Balance beam accuracy vs weighing bullets and new brass

Feb 21, 2013
205
53
28
#1
Not sure if this has been addressed specifically in relation to the question so here goes. For distances of 1000 yards and beyond, specifically 1 mile, I would like to know from anyone who can elaborate on using an analytical balance such as the Sartorius Entris64-1s. To load to the kernel of powder is it worth spending the money on this type of scale to achieve the level of performance if I'm only going to use new brass and not weigh individual bullets and cases. I do not have the time or patience to prep fired brass.
 
Last edited:
Oct 18, 2012
396
36
28
46
#2
You better off buying a good E scale to measure to the kernel. I hear that the FX 120 is great scale for the money. An yes it is worth the money for the consistency of your load. I have a more expensive E scale that very very accurate to the kernel. It has cut my vertical in half at long range. Plus it will save you time. I had a beam scale for years it drove me nuts because it was not consistent at all from shot to shot. IF you are going to be in this sport long term then BUY ONCE CRY ONCE. Its nice to load a 100rds in less than 40 MINS vs a beam scale which took me 2 hr.
 

mijp5

Gunny Sergeant
May 7, 2009
4,890
2,119
113
#3
The guy who created the auto trickler with the fx scale wrote a very good essay on the need for a scale with the ability to measure each kernel. Breaks it down mathematically and basically, the difference is something like .1” at 1000 yards with the higher resolution scale
 
Feb 21, 2013
205
53
28
#4
I have no problem spending the money on one as long as not sorting bullets and cases is not going to overshadow the advantage I'll gain from the E scale. Just checking before I make a bad decision. Thanks for the info.
 

Bradu

Full Member
Aug 24, 2011
2,072
307
83
IL
#5
The guy who created the auto trickler with the fx scale wrote a very good essay on the need for a scale with the ability to measure each kernel. Breaks it down mathematically and basically, the difference is something like .1” at 1000 yards with the higher resolution scale
I haven't read that yet but not sure I buy into that though. I don't think it matters that much if you are in a good node. I mean if you have single digit sd's even using a chargemaster like I'm running , I don't see how a few kernels will matter. I used to run a tuned beam scale which is more accurate than my chargemasters. I will try to find it because I'm curious and am always willing to learn
 
Mar 18, 2012
374
48
28
33
#7
I went from a beam scale, to a charge master, then to auto trickler. I don't think I gained much if any in accuracy that I can attribute to the different powder dispensing methods. I made each move for speed. I will never go back to the chargemaster or other methods. The auto trickler also satisfies my OCD and I have settled on a .04gn variance max. I usually have to dump and re throw 5 or less in a round of 50 to meet my standards.
 
Feb 21, 2013
205
53
28
#8
So where do we stand on sorting bullets and cases in relation to the powder charge? If we are chasing consistency at a mile is it senseless to worry about the powder charge to the kernel if the internal capacity of the brass is not exactly the same or the bullets are not sorted by weight, length, etc?
I will spend time to play with a load until I feel like I can do nothing more to better it given the variables I can control within the parameters I set forth. I just don't have the time to do that and quality control every projectile and piece of brass to sort them into groups.
 

Bradu

Full Member
Aug 24, 2011
2,072
307
83
IL
#9
So where do we stand on sorting bullets and cases in relation to the powder charge? If we are chasing consistency at a mile is it senseless to worry about the powder charge to the kernel if the internal capacity of the brass is not exactly the same or the bullets are not sorted by weight, length, etc?
I will spend time to play with a load until I feel like I can do nothing more to better it given the variables I can control within the parameters I set forth. I just don't have the time to do that and quality control every projectile and piece of brass to sort them into groups.
As long as you have single digit sd's you will be fine. There are a few things to do to get them lower before getting into the more critical shit in my opinion. I've seen just changing seating depth lower the sd's vs almost 20 fps. I wouldn't have believed it if I didn't help the guy with his load development. He was having issues with sd's and he was at mag length with the plate removed so I drilled the plate out and plug welded the holes. Then we got it out to almost mag length without the plate and the sd's dropped from mid to upper 20's to single digits.

I have considered getting more serious with case prep and sorting brass and bullets but I don't think I can shoot the difference.
 
Oct 29, 2008
576
172
43
Denver CO
#10
Strive for an ES of less than 10 fps. Lofty goal and you can probably get away with just getting to single digit SD's but if you can obtain a single digit ES's you will definitely see a difference at a mile and beyond.

Neck tension, ignition and other issues all contribute to an expanding ES not just weighing the powder to the fraction of a kernel.

I have achieved single digit SD's and occasionally single digit ES with a balance beam scale ... it does take more time.