QUICK LOAD VELOCITIES?

[antelopedundee]

Anyone compared actual velocities to those given at Quick Load if you duplicate their load data and chronograph the load? If so was the variation enough to write home about?

 

[jimbires]

that's one of the items I use to true up quickload predictions . I'll enter all my info , then I look at X grains of powder = ???? velocity . from there I can tweak weighting factor , and or maybe powder rate to get just about spot on .

 

[antelopedundee]

For instance, for the 6.5-06AI and 127 grain Barnes LRX bullet at COL 3.340 QL shows a load of 60.8 grains of IMR7977 giving 2972 fps from a 24 inch barrel. Should I expect to get that velocity under like conditions? I get pretty good [for me] accuracy with 59.3 grains from a 26 barrel .050 or so off the lands with a COL of 3.385 as best I can measure.

 

[Mikecr]

With same powder, and same barrel (just cut shorter), and same bullet,, if QL results are good for 26" they'll be good for 24". But, this is based on your validation of correct results, from said powder/bullet/barrel.

If you're asking if QL is right without validation, the answer is maybe. Is a reloading manual right? Maybe..
It is impossible to predict with YOUR components, without some validation.

 

[jimbires]

it's really hard to say . I don't have a 6.5-06 AI listed to be able to run some numbers . usually there's a difference in powder burn rates from lot to lot , some barrels are faster than others , some makers brass has a higher case capacity than others . you could be very close to the estimate , or you could be off a fair amount .

Mike types faster than me .

 

[antelopedundee]

With same powder, and same barrel (just cut shorter), and same bullet,, if QL results are good for 26" they'll be good for 24". But, this is based on your validation of correct results, from said powder/bullet/barrel.

If you're asking if QL is right without validation, the answer is maybe. Is a reloading manual right? Maybe..
It is impossible to predict with YOUR components, without some validation.

What I'm asking is if anyone has used QL to estimate a load and then validated the QL results with actual chronograph data. If so how close were you? I'm within about a grain of the QL estimate with no signs of pressure yet. The load shoots pretty good as is and even tho estimated velocity isn't tops, accuracy tops velocity in my book. The fact that copper fouling is almost nil with that powder is another big plus. I clean my barrel in that rifle with wet rubbing alcohol patches.

 

[Mikecr]

What I'm asking is if anyone has used QL to estimate a load and then validated the QL results with actual chronograph data. If so how close were you?

About 12yrs ago I sat down with cartridge design software, ballistic software, a blank reamer print, and QuickLoad, with intent to build the most efficient 26cal with 140gr bullets. Running 'what-is' with everything I came to the capacity needed with a wildcat very close to 260AI, but able to handle more pressure. A 26wssm Imp.
Ordered a reamer set, barrels, an action & stock and had a 16.5lb BR gun built.

The load predictions from Quickload matched up with similar cal/capacity results as posted at ReloadersNest at the time, so I was confident enough to buy all the brass, powder, primers, and bullets needed for several barrel lives, which I also knew, right up front.

When the gun was finally finished, I setup my Oehler with 20' screen spacing and worked up safely. New brass was ~10fps off (slower) than predicted, fire-formed was dead nuts on. Possibly more accurate than my chrono.
I was blown away by that, as I know there is some luck to it. I had to guess on a couple things (like weighting factor) so I would have been impressed enough within ~50fps of predicted. As long as pressures were ok.
Another unbelievable: 3 barrels later, same 80 cases for all 3, the gun still shoots within an 8fps ES of originally predicted. The same make barrels(Border) had been finished together, and I've used same lot of every component.
It couldn't have gone better.

 

[antelopedundee]

I usually start with a load a couple grains less than QL tops mostly to avoid changes from possible component variation and to avoid pressure situations that may be safe, but affect case life like loosening primer pockets. So far the load data has been pretty good and would probably make a loading manual cringe with fear.

 

[Rhett Crider]

I use QuickLoad to get me safely started on a load development. Too many variables such as twist rate, barrel bore, primers, powder lots, etc. to think it's that close. It's a great tool especially when they have data and the reloading manuals don't. I pretty much know what powders perform and which primers are needed so I just use their software to predict the load that looks good and back off the 10% and start my development. And yes, I've seen MV swings in both directions from their predictions.

Rhett

 

[TRG65]

I use quick load to get some estimates. Then tune the powder factors and start pressure to the powder, bullet and barrel. Once I do that, then further estimates are usually pretty good to hit nodes or change seating depth and keep things in a node based on barrel time.

 

[asd9055]

For Quick Load to make good predictions it needs to be calibrated. You need to fire at least 10 round over a chrono. Then weight the water capacity of each fired case. Take the average of the MV and case capacity and enter these into QL. Adjust your QL temperature for the actual when you shot, and powder burn rate to much velocity. Thats the basics steps required to use QL. Then you are set for that powder, bullets, cases and rifle. Need to do that every time one of those changes.