Jump to content
UKV - The Place for Precision Rifle Enthusiasts
Sign in to follow this  
No i deer

Rcbs electronic powder Despenser versus Gempro 250

Recommended Posts

Hi all

I am sure some of got both sets of scales and have done the comparisons and I am curious on your thoughts and findings.

I currently uses gempro 250 and once warmed up it seem to weigh really accurately down to the last kernal but is a really slow process.

If I switched to a powder Dispenser would I see a difference on long-range paper shooting.in real terms how much does 1\10 of a grain make

atb No I deer 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Already ran an extensive test on this a while back. I've found the RCBS CM Lite to be as every bit accurate as the lovely little GemPro - as long as you know the CM Lite's quirks.

Having the CM Lite, I will never go back to a scale (whether that's balance beam, GemPro equivalents or even the Target Master) because they're so painfully slow as you note. 

Using the CM Lite as I spell out in my tests, I've halved my reloading time and getting to within 0.02g accuracy (that's about 2 kernels of N140). 

http://ukvarminting.com/topic/38699-rcbs-chargemaster-lite-arrived-today/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very comprehensive testing.are you a scientist ;).thanks for that.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha - no not a scientist but a big part of my job is research and analysis.

I was genuinely surprised by the accuracy of the CM Lite load balancer. But it's  just a  shame you've got to jump through a couple of small hoops to really get the best reloading solution out of it. 

Regardless, it's still way easier, quicker and more accurate than any of the other methods I was using before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Catch-22 said:

Ha - no not a scientist but a big part of my job is research and analysis.

I was genuinely surprised by the accuracy of the CM Lite load balancer. But it's  just a  shame you've got to jump through a couple of small hoops to really get the best reloading solution out of it. 

Regardless, it's still way easier, quicker and more accurate than any of the other methods I was using before.

The RCBS CM lite and Lyman Gen 6 seem to be very similar in performance for a lot less than previous generations.  The Gen 6 uses a screw-in reducer plug for dispensing large extruded grains but I've not found that it works that well. Dave at Shooting shed makes  custom inserts ("thingies" as he calls them) for these which have been tried and tested.  As you say, a few hoops to jump through but once sorted, they do make reloading less of a chore. For finer powders, I good precision from a BR3 thrower, which is quicker still :).  On your analysis and testing, when you mention removing the pan then trickling up, I assume that you punch in the initial charge, let it dispense that charge, then remove the pan and manually trickle up?  I do something similar except I transfer the initial charge to manual scale pan and trickle that up whilst the Lyman gets on with dispensing another charge.  I've found that this is quite a fast and reliable means of achieving accuracy and having recently tested a small batch thrown like this, ES figures dropped another few points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that's right, I throw a 0.1g under charge, take the pan off the scale, replace the pan once the scale has normalised (takes about 1 second) and then manually trickle up to my final desired weight.

I chose not to have multiple items of equipment, partly due to cost of having multiple expensive scales, partly due to reducing the amount of clutter on the bench, and partly to remove other possible variances - but mostly the former.

In all honesty, I've just not bothered to look at improving the initial throw because my testing shows the scale only picks up (and measures the weight accurately) when the pan's removed and replaced. This is confirmed by my tests where i throw an under charge then trickle up without removing and replacing the pan. The final weight is out by a few hundredths.

It might be interesting to see if the Lyman G6 differs in its reading when removing and replacing the pan before trickling up. I actually stumbled across this phenomenon by accident when I was conducting my initial tests but now I know it's there and have seem the dramatic improvement, I wonder if readings from other electronic scales could be improved simply by following my technique. Dunno - worth a test I think 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gempro 250 can vary a fraction too take pan off and on off and on but not every time.quite often it's bang on. A fraction as in 0.02 or 0.04 which is one or 2 kernels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried Catch-22's method today using the lyman Gen 6 and an additional electronic scale and with RS62, one in about 5 charges were being thrown 0.1gr over with the rest bang on.  I'm impressed with the consistency of the Gen6 which threw all charges using RS50 bang on.

As I'd stupidly sold my trickler when I disposed of my beam scales, poverty being the mother of invention led me to make this no-expense spared piece of precision engineering.  It works better then the RCBS trickler before it!

Cleaned out .308 case half filled with propellant and inserted through a 12mm dia hole bored at a slight downward angle.  Who needs posh tricklers?

 

Trickler.thumb.jpg.7db5042887a669b0c92cd8dc9130f022.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy