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
Reloading
Temperature Sensitivity Experience N560 and RL-26
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="Veteran" data-source="post: 2256533" data-attributes="member: 118038"><p>Just out of curiousity, what do you have against QL or what is your bad experience with it? I find it a very useful guide especially when you tune it using your actual velocity data from shooting. </p><p></p><p>QL like any tool, is only as good as the inputs and the time you invest in getting and putting in good data a parameters.</p><p></p><p>It really made impression on me when it caused me to measure the volume of my Hornady .338 Lapua cases which averaged </p><p>107 vs. my Lapua cases at 116.1. There is a world of difference in pressure and velocity at those two inputs for a given charge weight and QL can help you see what that magnitude is. </p><p></p><p>So understanding case volumes has been one big benefit. It can and does help me quantify pressure and velocity changes from seating depths, use of different bullets, and certainly to a large extent different powders. </p><p></p><p>And I find it very accurate once I get my brass measured correctly, input all my specific bullets, barrel length, and then chronograph my actual velocities to "tune it" to the specific lot of powder I am using as to its actual burn rate. </p><p></p><p>Different lots of powder can vary 5-10% in their specific actual burn rates vs. what the manufacter says.</p><p></p><p>So unless you calibrate your QL inputs for actual velocities with an adjusted burn rate entry, you won't really realize its </p><p>full potential. Once you "tune" it up, it works great.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Veteran, post: 2256533, member: 118038"] Just out of curiousity, what do you have against QL or what is your bad experience with it? I find it a very useful guide especially when you tune it using your actual velocity data from shooting. QL like any tool, is only as good as the inputs and the time you invest in getting and putting in good data a parameters. It really made impression on me when it caused me to measure the volume of my Hornady .338 Lapua cases which averaged 107 vs. my Lapua cases at 116.1. There is a world of difference in pressure and velocity at those two inputs for a given charge weight and QL can help you see what that magnitude is. So understanding case volumes has been one big benefit. It can and does help me quantify pressure and velocity changes from seating depths, use of different bullets, and certainly to a large extent different powders. And I find it very accurate once I get my brass measured correctly, input all my specific bullets, barrel length, and then chronograph my actual velocities to "tune it" to the specific lot of powder I am using as to its actual burn rate. Different lots of powder can vary 5-10% in their specific actual burn rates vs. what the manufacter says. So unless you calibrate your QL inputs for actual velocities with an adjusted burn rate entry, you won't really realize its full potential. Once you "tune" it up, it works great. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Temperature Sensitivity Experience N560 and RL-26
Top