Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Custom action pressure ceiling.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Fitch" data-source="post: 391139" data-attributes="member: 19372"><p>It is not true that a measurement of unknown accuracy is of no value. It is also not true that the accuracy of the PT unit can't be extabilshed within reasonable limits. The copper crusher measurement system used by industry for decades turned out to be useful and to have almost no relationship to what they thought they were measuring. </p><p> </p><p>For engineering purposes, or to be useful for some load development, it doesn't have to be perfectly accurate, and there doesn't have to be a pressure goal to make pressure instrumentation useful. The ammo industry went for decades using copper cursher testing that they didn't even understand and it was useful. Used on a test barrel of specified geometry, the Pressure Trace system is better than the copper crusher. Located with due consideration for geometry and checked with some factory ammo, it can be close enough to be useful as an engineering tool for a guy trying to get a better understanding of what's happening.</p><p> </p><p>I'm an engineer. I spent 35 years in Aerospace mostly figuring out how to do what had never been done before. We did all sorts of experiments and simulations to "engineering" accuracy. Worked pretty well for gaining an understanding of what's going on. </p><p> </p><p>If barrel exit time is of interest, the PT system will allow measuring it. If one is working on reduced or subsonic loads, the PT system can be useful for making sure there is enough margin in the load to assure the bullet won't stick. It can provide assurance there are so secondary detonation issues with a reduced load.</p><p> </p><p>I could make the argument that using the PT as an engineering tool in conjunction with QuickLoad is potentially more useful for developing hunting loads than intentionally proving over and over and over thousands of times that it's possible to exceed the pressure of the brass. I see little value in that unless it leads to better brass for your rifle, which so far doesn't seem to have been the case. </p><p> </p><p>That said, while I do use QuickLoad a lot, I don't see the need for a PT unit for developing hunting loads, nor do I see any reason to develope an inordinate fixation on blowing up brass for developing hunting loads. Blowing up brass seems to have become an end in and of itself. If it feels good, do it, but I don't see any benefit from proving the obvious over and over again.</p><p> </p><p>Fitch</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fitch, post: 391139, member: 19372"] It is not true that a measurement of unknown accuracy is of no value. It is also not true that the accuracy of the PT unit can't be extabilshed within reasonable limits. The copper crusher measurement system used by industry for decades turned out to be useful and to have almost no relationship to what they thought they were measuring. For engineering purposes, or to be useful for some load development, it doesn't have to be perfectly accurate, and there doesn't have to be a pressure goal to make pressure instrumentation useful. The ammo industry went for decades using copper cursher testing that they didn't even understand and it was useful. Used on a test barrel of specified geometry, the Pressure Trace system is better than the copper crusher. Located with due consideration for geometry and checked with some factory ammo, it can be close enough to be useful as an engineering tool for a guy trying to get a better understanding of what's happening. I'm an engineer. I spent 35 years in Aerospace mostly figuring out how to do what had never been done before. We did all sorts of experiments and simulations to "engineering" accuracy. Worked pretty well for gaining an understanding of what's going on. If barrel exit time is of interest, the PT system will allow measuring it. If one is working on reduced or subsonic loads, the PT system can be useful for making sure there is enough margin in the load to assure the bullet won't stick. It can provide assurance there are so secondary detonation issues with a reduced load. I could make the argument that using the PT as an engineering tool in conjunction with QuickLoad is potentially more useful for developing hunting loads than intentionally proving over and over and over thousands of times that it's possible to exceed the pressure of the brass. I see little value in that unless it leads to better brass for your rifle, which so far doesn't seem to have been the case. That said, while I do use QuickLoad a lot, I don't see the need for a PT unit for developing hunting loads, nor do I see any reason to develope an inordinate fixation on blowing up brass for developing hunting loads. Blowing up brass seems to have become an end in and of itself. If it feels good, do it, but I don't see any benefit from proving the obvious over and over again. Fitch [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Custom action pressure ceiling.
Top