miss blow a group, I like to be able to prove to myself that the variation was the shooter (me) and not the other variables. For me this is fun. 

The other concern I have and wanted to understand is regarding loading pistol rounds where a tenth of a grain is much more of an issue than with my 25-06. My brother and I load 17 Mach IV (17 Fireball) and 460 Rowland cartridges which are by nature fairly hot and sensitive to load variation. A couple of tenths of a grain will make a significant difference. (If you haven’t shot a 460 Rowland in a 1911, you have to try it, Clark makes great barrels and they shoot great. http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/rowland.htm )

I have purchased an Acclab VIC 123 which reads to .01 grains and have found it to be extremely accurate, precise and reliable.  While it reads to 2 decimal points (.01 gr) I can not use that digit, since the scale does have some measurement error as an electronic / mechanical device.  But I can ALWAYS rely on the tenths (.1gr) reading  with confidence.  .1grain is as precise as I need to be for any of my activities and this ability has allowed me to significantly shrink groups.  After trying different RCBS, Ohaus and Lyman DPS scales, which all read to .1grain, NONE of them were reliable for measuring or sorting to closer than 1 grain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When preparing to reloading some 223 rounds my brother and I decided to sort the cases by weight after all case preparation was finished.<br />
We started off with a Lyman DPS 1200 and when I rechecked some of the readings were up to .4 grains different than what the cases checked a few minutes earlier.  Thinking it was the scale I got my RCBS Rangemaster and sorted them again, similar results !!</p>
<p>We tried it zeroing on a case then sorting by weight difference and by zeroing the scale and separating by actual weight.  We compared between scales and found they often differed by .2 and once in a while .3 grains.My brothers reloading room is draft free with a very solid and level bench. </p>
<p>After contacting Lyman, RCBS and Ohaus I have gathered the following information:<br />
Most of these scales use strain gauge technology. . Learn more on strain gauges at <a href="http://www.sensorland.com/HowPage002.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.sensorland.com/HowPage002.html</a> </p>
<p>The strain gauge can give you good weighing results for static loads, but can drift much more due to temperature variations which may occur by just by using the scale. Especially those with the feed motor (like the DPS 1200) which will generate heat just from being used. Zero often, and calibrate when suggested by the system. Any voltage fluctuation may confuse the electronics into thinking the load has changed.</p>
<p>These scales are VERY sensitive and will detect any movement which could cause the strain gauge to flex at all under it’s load (including the empty pan). Light drafts can be caused by the movement of your hand while loading the scale and will affect the reading, but should stabilize once the &#8216;breeze&#8217; subsides. Test it – it’s cool!</p>
<p>Any vibration of the scale will affect the reading if it causes the scale to move at all. Another fun test.</p>
<p>AC Line noise will affect the scales, a line conditioner is an excellent investment.<br />
Fluorescent lights are not a problem unless they are close to the scale, in the 2 to 3&#8242; range.<br />
Cell phones can cause interference with electronics, all recommend that they be turned off if near the scale (10ft).  My scales went crazy whenever my cell was in use (dialing &#8211; talking &#8211; etc.) and did &#8216;wander&#8217; more when it was just in my pocket turned on.  We had to move it 10 ft away before it stopped bothering the scales.</p>
<p>Both RCBS and Lyman offered to evaluate the scales for me, I paid shipping, which I will do, and am grateful for since they are not brand new. Both then replied that the scales were out of warranty and they only offered to sell me new scales &#8211; I took the offer and got a new DPS 1200.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ll see get better performance, linearity and repeatability with an electromagnetic weigh sensor which cost a whole lot more, and takes us back to the “Does it really make a difference?”</p>
<p>I have received a lot of feedback asking “What am I thinking and why worry about it so much?”. Well the answers are simple in my mind. The pursuit of perfection is why I got into the hobby of shooting, smithing and reloading. It’s fun to be able to make one hole. When I screw up and miss blow a group, I like to be able to prove to myself that the variation was the shooter (me) and not the other variables. For me this is fun. </p>
<p>The other concern I have and wanted to understand is regarding loading pistol rounds where a tenth of a grain is much more of an issue than with my 25-06. My brother and I load 17 Mach IV (17 Fireball) and 460 Rowland cartridges which are by nature fairly hot and sensitive to load variation. A couple of tenths of a grain will make a significant difference. (If you haven’t shot a 460 Rowland in a 1911, you have to try it, Clark makes great barrels and they shoot great. <a href="http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/rowland.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/rowland.htm</a> )</p>
<p>I have purchased an Acclab VIC 123 which reads to .01 grains and have found it to be extremely accurate, precise and reliable.  While it reads to 2 decimal points (.01 gr) I can not use that digit, since the scale does have some measurement error as an electronic / mechanical device.  But I can ALWAYS rely on the tenths (.1gr) reading  with confidence.  .1grain is as precise as I need to be for any of my activities and this ability has allowed me to significantly shrink groups.  After trying different RCBS, Ohaus and Lyman DPS scales, which all read to .1grain, NONE of them were reliable for measuring or sorting to closer than 1 grain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Lewis</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-1075</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 06:40:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-1075</guid>
		<description>Great article, I especially liked the punch line at the end about the Hornet, that is exactly what I have been working on. I just sorted about 200 cases of two brands and the tape was a great way to do it. Another shooter told me he uses 1 grain spread for cases and 1/2 grain spread for bullets. The 3% rule you shared is actually the equivalent to the one grain, so it worked perfectly. SO hopefully I am on my way to more accuracy for my Hornet. Thanks again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article, I especially liked the punch line at the end about the Hornet, that is exactly what I have been working on. I just sorted about 200 cases of two brands and the tape was a great way to do it. Another shooter told me he uses 1 grain spread for cases and 1/2 grain spread for bullets. The 3% rule you shared is actually the equivalent to the one grain, so it worked perfectly. SO hopefully I am on my way to more accuracy for my Hornet. Thanks again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Colin Scott</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>Colin Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:16:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-47</guid>
		<description>Good artilce and some great tips for the reloader. Once I have sorted the brass into lots I stamp the bottom of the case using an automatic center punch, the punch mark is placed in different locations, using the case stamp as reference points. ie for lot one the stamp mark is after the &quot;a&quot; Lapua. Works real easy and the punch can be adjusted to give a very light mark on the rim.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good artilce and some great tips for the reloader. Once I have sorted the brass into lots I stamp the bottom of the case using an automatic center punch, the punch mark is placed in different locations, using the case stamp as reference points. ie for lot one the stamp mark is after the &#8220;a&#8221; Lapua. Works real easy and the punch can be adjusted to give a very light mark on the rim.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad Ruthven</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-43</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad Ruthven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:25:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-43</guid>
		<description>Keep up the good work guys. The tech. tip on weighing cases was a solid reminder on an all too often over looked step in the reloading process.

Keep them tips coming!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep up the good work guys. The tech. tip on weighing cases was a solid reminder on an all too often over looked step in the reloading process.</p>
<p>Keep them tips coming!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Kellitt</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Kellitt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 17:34:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-42</guid>
		<description>Hi All
I am a 1K yd benchrest shooter and we all weigh cases as in the article as we have found from testing there is definately an improvement in accuracy when your cases are batched by weight.
In answer to some of the questions above it is thought best by most benchrest shooters to size, trim length, turn necks and uniform primer and flashole pockets usually in this order prior to batching.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi All<br />
I am a 1K yd benchrest shooter and we all weigh cases as in the article as we have found from testing there is definately an improvement in accuracy when your cases are batched by weight.<br />
In answer to some of the questions above it is thought best by most benchrest shooters to size, trim length, turn necks and uniform primer and flashole pockets usually in this order prior to batching.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Schmuck</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Schmuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:50:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-41</guid>
		<description>With any batch of new cases, I trim each case before weighing.  I find this reduces much of the varience in case weights.  Regardless, this article is a good reminder of why weighing before loading can pay dividends later.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With any batch of new cases, I trim each case before weighing.  I find this reduces much of the varience in case weights.  Regardless, this article is a good reminder of why weighing before loading can pay dividends later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny R. Johnson</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny R. Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-38</guid>
		<description>Thank You Very Much.. Great Article..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank You Very Much.. Great Article..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gil Chambers</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-37</link>
		<dc:creator>Gil Chambers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:02:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-37</guid>
		<description>I am already enjoying the news letter, thanks for the information.  I have the same question wouldn&#039;t you turn the necks trim the cases and square the heads first and in what order? also if you were squaring the heads it seems like there would be a lot of weight lost  and would affect your head space and make some of the cases have shorter heads with longer necks, is there an exact protocol for these steps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am already enjoying the news letter, thanks for the information.  I have the same question wouldn&#8217;t you turn the necks trim the cases and square the heads first and in what order? also if you were squaring the heads it seems like there would be a lot of weight lost  and would affect your head space and make some of the cases have shorter heads with longer necks, is there an exact protocol for these steps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Willie van Niekerk</title>
		<link>http://blog.sinclairintl.com/2008/12/24/weighing-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>Willie van Niekerk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 06:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sinclairintl.com/?p=37#comment-36</guid>
		<description>Great tips !! Thank you</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great tips !! Thank you</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

