super trickler
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
You can disagree all you like, it still doesn't change the fact of the matter that you can still load to crappy SD/ES values using a Prometheus and you can load with excellent SD/ES values using other methods (SuperTrickler, ATV3, and ATV4 included). I personally have loaded ammunition using a Hornady pocket scale that had better SD/ES values than some loads I've tested using a Prometheus, because ignition consistency is a multifaceted beast that includes factors beyond measuring weight of the charge to the precision of a single kernel of powder.
Disagreeing with basic facts is a bad look, and even ignoring those facts it's disingenuous to pretend that any difference in SD/ES you might see would have any effect on any of the shooting you do. I've shown how even an ES of 50fps wouldn't allow you to truthfully blame the ammo for missing a prairie dog at 500 yards, and the only reason you continue to ignore it is because even you understand here that it's impossible to argue with basic and unopinionated fact.
Math is real. Very real. And one, here, that doesn't lie in regards to what @ThePretzel has said... Just sayin. 
ES and SD has absolutely NOTHING to do with my argument... but don't let that stop you.
I'm here to learn... But what makes you say that it doesn't matter? In fact, I would believe that it would matter, correct? Since the argument that X scale does better than Y scale to produce Z results? Wouldn't LOWERING external variables yield tighter ES/SDs to produce ammo capable to doing ABC job?
Pre
Pretty sure the first PD Orkan shoots at is a “sighter” for his next 99 kills in a row
Pretty sure the first PD Orkan shoots at is a “sighter” for his next 99 kills in a row
ES/SD are the quantifiable forms of measuring whether something does or doesn't improve the consistency of ignition in your reloads.
Measuring weight of the powder charge more accurately is all well and good, but it doesn't mean anything when it comes to measurable improvements in your accuracy at long range. The effects of improved consistency (better SD and ES) are what actually matter, with consistent charge weights making up one piece in the puzzle of achieving consistent muzzle velocities.
The idea that measuring your charge weight to be exactly the same each time will affect whether your zero is the same each time you go to the range is a pretty ridiculous claim when you consider the fact that fx scales are calibrated before each use. The Prometheus will be repeatable in that it's 30.0gr of powder today will be the same as its 30.0gr of powder 2 years from now, but that's not some kind of advantage over the fx scales that are calibrated each time they're used.
ES is an excellent way to refute exactly what you were discussing, which is that the Prometheus allows your zero to remain constant across multiple range trips. The way that different charge weights caused by loading with an inconsistent scale at different times would be measured is by checking the velocity of the loaded ammo, because without any change in velocity (or atmospheric conditions) you don't have any change in zero.
Even if you fully accept the premise that the Prometheus is more accurate when loading (precise to a single kernel of Varget, and accepting the assumption that this isn't possible on an fx scale) and the premise that the Prometheus is more consistent in giving the same weight for the same requested charge over years of use - it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if both of those things are true, because the difference in muzzle velocity because of those two facts would have to be massive (well over 50fps) for you to even notice it in the type of shooting you currently do.
You can't even claim to have data to back up your premises, much less data to show that it makes any difference, because the possible difference in performance/zero shift if your premises are true is so small as to be entirely meaningless and unmeasurable with the shooting you do (prairie dogs out to 300 or more yards). The shooting you do requires such a low level of precision that you would not be able to notice any difference using your preferred performance metric of simply counting hits vs misses on prairie dogs.
That's the point I'm trying to get across - even if your claims are 100% true that the Prometheus is more accurate, precise, and consistent than anything else it doesn't matter because the difference it makes in the actual outcome (accuracy and precision of your rounds sent downrange) is so small as to be literally unmeasurable. Even with 50fps difference in ES you can't measure the difference in your own shooting, and going from excellent F-class/benchrest SD/ES (using any other method of weighing powder charges) to a slightly more excellent SD/ES with a Prometheus (a maximum improvement of 10fps if you went from 5/10, which is not unheard of in f-class/benchrest, to something like 0/0) is an even smaller difference than the large 50fps swing discussed above.
TLDR:
Even assuming every claim you've made is correct, the conclusions you make based on those claims are flawed.Any differences that affect the outcomes you're measuring (hitting more/fewer prairie dogs or having a zero shift between shooting trips) would ultimately result from either equipment failure or a difference in muzzle velocity. That's the root cause, discussing the outcome while ignoring the cause is nonsensical.
Even assuming all your claims are correct and the Prometheus is better, you would never be able to notice a difference in your final outcome with your style of shooting because even a 50fps swing produces such a small change in outcome for your shooting scenarios. For the best in the world who already have 5/10 SD/ES with other methods even the maximum improvement of going to 0/0 SD/ES would make very little difference ultimately compared to the other factors that go into reloading for precision and accuracy.
Last edited:
I will pretty much overspend on any cool reloading shit out there and the Prometheus has never called to me. It may be the only thing not calling my name in this space. Not only does the whole leasing thing turn me off, but it seems clear that a better, cheaper mousetrap has already been built.
I’m trying to refrain from ad hominem but Orkan is on the front page of the Prometheus website and Upton Sinclair said
“It’s hard to get a man to understand something when his salary [or any other vested interest] depends upon his not understanding it.”
“It’s hard to get a man to understand something when his salary [or any other vested interest] depends upon his not understanding it.”
You can reduce the speed of the small tube on the ATV4 and get .01 accuracy. With calibration, it will always be exact and correct.
Also, the u it used BLE to talk, so there isn't a reason you couldn't build a standalone touchscreen for it around $20 or so... Or even just buy a $50 dedicated tablet.
Also, the u it used BLE to talk, so there isn't a reason you couldn't build a standalone touchscreen for it around $20 or so... Or even just buy a $50 dedicated tablet.
Are you trying to claim I benefit financially from the sale of a prometheus?
No I'm saying it's hard to be on the website front page and say anything that remotely detracts from the unassailable superiority of the device; the vested interest is the relationship with Brand
Like I doubt Turban would want me on the website when I say my ammo don't get more concentric with the Prazipress
Like I doubt Turban would want me on the website when I say my ammo don't get more concentric with the Prazipress
So I’ll lie to thousands of people because I know the owner/inventor. Got it.
And I’m sure you take endorsing a product very lightly too. It’s not like you have a successful business that you don’t care about so you probably endorse anything.
Seriously I can’t speak to the Prometheus, V4 debate (both arguments make sense to me and unless I have both to test personally I won’t comment) but posts about @orkan’s integrity, especially when he makes one of the best products on the market, spends his time educating others, talks to anyone on the phone because he loves to teach, just not cool and doesn’t add any information to the debate.
The two people on the thread with the Prometheus I’m very interested in hearing their thoughts, wether they agree or not. My .02 that’s worth .01 since no one asked.
Also happy holidays to everyone and how amazing that we get to talk to people all over the world about the minutia of reloading.
That's good to know. It has me reconsidering the ATV4. When you hook this tablet up can it communicate beyond the reloading room? For example, if a computer's left on in the office down the hall can this device link up to it? Can you tell the tablet to only communicate with the ATV4?
I'm not tech savvy, this is an honest question, and I just reread 1984 not too long ago.
Thanks.
The tablet talks to the ATV4 over Bluetooth. So, if you want to restrict it, you could turn off wifi.
.
.
Last edited:
Thanks for that, NoDopes. I find that watching porn when I'm reloading makes me lose focus on my whiskey drinking.
Or now you could use the dedicated screen for the autotrickler and the other screen for porn. If you had a V3 and upgraded to the V4 - now you have an extra shot glass for your whiskey. I personally found a .2 MOA gain with Tequila but YMMV. Three birds with one stone. You're welcome.
I’m on Vudoo’s website and I regularly steer people in a different direction if their particular circumstance dictates.
Some of us and some companies appreciate living in reality in which their are pros and cons to everything.
The Prometheus is a very neat, very precise, TOY. I would love to have one, and some day I might. But I’m under no illusion it would improve my shooting whatsoever. I would bet that if orkan loaned me his prometheus, dies and data for his prairie dog rifle, he couldn’t tell the difference between what I loaded on his setup or my little slicked down Dillon Ohaus made 505 and my old Dandy products auto trickler. I’ve tested that setup and it is usually within one kernel of what my v3 is, and in fact I trust it more.
There are some guys who have to have the things tho, and that’s fine. He’ll never have to worry about his charges. All of us do the same to a degree so I wouldn’t go beating him up because a Prometheus is just a bridge too far lol.
There are some guys who have to have the things tho, and that’s fine. He’ll never have to worry about his charges. All of us do the same to a degree so I wouldn’t go beating him up because a Prometheus is just a bridge too far lol.
Here is the thing. Say you are out prairie dogging, and you are shooting 22 Creedmoor with a load of 38 grains of RL 16 under 82 Bergers. No idea if anybody actually shoots this load, but Quickload estimates it at 3194 from a 24" barrel. It shows that the delta for .1 grain of powder is roughly 7 fps. At 500 yards that is roughly one inch of difference between +.2 grains and -.2 grains. Even at 1000 yards it is a 6 inch difference. It's hard to understand that making much of a difference on target on the first or tenth round, and even then, nobody is suggesting that the best the AT4 can do is +/- .2 grains while the Prometheus holds absolute zero.
The Prometheus is a bit of a work of art. Many things in reloading are, and they can absolutely enhance the subjective reloading experience. They can also change the amount of time it takes to reload. But numbers determine ballistics, and it is really hard to see any possibility of improvement from one over the other. In fact, I can throw RL16 on a Johnson's Quickmeasure, mounted on a Dillon press, in that range, with a SD of 0.11 grains, which basically says that 95% of the time, on a progressive press with a powder measure, I am still in that above =/- 0.2 grains!
There are a number of great insights into reloading that come on this subforum, especially from Orkan, but one insight many miss, including myself most of the time, is that results are not dependent on perfect powder measuring, especially at "normal" distances. How the knowledge of perfect powder measuring affects confidence is another, equally important, question.
The Prometheus is a bit of a work of art. Many things in reloading are, and they can absolutely enhance the subjective reloading experience. They can also change the amount of time it takes to reload. But numbers determine ballistics, and it is really hard to see any possibility of improvement from one over the other. In fact, I can throw RL16 on a Johnson's Quickmeasure, mounted on a Dillon press, in that range, with a SD of 0.11 grains, which basically says that 95% of the time, on a progressive press with a powder measure, I am still in that above =/- 0.2 grains!
There are a number of great insights into reloading that come on this subforum, especially from Orkan, but one insight many miss, including myself most of the time, is that results are not dependent on perfect powder measuring, especially at "normal" distances. How the knowledge of perfect powder measuring affects confidence is another, equally important, question.
Just to add one other thing, we tend to preference what we can measure, even if it isn't that important. Best example would be runout, which we can measure very easily, but which, from all on target results, has minimal importance until you get to (high) runout levels that are almost unthinkable with even reasonable loading techniques.
Now we are going to start measuring primer depth to the half thousandth, and while it may have significant effects, we will assume that it does simply because we will measure it more.
That's not to say that powder charge isn't very important, it is, along with its column density. But, the more we can measure it to the .0001, the more we think those changes matter. When we couldn't measure as well, or easily, weight wise as we could volumetrically, we thought volume was more important. There is probably some chicken and egg issue going on here.
Now we are going to start measuring primer depth to the half thousandth, and while it may have significant effects, we will assume that it does simply because we will measure it more.
That's not to say that powder charge isn't very important, it is, along with its column density. But, the more we can measure it to the .0001, the more we think those changes matter. When we couldn't measure as well, or easily, weight wise as we could volumetrically, we thought volume was more important. There is probably some chicken and egg issue going on here.
Just a data point on the V3 (but really the entire set up). This is all weighed on an A&D EJ54D2 - it is accurate to .003 grains. The scale was in an environmentally stable environment, calibrated and perfectly level. This is for a charge weight of 43.1g of Staball 6.5 - its only 8 measurements and not enough to be totally statistically significant although the difference of the errors is small. I weighed the unloaded primed cartridges with as little handling as possible and using gloves. I had just gotten the V3 so wanted to make sure it worked as advertised - I dont do this often, this was for an 8 shot string to prove that the charge weight worked. These particular 8 shots had an SD of 4.6 and ES of 16 fps as measured by a lab radar with an average speed of 2883. One note - the primer seating was done with the CPS and got me the best results of anything I've tried. Basically the Autotrickler seems to work as advertised with a .02 grain error which on both sides coincides with a .04 grain maximum spread.
For me, this set up gives me the confidence I need for my particular application. As to the advantage of a Prometheus - personally, knowing myself and the level of my anal retention, if I could afford it, having 0 difference would be great to have because I always want everything to be the same . Wether that matters or not on target, I wont even attempt to argue (.04 grains vs 0). Ironically enough, the BR guys that shoot at my club use Chargemasters at the bench but are loading to the environment for the particular time they are shooting. I have no clue but find all of this conversation very interesting so thank you all.
... and if you understand positive compensation, it matters even less!
Though how many times do I have to say, this is not about ES/SD? Tell you what, I'm going to refuse to explain that any further here. Someone wants to know, they can call me... and if their attitude is good, I'll explain it.
I'm already taking enough of a rash from people about primer seating depth. Let me guess, that doesn't matter either? lol Merry Christmas folks.
I'm not saying what matters and what doesn't, and I'm not talking about ES/SD either. I am talking about a human epistemological issue that those of us in semi quantitative fields, like economics, finance and medicine, deal with regularly. Hard sciences have different issues here. That is we all tend to preference what we can measure, and it is up to us to be able to decide what we measure because it is important, and what we measure because it is measurable. As you know, I am a fan of your stuff, and I am not saying anything about you either way.... and if you understand positive compensation, it matters even less!
Though how many times do I have to say, this is not about ES/SD? Tell you what, I'm going to refuse to explain that any further here. Someone wants to know, they can call me... and if their attitude is good, I'll explain it.
Merry Christmas folks.
ETA: an example from everyday life is that it is easy to measure your weight, but it is relatively unimportant. It is more difficult to reliably measure bodyfat percentage, though it is far more important a measure. So we default to measuring weight, and to giving health recommendations by weight rather than to figure out a way to measure bodyfat.
Last edited:
Just to be absolutely clear regarding the charge weight (column 1): Is that value (43.10) what the V3 was set to throw or what the scale readout actually read (or both)?
Thanks!
Yes that was the programmed charge on the V3. I didn’t record the actual weight from the 120 (in retrospect I probably should have) - I went straight to the other scale with the filled case to check against the theoretical weight. I was just checking how accurate it is. The weights do vary by .02 on the display here and there so it would seem what you see is what you get based on this small sample. Maybe next time I will try getting all the charges to the exact same weight and not accept the .02 but that defeats the purpose of this machine vs throwing a charge and finishing it with my dandy . For my purpose that’s plenty good - that load was capable of sub .25 moa groups. However, I do have a call into @okran because I truly want to understand what he is saying as I’m sure it will help my reloading.
Last edited:
I have same scales and did the same thing after all the talk about the Prometheus. I ran 100 loads and out of the 100 only 4 were the .04 off. Everything else was .02 or dead nuts, and the ones .02 off were almost all over .02 not under. I did get to see how the FX120i has trouble with the .005 variance. Sometimes it goes up and sometimes it goes down lol. I lifted the cup and placed it back down and the FX would flash back and forth, up and down trying to decide how to deal with .005. I think the biggest thing I see with peoples set ups is they are not in a controlled area. The garage is not the place to set these systems up. I built a room in the house dedicated for loading. Clean power, temp controlled and humidity controlled with no static. Both scales are solid, they do not walk. Environment is very important for these to run properly. I would like to test the Prometheus to see if it throws that much tighter.
That's the thing - the only change you'll see from improvements in charge weight consistency is better SD/ES or more consistent velocity from range trip to range trip. You won't see other changes. Your zero won't shift any more or less than the velocity dictates. Your groups won't be any more accurate than what the velocity variance dictates.
Powder affects velocity, you're not going to magically change the harmonics of your bullet exiting the barrel (like you do with barrel tuners or seating depth tuning) to improve groupings if your powder charge is precise to 0.05gr instead of 0.1gr, or if you're using a beam scale or a digital scale to achieve your precision. You'll tighten up the waterline of your groupings with more consistent velocity, but the dispersion from how the bullet exits the muzzle will remain unchanged if you use a Prometheus or a ATV3/V4/SuperTrickler instead.
I use a Prometheus because I like the simplified workflow compared to the digital systems, not because it's more accurate. You just put a case underneath it and work the powder measure, that's it. No separate container for weighing the powder, no moving powder around from scale to case, and no funnels. Not having 0.02gr digital resolution in my face also gives me peace of mind since nothing ever looks "wrong" even if the 0.02gr difference is solely because individual kernels weigh more than 0.02gr and getting it exact may be impossible.
The fx-120i scale is accurate to 0.02gr, while the Prometheus is accurate to approximately 0.05gr. Accuracy is actually in favor of the electronic systems, particularly when you consider they can be easily calibrated for verification. If you slow trickle your powder to that level of accuracy (0.02gr) and follow usage recommendations for the fx-120i (such as a power conditioner), you will get exactly the same results as you would with a Prometheus.
How do I know this? I've done it myself with repeated trials and much more stringent testing than just claiming I "hit more prairie dogs" or "have less zero shift". I showed the numbers above on how velocity variances affect ballistic performance, and I am more than happy to convert the notes and data from my testing of Prometheus vs ATV3 into a digital format for all to see. The results aren't surprising at all, they show that it doesn't matter what method you use to measure powder if your charge weight variance is +/- 1 kernel of powder either way. More importantly, I stand by what I've said and am willing to put it all in writing instead of running away with my tail tucked when people start asking the hard questions.
That's the problem here, you're claiming the Prometheus is better than everything because of some mysterious magical voodoo that you refuse to elaborate on. I'm calling you out on your bullshit - and that's exactly what it is - as an owner and user of the Prometheus who has legitimately tested the performance of these devices head to head, with the hard data to prove it. Online resources like this site can be a treasure trove of valuable knowledge, but not if the information posted is fabricated to support an opinion rather than factual truth supported by data.
Oh, so your opinion outweighs mine eh? Ok. lol
What is your full time job? What’s your name mr anonymous bread product? You want to talk about run and hide… how about you get some skin in the game? We’ll see if you’re somebody.
What is your full time job? What’s your name mr anonymous bread product? You want to talk about run and hide… how about you get some skin in the game? We’ll see if you’re somebody.
No, my measured data from testing outweighs an opinion that you refuse to explain and which lacks any factual basis.
You're claiming that measuring out the same charge weight using with two different methods will result in the method that is both less-precise (0.05gr resolution rather than 0.02gr resolution) and less-accurate (cannot be calibrated in the same fashion as an fx-120i) somehow giving superior ballistic results. Not only are you the person making absurd claims, you're refusing to actually back them up with anything other that vague claims about zero shift and fantasies about a 103% or higher hit rate on prairie dogs for an afternoon of shooting.
If the actual average charge weight is the same, regardless of what charge weight was targeted (to account for a lack of accuracy or calibration), then it's patently absurd to claim that the less precise method of achieving that charge weight will produce superior results to the more precise alternative.
I am an electrical systems integration and software engineer for a major medical device company. I have substantial experience with both the principles of engineering as well as the process of stringently testing for the effects of a single variable in a system with multiple confounding factors as part of the FDA approvals process for the various devices I have led development on. Testing the effects of variables that are hard to individually distinguish among the noise is quite literally what I do for a living.
I've pulled up my notes from the testing I did with 105 Hybrids and Varget and punched them into a spreadsheet for easy reference, which is attached below as a PDF. If you would prefer a different file format feel free to let me know and I'm more than happy to convert it as necessary.
The differences in group sizes, SD, and ES were not statistically significant between the ATV3 and the Prometheus. The Prometheus gave higher velocities at the same measured charge weight, indicating a slight difference in accuracy compared to the calibrated fx-120i, but this was not important for the purposes of this test (we both agree that precision is far, far more important than exact accuracy in this context).
Put up or shut up. I've shown exactly why and how your claims are both ridiculous (claiming a less-accurate and less-precise method of measuring the same charge weight is better) and unmeasurable using your own methods of evaluation (300 yard prairie dogs and zero shift). Now it's your turn to try and explain what performance advantages you believe the Prometheus provides and how you measured those advantages.
So, basically the guy above me is smarter than me in all ways except when checking prostates during my day job... 
I'm still stuck on the claim that charge weight consistency != ED/SD variance reduction
This is assuming your other loading/prep steps are reasonable.
This is assuming your other loading/prep steps are reasonable.
Assuming that Orkan is not full of shit, which, given his history and knowledge is a more than fair assumption, maybe it makes sense to think of what other than purely powder charge the Prometheus could be adding in order to improve performance. The thing that comes to mind, and is testable, is that it delivers that charge in the same mechanized way each time, as opposed to the Atv4 which is dependent on human action to get the powder from the scale into the case. It may seem crazy, but remember that short range benchrest shooters still often charge through powder throws, and that those throws are providing a more consistent powder column density than ladling in through a short funnel. Maybe the Prometheus is giving that advantage as well.
It would be easy enough to test. Just charge the Prometheus into a cup and then pour into a powder funnel and see if that changes anything. In connection with my earlier point, it is much easier to measure weight of powder dropped than it is to measure quality (consistent density) of fill, so we default to assuming that what we can measure is more important than what we cannot. There may be other distinctions between the Prometheus and Atv4 that could explain the perceived difference in the field, I just don't have the experience with the Prometheus to begin to guess what it could be. But it is a mistake to assume that powder charge and velocity variance are monocausally linked.
It would be easy enough to test. Just charge the Prometheus into a cup and then pour into a powder funnel and see if that changes anything. In connection with my earlier point, it is much easier to measure weight of powder dropped than it is to measure quality (consistent density) of fill, so we default to assuming that what we can measure is more important than what we cannot. There may be other distinctions between the Prometheus and Atv4 that could explain the perceived difference in the field, I just don't have the experience with the Prometheus to begin to guess what it could be. But it is a mistake to assume that powder charge and velocity variance are monocausally linked.
The Prometheus itself uses a short funnel to put the powder into the cases. I believe it's an RCBS, matching the powder throw supplied with it, with inserts made by Brand for different cartridge diameters. Powder drops from the weighing funnel (just a metal cone with a stopper ball to seal the hole in the bottom) into the second funnel, but the weighing funnel already extends an inch or so down into the second funnel. The weighing funnel protrudes outside of the metal housing on its own, the second funnel helps protect it from being bumped or disturbed.
In short, the funnel would have nothing to do with it because the Prometheus itself uses a funnel in the exact same fashion, and also doesn't have any additional drop height that might serve to compact powder since it drops the powder from below the top of the funnel anyways.
In short, the funnel would have nothing to do with it because the Prometheus itself uses a funnel in the exact same fashion, and also doesn't have any additional drop height that might serve to compact powder since it drops the powder from below the top of the funnel anyways.
Why is there kernels of powder laying all over the place in virtually every picture of an autotrickler/FX120 setup? Do people think that only happens when it throws a charge? A clue, perhaps?
Also, you're 100% correct in that a prometheus will mimic a drop tube, where as a normal short funnel does not. Use of a drop tube with the autotrickler can get them close, if the operator dumps the powder uniformly each time... but that still doesn't solve the powder handling problem.
... but hey, I only shoot for a living and live on my range. What do I know? I'm sure a software engineer gets more range time to test things than I do.
Your reading comprehension is even crappier than your blatantly false claims. I specifically said the Prometheus does NOT have any sort of drop tube effect, because the powder is released from below the top of the funnel. If you use an ATV3 and drop your powder from even flush with the top of the funnel you get more of a drop tube effect, and if you use an ATV3 with a drop tube you actually get a real drop tube effect because you actually used a drop tube.
As you can clearly see in the photo below, the Prometheus drops powder from below the top of the funnel negating any potential "drop tube effect" exactly like I said above.
Why is there kernels of powder laying all over the place in virtually every picture of an autotrickler/FX120 setup? Do people think that only happens when it throws a charge? A clue, perhaps?
Also, you want to talk about powder kernels scattered everywhere while pretending the Prometheus never has that? The Prometheus scatters so much powder that Brand has to specifically tell people not to use pressurized air to clean it out. You, of all people, should know this because Brand posted the info on your own damn forum website! https://forums.gunhive.com/topic/3722/cleaning-scale-and-inside-of-housing
This is how a Prometheus looks inside after loading about 200 rounds with Varget gunpowder.
No you don't, you sell products for a living. People who shoot for a living get paid specifically to shoot, and they also compete (and win) matches. Living on a range just means you've got a well-sized pasture of prairie dogs out back, which is not too different from many shooters here. Funny enough, your second business is actually an IT services company (operated from the exact same address as Primal Rights) that most sources peg as having higher revenue than your shooting-related business. You can't make claims about software engineering being irrelevant to shooting when you yourself are operating an IT business, especially when I have gone into detail about how my job is literally to determine the effects of changing variables in systems filled with lots of external noise.... but hey, I only shoot for a living and live on my range. What do I know? I'm sure a software engineer gets more range time to test things than I do.
All that is besides the point however. Cut the shit and either provide some arguments and data to back up your claims or quit spouting off nonsense. You claim you want to teach and mentor shooters, here's your chance to prove it. I'm very interested in seeing what you believe is different about identical charges measured via Prometheus vs other methods, but you don't seem to be very interested in actually explaining or defending it beyond making ad-hominem attacks that are hilariously ironic themselves.
Yes. It's because the cup wasn't aligned under the funnel correctly. In the off chance you do get a grain on top of the pan, just clear the pan and redrop the charge. Missed grains on the side do not affect anything, as they aren't part of the weighing.
Only reason Im chiming in is because I spoke to Orkan yesterday for a while and the conversation ended with me, unfortunately considering a prometheus, but more importantly with a better protocol for my V3 and soon to arrive V4 (I hope). I think in the end the two of you use the prometheus for the same reason and its very possible that with the correct protocol the difference between the two gets minimized. I dont pretend to be able to even come close to explaining this as it was explained to me but will try as well as what Im going to do different because of it.
Net net - if you were to charge 300 cartridges with the two devices over say 100 minute period, the Prometheus would win out by a much bigger factor than we give credit for as measured by pressure curves and therefore harmonic effect and ultimately accuracy/precision (something not always picked up by minimal SD/ED due to positive compensation). One is a finely tuned physical system and one is an electronic one prone to greater errors. Errors induced by how the electronic scale works and how it treats the noise that ultimately becomes a signal, which end up being translated to weight. This noise can tbe introduced from dirty current as well environmental factors like changes in temperature and air currents (there's a reason electronic lab scales are much more expensive, many times in clean rooms and professionally calibrated often - fyi my experience is as a VC walking these labs - I focus on healthcare too). Then there is the charging method itself, one is a cup into a funnel into a case, and the other a direct powder drop (again dont have one so this is just my understanding). From Bryan Liz, we know that in ballistics, errors get compounded and aren't linear - I am going to assume the same formula applies here - so there is a lot of error from both the device and user that can be introduced that we aren't accounting for, where again those 300 cases from the prometheus will outshoot the V4 ones vs what we are getting in the theoretical realm.
So what am I doing different (and probably something that Pretzel already does and why he gets good results) is slow down my reloading and a slight change of my set up. My scale now sits on a precision slab which sits on an anti static mat. The scale is plugged into a power cleaner which is plugged into a batter backup to the wall. Luckily I am in an environmentally stable place but whereas I used two cups and moved a lot when reloading, now I will do one cup to stop creating my own current. I will also slow down to make sure that the powder is reaching its intended place and be more conscious if there are kernels on the scale or platen. If Im charging more than 100 rounds, I will also check the calibration to make sure I didn't drift from the calibration.
I hate chiming in because I dont have a prometheus and haven't tested myself and can not speak with the authority either of you do but Orkan is one of the most knowledgeable guys out there. Pretzel, not disregarding anything you are saying either. Just sharing my understanding and what Im going to do different in order to reload better. Ultimately these conversations benefit folks like me so I thank you both. Also
Last edited:
I don't mean to be a dick, but I want to meet the guy who can shoot the difference between a charge from a clean line and an unclean line.
That test was 180 cartridges, loaded over the course of about 5 hours the afternoon before. The ATV3 was powered on for the entire duration of the powder measuring portion, which took about 100 minutes for each device due to changing powder weights and discarding any charges that were XX.X2gr or XX.X8gr that occasionally happen because extruded powder kernels weigh more than 0.02gr each.
Thing is, everybody loves to pretend like balance scales are not prone to errors themselves when the reality is that they have just as many issues as electronic systems. They must be perfectly level to be accurate, and must remain very solidly affixed to be precise. The Prometheus can be leveled from front to back, but has no mechanism for leveling from side to side which can affect its accuracy if you do not go out of your way to level it that way yourself (and you have to level the scale inside the box, not the box itself). Balance scales are also quite sensitive to how clean or dirty they are, in addition to increased sensitivity to any vibrations that are often present if your press is on the same bench as your scale. The Prometheus has a balancing edge made of sapphire for increased durability, but it is still prone to damage like any other beam scale if your bench or the device is bumped while the beam is setting upon on the balance.
Ignoring all of that entirely, to pretend the Prometheus is a solely analog system is itself untrue. It uses an Arduino Uno and two IR beam sensors to determine when to slow the trickle speed, and when to stop the trickle altogether. It's an elegantly simple solution and plenty sufficient for the job it completes, but still requires careful placement of the sensors when manufactured and periodic checks to ensure correct behavior.
At the end of the day, one of these devices is certified by metrological institutions to hold 0.02gr precision and the other is a balance scale that is made (very well, I might add) in a backyard tool-shed with unverified claims of 0.05gr precision. I believe those precision claims despite the lack of certification, based on my experience, but to pretend like it's better solely because it's a physical system rather than electronic is a foolhardy and brazen claim rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding or distrust of electronics.
In either event power conditioners are a recommended practice for the fx-120i, but the truth of the matter is that even with florescent lighting in your loading room and the scale plugged into the same circuit as your refrigerator or air conditioner (nasty power-hogs that do more to "contaminate" a circuit than any other in most homes) the fluctuations in measured weight will be quite small and almost always less than +/- 0.04gr, or still tighter than the precision of the Prometheus. You can test it for yourself if you don't believe me - go ahead and plug the fx-120i into the "dirtiest" circuit in your home (if you have an outlet that shares a breaker with your AC or fridge, that's the one) and calibrate the scale when you first power it on. Then go ahead and wait until you hear the fridge/AC compressor either kick on or stop running if it was already running when you first calibrated the scale, and put the calibration weight back onto the scale. You'll see exactly how insignificant the difference is in the grand scheme of things first hand, because the scales already have decent (not great, but decent) power circuitry built-in for device protection and to help maintain precision.
Seriously, it doesn't matter if you use an ATV3, ATV4, SuperTrickler, or a Prometheus to measure charges for your ammo. They all measure ammo very precisely, more precisely than the ammo itself can be metered in the case of the fx-120i (because it measures weights less than a single kernel of most powders), and they all do it very precisely time and time again. The advantage of the Prometheus is not precision, the advantage of the Prometheus is a simplified work flow because you just hold a case under the funnel and work the powder measure with no extra steps.
What "second business?" Oh you mean the one I closed months ago? lol Oh boy, ya got me. lol
So no kernels escape when people are manually throwing charges into their cases and leaving those cases hang open hundreds at a time? lol
When kernels splash on an FX120, they can land on the weighing tray, hidden from the operators view. When kernels splash in a prometheus, they land on the floor of the machine, NOT a part of the weighing.
I can easily run my prometheus completely manually, with no electricity. All the sensors and electronics do is automate it. It is 100% mechanical in its weighing capability.
Run a full case of powder on an autotrickler with small funnel. Drop that same exact charge from a prometheus and you'll have more room in the case. Prometheus mimics a drop tube... period.
If you think the prometheus isn't better, call Brand and return it. He'll take it back.
You have a merry christmas fella.
So no kernels escape when people are manually throwing charges into their cases and leaving those cases hang open hundreds at a time? lol
When kernels splash on an FX120, they can land on the weighing tray, hidden from the operators view. When kernels splash in a prometheus, they land on the floor of the machine, NOT a part of the weighing.
I can easily run my prometheus completely manually, with no electricity. All the sensors and electronics do is automate it. It is 100% mechanical in its weighing capability.
Run a full case of powder on an autotrickler with small funnel. Drop that same exact charge from a prometheus and you'll have more room in the case. Prometheus mimics a drop tube... period.
If you think the prometheus isn't better, call Brand and return it. He'll take it back.
You have a merry christmas fella.
Last edited:
DAKOTAPC, INC. :: South Dakota (US) :: OpenCorporates
Free and open company data on South Dakota (US) company DAKOTAPC, INC. (company number DB049243)
I bet most closed business continue to pay for web hosting services for months afterwards and continue to file their annual reports for business as usual, without filing any Articles of Dissolution as required by S.D. Codified Laws § 47-1A-1403. I'm also sure most closed businesses also still provide services for their clients, as evidenced by things as easily verified as the recent revision history of client webpages.
People can drop kernels, yes. Same way that the Prometheus can and has dropped kernels if you don't hold the case up to the funnel correctly. As mentioned before, the Prometheus simplifies the work flow to reduce the odds of user error but user error is a variable for either system.
The weighing tray is literally right there in front of you, not hidden from view by anything. If you choose not to look, then yes it's possible to have a kernel or two on the weighing tray that will affect the weight of the charge it was measured for. The Autotrickler and Supertrickler both re-zero their scale each time you set the cup back down, however, meaning such a problem would effect a single thrown charge only and would cause it to be off by literally 1-2 kernels of powder at most (any more and it's really visually obvious they're scattered all over.
@orkan I notice you still haven't actually bothered to address any of the claims you've made earlier about improved precision or ballistic performance. In case you missed it, the data is still attached to the post I've linked below. I'd love to hear your thoughts and process of measuring performance that show an advantage for the Prometheus other than ease of use and simplicity in workflow.
super trickler
That said, pretending it gives quantifiably better results is simply not truthful or accurate. ... and I strongly disagree. You guys have a Merry Christmas.
www.snipershide.com
A power conditioner serves to regulate the frequency, voltage, and phase of A/C power from the wall or grid.
Power from the grid will generally have frequency drift over time within specified limits, as well as a voltage variation from the standard spec (in the US) of 120v AC. The phase will also shift as various loads are added and removed from the grid, with devices constantly turning on and off. The power companies do their best to balance the loads and compensate for changes, but it's impossible to keep up on that large of a scale in real-time since the changes are not perfectly predictable.
The power conditioner takes this slightly variable input from the grid and "conditions" it to maintain a steady 120v/60Hz AC (or whatever the specified output is) even as its input power sees frequency, phase, or voltage drift. As long as the grid doesn't experience some catastrophic issues causing it to shift voltage/frequency/phase dramatically outside the norm, the power conditioner can accept the varying input while providing a constant output with only a small power draw/loss inside the conditioner itself.
One person in this thread speaks with tact and sincerity... Another person speaks with sand-thrown-into-the-eye and is taking it a little too personal.
When you lack data/ evidence, ad hominem is your only recourse.One person in this thread speaks with tact and sincerity... Another person speaks with sand-thrown-into-the-eye and is taking it a little too personal.
Little additional anecdotal comment. I compared the weight on my fx120i to an Sartorius lab scale (both calibrated) and they were exact to the .01 grain. I also read somebody who has periodically checked his fx120i over the course of a year and it never needed re-calibrating.
Possible dropped kernels and human error in loading case seem to the be biggest potential error.
I don't understand the powder column argument. Soon as you pick up the case, that powder column/compression is going to change. What am I missing here?
Possible dropped kernels and human error in loading case seem to the be biggest potential error.
I don't understand the powder column argument. Soon as you pick up the case, that powder column/compression is going to change. What am I missing here?
