Quickload good are bad

[dully1963]

Hi

I put one of my favorite 6mm Br loads through Quickload only to find it said it was a compressed load , Now I know quickload is only a guide but it is nowhere near been compressed I can shake it and hear the powder inside , also before seating the bullet you can see it will be nowhere near being compressed so if it is so far out on that how far out is it on other readings . just thought I would bring it to light as I know some people swear by it.

Anybody have any thoughts

all the best and safe loading

dully1963

[Danpd]

Did you enter your actual COAL and actually measured case capacity from your fired brass? Or just type in the powder charge you use?

[kent]

Hi

I put one of my favorite 6mm Br loads through Quickload only to find it said it was a compressed load , Now I know quickload is only a guide but it is nowhere near been compressed I can shake it and hear the powder inside , also before seating the bullet you can see it will be nowhere near being compressed so if it is so far out on that how far out is it on other readings . just thought I would bring it to light as I know some people swear by it.

Anybody have any thoughts

all the best and safe loading

dully1963

Its great at times, other times it spurts out total rubbish. As regards case fill I have never found an issue though it depends on the brass etc

[achosenman]

Like any calculator or computer program, garbage in garbage out.

 

FWIW It sounds to me like you have not input anything like true and relevent data.

You have to do your part to get the best from QL. Any time I have got unexpected results from the program I have revisited the calculation and either found an error on my part or learned something new about reloading. Ie start pressure or missed the calculation for a different type of primer etc.

 

I have used QL as a sole means for load work up for many years, I know it's very good. The draw back is that it is very complicated (more so than many believe) and requires more than a few blind clicks of the mouse to get pertinant results. There is a great deal of information on the web from very experianced users available and will occupy you for many many hours. This program requires a great deal of learning from the user if you want accurate output. However It can be used as a rough guide if you use the standard parameters already present in the program for any specific cartridge...but a rough guide only.

 

Atb.

[dully1963]

Hi danpd

yep measured and double checked coal and case capacity also bullet length . I know I'm probably splitting hairs but why does it say its a 1.3 % compressed load when its not ,do you think its just a built in safety to err on the safe side.

cheers anyway to both you and kent for taking the time to reply

[gunner]

are you sure you have the exact same bullet from the list or its a new bullet but not new data ? it could be the same weight bullet but like berger have prob 3 or 4 diffrent 80 grain 224 cal bullets some vld some not ! just a thought ! ATB ... tim ...

[dully1963]

Hi

Just like to take the time to reply to a chosenman the fact that you say garbage in and garbage out just woundering if you remember saying "I find QL very good most times. I find I have to work on the variables that are peculiar to my load and rifle though. It does drop the ball occasionally. On the whole it's better than most reloading manuals." your own words.

Does this mean you put garbage in and got garbage out when it droped the ball It sounds to me like you have not input anything like true and relevent data.

And by the way if you took time to read my post I was looking for oppinions on quickload and what people thought and if anybody else had come across this sort of error not my ability to use it wich I can to its fullest.

Now I'm not going to get into a slanging match but just felt the need to reply to your dig at me

[achosenman]

Ok, sorry if you thought I was digging at you that was not my intention.

 

The term dropping the ball occasionally is relative. By that I mean I don't get to within a few fps of my chronometer reading or the bullets in the data base are off in dimensions etc. In answer to your second statement then yes, I'm guilty as charged. I did indeed fail to input true and relevant date, so I had to go back and re-do it. In my everyday working world we cross monitor each other and challenge every single mistake we make as a crew. Lives depend on it. There is no shame in getting it wrong and admitting it. We are all human...we all make mistakes.

 

When I first started with QL I realised that I was going to have to get serious with it to use it to it's potential. That meant learning that everything mattered on the parameter stakes...no matter how small or seemingly inconsequential. They all add up to the end result. Plus or minus .1 gn does not seem a large error but that will show up when you are looking at digits and not a target at the range.

 

Considering that the vast majority of scales cannot do better than this on a good day with a following wind, you can see how small errors creep in despite our best efforts. The rest of the kit we use to take measurements and input the data needs to be engineering quality and we need to be able to use it. Without judging anyone, some shooters can and do and some simply don't have the kit or the knowledge to do it and get meaningfull results.

 

From your first post I had to decide how big your error was and what the likely cause was going to be. I don't know your technique or the equipment in use, so I had to make a judgement call. I spend a lot more on loading kit than most spend on the actual shooting. In fact complete overkill to be honest but as they say, "there are no pockets in a shroud" and I like toys. You for all I know will not be like me and will have more sense so again it's a judgement call and when you say you have measured it or weighed it, I have to decide to what degree of probable accuracy.

 

Your subsequent post gave a little more information in that it was only 1.3% compressed. That is a very small compression factor and you will in all likeleyhood get some rattle of powder in a case. If you then consider other errors in weighing and measuring that would IMHO be a very reasonable expectation. None of this information was available in your first post and I wrongly assumed we were talking about heavy compression. I think this information would have added clarity to your stated problem, which IMHO is one of expectation rather than error.

 

Again I am sorry if I came across as having a go at you that was not my intention.

 

Atb

[gun nut]

" There is a great deal of information on the web from very experianced users available and will occupy you for many many hours. This program requires a great deal of learning from the user if you want accurate output."

 

 

 

Can you point me in the direction of some of this achoseman as I'm new to QL and although I've got the right bullet, the right powder the right col and case capacity etc etc the results I'm getting are between 100 and 300fps lower than what my chrono says for my 270 and 6.5x47. And I've verified the chrono readings with real range results and ballistic programs, and whilst it is maybe 20-30fps out it's not 300fps!

Also the load I've used for the last 3 years in my 20tac is apparently over pressure according to QL but in reality I have no pressure signs and get 10x reloadings in my Dakota brass so it's patently not over pressure??

 

Mike

[achosenman]

I can mate but not right, now since my main desktop pc died through motherboard failure last week. I will be re-building it when the new Haswell CPU chip is released early next month along with the new Z87 motherboards. I'm loath to spend money on soon to be obsolete pc components and have decided to wait a few weeks. I'm stuck with my iPad at the moment and all my bookmarks etc are on the main pc.

 

In the meantime you could google QL parameters and see what comes up. As soon as my main pc is running I'll post some links that I found helpful.

 

I'm assuming you have got the case length, case volume, actual bullet length and seating depth as measured. Don't rely on the data base. From memory since I can't open QL atm, you need to weigh the actual bullets since they vary from lot to lot and between individual bullets as well. Then you need to adjust for the weighting factor, start pressure (which should encompass the primer calculation for standard or magnum) then look at the burning rate factor. Lot to lot variations of 10% can occure between powder lots. Then take a look at the bore cross section calculation since it will also affect the output, I found especially if you are using a 5r barrel. Check your actual barrel length is as you think. I have been dumbfounded that some get confused about where that measurement should be taken from....no seriously, I ordered a 24 inch barrel and the builder took that to mean 24 inches in front of the chamber!

 

Without teaching you to suck eggs. The more real world data you can enter, the closer the output will be to what you see on the test range.

 

Atb

[gun nut]

Cheers, will give the QL parameters a go.

 

Mike

[kent]

Its a guide, it doesn't replace loading practice. I generally get more over the chrono and it has some seriously out of wack data for LilGun, those are just my experiences. its way better than a guide because of the masses of data you can mix. if you look at single calibre loading data books you might think the different labs were using different cartridges at times

[achosenman]

I agree, it's a great tool and capable of excellent results if we do our part. How close we get the predictions is down to each user. You can be happy with ballpark results or fine tune it to the enth degree just because...

 

The powder issues you mention I have not come across. But considering the quality control of some manufactures that's not surprising.

 

 

Atb

[Dark Star]

Just to show how QL can be really useful and good at what it does, yesterday I needed to put together some practise rounds without eating into my dwindling stocks of match-grade components so I worked out a completely new load in QL using bullets and powder I haven't ever used in combination before.

 

I shot them today at 1000yds and the average MV was within 53fps of QL's predicted figure, SD over 5 rounds was 12 and they grouped sub 1/2 MOA at 1000. This is a load and bullet/powder combination I have never used before.

 

Pressures were nowhere near the limit, so I had the confidence to try this load without working up to it, but I've got here through lots and lots of chrono'ing and data collection, so I realise this is not the sort of approach most people would feel comfortable taking. It works for me, though and saves a lot of time and powder/bullets!

[gbal]

Just to show how QL can be really useful and good at what it does, yesterday I needed to put together some practise rounds without eating into my dwindling stocks of match-grade components so I worked out a completely new load in QL using bullets and powder I haven't ever used in combination before.

 

I shot them today at 1000yds and the average MV was within 53fps of QL's predicted figure, SD over 5 rounds was 12 and they grouped sub 1/2 MOA at 1000. This is a load and bullet/powder combination I have never used before.

 

Pressures were nowhere near the limit, so I had the confidence to try this load without working up to it, but I've got here through lots and lots of chrono'ing and data collection, so I realise this is not the sort of approach most people would feel comfortable taking. It works for me, though and saves a lot of time and powder/bullets!

 

Might be a new record setting load!

 

But it helps make the point-very good data in,very good data out.

 

I get a little sceptical of claims that the "theory`" eg QL is seriously misleading,when the input might be made by those who have loads 500 fps above recommended SAAMI maxima,yet blithely say 'no pressure signs'-of course ,this is never measured,or the BC is +/- 25 % of reality (or as used by QL),and so on.While not quite as robust as the macro laws of physics,QL is probably more reliable and valid than some of its users.As long as no-one gets hurt,that's ok,but I'd hesistate to blame the tool too readily.Like the americans,according to the inimitable-though not always correct,Winston,in a different context,reloading enthusiasts/optimists usually get to the right conclusion (human error),even if most of the others are proposed first.

Gbal

[Dark Star]

Might be a new record setting load!

 

 

 

I've spent so much time perfecting my match loads it would be ironic and a bit irritating if it was!

 

It's certainly good enough for a 1000yd practise load to hone my wind-reading 'skills' but I've got a couple of combinations which regularly produce sub 1/3 MOA groups at all distances, up to 1200yds and have other advantages over this new one, so I'm not going to jump to any conclusions just yet.

 

When I started using Quickload, I had already spent probably 12 months and many thousands of rounds working out what worked and what didn't and developing a few good loads using the traditional methods but I collected as much data as I could and chronographed almost every round I fired. That was very useful once I learnt how to use QL and when I then plugged all that data I'd collected into it, I was gratified to find the predicted optimal loads (using the OBT theory) were very close to the loads I had developed through practical experimentation and trial and error.

 

Since then, I've trusted QL to get me pretty close if I want to try a new bullet or powder, but I'll still make manual tweaks and test empirically just to make sure.

 

As for pressure, without a way to measure chamber pressure accurately, you can only guess as to whether you're approaching excessive pressure using the usual signs. I'd rather leave a reasonable amount of overhead than try and push velocities and pressures to the limit (whatever your limit might be!).

 

I've probably got more overhead than some anyway as I almost exclusively shoot .308 and unless you are really silly with your choice of powder or start jamming the bullet, you can't really go too far as the case capacity is the limiting factor usually.