Grains to grams
- Thread starter Nube
- Start date
2016? I thought I put that Excel table together longer ago than that. Maybe not.
I just sold a 4 beam Ohaus lab. type scale that measured in grams; at the same time I have Ohaus/RCBS scales that measure in grains. And for the need of parts I purchased a 10/10 RCBS scale with two beams, one beam measured in grams, the other in grains.
Not over yet: I have an 2 additional Ohaus 3 beam lab type scales that I am going to sell. When it comes to conversions I want not because I have an option, I can measure in grams and or grains. And with all of these scales it would be a waste if I did not have check weights. I have two sets of Ohaus 47 piece check weights.
I have check weights that do not agree.
F. Guffey
Not over yet: I have an 2 additional Ohaus 3 beam lab type scales that I am going to sell. When it comes to conversions I want not because I have an option, I can measure in grams and or grains. And with all of these scales it would be a waste if I did not have check weights. I have two sets of Ohaus 47 piece check weights.
I have check weights that do not agree.
F. Guffey
So is that like having two watches and not knowing the correct time? I doubt it matters with check weights as long as any error between the two does not come in light of their intended use. Within any class of check weights there is an allowable uncertainty as can be seen in the spread sheet Unclenick put together. All standard weights used for calibration and or certification of scales have a class and each class has an allowable tolerance or error. The tables and charts may be found here. So we can have class by ANSI/ASTM E617 or International Organization of
Legal Metrology Recommendation R 111.
The difference between a test weight and the unit under test (scale) is a test uncertainty ratio so all we need to do is know how accurate we need a standard to be as compared to the device under test. Would 1:1 be OK? Maybe 4:1 or even 10:1?
The thread has gone well off track since we started with grains to grams or grams to grains and every US printed reloading manual I have seen uses grains and in reloading grams is a rather large unit of measure unless we like decimals.
Ron
I find the check weight thing laughable, Only on a reloading forum would anyone care if the powder was weighed on a scale that was calibrated with a check weight that is .001 grams off. I doubt if a world class 1000 yd BR shooter shooting a 10K custom rig would notice as long as all of their rounds were consistently .001 grams off. But my 1903 Springfield with the original barrel sure would...no kidding.......chuckle, sure it would
I keep a .20 cal 32 gn bullet that my scale say weighs 32.02 gns or 2.704 with my scale on the A&D. If I weigh that bullet on the A&D before the loading session and it comes up 32.02 grains then I am pretty sure if I weigh out 38.4 gns of H4350 that it will weigh the same as the 38.4 gn charge I loaded last week, My $20 Smartweigh scale has shown that same bullet as weighing 32.04 gns consistently. I don't sweat .02 grains in my loads
I keep a .20 cal 32 gn bullet that my scale say weighs 32.02 gns or 2.704 with my scale on the A&D. If I weigh that bullet on the A&D before the loading session and it comes up 32.02 grains then I am pretty sure if I weigh out 38.4 gns of H4350 that it will weigh the same as the 38.4 gn charge I loaded last week, My $20 Smartweigh scale has shown that same bullet as weighing 32.04 gns consistently. I don't sweat .02 grains in my loads
I agree. I don't shoot F class so can't comment on how important 0.001 grain would be but doubt it matters. Personally I don't see any of this as relevant to the thread topic. Question asked and question answered. While we all want uniformity in a charge starting to split even 0.01 grain seems taking it to an extreme. Shooting 500 yards I don't see much difference in +/- 0.1 grain of my target weight. Then too, maybe for those at the 1,000 yard line it matters.
Ron
Ron
A reloader in the neighborhood called to ask me what was wrong with his OHAUS 10/10 scale; I did not jump out into the fast lane and start showing off, I told him "I do not know". He brought the scales to me, that gave me the opportunity to check the scales.
First thing? The machinist level, calibrated to .001" per foot, next was the stick-um pad for leveling the scale test plate. There was a chance his scale was correct when weighing in one position and incorrectly in another. Because he is one of the most disciplined reloaders/shooters/craftsman I know I was not surprised he sent the scales back to Ohaus for repair and then purchased another Ohaus 10/10 type scale because he will not be without one when reloading.
F. Guffey
Another friend/reloaders/smith/builder of bench rest type rifles decide he would go with RCBS combination scale/powder measure. He was running two of them at a time. He had it down to running one and dumping the other. And then one day one of the machines went dark.
In the DFW area, not a problem. The company that made the scales is in Grand Prairie, TX. So he waited and waited etc., and then the other scale: the spirit that operated it decide to leave it, by then they had both of his scales and the waiting continued on and on and my friend was not a patient man and then he has his lawyer get involved. He did not receive the same scales he gave them, I know; what is the difference but when all of your equipment is green and one scale is returned 'GRAY'
It was about that time he informed me this was the second time around, the first time he asked them if they could speed them up when they repair them.
I offered to loan him two of my units, it was about that time one of my scales had a load cell failure and then one of the chargers failed, I saw the little spirit leave. I could not blame the dryer or long white tubes/bulbs with ballast.
F. Guffey
If you develop the load correctly you should have a flat node of .3 to .5 minimum. I always seem to find a node where I could vary by .1 or .2 gns and it would not matter. This is just a example of what done, and I am still a newbie at precision reloading. At 21.5 gns of powder the avg speed was 2604 and at 22.0 gns it was 2609 FPS. Both groups had roughly the same POI and were .5 groups. I could load rounds at random weights between 21.5 and 22.0 gns of Varget and do headshots on ground squirrels at 200 and never adjust the crosshairs
https://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=109552&d=1555593899
https://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=109552&d=1555593899
Last edited:
It was all volumetric measure. No scales were involved. One reason is slightly compressed loads seem to do best with Black powder because they make ignition consistent, regardless of exact charge weight, so the gunsmith set the measure volume to do that. Different Brands produced different pressures and performance, but the variation was not enough to risk the integrity of the gun, so all were typically loaded slightly compressed, and that was that.
Not sure how the thread has evolved to this but .....
it's a pretty well accepted belief is that a 90% case fill is a good thing for low extreme spread velocities. I prefer using the lowest velocity node available that will get the job done but if the only node that works is a manufacture verified compressed load then fine. Do workup starting low and working up slowly checking for the usual primer related pressure signs. If you really want to be sure take a blade mic or calipers and measure the case expansion at the web and look for any signs of a bulge. Even the books can be wrong and when reloading you are the one ultimately responsible for your safety.
it's a pretty well accepted belief is that a 90% case fill is a good thing for low extreme spread velocities. I prefer using the lowest velocity node available that will get the job done but if the only node that works is a manufacture verified compressed load then fine. Do workup starting low and working up slowly checking for the usual primer related pressure signs. If you really want to be sure take a blade mic or calipers and measure the case expansion at the web and look for any signs of a bulge. Even the books can be wrong and when reloading you are the one ultimately responsible for your safety.
It had to be a simpler life, I have scales that go back that far and they did not have the Internet; back then it was more about how it can be done. Back then they did not have enough information to talk it to death.
And there was the Sears catalog: The Sears catalog had a picture of the bullet, weight of the bullet and powder weight. Calibrating scales was a matter of 'zeroing' the scales. And dippers, they had dippers, when they purchased the pistol or rifle they purchased it with the dipper.
Check weights: Back then they did not have anyone on the Internet telling them nothing works and or 'it just can not be done'. And they did not have folks jumping out into the fast lane because they did not have passing lanes and second gear. And then there was this thing about getting up hill. there was a time when they hauled one wagon up at a time. And then there was getting down hill. It required more skill getting down the hill than up the hill.
I was watching a news report about a runaway wagon being pulled by two magnificent draft horse. I looked at the rigging and knew if the parade route was not flat they were going to have a run-away.
The toughest job in the old days: That goes to 40 mule team skinner/driver and his brakeman. The life expectation of the brakeman was very short.
F. Guffey
And there was the Sears catalog: The Sears catalog had a picture of the bullet, weight of the bullet and powder weight. Calibrating scales was a matter of 'zeroing' the scales. And dippers, they had dippers, when they purchased the pistol or rifle they purchased it with the dipper.
Check weights: Back then they did not have anyone on the Internet telling them nothing works and or 'it just can not be done'. And they did not have folks jumping out into the fast lane because they did not have passing lanes and second gear. And then there was this thing about getting up hill. there was a time when they hauled one wagon up at a time. And then there was getting down hill. It required more skill getting down the hill than up the hill.
I was watching a news report about a runaway wagon being pulled by two magnificent draft horse. I looked at the rigging and knew if the parade route was not flat they were going to have a run-away.
The toughest job in the old days: That goes to 40 mule team skinner/driver and his brakeman. The life expectation of the brakeman was very short.
F. Guffey
If anyone has any use for it this is a link to a tiny little program for converting Grams to Grains or Grains to Grams. About all it does is save you either doing the math or using Google and the Internet. The file downloads as a small zip file so when you download it just download to somewhere convenient like your desktop, right click the folder and choose extract all just like any other zip file folder. There are a few small files and just double click the Setup.exe file and follow the on screen instructions. It will install like any other program.
Here are a few simple screen shots of how it works and what it looks like.
When the program runs it starts like this. There are 3 text boxes and you enter a value in the top box.
In this example I entered a value of 15.4324 which is how many grains are in a gram and also 15.4324 grams happen to be 238.16 grains.
The entry is merely a number the lower text boxes will display the entered number in both grains and grams.
Any confusion on how to download and install there are more instructions on This Page about 1/2 way down the page. I believe the screen shots were Windows XP so just adapt to your operating system. The images in this post are mine linked to a domain which is also mine. The software is free to anyone who wants it or has a use for it. That also applies to anything (downloads) on the page I linked to. Any questions just ask. The software will run on any Windows OS from Windows 98 through Windows 10. It was only written for a Windows OS.
Ron
Here are a few simple screen shots of how it works and what it looks like.
When the program runs it starts like this. There are 3 text boxes and you enter a value in the top box.
In this example I entered a value of 15.4324 which is how many grains are in a gram and also 15.4324 grams happen to be 238.16 grains.
The entry is merely a number the lower text boxes will display the entered number in both grains and grams.
Any confusion on how to download and install there are more instructions on This Page about 1/2 way down the page. I believe the screen shots were Windows XP so just adapt to your operating system. The images in this post are mine linked to a domain which is also mine. The software is free to anyone who wants it or has a use for it. That also applies to anything (downloads) on the page I linked to. Any questions just ask. The software will run on any Windows OS from Windows 98 through Windows 10. It was only written for a Windows OS.
Ron
If you don't want to clutter your computer with additional software, just use an online HTML converter like this one. There are converters for everything online now. Want to convert thermal conductivity units of Btu-inches/hour-ft²-°F to Watts/meter-Kelvin? It's online.
If you want to host the conversion on your machine for when you are not online, another approach you can take is to use Excel. The current crop of Excel has conversion factors in it. To do the same thing the above calculator does, using cell A1 to hold the argument:
In cell A1 type:
Select another cell for the first answer and into it type:
For the reverse conversion, in a third cell type:
You can just copy and paste the above text in, quotation marks and all. As long as your copy of Excel is recent enough to support the CONVERT function, you will be good to go. You may have to format the cell to get the number of decimal places you want or to make it display the units (though most folks just put the units in an adjacent cell).
(Note that "lbm", above is a pound of mass, as distinct from a pound of force, "lbf".)
If you want to host the conversion on your machine for when you are not online, another approach you can take is to use Excel. The current crop of Excel has conversion factors in it. To do the same thing the above calculator does, using cell A1 to hold the argument:
In cell A1 type:
1.5432358
Select another cell for the first answer and into it type:
=CONVERT(A1*7000,"g","lbm")
For the reverse conversion, in a third cell type:
=CONVERT(A1/7000,"lbm","g")
You can just copy and paste the above text in, quotation marks and all. As long as your copy of Excel is recent enough to support the CONVERT function, you will be good to go. You may have to format the cell to get the number of decimal places you want or to make it display the units (though most folks just put the units in an adjacent cell).
(Note that "lbm", above is a pound of mass, as distinct from a pound of force, "lbf".)
I used this today to figure out how many 120SMKs I had left in a partial box of 500. I tared a plastic container on a postal scale, set it to Kgs, weighed bullets, converted the grams to grains and divided by 120. I now know I have exactly 178 bullets left in that box. It took less than 2 minutes from start to finish to weigh and divide. Can you imagine the time it would take to count 178 bullets and even then you would wonder if you had miscounted.