Beam Scale 101, a look at the tried and true

[Project355]

Tupperware is cheaper - steal it from yer 'ol lady!

 

[JFrank]

Jim what you said about knife edges... I like to make sure they're up to snuff before any beam calibration. Not really a sharpen, as most are adequate, but just to check for little rough edges that have kicked out sideways from the knife edge itself. Your thoughts?

I would agree with that , I’m suggesting that a person could negatively affect an otherwise good scale that only needed a pan hanger adjustment for example or a good cleaning.
Being relatively new to scale tuning ( a few years) I had a project that wouldn’t seem to respond to my efforts including sharpening, after a conversation with 1066 I reviewed a couple other things I hadn’t thought of previously with final results equaling success.
Did I need to sharpen?
I suppose I’ll never really know

 

[JFrank]

If I may add one more thought , testing ones hard work is accomplished with a chronograph in single digit ES.

I had an ES of 7 fps

 

[Project355]

I would agree with that , I’m suggesting that a person could negatively affect an otherwise good scale that only needed a pan hanger adjustment for example or a good cleaning.

Ah true that is! I've never seen a big chip like what was shown above, mostly just a dingus on the edge. The kind that curls metal to one side. I think we're on the same page.

An extreme spread of 7fps, that's benchrest-retentive territory there, Sir! Good work!

(nightmares of cutting tapered gain twist rifling will surely follow me to bed tonite.....)

 

[buck460XVR]

Some Redding scale issues:

You can see they inserted the bearing rods, then cut V notches in after the scale was painted! The V notch on he three I examined within the last year were all either too far right, or too far left. The problem is when the scale is set that way, the damping tab rubs on the frame, or (or in addition) the knife edges on the beam rub on the frame of the scale. This is just terrible QC.

Yes it is, but it also something that most reloading press/tool manufactures would be more than happy to fix or replace from my experience.

 

[Project355]

And the reason I started down the treacherous path of no return with scales is because Redding was not really stepping up to the plate. It was a good learning experience, and actually, once I get a little more situated where I'm at, I plan on making new circumferential cut bearing rods for it. I've got a few other things to finish first though

 

[1066]

And the reason I started down the treacherous path of no return with scales is because Redding was not really stepping up to the plate. It was a good learning experience, and actually, once I get a little more situated where I'm at, I plan on making new circumferential cut bearing rods for it. I've got a few other things to finish first though

I took the circumferential bearing route on this Redding.

 

[Project355]

And I see you weighted the frame, and put in a little bumper at the bottom of the slot too - ah great minds my friend!
My foam bumper was too thick, so I've got to steal a bit of sticky back felt I've got somewhere and use that.

And it looks like your casting is convex on the far side and concave on the inboard side - like mine is. Mine was really distorted there, needed some correction. And the tab was bent, and...and ... pretty much what your excellent video shows.

 

[Sistema1927]

Any input or comments concerning the Lee beam scale?

I have had one for decades, and it has already worked well for me. Note that I am NOT the type of reloader who pushes the envelope, so if it is actually a .1 or .2 off it won't lead to a blown up gun. I have never bothered to check it against another standard. It does give me what I am expecting based upon volume with a variety of powders using Lee's VMD values, so I am guessing it is pretty close.

I store mine in the original cardboard box when not in use, this requires that I disassemble the beam from the base.

 

[Project355]

Lee sez the beam is phenolic, a hard plastic. The only phenolic I'm used to is very brittle stuff. Brittle as in "shatter if you drop it". I'm thinking... old time 50's/60's table top AM radio enclosures. I'm thinking distributor cap plastic (remember those!). Might as well say ignition rotor plastic too while I'm at it.... its brittle stuff, can be easily molded, sands well, but you don't want to try to tap threads in it.

I've never seen a Lee scale, so can't say overall how the quality is. But if "poises" don't wear down the phenolic beam, it might just be something that's a quality item.

Speaking of which..... nobody probably noticed a thread a while ago, but I managed to drop the frame of my RCBS M-1000 scale. It hit some laminate flooring, and shattered into pieces. I gathered up the pieces, thinknig I'd order a new "frame" from RCBS eventually when they reopen. Well the GF tossed out the "junk" with all the hardware still intact. So now I have no bearings, no pointer scale, no magnets... you know the drill. Now the parts are more expensive than a new scale. Bummer.

Well.... Just to show how it can be done, I've got an idea about a wooden, yes wooden frame for the perfect beam. I'll use some really well seasoned oak I've got here, rod bearings and some magnets from a hard drive (those are strong suckers!). Should be fun, and maybe I can make it look all old-timey while I'm at it.

So I'm not knocking Lee's phenolic beam, just saying if it works... it works!

 

[FROGO207]

Thank you guys for sharing and the detail that went into the explanations. I have the old Ohaus 10-10 self storing type. It has been reliable for many years with an infrequent cleaning here and there.

 

[1066]

Any input or comments concerning the Lee beam scale?

I have had one for decades, and it has already worked well for me. Note that I am NOT the type of reloader who pushes the envelope, so if it is actually a .1 or .2 off it won't lead to a blown up gun. I have never bothered to check it against another standard. It does give me what I am expecting based upon volume with a variety of powders using Lee's VMD values, so I am guessing it is pretty close.

I store mine in the original cardboard box when not in use, this requires that I disassemble the beam from the base.

My thoughts on the Lee scale:

The Lee scale has some really good design points, It only weight to 110 grains, this is a plus point when it comes to weighing powder. Why have a scale that reads to 500 grains when 98% of users will be using just the first 10% of the scale, that's like trying set the speed of your car at 12.6mph when your speedo reads 0-130mph - Far better to have a 0-20mph speedo for that sort of work.

The "notches" on the main beam are foolproof, a big ball bearing drops into one of the 10 cups on the beam - you really can't go wrong.

The "knife Edge" is actually a strip of razor edged blade, hidden out of sight and away from dust.

The scale has an "approach to weight" device in the form of a light plastic spring that starts the beam lifting smoothly, the only other scale fitted with this device is the RCBS 10/10 scale.

The Lee has a unique "self centering" system where the beam centers up on the knife edge when the pan is removed unlike most other scale that rely on the bearing end plates to limit side play.

The Lee has a single point pan hanger - this is far better mechanically than the usual wire stirrup pan hanger.

On the down side, the scale is built as a budget entry point scale, often included in the reloading starter kits - as such it should be foolproof. Unfortunately the Vernier adjustment for the secondary poise is fiddley to adjust, difficult to see and can be confusing for some users.

The whole scale is just too physically small to take advantage of it's potential accuracy with a beam moment length of just 3-4 inches.

Although it is magnetically damped with an aluminum blade, the damping is weak.

In conclusion, since the Lee scale was introduced in the 1970-80's, Lee have introduced, upgraded and improved a host of powder measures but the scale has stayed exactly the same - a replacement is well overdue.
I would like to see a new Lee scale introduced at a higher price point, I'm sure, with a little thought they could produce a real winner.

 

[1066]

Lee sez the beam is phenolic, a hard plastic. The only phenolic I'm used to is very brittle stuff. Brittle as in "shatter if you drop it". I'm thinking... old time 50's/60's table top AM radio enclosures. I'm thinking distributor cap plastic (remember those!). Might as well say ignition rotor plastic too while I'm at it.... its brittle stuff, can be easily molded, sands well, but you don't want to try to tap threads in it.

I've never seen a Lee scale, so can't say overall how the quality is. But if "poises" don't wear down the phenolic beam, it might just be something that's a quality item.

Speaking of which..... nobody probably noticed a thread a while ago, but I managed to drop the frame of my RCBS M-1000 scale. It hit some laminate flooring, and shattered into pieces. I gathered up the pieces, thinknig I'd order a new "frame" from RCBS eventually when they reopen. Well the GF tossed out the "junk" with all the hardware still intact. So now I have no bearings, no pointer scale, no magnets... you know the drill. Now the parts are more expensive than a new scale. Bummer.

Well.... Just to show how it can be done, I've got an idea about a wooden, yes wooden frame for the perfect beam. I'll use some really well seasoned oak I've got here, rod bearings and some magnets from a hard drive (those are strong suckers!). Should be fun, and maybe I can make it look all old-timey while I'm at it.

So I'm not knocking Lee's phenolic beam, just saying if it works... it works!

Keep us posted on your effort to produce a new "body" - I would expect a seasoned oak body to perform perfectly.

Here's a couple experimental beams I have made:

 

[film495]

Jim what you said about knife edges... I like to make sure they're up to snuff before any beam calibration. Not really a sharpen, as most are adequate, but just to check for little rough edges that have kicked out sideways from the knife edge itself. Your thoughts?

I've polished some knife edges on scales with a stone. Not trying to put a sharp edge on it per say, but to makes sure it is a good edge with no raised bits to make it rotate funny, sometimes there will be a hitch it the arm pivot, and it will stop on the hitch and give a false reading.

 

[Project355]

Yup

 

[Walkalong]

Great job guys, keep pouring it one, we'll make this a permanent fixture in the "Reloading Library of Wisdom" when it's done.

 

[JFrank]

Another Gentleman / tuning Guru we’ve yet to mention is Scott Parker Of Bakersfield Cal. He can be followed on Facebook under (Single Kernel Scales)
A chemistry something or other by trade a tuner by hobby Scotts skills are extraordinary.
If your willing to wait awhile you will receive a scale that is second to none and guaranteed for life.
J

 

[Project355]

1066, did you say a few posts ago that an aluminum damper was superior? I was led to believe that the damping effect was in proportion to the conductivity of the part moving through the field. Something like silver would be excellent, copper in the middle, and aluminum not as good as copper.

 

[JFrank]

Residing in England it may take awhile for your question to get to @1066

 

[1066]

1066, did you say a few posts ago that an aluminum damper was superior? I was led to believe that the damping effect was in proportion to the conductivity of the part moving through the field. Something like silver would be excellent, copper in the middle, and aluminum not as good as copper.

No, your choice of silver would be the most effective for Lorentz damping. Aluminum works but only about 60% as well as copper, the only plus point is that it's cheap and light. I'm sure it's use on the Lee scale scale is based on cost although cutting down unnecessary mass in the beam should be a bonus point.

Here's little video I made to demonstrate using aluminum for damping:

 

[1066]

Residing in England it may take awhile for your question to get to @1066

Yes, sorry guys, I'm a bit out of phase. - I've just returned home after an afternoon at the range. It's now 18.00 here's so time for a couple of hours in the workshop.

 

[Project355]

that's like trying set the speed of your car at 12.6mph when your speedo reads 0-130mph - Far better to have a 0-20mph speedo for that sort of work.

.....The whole scale is just too physically small to take advantage of it's potential accuracy with a beam moment length of just 3-4 inches.

.....Although it is magnetically damped with an aluminum blade, the damping is weak.

I'm sorry, I totally mis-read your post, I was in a hurry between various "stuff" at work. Yah, silver would be best but the cost....

I have a thought on what you said on the low maximum scale reading, and the length of the scale. It would have been REALLY nice if they had a long beam that measured only 110 grains, using a light poise that moved a longer distance. But keeping the scale short, and limiting the max reading... isn't that still like having a 0-20 speedo that reads in essentially the same needle deflection of say 15 degrees or so, as a 0-130 speed that reads in 100 degrees. With lower max weight, but a short beam, its as compressed as a longer beam with higher max weight no? Better to "decompress" it into a longer beam, using a lighter poise. Maybe my thoughts are fuzzy on that.

 

[Mr. Zorg]

The higher maximum value of the 10-10, 10-0-5, and 5-0-5 had the ability / flexibility to serve purposes beyond powder charge measurement in metallic cartridge reloading. It allowed weighing & sorting projectiles & brass including for dangerous game. Whether every reloader owning such a scale required that flexibility and measurement range is a question of limiting the breadth of the target market I suppose. Lee's approach with a significantly lower total measurement range of the Lee Safety Powder Scale omits this flexibility.

 

[JFrank]

This OHaus 10-10 arrived today as an addition to my small collection of scales. I started with just a simple wipe down of the beam and knifes and Agates using Q tips and Alcohol, then lubing the main leveler threaded rod. My plan for this is to be my road scale, so durability , accuracy and consistency is key for this project.
I’ll give it a better look in the next few days

 

[Mr. Zorg]

This OHaus 10-10 arrived today as an addition to my small collection of scales. I started with just a simple wipe down of the beam and knifes and Agates using Q tips and Alcohol, then lubing the main leveler threaded rod. My plan for this is to be my road scale, so durability , accuracy and consistency is key for this project.
I’ll give it a better look in the next few days

View attachment 946990

I'm also on a quest to accumulate (collect is too highbrow for my methods) a few analog scales to have available in addition to the Lyman Gen6 digital combination scale & dispenser / trickler. Like you I'm targeting vintage non-plastic / polymer analog scales. I have a Lyman D5 plus I just purchased an Ohaus 10-10 like your post has yesterday evening. I want to see how I like the rotary right hand poise vs the hanging right hand poise.

I do need to also see whether my brain is more repeatable with scale markings in multiples of 5 and 10 fractions of 1 on the Lyman D5 (also used on the D7, 10-0-5, and 5-0-5 models) vs what seems to me the more straightforward multiples of 10 and 10 fractions of 1 on the 10-10 scale. I'm not sure keeping both styles will be in my best interest as it's one more thing to be careful about but I think incorporating a procedural step to use check weights at a weight similar to the charge weight I'm preparing to throw or check each time before putting any powder in the scale pan would be an effective risk mitigation protocol for me to incorporate.