Jump to content

Quick Load


Recommended Posts

Wouldn't be without it. Obviously its a guide NOT 'gospel' on loads and pressures but I have found it to be pretty accurate.... subject to real load testing naturally!

 

Also gives a fairly good drop table (Quicktarget) based upon load details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Wow, £125 for ballistics software! I would have to be carrying out an awful lot of experimentation with all sorts of calibres to feel it was worth considering. The other day someone here - sorry, forget who, might even have been Anthony - offered me some Quickload figures for my 20Tac which, with the greatest respect, I found not credible: my load of 23.7gr of N130 behind a 40gr bullet was according to Quickload generating something approaching 67000 psi, significantly over what I believe to be a SAAMI recommended max, and which is not at all reflected or suggested by my experience. My cases extract easily, they do not stretch beyond the minimum, my primers are not totally flattened, and my MV figures are both believable and acceptable. I've been hearing and reading about Quickload for a long time now, but I'm still not persuaded that it offers better accuracy (certainly not better value) than care & attention to detail, studying load manuals, cross-checking experience with other shooters, and sensible experimentation.

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quickload was never meant to be a replacement for "care & attention to detail, studying load manuals, cross-checking experience with other shooters, and sensible experimentation" it is another tool that gives you an indication of what to exect using different powders, charges,seating depths, cases, bullets etc...

 

I use it all the time and would be lost without it.

 

 

Couldn't agree more. Worth every penny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use QL for re-loading not ballistics.

 

I’m not really too interested in what some lab technician got out of his test barrel...since I don't have one.

 

You have to put the work in and learn to use QL. I turned to it when I needed to find powders that were not listed in load manuals for the calibre I was loading for. As long as you understand the importance of the weighting factor, along with all the other little adjustments and how to tweak them, you can get a predicted velocity within a few FPS from that recorded over the chronograph. I’m now very content to workup a load that is not listed in any load manual. It works with no surprises for me. However, if you don't apply common sense you get a Darwin award. :unsure:

 

IMHO the lawyers who got involved with the load data now published means it is less meaningful these days. Nosler’s book is so conservative I tend to use it to gather dust and as a source of amusement when I’m really bored. I’m 2gns over max listed in the Nosler book for calibre, but I seat long and QL accounts for that, Nosler doesn’t.

 

ATB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, £125 for ballistics software! I would have to be carrying out an awful lot of experimentation with all sorts of calibres to feel it was worth considering. The other day someone here - sorry, forget who, might even have been Anthony - offered me some Quickload figures for my 20Tac which, with the greatest respect, I found not credible: my load of 23.7gr of N130 behind a 40gr bullet was according to Quickload generating something approaching 67000 psi, significantly over what I believe to be a SAAMI recommended max, and which is not at all reflected or suggested by my experience. My cases extract easily, they do not stretch beyond the minimum, my primers are not totally flattened, and my MV figures are both believable and acceptable. I've been hearing and reading about Quickload for a long time now, but I'm still not persuaded that it offers better accuracy (certainly not better value) than care & attention to detail, studying load manuals, cross-checking experience with other shooters, and sensible experimentation.

Tony

 

i ran the data and depending on what h2o grs case capacity you have, it shows 53595psi with 30grs h2o case capacity

and 3569fps with 22" barrel and 23.7grs n130

 

tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few votes for QL, then, from guys who obviously know their stuff so I defer to your expertise. As I said, I'm not unfamiliar with QL since people have been using/talking about it for years, it just seems rather a boutique product to me and not much value unless one spends an awful lot of time handloading for lots of different calibres, obscure calibres, or whatever. I don't do that since I never have more than a couple of centrefire chamberings at any one time, and having worked up a load that works for me (using established sources of info and e.g. Vihtavuori's handy formulae) I don't tinker with it much. In 25+ years I've only loaded for .45ACP, .303, .222, 22-250, .223 and 20Tac, none of which presented difficulty in sourcing info for load development - something I take lots of trouble over but for which QL would be overkill. And for its substantial price I can buy 200 more Lapua cases plus a few post-shooting pints... Just ordered some in fact - the brass, not the pints. But good luck to you experimenters, whatever works for you. (This summer I might be shooting with an acquaintance from Detroit who has the most impressive loading room I've seen, in his basement, will ask if he uses QL since he loads for a hell of a lot of calibres.)

Regards, Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i ran the data and depending on what h2o grs case capacity you have, it shows 53595psi with 30grs h2o case capacity

and 3569fps with 22" barrel and 23.7grs n130

 

tony

 

Thanks for that, Tony. So widely disparate data so far, then, from two guys each using Quickload... I've no idea what the water capacity of my cases is since there's only one source of factory brass in 20Tac, Dakota/Lapua, hence no comparative experimentation necessary. Still puzzled by the MV figures apparently suggested by QL since my real-world chrono figures (from a chrono I've found dependable & consistent with other rounds) are considerably higher and match other shooters' reported MVs for this calibre with similar loads.

You're another Tony H? Could get confusing.

Regards, Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, Tony. So widely disparate data so far, then, from two guys each using Quickload... I've no idea what the water capacity of my cases is since there's only one source of factory brass in 20Tac, Dakota/Lapua, hence no comparative experimentation necessary. Still puzzled by the MV figures apparently suggested by QL since my real-world chrono figures (from a chrono I've found dependable & consistent with other rounds) are considerably higher and match other shooters' reported MVs for this calibre with similar loads.

You're another Tony H? Could get confusing.

Regards, Tony

 

No criticism intended but I suspect the difference is in user input Tony.

 

Case volume must be correct. You then have to decide on what weighting factor to use since leaving it at the default of 6 will mean the bullet is treated as almost the same diameter as the case …and we know that's not true. The bullet length can be off in the database and must be checked. Your individual case trim length must be entered along with your C.O.A.L. You must remember to use the temp function for Viht powders, if you don’t it will return the default 21c which may or may not be true. Not forgetting the powder burning rate factor (BA)...in short rubbish in rubbish out.

 

As to whether it’s worth the money? I suppose we all make our own choices, but I can now discount some powders that are listed in the manuals, or find a use for something I have left over, or the only canister the local RFD has in stock. I spend less time and money hunting the “holy grail” and more time putting rounds downrange. I don’t have to buy the latest manual from Speer/Hornady et al to find out it’s still just rehashed info in a new cover.

 

ATB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No criticism intended but I suspect the difference is in user input Tony.

 

Case volume must be correct. You then have to decide on what weighting factor to use since leaving it at the default of 6 will mean the bullet is treated as almost the same diameter as the case …and we know that's not true. The bullet length can be off in the database and must be checked. Your individual case trim length must be entered along with your C.O.A.L. You must remember to use the temp function for Viht powders, if you don’t it will return the default 21c which may or may not be true. Not forgetting the powder burning rate factor (BA)...in short rubbish in rubbish out.

 

As to whether it’s worth the money? I suppose we all make our own choices, but I can now discount some powders that are listed in the manuals, or find a use for something I have left over, or the only canister the local RFD has in stock. I spend less time and money hunting the “holy grail” and more time putting rounds downrange. I don’t have to buy the latest manual from Speer/Hornady et al to find out it’s still just rehashed info in a new cover.

 

ATB

 

yep your right on the money there, and i for one dont think its worth the money, i think £35 is about right. simple load data and a chrono and some time on the targets beats QL any day of the week, but it also gives alot more to a bloke in the know, where as i, just brought it cos i thought, why not..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy