Quickload....who uses it?

I’m just lurking here. I’ve been meaning to get this as well, haven’t yet, but very interested in the responses.

Just started. . . I've had a hunch that VV Tin Star N32C would make a nice cast 300BO powder, but them Finnish slackers haven't published data.

So the first -25% max batch worked just as predicted; workup coming soon.

Next project will be a broader set of HS-7 data.

I bought it last year and have had fun playing with it. But I am far from a power user at this point! What I have used it for mostly is to identify promising powders for a given cartridge. I compare QL's list with my available powders and published load data looking for efficiency. I have also looked at QL's projected barrel time to estimate where I might find an accuracy node for a given load.

My understanding is that to get the best from QL, you have to tune it with your own data. For instance, check the water capacity of cartridges fired in your rifle and put that number in instead of the default; set the seating depth to what you actually use rather than the depth based on the "book" COAL; etc.. The more accurate your input data, the more accurate the results from QL.

Thus far, QL has helped me decide on where to start load development. I don't accept QL's output without checking it against published load data where it exists. But it is very helpful in working with non-standard (e.g., Ackley Improved) cartridges.

I use it. Not terribly often, but I do.

I've found it to be quite accurate in predicting muzzle velocity for rifle loads. I was doing a lot of work with .243 over the last couple of years and usually what QL was predicting for MV was pretty close to what I was seeing out of the chrono.

In a thread a few weeks ago I was wondering if the needed COL for a certain 115gr (9mm) bullet was too short for the published starting load, and I ended up needing to go below starting given how deeply I needed to seat this bullet. As I was deciding where I should start (and many fine folks here chimed in) I used QL to see what the estimated pressures and MVs would be. As I recall it was *not* particularly accurate in that scenario. (Although I have to say it doesn't have good support for lead bullets I don't believe.)

There are two things I think you have to be really careful about when using QL:

• There are so many parameters you can change, you have to remember to confirm those are set where they should be. For example, after doing some rifle work in it and having the barrel length set to 26", then when I did some pistol stuff - and the output looked odd - it took me a while to realize I hadn't changed the barrel length.
• The presence of tons of data can give the illusion of accuracy. I always have to remind myself it's not reality - it's a simulation. Many people have told me to not rely on it like a loading manual, and I've found that hard to do. But now I see it as "yet another data point" to factor into the mix of deciding on what different loads might do.

I'm going to start using QL in combination with Optimal Barrel Timing techniques. I haven't done this before. But apparently these two tools/techniques (OBT and QL), when used together, can help one settle on optimum loads much more quickly than some other methods.
http://the-long-family.com/optimal barrel time.htm

OR

I've used it for years and I find it valuable for working up loads, and predicting pressure and velocity as you go. I also like the ability to load outside of loading manual's scope (mouse fart loads and cast bullet rifle loads).

Im thinking about buying it, but I cant find a cartridge list anywhere. Can someone tell me if 458 socom is in it?

Yes, it is.

I use it to get ideas for loading powders I have not used in a given caliber before, and to compare different powders in the same cartridges. I am disappointed that some established powders (WST, for instance) are not included, and the bullet profiles are pretty limited. But I think it's a useful tool for working up loads.

I have thought about buying it for a number of years. Still l have not quite justified the cost at this point. Guess l learned load development in the dark ages without all the fancy stuff and managed to get along quite well anyway. You know the drill.

From two previous posts:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/quickload-user-forum.724152/#post-9044303
QuickLoad is as sliced bread to those who use it intelligently. It provides
information/options/consequences/projections that nothing else does
in this business. Absolutely nothing else at all.

HOWEVER: QuickLoad goes most effectively with a chronograph. Without
it the shooter is operating no less blindfolded as he is just blindly following
a manual.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/sho...nd-QuickLoad&p=4333578&viewfull=1#post4333578
30-40 Krag, RETUMBO, and QuickLoad
Still playing with cast in the original-config 29" Krag, I've gone through multiple bullet designs/weights/velocities/powders... picky and fickle.

Finally seemed to settle a bit on a 190gr #301_SAECO 301_TC-GC in #2 using Winchester 780 Supreme ... which of course is now no longer made... And still it exhibited significant velocity swings depending on powder position in that relatively large case for the intended pressure (28ksi) velocity range.

The heck w/ it.
Ask QUICKLOAD for the best combo of
- Pressure (target 28,000 psi)
- Velocity (target 2,200 fps)
- Case Fill (103-108% to insure complete fill/slight compression)
- Burn (mid 80s and up...)

QuickLoad spits out a reeeeeeeaaaaally long list, which w/ a little filtering:


Problem is. there is NO published (manufacturers' or even WAG internet) data on that kind of "ridiculously unsuitable" powder/bullet/cartridge combination.

So I dig out a Berger manual which does use RETUMBO and a 190gr bullet -- for the 300 RUM. OK, what does Quickload predict for the RUM ?
Turns out it matches dead nuts on w/ Berger's data; and is reasonably consistent with interpolated Hornady and Lyman data at both MIN/MAX levels and pressure/velocities,

So we go ahead and scale it down for the Krag and take it out this evening

actual Oehler velocity: 2,173 ± 07 (wow)

So again: (1) Quickload as a computer-driven internal ballistics model (2) Basic learning curve in "safe" regions (3) rational calibration looking at other people's examples/data/experience "even internet" (4) and a CHRONOGRAPH (stomp, stomp)

One for the search engines then.....
(YMMV, of course. Take great care)

I've used it a fair amount. I like it. Matches up pretty well with chronograph data. Make sure you measure case volume and case length for your brass if you plan on using it up near the top end of things.

I've done a little tinkering with Optimum Barrel Time using Q/L (google it). So far, it's been a pretty quick way to put you in the the neighborhood of solid loads. There's some useful youtubes on how you can leverage QL as well.

It's got a lot of levers you can pull.

30Cal said:

I've used it a fair amount. I like it. Matches up pretty well with chronograph data. Make sure you measure case volume and case length for your brass if you plan on using it up near the top end of things.

I've done a little tinkering with Optimum Barrel Time using Q/L (google it). So far, it's been a pretty quick way to put you in the the neighborhood of solid loads. There's some useful youtubes on how you can leverage QL as well.

It's got a lot of levers you can pull.

Click to expand...

good advice there. I've only run into two problemz with QL data, both caused by significant case capacity differences from assumed, and an unusual powder for the cartridges.