Reloaders - should we go metric? Or both?

dcloco

February 03, 2006 19:15

Just a thought. Of the trials and tribulations of purchasing a couple of powder measurers, I ended up purchasing a stand alone digital scale.

During the quest of looking at the various specs, resolution in grains is only to the tenth of a grain (0.1). Resolution in grams goes to the hundreth (0.01).

grains grams
45.1 2.922434
45.2 2.9289139
45.3 2.9353938
45.4 2.9418737
45.5 2.9483536
45.6 2.9548335
45.7 2.9613134
45.8 2.9677933
45.9 2.9742732

Back to the original question - maybe reloaders should measure in both, grains and grams, for accuracy????

Probably just splitting hairs on this one.

0

• 

  jonk

  February 03, 2006 20:03

  Well if it measures to .1 gr., that is measuring to one seventy-thousandth of a pound. Being as grams are heavier (one gram is 15.432grains), it would seem to me that to get the same degree of precision, you would need several more decimal places. That is to say, if you measured the gram weight by only one decimal point, you would potentially be plus or minus something like 1.5gr, so you would need to take it to at least 2 decimal places to get similar precision as the grain weight.

  0
• 

  Tailgunner1954

  February 04, 2006 04:39

  After rounding the gram results to represent .01 increments
  
  grains grams
  45.1 2.92
  45.2 2.93
  45.3 2.94
  45.4 2.94
  45.5 2.95
  45.6 2.95
  45.7 2.96
  45.8 2.97
  45.9 2.97
  
  As far as which one to use, both work, but trying to use them together would be a unnessasary confusion. Pick one and go.

  0
• 

  dcloco

  February 04, 2006 04:43

  Agreed - splitting hairs.
  
  Probably could not measure cylindrical powder to the 1/1000th of a gram.

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.