Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

.0648

Discussion in 'Ammunition & Reloading' started by Smiddy, Oct 3, 2013.

  1. Smiddy

    Smiddy Hillsboro, OR Active Member

    Messages:
    168
    Likes Received:
    36
    GR(.0648)=G Its not a complicated formula. If your going the other way its G(15.432)=GR

    Just saying.
     
  2. MarkAd

    MarkAd Port Orchard Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    617
    huh
     
  3. Certaindeaf

    Certaindeaf SE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,860
    Likes Received:
    7,257
    Grains to grams? They have conversion tables/convertors for all units of measure.
     
  4. Certaindeaf

    Certaindeaf SE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,860
    Likes Received:
    7,257
    Did you blow something up?
     
  5. bballer182

    bballer182 Molalla Active Member

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    53
    Were you drunk or high or a combination of both while posting this thread?
     
  6. Smiddy

    Smiddy Hillsboro, OR Active Member

    Messages:
    168
    Likes Received:
    36
    :laugh: I dont think I was drunk at the time. I want to buy a scale that measures milligrams. I looked on a couple forums to find a inexpensive scale that can accurately measure at this level. You know, some good old internet feedback. I just found a bunch of posts imploring OPs to buy scales that weigh in grains. Fears of getting the formula's wrong, etc. Original threads weren't from this forum, but I wanted to make a rant on my favorite forum. If there were multiple steps to some crazy formula I would understand the hesitation but I think this is pretty straight forward.

    example:
    42grain load x .0648 = 2.722 grams to the milligram.
    42.5 grain x .0648 = 2.754 grams to the milligram.
     
  7. bballer182

    bballer182 Molalla Active Member

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    53
    Lol. I just laugh every time I think of this thread. The thread title is just a decimal number and then a 2 line formula in the message body. It just makes me laugh a little. I understand the logic behind the post, but it was so vague that it didn't make its existence seems productive. Hahah. I'd change the thread title to something like "unit conversion formula" or something.
     
  8. Smiddy

    Smiddy Hillsboro, OR Active Member

    Messages:
    168
    Likes Received:
    36
    Yes. Twas a little vague.
     
  9. Certaindeaf

    Certaindeaf SE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,860
    Likes Received:
    7,257
    Go grains whatever you do.
     
  10. SinisterSouthpaw

    SinisterSouthpaw SW WA Active Member

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    76
    A scale that reads in grams as well as grains is useful if you keep track of the density of your powder from lot to lot--doing the math is a LOT easier in metric--something perhaps less necessary these days, but I still do it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2013
  11. noylj

    noylj high desert Active Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    44
    Almost any available reloading scale is good enough. If you want better than +/- 0.1gn (I hate "gr" for grains as I tend to read it as grams, whereas "gn" is clearer to me), than you need to go to an analytical balance that probably only reads grams.
    See Mettler and Sartorius.
     
  12. Certaindeaf

    Certaindeaf SE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,860
    Likes Received:
    7,257
    See the Hubble telescope.. for a while there, it could hardly see.
     
  13. SinisterSouthpaw

    SinisterSouthpaw SW WA Active Member

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    76
    When it was not seeing as some folks thought it should---they spent a lot more tax payer's money to "fix" it. Since there was no other hubble bubble to compare with, how do we know what it is "seeing" now is correct? What that has to do with being over picky about powder charges I could not say..............
     
  14. Otter

    Otter Oregon - mid Willamette Valley Active Member

    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    225
    Maybe this thread should have been titled 4:20
     
  15. noylj

    noylj high desert Active Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    44
    Actually, the Hubble could see quite well, just not as well as it was designed. Insert a contact lens and bingo--sharp images into deepest space.
     
  16. saxon

    saxon springfield Active Member

    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    164
    a pint is a pound the world round
    but how much is a hogs head?
     
  17. DieselScout

    DieselScout S Clackamas County Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,350
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    63 gallons or 504 pints