SAC StudioA plain 22 lb stainless kitchen scale — headroom for batch cooking, no built-in nutrition data.
The Greater Goods Digital Food Scale (22 lb) is a plain, high-capacity kitchen and baking scale, and that plainness is the honest headline. Per the listing it weighs up to 22 lb (10 kg) in 1 g increments, reads in grams, ounces, lb:oz and milliliters, and has a ZERO (tare) button, a HOLD function and a display that extends past the platform so a wide bowl does not hide the number. The body is stainless steel with touch controls, and it carries a 5-year limited warranty. There is no built-in nutrition data: you weigh in grams and log the number in your tracking app.
Earlier this slot belonged to the Greater Goods Nourish, a model with an onboard food database; that product is gone, so we scored the plain scale fresh from its listing and it lands at 8.3. It suits a defined buyer, the batch cook who wants weight headroom, and is a solid ordinary scale for everyone else. Here's the full breakdown.
The listing states 1 g increments across the full 22 lb (10 kg) range. That clears our 1 g floor for calorie tracking and matches the other 22 lb scale on the list (Nicewell 8.4), but there is no 0.1 g mode, so on our heaviest-weighted axis it sits below the precision leaders (Etekcity 9.6, Ozeri 8.8). The figure is the manufacturer's; we did not bench-test it.
ZERO (tare), four units (g, oz, lb:oz, ml), a HOLD function that keeps the reading for up to 5 minutes, auto shut-off after 2 minutes and a display that extends beyond the platform, per the listing. The extended display and HOLD are real conveniences under a big bowl; there is no backlight claim, no bowl and no nutrition data. That puts it level with the Ozeri (8.4) and below the Etekcity (9.2) and OXO's pull-out display (9.0).
The listing describes stainless steel with touch-sensitive controls and a 5-year limited warranty. On our material principle (stainless above tempered glass above plastic) that places it above the Nicewell's stainless-and-glass platform (8.0) and below the Etekcity's 304 stainless (9.0) and the OXO (9.6); the steel grade is not stated.
We could not verify a current price, so this line is directional. For a 22 lb-capacity kitchen scale the value case rests on whether you need the headroom; strictly as weighing hardware the Etekcity and Ozeri give finer resolution for similar money. Check the current listing price.
“22 lb (10 kg) capacity with 1 g increments.”
Stated in the Amazon title ('22lb High Capacity') and the listing's feature bullets ('weighs up to 22 lb (10 kg) with 1 g precision'). These are manufacturer specs; we did not bench-test accuracy.
“Stainless steel, with a display that stays visible under large bowls.”
The listing describes stainless steel with touch-sensitive controls and an LCD that extends beyond the weighing platform. The product photo is consistent with that; the steel grade is not stated.
“A food scale meaningfully helps weight loss.”
The category's research-backed claim: obese adults underreported their actual calorie intake by ~47% in Lichtman 1992 (NEJM, PMID 1454084) and misjudged solid foods roughly ten times more than liquids in Lasschuijt 2019 (PMID 31255647). Any accurate scale does this work; the honest gram weight is what matters.
This slot was originally scored on the Greater Goods Nourish, a model that stored an onboard food database. The ASIN now resolves to the Greater Goods Digital Food Scale for Kitchen & Baking (22 lb high capacity), which carries no such data. We removed every claim about built-in nutrition, code lookup and recipe totaling and scored the plain scale fresh from its listing; the Features line fell from 9.4 to 8.4 and the overall score from 8.4 to 8.3.
The listing states a 22 lb (10 kg) capacity with 1 g increments. For everyday plates an 11 lb scale is plenty, so the headroom only matters if you batch-cook, weigh big cuts or use large bowls and Dutch ovens — the cases where the extended display and HOLD button also earn their place. One gram is the floor for honest calorie tracking; for oils and nut butters a 0.1 g scale reads finer.
Weigh the calorie-dense foods in grams, zero out the bowl, and log the number in Cronometer, MacroFactor or a similar tracker; the app converts grams into calories and macros. The scale's job is the honest number, which is exactly what defeats the estimation error documented in the research.
The Greater Goods Digital Food Scale (22 lb) is a plain, high-capacity kitchen and baking scale. It replaced the Nourish nutrition-database model this slot was originally scored on, so the linked product shows weight only — your tracking app does the calories and macros. Per the listing you get 22 lb (10 kg) of capacity in 1 g steps, a stainless body, a HOLD button and a display that stays visible under a wide bowl, backed by a 5-year limited warranty. That is a good fit for a batch cook who logs in an app, and it scores 8.3 on our gear criteria. If you want 0.1 g resolution for small calorie-dense foods, buy the Etekcity (#1) or the Ozeri (#4) instead. Either way, the honest gram weight is what makes your deficit real.
Affiliate link — Super Achiever Club earns a small commission at no extra cost to you.
Our #1: finer 0.1 g resolution on a 304 stainless platform with a bowl, for about $20. Choose it if you track in an app and just want the best hardware.
See it on the list →The buy-it-for-life build with a pull-out display a big plate can't hide. Choose it for premium construction and readability.
See it on the list →0.1 g Variable Graduation precision at the lowest price in the lineup (~$15). Choose it for maximum precision per dollar with an app.
See it on the list →Doubly-labeled-water study: obese adults who reported diet resistance underreported their actual caloric intake by 47% on average and overreported activity by 51% — self-report fails exactly where weighing is exact. The case for weighing at all: the honest gram weight is what defeats the estimation error.
Estimation error was roughly ten times greater for solid foods than liquids — precisely the whole-food staples a scale handles best. Weighing in grams targets the foods the eye misjudges most.
