MarkInPA
Well-Known Member
LOL.... yea, so am I. Just an amateur. Just an amateur trying to wrap my mind around GRT. Isn't that one of the reasons we are here? To try and help each other.
GRT vs Quickload
- Thread starter nksmfamjp
- Start date
asd9055
Well-Known Member
I understand. He was German.
asd9055
Well-Known Member
I came from spending decades in simulation world. Not in ballistics but another field. The thing we always emphasized was that we have more unknown and use "average" values than we have knowns. We use the best guess, run simulation, adjust, repeat until simulated results get closed measured data. What I meant to but failed to point out, was that we can just play with Ba and get an answer but the way Gordon was saying is, play with initiation pressure to get close and then use that to calibrate Ba and K. In reality there are more unknowns, like friction, primer, etc.
I took a long break due to financials, but about to move to another house where I will have my own 400+ range and will be able to run my experiments using GRT.
MarkInPA
Well-Known Member
I've been tinkering with the GRT. I probably know just enough about it to be dangerous. I was doing some research with 180 grain bullets out of a .30-06. I got to ask the question. According to this tool, is there any powder remotely close to IMR 4350 that is adequate for 180 grain .30-06 loadings? The IMR 4350 seems to be nearly perfect when looking at case fill ratio's and a complete burn before leaving the barrel. I always knew that IMR 4350 was an excellent powder for the .30-06 but, WOW! Seems to be a match made in heaven.
