Work surrounding the replicability and generalizability of network models has increased in recent years, prompting debate as to whether network properties can be expected to be consistent across samples. To date, certain methodological practices may have contributed to observed inconsistencies, including the common use of single-item indicators to estimate nodes, and use of non-identical measurement tools. The current study used a resampling approach to systematically disentangle the effects of sampling variability from scale variability when assessing network replicability. Additionally, we explored the extent to which consistencies in network characteristics were improved when precision in node estimation was increased. Overall, scale variability produced less stability in network properties than sampling variability, however under more optimal measurement conditions (i.e. larger sample, greater node precision), discrepancies were markedly reduced. Findings also importantly underscored the value of improving node reliability: Use of multi-item indicators led to denser networks, higher network sensitivity, greater estimates of global strength, and greater levels of consistency in network properties (e.g., edge weights, centrality scores). Taken together, variability in network properties across samples may be less indicative of a lack of replicability, but may arise from poor measurement precision, and/or may reflect properties of the underlying true network model or scale-specific properties. All data and syntax are openly available online (https://osf.io/m37q2/).