I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."
http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Melba's
Jammin' > wrote,
>I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
>Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
>tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.

I'm sure it is very nice, but they all have those features now.

On sale for $11.99
http://www.harborfreight.com/1000-gr...ale-97920.html

But buy a digital thermometer first, if you don't already have one.

On 2011-06-01, David Harmon > wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Melba's
> Jammin' > wrote,
>>I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
>>Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
>>tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
>
> I'm sure it is very nice, but they all have those features now.

Perhaps not. I have a Cuisinart digital scale and it only measures as
fine as 1/4 oz (5g). OTOH, it's pretty robust and has survived a lot
of hard use.

Kitchen Tip:
Put yer digital scale in a zip-lock bag. Keeps it clean regardless of
how messy the work area, yet is still easy to read and use. Mine
still looks like I purchased it new, yesterday.

nb

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> wrote:

> I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
> Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
> tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.

I'm more likely to buy local and have a Target nearby. Thanks for the
recommendation!

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.

On 1 Jun 2011 16:21:20 GMT in rec.food.cooking, notbob
> wrote,
>On 2011-06-01, David Harmon > wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Melba's
>> Jammin' > wrote,
>>>I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
>>>Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
>>>tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
>>
>> I'm sure it is very nice, but they all have those features now.
>
>Perhaps not. I have a Cuisinart digital scale and it only measures as
>fine as 1/4 oz (5g). OTOH, it's pretty robust and has survived a lot
>of hard use.

How old is it? But you are correct, the basic accuracy does cost
something to produce so not all are equal there. Robust and
survives hard use costs something too, especially while retaining
accuracy.

But tare, different unit conversions, are only a little software and
add approximately nothing to the cost of producing an additional
unit, so even the cheapest can have them.

David Harmon wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Melba's
> Jammin' > wrote,
>> I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
>> Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
>> tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
>
> I'm sure it is very nice, but they all have those features now.
>
> On sale for $11.99
> http://www.harborfreight.com/1000-gr...ale-97920.html
>
> But buy a digital thermometer first, if you don't already have one.

That only goes to 1000 grams...The Primo one weighs up to 11 pounds

On 2011-06-01, David Harmon > wrote:

> How old is it?

About 10 yrs old. They were less common, then, and the $30 I paid in
a close-out sale was below retail. It works. I don't feel gaining
2.2g finer accuracy will provide me any advantage.... for cooking!

nb

"Goomba" > ha scritto nel messaggio

> That only goes to 1000 grams...The Primo one weighs up to 11 pounds

Useless for the kitchen. Drug dealing it might do.

On 2011-06-01, Goomba > wrote:

> That only goes to 1000 grams...The Primo one weighs up to 11 pounds

That's pretty good.

That's the trade off one must typically consider. How fine a
measurement versus maximum weight. Mine also weighs 11 lbs max, but
at the time I bought it, if I wanted 0.1 oz measurment, I had to
settle for 6 lbs max. OTOH, everything is getting cheaper. I jes saw
what appeared to be an orbital stand mixer at Walmart fer $70.

nb

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 14:38:20 -0400, Goomba >
wrote:

>David Harmon wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Melba's
>> Jammin' > wrote,
>>> I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
>>> Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
>>> tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
>>
>> I'm sure it is very nice, but they all have those features now.
>>
>> On sale for $11.99
>> http://www.harborfreight.com/1000-gr...ale-97920.html
>>
>> But buy a digital thermometer first, if you don't already have one.
>
>That only goes to 1000 grams...The Primo one weighs up to 11 pounds

This one weighs 5000 g to +-1g, or 10 lb to 0.1 oz. I paid $20 about
five years ago:
http://www.wholesale-scales.com/inde...oducts_ id=78
--
Best -- Terry

On 6/1/2011 1:49 PM, notbob wrote:
> On 2011-06-01, > wrote:
>
>> That only goes to 1000 grams...The Primo one weighs up to 11 pounds
>
> That's pretty good.
>
> That's the trade off one must typically consider. How fine a
> measurement versus maximum weight. Mine also weighs 11 lbs max, but
> at the time I bought it, if I wanted 0.1 oz measurment, I had to
> settle for 6 lbs max. OTOH, everything is getting cheaper. I jes saw
> what appeared to be an orbital stand mixer at Walmart fer $70.

I bet the stand mixer at wallyworld is manufactured in China, too!
Although, that's just a guess on my part.

Sky

--

Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!

On Jun 1, 11:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
wrote:
> I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. *Amazon has it for ~$23.50. *
> Target carries it, too. *It's been a champ for several years. *It has a
> tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams. *
> --
> Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
> Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
> "Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011

I've had mine for 3 years and it's just as accurate today as it was
when I first got it.

In article >,
Melba's Jammin' > wrote:
>I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
>Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
>tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.

You're lucky it displays tenths of ounces instead of eighths. Most
of them, including Salter, have now decided eighths are now the way to go.

Steve

On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 17:01:53 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:

> On Jun 1, 11:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
> wrote:
> > I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. *Amazon has it for ~$23.50. *
> > Target carries it, too. *It's been a champ for several years. *It has a
> > tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams. *
> > --
> > Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
> > Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
> > "Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011
>
> I've had mine for 3 years and it's just as accurate today as it was
> when I first got it.

How do you know? Just asking.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 22:18:28 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 17:01:53 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 1, 11:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
>> wrote:
>> > I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. *Amazon has it for ~$23.50. *
>> > Target carries it, too. *It's been a champ for several years. *It has a
>> > tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams. *
>> > --
>> > Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
>> > Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
>> > "Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011
>>
>> I've had mine for 3 years and it's just as accurate today as it was
>> when I first got it.
>
>How do you know? Just asking.

A pint's a pound, the whole world round-- Well, in water, anyway.<g>

Interesting- as I was looking to see what my 'time out' times were- I
noticed that my Myweigh 8000 has a 'calibration mode. You need a
5kg weight to calibrate & it says 'you'll never need to do this, but.
.. . ' - it is a 10 second procedure. Might be handy if I drop it or
something.

Jim

On Jun 1, 11:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
wrote:
> I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. *Amazon has it for ~$23.50. *
> Target carries it, too. *It's been a champ for several years. *It has a
> tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams. *
> --
> Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
> Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
> "Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011

Do tell - how often you use it and for what purposes? I'm wondering
if it's something I should add to my 'eekwibmen'.

Thanks.

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 22:18:28 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 17:01:53 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 1, 11:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
>> wrote:
>> > I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. *Amazon has it for ~$23.50. *
>> > Target carries it, too. *It's been a champ for several years. *It has a
>> > tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams. *
>> > --
>> > Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
>> > Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
>> > "Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011
>>
>> I've had mine for 3 years and it's just as accurate today as it was
>> when I first got it.
>
>How do you know? Just asking.

It's so easy to test scale accuracy that even you can do it... simply
place something of known weight on the scale, weighing standards is
how the Bureau of Weights and Measures check scales. Haven't any of
yoose ever been to the market and seen the scales being checked, in
large markets the BW&M tech checks all the scales daily.

In article
>,
Kalmia > wrote:

> On Jun 1, 11:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
> wrote:
> > I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. *Amazon has it for ~$23.50. *
> > Target carries it, too. *It's been a champ for several years. *It has a
> > tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams. *
> > --
> > Barb
>
> Do tell - how often you use it and for what purposes? I'm wondering
> if it's something I should add to my 'eekwibmen'.
>
> Thanks.

I use it when I make my brownies and for some of my jam recipes. I like
its profile - it doesn't take up much room and is always on my counter.
EVERYthing is always on my counter. . . . ;-\

--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."
http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011

In article >,
David Harmon > wrote:

> On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Melba's
> Jammin' > wrote,
> >I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
> >Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
> >tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
>
> I'm sure it is very nice, but they all have those features now.

Okay. You sound rather dismissive of my recommendation. Why?

> On sale for $11.99
> http://www.harborfreight.com/1000-gr...ale-97920.html

Nope. It would take too to weigh two pounds of sugar 1000 grams at a
time.

> But buy a digital thermometer first, if you don't already have one.

You say so.
--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."
http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011

On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 08:32:54 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> wrote:

>In article >,
> David Harmon > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Melba's
>> Jammin' > wrote,
>> >I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
>> >Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
>> >tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
>>
>> I'm sure it is very nice, but they all have those features now.
>
>Okay. You sound rather dismissive of my recommendation. Why?
>
>> On sale for $11.99
>> http://www.harborfreight.com/1000-gr...ale-97920.html
>
>Nope. It would take too to weigh two pounds of sugar 1000 grams at a
>time.

???
Two pounds of sugar (or anything else) equals 907 grams.

Ross.

<Ross@home> ha scritto nel messaggio
Melba's Jammin'
> > wrote:
> >>Nope. It would take too to weigh two pounds of sugar 1000 grams at a
>>time.
>
> ???
> Two pounds of sugar (or anything else) equals 907 grams.

While that's true, it is still too small capacity. Lots of things add up to
more than one kilo as you add this, that. If you want to figure cooking
time on a piece of meat? Weigh cucumbers for pickles so as to figure the
amount of salt? Large batches of anything.

On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 05:43:32 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> wrote:

>On Jun 1, 11:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
>wrote:
>> I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. *Amazon has it for ~$23.50. *
>> Target carries it, too. *It's been a champ for several years. *It has a
>> tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams. *
>> --
>> Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
>> Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
>> "Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011
>
>Do tell - how often you use it and for what purposes? I'm wondering
>if it's something I should add to my 'eekwibmen'.
>
>Thanks.

I don't use mine that often, but it's highly convenient at times: Easy
to make half of a cake mix. Weighing flour is rather more accurate
than measuring by volume, and it's great for recipes that specify
weights. Oh, and it's great for weighing kittens.***

<chemistry mode on>

Using water as a calibration standard isn't going to be very accurate.
Usually it's done the other way around; volume is calibrated by
weighing. That's how it's done with volumetric flasks, pycnometers,
etc. (don't worry about the names... )

A new nickel weighs 5.000 grams according to

http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint...specifications

Get five rolls of nickels. Drop one coin on the scale. It should
read 5 grams. Plop the rest of the coins on the scale. It should
read 1000 grams, plus or minus a bit. If it's more than a gram off
for the nickel, or more than 2-4 grams with the five rolls, it might
need some work. Or just remember how far off it is, and compensate as
needed when using it.

<chemistry mode off>

***Right after I bought my scale, a student came up to me after class
and asked if she could borrow a scale from the chemistry department.
Uh... I don't think so.... but then she showed me pix of tiny kittens
she and her roommates had rescued. (Not permitted in the dorms! Ah,
who cares?) She wanted to be able to weigh them periodically to be
sure that they were healthy while they were being bottle-nursed in
secret. I loaned her the scale which was perfect for her application.
She brought it back about a month later, with thanks. Kittens grew up
fine, and the gal is in vet school now.
--
Best -- Terry

Terry wrote:
>
> <chemistry mode on>
>
> A new nickel weighs 5.000 grams according to
> http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint...specifications

One of several abortive attempts by the US to "go metric" over the
years; this one well over a century ago at this point.

The US has been officially metric for a long time but there's no
enforcement so it doesn't take. The only reason (other than Fahrenheit
temperatures) is inertia. Military, engineering, export have all been
switched over but there's no pressure to switch in domestic civilian
use. It's bizzare to anyone outside of the US and to anyone in a
technical field within the US.

On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 20:00:43 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> wrote:

> Terry wrote:
> >
> > <chemistry mode on>
> >
> > A new nickel weighs 5.000 grams according to
> > http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint...specifications
>
> One of several abortive attempts by the US to "go metric" over the
> years; this one well over a century ago at this point.
>
> The US has been officially metric for a long time but there's no
> enforcement so it doesn't take. The only reason (other than Fahrenheit
> temperatures) is inertia. Military, engineering, export have all been
> switched over but there's no pressure to switch in domestic civilian
> use. It's bizzare to anyone outside of the US and to anyone in a
> technical field within the US.

Hey, everybody is happy. Leave well enough alone.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.

Terry wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 05:43:32 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> > wrote:
>
>> On Jun 1, 11:21 am, Melba's Jammin' >
>> wrote:
>>> I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
>>> Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
>>> tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
>>> --
>>> Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
>>> Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
>>> "Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011
>> Do tell - how often you use it and for what purposes? I'm wondering
>> if it's something I should add to my 'eekwibmen'.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> I don't use mine that often, but it's highly convenient at times: Easy
> to make half of a cake mix. Weighing flour is rather more accurate
> than measuring by volume, and it's great for recipes that specify
> weights. Oh, and it's great for weighing kittens.***
>
> <chemistry mode on>
>
> Using water as a calibration standard isn't going to be very accurate.
> Usually it's done the other way around; volume is calibrated by
> weighing. That's how it's done with volumetric flasks, pycnometers,
> etc. (don't worry about the names... )
>
> A new nickel weighs 5.000 grams according to
>
> http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint...specifications
>
> Get five rolls of nickels. Drop one coin on the scale. It should
> read 5 grams. Plop the rest of the coins on the scale. It should
> read 1000 grams, plus or minus a bit. If it's more than a gram off
> for the nickel, or more than 2-4 grams with the five rolls, it might
> need some work. Or just remember how far off it is, and compensate as
> needed when using it.
>
> <chemistry mode off>
>


And a dime weighs 35.0 grains. (that's 1/200 of a pound) I use nickels
to check my kitchen scale, and a specially designated dime with "35"
written on it with a Sharpie to check my gunpowder scale.

-Bob

On Jun 2, 1:18*am, sf > wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 17:01:53 -0700 (PDT), "
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jun 1, 11:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
> > wrote:
> > > I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. *Amazon has it for ~$23.50. *
> > > Target carries it, too. *It's been a champ for several years. *It has a
> > > tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams. *
> > > --
> > > Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
> > > Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
> > > "Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011
>
> > I've had mine for 3 years and it's just as accurate today as it was
> > when I first got it.
>
> How do you know? *Just asking.
>
> --
>
> Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.

I've checked it using known weights.

"Terry" > wrote
> Get five rolls of nickels. Drop one coin on the scale. It should
> read 5 grams. Plop the rest of the coins on the scale. It should
> read 1000 grams, plus or minus a bit. If it's more than a gram off
> for the nickel, or more than 2-4 grams with the five rolls, it might
> need some work. Or just remember how far off it is, and compensate as
> needed when using it.

You can buy calibration weights. Easier it to weight something and make a
note of it. The put that same piece back on the scale and it should read
the same.

A calibrated weight can cost from about $10 to over $1000 depending on the
accuracy and traceability needed. Unless you are doing rocket surgery, it
is not needed.

"Giusi" > wrote in message
...
>
> <Ross@home> ha scritto nel messaggio
> Melba's Jammin'
>> > wrote:
>> >>Nope. It would take too to weigh two pounds of sugar 1000 grams at a
>>>time.
>>
>> ???
>> Two pounds of sugar (or anything else) equals 907 grams.
>
> While that's true, it is still too small capacity. Lots of things add up
> to more than one kilo as you add this, that. If you want to figure
> cooking time on a piece of meat? Weigh cucumbers for pickles so as to
> figure the amount of salt? Large batches of anything.
>

If you are concerned about being off a few grams per kilo figuring cooking
times, you are going to drive yourself crazy. The oven is not accurate
enough anyway, not to mention the density of the meat, moisture content and
stuff that throws off such calculations.

For centuries, we just added ingredients until the recipe "looked right".

In article >, Ross@home
wrote:

> On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 08:32:54 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > David Harmon > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:21:57 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Melba's
> >> Jammin' > wrote,
> >> >I love my Escali Primo Digital Scale. Amazon has it for ~$23.50.
> >> >Target carries it, too. It's been a champ for several years. It has a
> >> >tare feature, weighs pounds, ounces (in tenths), and grams.
> >>
> >> I'm sure it is very nice, but they all have those features now.
> >
> >Okay. You sound rather dismissive of my recommendation. Why?
> >
> >> On sale for $11.99
> >> http://www.harborfreight.com/1000-gr...ale-97920.html
> >
> >Nope. It would take too to weigh two pounds of sugar 1000 grams at a
> >time.
>
> ???
> Two pounds of sugar (or anything else) equals 907 grams.
>
> Ross.

A poor example on my part.

--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."
http://web.me.com/barbschaller, updated May 27, 2011

On 3/06/2011 10:25 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> "Giusi" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> <Ross@home> ha scritto nel messaggio
>> Melba's Jammin'
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>Nope. It would take too to weigh two pounds of sugar 1000 grams at a
>>>> time.
>>>
>>> ???
>>> Two pounds of sugar (or anything else) equals 907 grams.
>>
>> While that's true, it is still too small capacity. Lots of things add
>> up to more than one kilo as you add this, that. If you want to figure
>> cooking time on a piece of meat? Weigh cucumbers for pickles so as to
>> figure the amount of salt? Large batches of anything.
>>
>
> If you are concerned about being off a few grams per kilo figuring
> cooking times, you are going to drive yourself crazy. The oven is not
> accurate enough anyway, not to mention the density of the meat, moisture
> content and stuff that throws off such calculations.
>
> For centuries, we just added ingredients until the recipe "looked right".

My wife still operates that way. Explains why the set of scales she was
given languished in the cupboard for over 5 years. I will make use of
them however.

Krypsis

On 3/06/2011 10:35 AM, Andy wrote:
> "Ed > wrote:
>
>>
>> > wrote
>>> Get five rolls of nickels. Drop one coin on the scale. It should
>>> read 5 grams. Plop the rest of the coins on the scale. It should
>>> read 1000 grams, plus or minus a bit. If it's more than a gram off
>>> for the nickel, or more than 2-4 grams with the five rolls, it might
>>> need some work. Or just remember how far off it is, and compensate
>>> as needed when using it.
>>
>> You can buy calibration weights. Easier it to weight something and
>> make a note of it. The put that same piece back on the scale and it
>> should read the same.
>>
>> A calibrated weight can cost from about $10 to over $1000 depending on
>> the accuracy and traceability needed. Unless you are doing rocket
>> surgery, it is not needed.
>
>
> Ed,
>
> In science class, I remember a small kit of precision calibration
> weights, made of brass, iirc. I forget the weights.
>
> If I was allowed to take one thing from school, that would be it.
>
> I'm a BUM!!! about precision.
>
> Best,
>
> Andy

I remember a set of large calibrated weights down at the station in the
days when stations were manned. These were used to calibrate the scales
at regular intervals, such calibration being a legal requirement for any
commercial scale.

Might be a tad large for kitchen use I suspect.

Krypsis

"Ed Pawlowski" > ha scritto nel messaggio news:If-

> If you are concerned about being off a few grams per kilo figuring cooking
> times, you are going to drive yourself crazy. The oven is not accurate
> enough anyway, not to mention the density of the meat, moisture content
> and stuff that throws off such calculations.
>
> For centuries, we just added ingredients until the recipe "looked right".
That wasn't the subject. The subject was is 1000 grams enough capacity for
a scale. I still say no. You may throw things at what you are cooking, but
in preserving, pickling, etc., you have to use at least X amount per pound
or kilo to be safe. For roasting, I find it handy to know approximately how
long the beats will occupy the oven so I know when the next thing can go in.
That's not down to the gram, but a half pound could make a difference.

I don't know about you, but I am expected to produce the same product every
time I cook it, within the realm of ingredients available. I also need to
be accurate when writing down what the next person should do. Why would
anyone be here if throwing things into a bowl always produced a birthday
cake?

Krypsis > wrote:

>On 3/06/2011 10:25 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>

-snip-
>> If you are concerned about being off a few grams per kilo figuring
>> cooking times, you are going to drive yourself crazy. The oven is not
>> accurate enough anyway, not to mention the density of the meat, moisture
>> content and stuff that throws off such calculations.
>>
>> For centuries, we just added ingredients until the recipe "looked right".
>
>My wife still operates that way. Explains why the set of scales she was
>given languished in the cupboard for over 5 years. I will make use of
>them however.

While I agree with Ed about not obsessing over getting ingredients
*just so* for most recipes-- the 'until it looks right' method only
works for recipes you're familiar with.

I'd love to see what I'd have come up with if someone told me to take
some eggs, lemon, flour, olive oil and baking powder- mix them until
they look right - cook, enjoy. It might have taken me a while to
come up with Torcolo.

Weights and measures help us communicate. I would say that at least
half of my cooking is [more or less] following a recipe. Baking
requires it to a certain extent.

The rest of what *we* eat is as much [more than?] 'adventure' as
fuel. I might have a couple dozen 'regulars' that I put together
on the fly-- but I'm a lot more likely to try something new-- and
for that I thank being able to use a scale to see what the other guy
was eating.

Jim

On 3/06/2011 9:45 PM, Jim Elbrecht wrote:
> > wrote:
>
>> On 3/06/2011 10:25 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>
>
> -snip-
>>> If you are concerned about being off a few grams per kilo figuring
>>> cooking times, you are going to drive yourself crazy. The oven is not
>>> accurate enough anyway, not to mention the density of the meat, moisture
>>> content and stuff that throws off such calculations.
>>>
>>> For centuries, we just added ingredients until the recipe "looked right".
>>
>> My wife still operates that way. Explains why the set of scales she was
>> given languished in the cupboard for over 5 years. I will make use of
>> them however.
>
> While I agree with Ed about not obsessing over getting ingredients
> *just so* for most recipes-- the 'until it looks right' method only
> works for recipes you're familiar with.

My wife has been cooking for most of her life. The only time she really
needs a recipe if it is a western style food she is preparing. She is,
or was, unfamiliar with those. Vietnamese food she can do blindfolded
but currently she is fascinated by Thai food. She either simply looks at
a picture of a Thai dish, then has a go at making it herself or she
simply tries some at a friend and then makes it herself later. She can
tell, almost by instinct, what is in a particular Thai dish.
>
> I'd love to see what I'd have come up with if someone told me to take
> some eggs, lemon, flour, olive oil and baking powder- mix them until
> they look right - cook, enjoy. It might have taken me a while to
> come up with Torcolo.
>
> Weights and measures help us communicate. I would say that at least
> half of my cooking is [more or less] following a recipe. Baking
> requires it to a certain extent.

I am getting the idea that a smidgen more or less of yeast, for example,
can make a huge difference to the outcome when baking bread. I need the
measuring devices just to get a recipe accurate enough for the outcome
to be edible. Judgement and experimentation can come later when I've had
lots of experience under my belt.
>
> The rest of what *we* eat is as much [more than?] 'adventure' as
> fuel. I might have a couple dozen 'regulars' that I put together
> on the fly-- but I'm a lot more likely to try something new-- and
> for that I thank being able to use a scale to see what the other guy
> was eating.
>
> Jim

I intend to make full use of these scales and any measuring devices I
find useful and I won't feel guilty in the slightest.

Krypsis

On 3/06/2011 1:46 PM, Andy wrote:
> > wrote:
>
>> On 3/06/2011 10:35 AM, Andy wrote:
>>> "Ed > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> > wrote
>>>>> Get five rolls of nickels. Drop one coin on the scale. It should
>>>>> read 5 grams. Plop the rest of the coins on the scale. It should
>>>>> read 1000 grams, plus or minus a bit. If it's more than a gram off
>>>>> for the nickel, or more than 2-4 grams with the five rolls, it might
>>>>> need some work. Or just remember how far off it is, and compensate
>>>>> as needed when using it.
>>>>
>>>> You can buy calibration weights. Easier it to weight something and
>>>> make a note of it. The put that same piece back on the scale and it
>>>> should read the same.
>>>>
>>>> A calibrated weight can cost from about $10 to over $1000 depending
> on
>>>> the accuracy and traceability needed. Unless you are doing rocket
>>>> surgery, it is not needed.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ed,
>>>
>>> In science class, I remember a small kit of precision calibration
>>> weights, made of brass, iirc. I forget the weights.
>>>
>>> If I was allowed to take one thing from school, that would be it.
>>>
>>> I'm a BUM!!! about precision.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Andy
>>
>> I remember a set of large calibrated weights down at the station in the
>> days when stations were manned. These were used to calibrate the scales
>> at regular intervals, such calibration being a legal requirement for
> any
>> commercial scale.
>>
>> Might be a tad large for kitchen use I suspect.
>
>
> Krypsis,
>
> I'm familiar with the station scales.
>
> I was awestruck to see them used! They were in kilogram measure, iirc.
>
> They'll be accurate forever!
>
> Best,
>
> Andy

The ones I remember were in pounds. Can't recall if they used the
"stone" measure as it was quite a long time ago but I do remember seeing
one scale measuring large stuff in CWT but that was in the goods shed.

They were simple robust devices and that is why they lasted so long.

Krypsis

On Jun 2, 4:00*pm, Doug Freyburger > wrote:
> Terry wrote:
>
> > <chemistry mode on>
>
> > A new nickel weighs 5.000 grams according to
> >http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint...specifications
>
> One of several abortive attempts by the US to "go metric" over the
> years; this one well over a century ago at this point.
>
> The US has been officially metric for a long time but there's no
> enforcement so it doesn't take. *The only reason (other than Fahrenheit
> temperatures) is inertia. *Military, engineering, export have all been
> switched over but there's no pressure to switch in domestic civilian
> use. *It's bizzare to anyone outside of the US and to anyone in a
> technical field within the US.

My tool box weighs twice what it ought to. I need metric and SAE
wrenches, sockets, hex drivers, etc. At least I haven't needed
Whitworth wrenches for a long time now. When do you expect that US
plumbers will start using metric pipe sizes and threads? Are there
metric light bulbs?

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.

On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 22:41:32 +1000 in rec.food.cooking, Krypsis
> wrote,
>I am getting the idea that a smidgen more or less of yeast, for example,
>can make a huge difference to the outcome when baking bread. I need the
>measuring devices just to get a recipe accurate enough for the outcome
>to be edible.

The problem with that is that the age of the yeast, variations in
the flour, mixing and kneading, the exact temperature, humidity,
etc. can make just as big a difference. Meanwhile, most bread
recipes tolerate some pretty large variations while remaining
edible, even if not perfect.

On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 07:42:24 +0200 in rec.food.cooking, "Giusi"
> wrote,
>That wasn't the subject. The subject was is 1000 grams enough capacity for
>a scale.

No, that wasn't the subject. That was an example of a tiny, tiny,
and inexpensive, digital scale that still had the software features
like tare and different units. How much capacity do you need when
you weigh out your saffron?

On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 08:11:50 -0700 (PDT) in rec.food.cooking, Jerry
Avins > wrote,
>My tool box weighs twice what it ought to. I need metric and SAE
>wrenches, sockets, hex drivers, etc. At least I haven't needed
>Whitworth wrenches for a long time now. When do you expect that US
>plumbers will start using metric pipe sizes and threads? Are there
>metric light bulbs?

Most of my lightbulbs are rated in Watts and/or lumens, which are
both metric units.

Jerry Avins wrote:
> Doug Freyburger > wrote:
>
>> The US has been officially metric for a long time but there's no
>> enforcement so it doesn't take. *The only reason (other than Fahrenheit
>> temperatures) is inertia ...
>
> My tool box weighs twice what it ought to. I need metric and SAE
> wrenches, sockets, hex drivers, etc. At least I haven't needed
> Whitworth wrenches for a long time now. When do you expect that US
> plumbers will start using metric pipe sizes and threads?

It's beyond my kenn that any profession in the US tolerate having the
old system in use. Yet I watch "Holmes on Homes" and "Holmes
Inspection" about housing construction in metrified Canada and they
talki inches.

> Are there metric light bulbs?

Those have always been metric from teh gate. Watt is metric.