Review EGO Dante scales

[WestKentucky]

I recently bought a very cheap set of scales to use in place of my FA scales which have been misplaced in a recent move.

scales at this link. I have no affiliation with Amazon. If I did I would not be working a day job.
https://www.amazon.com/Milligarm-Re...9Y2xpY2tSZWRpcmVjdCZkb05vdExvZ0NsaWNrPXRydWU=

I got the scales in 2 days as advertised. So far I’m neither impressed nor unimpressed. Having played with them checking repeatability I’m giving them a B. They do well at coming back to the same reading (or within .02 gr) BUT they don’t do so well when swapping around between using a pan or not. The items I weighed had a difference of anywhere from spot on up to .16gr when weighed once with pan and once without having been zeroed after removing the pan. It’s not a big deal because for powder I will always use the pan. For other stuff I doubt I do but either way it is repeatable as long as you stick to the same thing… pan or no pan.

Quirks of this thing are much less than I expected given its $17 price point. The scales are a bit position sensitive but once the pan is nested into the face of the scales it’s good to go. The scale turns off too quickly for my liking, and it zeroes automatically when it powers on. Going to be a bit of a pain to check weights periodically when using a drop. Won’t be an issue for 100% weighed charges for hunting rounds and precision rounds. For usability I give it another B.

The reviews said that the scale will climb in reading slowly. I don’t see that as being possible since it turns off fairly quickly. I watched it for a full cycle between initial weigh and then through power down and it did fluctuate but very little and it kept coming back to the original readings. Breathing on the scale did make it fluctuate but flipping the lights off and on didn’t. Powering on the computer about 2 feet away DID cause some fluctuation but it settled back down quickly. I blame that on me most likely wiggling the table when I hit the switch.

Would I rely on them for reloading… yeah I think so but I’m going to do a bit more fiddling with it first. I have some known weighed charges from Lee safety scales and from my FA scales so I can tear a few rounds down and compare known trusted weights against what this thing reads. I feel confident it will be ok but I will feel better about the scale after doing this… yeah a lot better.

4 pans, all plastic. Not very impressed but I have aluminum pans I can use. Tweezers are junk. Dipper has Chinese symbols on them. Not sure what they mean. Has the number 2 as well. Possibly 2cc but it seems too small for that. But that really makes me no difference at all. I have a bunch of Lee dippers and I don’t use them except for pyrodex shotgun loads. This dipper does look to be roughly appropriate for the 60ish grain charges of pyrodex I want to use in 16ga.

Overall… Solid B. It has its pros and cons. It’s cheap and it’s usable. Not weighing diamonds on a 17 dollar scale and not loading anything so tight as to where .16 grains would be catastrophic. It’s no beam scale for certain but it’s good enough for my purposes. I will probably swap back to the FA scales when I find them. The count feature is neat though so I may use that when dealing with items in bulk… shotgun wads or pieces of brass perhaps.

I ain’t loading .25acp with this thing… yet.

 

[Airborne Falcon]

So, assuming that your word "climb"`is the equivalent of what we refer-to as "drift" .... that's not cool.

Drift is the bain of all reloading scales imho.

A $17 scale, especially with all those pans, is usually a waste of money imho.

You're better-off using balance beam scales.

Digital scales are ALWAYS iffy.

Watch Eric Cortina's video on scales.

 

[Rule3]

I guess the $17 question is that out of the hundreds of scales out there, why did you pick this one??

 

[WestKentucky]

I guess the $17 question is that out of the hundreds of scales out there, why did you pick this one??

Because it’s $17

not knocking any of the common scales, but why spend ten times as much for a scale when what you can get cheap is usable. There’s room on all ends of the spectrum for new gear suppliers so I took a shot. No it’s not a $300 scale, it’s a $17 scale that is repeatable and usable.

 

[LiveLife]

$17 scale ... is usually a waste of money

Digital scales are ALWAYS iffy

I conduct myth busting threads for THR with measurable and repeatable objective data to bust (or confirm) whether information being perpetuated is correct or not.

While I have been a lifetime user and fan of beam scales like Ohaus 10-10 and RCBS 5-0-5 for their 0.1 gr resolution and repeatable detection/zero (When regularly cleaned and used level), over the decades I have seen the improvement of digital scales and started to see that even cheaper digital scales demonstrated higher resolution of 0.08 gr down to 0.04 gr (Although most advertise 1mg/0.02 gr resolution, I haven't been able to verify with check weights down to 1 mg).

We have conducted several myth busting threads for digital scales starting with original group project where members compared their various digital scales for lowest weight detection and verification of check weights - https://www.google.com/search?q=myt...YIBiAGCAZIBAzAuMZgBAKABAqABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz

Here's our findings from the original 2014 myth busting thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...tal-scale-accuracy.759750/page-4#post-9591790

bds/LiveLife: American Weigh Scales Gemini-20 - .02 gr resolution, .06 gr detection of 1 piece of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($23)​

bds/LiveLife: Frankford Arsenal DS-750 - .1 gr resolution, .1 gr detection of 2-3 pieces of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($25-$30)​

Otto: American Weigh Scales Gemini-20 - .02 gr resolution, .06 gr detection of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($20)​

Peter M. Eick: RCBS/Pact Powder Pro - .1 gr resolution, .1 gr detection of 2 pieces of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($150)​

rcmodel: "ancient" Cabela/RCBS - Failed to detect up to 6 pieces of paper​

rg1: Pact 120v - .1 gr detection of 3 pieces of printer paper, check weight verified​

armarsh: A&D FX120i - .015 gr resolution, .04 gr detection of post-it note ($400)​

cmb3366: Mettler AE200 - .0015 gr resolution, .058 gr detection of notepad ($200)​

RedHawk357Mag: Acculab VIC123 - .015 gr resolution, .04 gr detection of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($240)​

Jesse Heywood: RCBS Range Master 750 - .1 gr resolution, Failed to detect up to 10 pieces of 20 lb paper ($110)​

Since the original myth busting thread, with the use of Ohaus ASTM Class 6 check weights down to 1 mg/0.015 gr, I have used various digital scales and can confirm after several years of use, accuracy and consistency of even "cheaper" digital scales like these - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...les-1-mg-analytical-lab-scale-for-120.873830/

• WAOAW W-01-50 (Sensitivity .06 gr) -https://www.amazon.com/WAOAW-Milligram-Reloading-Calibration-Batteries/dp/B06W5VXN53

• American Weigh Scales Gemini-20 (Sensitivity .04 gr) - https://americanweigh.com/product_info.php?products_id=580

And in this myth busting thread, we examined what factors cause zero drift of digital scales and how to address them - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-scale-zero-drift-and-can-it-be-fixed.893402/

Because it’s $17

There’s room on all ends of the spectrum for new gear suppliers so I took a shot.

To me, any scale whether beam or digital, that can verify check weights down to 0.1 gr is good enough for reloading. (And if scale is able to verify check weights below 0.1 gr, even better)

And what we have learned from our various myth busting threads on digital scales is that while 0.1 gr resolution beam scales can be consistent with regular cleaning and level bench use, some digital scales (even sub $20 ones) CAN verify check weights down to 0.08 gr, even 0.06 gr and 0.04 gr repeatedly and consistently.

Can digital scale zero drift? Sure, because they are sensitive electronic equipment susceptible to internal and external variables as circuitry warms up (And why they require sufficient "warm up" time). But like endorsing level bench surface for beam scale use, we also endorse using digital scales within manufacturer's normal operating temperature range (Typically 59F to 95F) and eliminating factors that can drift zero.

So no, use of digital scales, even cheap sub $20, are not "... a waste of money ... Digital scales are ALWAYS iffy".

 

[Airborne Falcon]

I conduct myth busting threads for THR with measurable and repeatable objective data to bust (or confirm) whether information being perpetuated is correct or not.

While I have been a lifetime user and fan of beam scales like Ohaus 10-10 and RCBS 5-0-5 for their 0.1 gr resolution and repeatable detection/zero (When regularly cleaned and used level), over the decades I have seen the improvement of digital scales and started to see that even cheaper digital scales demonstrated higher resolution of 0.08 gr down to 0.04 gr (Although most advertise 1mg/0.02 gr resolution, I haven't been able to verify with check weights down to 1 mg).

We have conducted several myth busting threads for digital scales starting with original group project where members compared their various digital scales for lowest weight detection and verification of check weights - https://www.google.com/search?q=myt...YIBiAGCAZIBAzAuMZgBAKABAqABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz

Here's our findings from the original 2014 myth busting thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...tal-scale-accuracy.759750/page-4#post-9591790

bds/LiveLife: American Weigh Scales Gemini-20 - .02 gr resolution, .06 gr detection of 1 piece of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($23)​

bds/LiveLife: Frankford Arsenal DS-750 - .1 gr resolution, .1 gr detection of 2-3 pieces of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($25-$30)​

Otto: American Weigh Scales Gemini-20 - .02 gr resolution, .06 gr detection of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($20)​

Peter M. Eick: RCBS/Pact Powder Pro - .1 gr resolution, .1 gr detection of 2 pieces of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($150)​

rcmodel: "ancient" Cabela/RCBS - Failed to detect up to 6 pieces of paper​

rg1: Pact 120v - .1 gr detection of 3 pieces of printer paper, check weight verified​

armarsh: A&D FX120i - .015 gr resolution, .04 gr detection of post-it note ($400)​

cmb3366: Mettler AE200 - .0015 gr resolution, .058 gr detection of notepad ($200)​

RedHawk357Mag: Acculab VIC123 - .015 gr resolution, .04 gr detection of 20 lb paper, .5 gr check weight verified ($240)​

Jesse Heywood: RCBS Range Master 750 - .1 gr resolution, Failed to detect up to 10 pieces of 20 lb paper ($110)​

Since the original myth busting thread, with the use of Ohaus ASTM Class 6 check weights down to 1 mg/0.015 gr, I have used various digital scales and can confirm after several years of use, accuracy and consistency of even "cheaper" digital scales like these - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...les-1-mg-analytical-lab-scale-for-120.873830/

• WAOAW W-01-50 (Sensitivity .06 gr) -https://www.amazon.com/WAOAW-Milligram-Reloading-Calibration-Batteries/dp/B06W5VXN53

• American Weigh Scales Gemini-20 (Sensitivity .04 gr) - https://americanweigh.com/product_info.php?products_id=580

And in this myth busting thread, we examined what factors cause zero drift of digital scales and how to address them - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-scale-zero-drift-and-can-it-be-fixed.893402/


To me, any scale whether beam or digital, that can verify check weights down to 0.1 gr is good enough for reloading. (And if scale is able to verify check weights below 0.1 gr, even better)

And what we have learned from our various myth busting threads on digital scales is that while 0.1 gr resolution beam scales can be consistent with regular cleaning and level bench use, some digital scales (even sub $20 ones) CAN verify check weights down to 0.08 gr, even 0.06 gr and 0.04 gr repeatedly and consistently.

Can digital scale zero drift? Sure, because they are sensitive electronic equipment susceptible to internal and external variables as circuitry warms up (And why they require sufficient "warm up" time). But like endorsing level bench surface for beam scale use, we also endorse using digital scales within manufacturer's normal operating temperature range (Typically 59F to 95F) and eliminating factors that can drift zero.

So no, use of digital scales, even cheap sub $20, are not "... a waste of money ... Digital scales are ALWAYS iffy".

I disagree with you wholeheartedly based solely upon my own personal experiences. I've got a Chargemaster 1500 sitting in front of me right now along with a 5-0-5, and a GS350 and $120 worth of the best check weights I've been able to find.

Please start here with Erik Cortina's interview of Brand Cole who is considered, by just about everyone who takes reloading very seriously, to be the final word in scales, throwing powders/charges, and LEDs vs Mechanicals ... full disclaimer, I leased one of his scales for a year and a half ... his words, (hopefully I have time stamped them to begin at around the three minute (3:00) mark and I encourage everyone to at least watch it through the five minute (5:00) mark at which time, if you are a serious reloader and interested in this question of scales you will be hooked - it'll be a very telling use of two minutes of your time and the entire interview is fascinating ... anyways, on to the video.



Anyone discount Brand Cole's or Erik Cortina's bonefides to speak on the matter at hand?

As far as your (@LiveLife) measurable and repeatable data analytics and so-called scientific findings are concerned ... no you didn't imho. Shame on you for perpetuating the myth that your methodology is somehow conclusive and scientific. It most certainly is not. It is virtually impossible to get repeatable consistent data from cheap digital scales. I've seen the same tray placed on cheap scales over and over and over again and never once get the same result, especially not consecutively ... tell you what, let's do it again this way ... lemme find something from the experts, there are tons of examples proving your conclusions wrong using every measurable scientific metric out there where weighing charges are concerned ...

Here we go from Gavin Toobe:



And then there is everyone's good old everyday guy (like most of us around here), Johnny (not his real name but everyone knows him by that name so) ...

He tries sixteen (16) of the best selling inexpensive digitial scales on the market and, as he states from the get-go, he wouldn't trust any of them to accurately and repeatedly measure the weight of his charges ....



For that matter, if all of the above (and there are many others that could be posted supporting the fact, not myth, that cheap electronic scales are not trustworthy when it comes to explosives) ... if all of the above and anyone who takes reloading seriously says cheap scales are not to be trusted ... then is it not you that is actually perpetrating a myth that cheap scales are perfectly fine when measuring explosive propellants to be ignited in a tightly sealed container near one's face?

Seems like a sure way to blow one's face off eventually, imho. Why would you recommend something like that to anyone?

I wouldn't. I refuse-to do so under any circumstances. I know of no seriously reloader who does be they locally, part of our club in which several are well known regulars on the beat known reloading forums out there ... or, for that matter, I dare you to find any well known reputable reloader, competitive shooter, be they whatever discipline, f class benchrest to weekend three-gun ... find us one who will tell you that they trust cheap LED scales to weigh their charges.

Thanks for your response to my innocent well-intentioned little response post above @LiveLife ... good luck with all of your future myth busting efforts here on THR. I know that your intentions are well-meaning and that it is important to you to try to get it right.

Regards

 

[Rule3]

Because it’s $17

not knocking any of the common scales, but why spend ten times as much for a scale when what you can get cheap is usable. There’s room on all ends of the spectrum for new gear suppliers so I took a shot. No it’s not a $300 scale, it’s a $17 scale that is repeatable and usable.

I am more of a $25 scale guy!

 

[WestKentucky]

I am more of a $25 scale guy!

Now your bragging…

 

[Rule3]

Now your bragging…

But I also have a Dliion beam Balance scale which is the same as the old Ohous or RCBS

The digital is great for fast checking powder set up or a bullet weight. Dial in the powder measure and the double check on the beam scale. It's dead nuts accurate,
https://www.amazon.com/Frankford-Arsenal-Digital-Reloading-Display/dp/B002BDOHNA?th=1&psc=1

 

[WestKentucky]

I disagree with you wholeheartedly based solely upon my own personal experiences. I've got a Chargemaster 1500 sitting in front of me right now along with a 5-0-5, and a GS350 and $120 worth of the best check weights I've been able to find but .... you know what LiveLife Mr Defacto DeBunker of myths :::::: pause :::::::

LOL, alright tell you what .... since you're the defacto expert THR myth buster on digitial scales (amd everything else we must assume), lmao, I'll let the experts do the talking .

Start here with Erik Cortina's interview of Brand Cole who is considered, by just about everyone who takes reloading very seriously, to be the final word in scales, throwing powders/charges, and LEDs vs Mechanicals ... full disclaimer, I leased one of his scales for a year and a half ... his words, (hopefully I have time stamped them to begin at around the three minute (3:00) mark and I encourage everyone to at least watch it through the five minute (5:00) mark at which time, if you are a serious reloader and interested in this question of scales you will be hooked - it'll be a very telling use of two minutes of your time and the entire interview is fascinating ... anyways, on to the video.



Anyone discount Brand Cole's or Erik Cortina's bonefides to speak on the matter at hand?

As far as your (@LiveLife) measurable and repeatable data analytics and so-called scientific findings are concerned ... no you didn't. Shame on you for perpetuating the myth that your methodology is somehow conclusive and scietific. It most certainly is not. It's the worst kind of internet nonsense being presented and portrayed as accurate and undeniable. It is virtually impossible to get repeatable consistent data from cheap digital scales. I've seen the same tray placed on cheap scales over and over and over again and never once get the same result ... tell you what, let's do it again this way ... lemme find something from the experts, there are tons of examples proving you wrong using every measurable scientific metric out there where weighing charges are concerned ...

Here we go from Gavin Toobe:



And then there is everyone's good old everyday guy like most of us around here, Johnny (not his real name but everyone knows him by that name so) ...

He tries sixteen (16) of the best selling inexpensive digitial scales on the market and, as he states from the get-go, he wouldn't trust any of them to accurately and repeatedly measure the weight of his charges ....



So, who is really perpetuating incorrect information Mr. @LifeLife defacto myth buster? For that matter, if all of the above (and there are many others that could be posted supporting the fact, not myth, that cheap electronic scales are not trustworthy when it comes to explosives) ... if all of the above and anyone who takes reloading seriously says cheap scales are not to be trusted ... then is it not you that is actually perpetrating a myth that cheap scales are perfectly fine when measuring explosive propellants to be ignited in a tightly sealed container near one's face?

Seems like a sure way to blow one's face off eventually, imho. Why would you recommend something like that to anyone?

I wouldn't. I refuse-to do so under any circumstances. I know of no seriously reloader who does be they locally, part of our club in which several are well known regulars on the beat known reloading forums out there ... or, for that matter, I dare you to find any well known reputable reloader, competitive shooter be they whatever discipline, benchrest to weekend three-gun ... who will tell you that they trust cheap LED scales to weigh they charges.

All of this is starting to cut into my reloading time. Thanks for your response to my innocent well-intentioned little post @LiveLife ... good luck with all of your future defacto myth busting efforts here on THR.

And thanks for the belly laugh. Lol

Regards

First things first I have never heard of the guy or the Prometheus that he is the creator of. Secondly since he is the creator of the Prometheus he is inherently biased against everything else, so his credibility is questionable (not wrong, not bad, just take a look and sort apples from oranges). Third, all he said in the timeframe you referenced (about the time he went off camera to deposit some spit from his chaw (also leads to some questionable credibility because a professional would likely not do that during an interview) is that the numbers might be lying to you. Guess what… my kids might be lying to you but they are still my kids. Mr. Coke also didn’t ever look at the camera during the portion of the interview that I watched. I find that to be a bit strange (though it says nothing of his expertise or lack thereof, just an odd quirk that most professionals would not exhibit).

Y’all can put stock in whatever you want to put stock into, but my first take on Mr. Brand Cole is not a favorable one.

I will continue to believe what I have evidence to support and I will take your point of concern into consideration.

 

[LiveLife]

I disagree with you wholeheartedly based solely upon my own personal experiences.

So provide us your personal experience data.

Purchase check weights that go down to 1 mg and see how sensitive your scales are and how accurate they verify the check weights at different load range.

Here on THR, that's what members do ... They conduct their own tests and share them with other members (Good or bad). When second hand information that is questionable is presented, we often take matters into our own hands and see how they perform under "Real World" conditions (Believe me, THR peanut gallery has kept me in line many times and why I started doing myth busting threads )

Are our methods perfect? No. Can they be improved? Sure.

So we have initial group project where we set out to test sensitivity and detection of actual digital scales in use by THR members. Since not everyone had 0.1 gr check weight, we used 1/4"x1/4" piece of 20 lb copy paper which weighs around 0.05 gr to see how many pieces it took for different scales to detect and we compiled that data. It certainly is not "lab grade scientific" but gives other THR members a sense how each scale performed and compares to others which is way better than saying "Digital scales are not reliable and should not be used for reloading". (Keep in mind that 0.1 gr resolution beam scales have been successfully used for decades by reloaders and match shooters to win matches and set world records. )

And during current component shortage, I ended up "Paying It Forward" a large chunk of my reloading components I stocked up for retirement when I had to liquidate over 90% of my gun stuff to tend to my aging parents' medical issues. So instead of shooting up centerfire cartridge components, they were shared with others in need and I decided to test 22LR I stocked up at $16-$20/500 shipped (With most of my 22LR stock piled PIF and shared with family/friends/neighbors also) supporting this thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/22lr-for-less-than-15-20-500-shipped.853059/

22LR brands/weights in terms of accuracy and consistency of primer ignition were something I have been wanting to test for some years so I bought two new 10/22 and T/CR22 and proceeded to capture 10 shot groups out of the box and shared accuracy trends as trigger/rifling broke in on these threads - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/real-world-accurizing-22lr-on-the-cheap.898035/

But were my testing methods lab grade scientific? Hardly. I did the best I could with eyes inflicted with cataract and glaucoma (I did get cataract surgery last year with Vivity IOL implants and now have 20/20 vision). But something that THR members could glean from over 9000 rounds shot through these new rifles were relative comparison of different brands and weights of ammunition seeing certain accuracy trends that became apparent as thousands of rounds were shot. ("Real World" findings - CCI SV, Blazer and Aguila consistently produced smallest 10 shot groups at 25/50/100 yards compared to other non-match "cheap/bulk" ammunition). And now I am working to conduct comparison of sub $200 scopes for THR members who cannot afford $600-$800 scopes for 22LR plinking - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/sub-200-6-18-20-24x50mm-scope-comparison.901816/

To me, reloading is a hobby that has become a passion and have enjoyed sweating the details. I was a Bio-Chemistry major so I am aware of "scientific" testing approach but I am also fully aware the vast majority of THR members will conduct their reloading and shooting under "Real world" conditions, not "Laboratory" conditions. So my testing and myth busting approach may not be up to the golden standards some may hold but for me, I deem them as good as I can get under "Real world" conditions.

BTW, I am just an "average retired Joe" on the internet posting random things ... Here are some of what I have been doing for THR members on reloading/shooting variables - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...endence-from-work.853305/page-5#post-11672875

• Bullet sizing/diameter difference (keep in mind lot to lot variation exists) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...re-sized-the-same.818806/page-2#post-10567453

• Neck tension and bullet setback - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...neck-tension-and-bullet-setback.830072/page-4

• Residual lube affect on neck tension/bullet setback - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-tension-bullet-setback.834035/#post-10787026

• Accuracy of digital/beam scales verified by Ohaus ASTM Class 6 check weights - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/revisited-myth-busting-digital-scales.821449/

• Accuracy of calipers verified by Vermont Class ZZ +/- pin gages - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ks-for-digital-calibers.821135/#post-10545265

• Accuracy of "analytical" digital scale and trickling Varget to single kernel resolution - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...les-1-mg-analytical-lab-scale-for-120.873830/

• Digital scale zero drift - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-scale-zero-drift-and-can-it-be-fixed.893402/

• Long vs short OAL (greater neck tension for more efficient powder burn/chamber pressure build vs gas leakage) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...g-oal-col-long-vs-short.819257/#post-10511700

• Reducing OAL variance on progressive press (mixed range brass vs pre-resized brass) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...progressive-press.833604/page-2#post-10779806

• Powder charge variance - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/c-h-502-micrometer-powder-measure-10-drops.834894/

• RMR 9mm 95 gr FMJ load development and pistol/carbine range testing - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...endence-from-work.853305/page-4#post-11387109

• 22LR accuracy comparison with 20+ brand/weight ammunition using brand new 10/22 Collector #3 and T/CR22 capturing every 10 shot groups at 25/50 yards - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...eeding-your-22lr-rifles.874713/#post-11635224

• Accurizing 22LR on the cheap (With transparency of round count) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...22lr-on-the-cheap.898035/page-2#post-12176951

• Sub $200 6-18/20/24x50mm scope comparison - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/sub-200-6-18-20-24x50mm-scope-comparison.901816/

 

[Airborne Falcon]

You and I are probably more alike than different LiveLife. Same ages, same ailments, same general philosophies I would guess.

I value your opinions and thank you for your conversation.

I can be too anal about watches, clocks, microscopes and scales at times.

Enjoyed reading those threads of yours - I had already read most of them over the years. Thank you for sharing.

 

[LiveLife]

The reviews said that the scale will climb in reading slowly. I don’t see that as being possible since it turns off fairly quickly. I watched it for a full cycle between initial weigh and then through power down and it did fluctuate but very little and it kept coming back to the original readings.

As we learned from previous myth busting digital scale threads, as digital scales increase in sensitivity to higher and higher resolutions (Say going from 0.1 gr resolution towards 0.02 gr resolution), increase in internal temperature from electronic circuitry warming up will expand different internal parts of the scale and could increasingly show up as "drifting of zero" - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-scale-zero-drift-and-can-it-be-fixed.893402/

BTW, these were identified as common sources of digital scale "drifting":

• Counter/bench top surface not level or stable
• Operating scale outside of manufacturer specified temperature range (typical 59F-95F but check your manual)
• Warm up of scale as electronic components/IC board temperature increase
• Scale housing construction the load cell/base is attached to
• Movement of air around the scale
• Any source of magnetic field
• Some claim fluorescent light fixture ballasts (I only use LED lighting in the house with no noticeable effect on zero)
• If battery powered, low battery
• Defective digital scale

But if your scale "drifting" is due to internal electronic circuitry warming up expanding internal parts and applying torsional stress on the strain gauge/load cell to induce "drifting of zero/readings", then as many members using higher resolution digital scales suggested, we need to allow the scale to "warm up" sufficiently to stabilize internal temperatures to not induce "drifting". If your digital scale use is brief and turned on/off before sufficient stabilizing of internal temperatures takes place, you may always see some level of "drifting" and for this reason, some members never turn off their digital scales.

Another factor that could be at play is ambient operating temperature. Digital scales typically have normal operating temperature range of 59F to 95F (Check with manual/manufacturer) and as ambient temperature approaches limits of cold/hot extremes, I found readings could start to become more erratic. When some of my friends complained about their digital scales reading being erratic at 100F+ temperatures of summer heat, I told them to take the digital scales indoor and under cooler airconditioned house temperature of 70-80F, readings became more consistent. It's winter time and opposite also happens and if your house temperature is close to 60F, try using digital scale at higher 70F and see if reading consistency improves.

They do well at coming back to the same reading (or within .02 gr) BUT they don’t do so well when swapping around between using a pan or not. The items I weighed had a difference of anywhere from spot on up to .16gr when weighed once with pan and once without having been zeroed after removing the pan.

In previous digital scale threads, we learned that some scales may not read very light check weights (Say lighter than 0.1 gr) but when a heavier check weight was placed on the pan, they would more consistently read incremental weight increase. So using a pan to read smaller charges may improve consistency of readings.

And if your powder charge ranges are around 3 gr/4 gr/5 gr for common pistol calibers from 380Auto to 45ACP and your scale repeatedly verifies these charges within 0.1 gr variance of check weights, I would consider the scale "good enough" for reloading as that's what most beam scales will resolve to with 0.1 gr resolution.

Quirks of this thing are much less than I expected given its $17 price point. The scales are a bit position sensitive but once the pan is nested into the face of the scales it’s good to go. The scale turns off too quickly for my liking, and it zeroes automatically when it powers on.

I recently learned about some digital scales now having continuous "auto tare" function which is scale continuously resetting zero to display "0.00" instead of drifting from zero. This likely is manufacturers' answer to complaints of zero drifting as scale "warms up" under cold/hot ambient temperatures.

Regardless what factors are causing the zero drift of digital scales, ultimately, as long as they accurately and repeatedly verify check weights after sufficient warm up, especially around powder charge ranges in use within 0.1 gr, IMO they are good enough for reloading, even though they cost $17.

 

[Blue68f100]

As our digital electronics has improved over the years so has the lower cost scales. 10 yrs ago you could not get a decent scales for <$100. Now we're below $20 with higher resolution. As technology advances it comes more doable.

 

[Nature Boy]

All load cell type scales are slow and prone to drift. The only solution to this is a mechanical balance type scale and they start at $500.