QuickLOAD/QuickTARGET Ballistic Prediction Software

How much does it cost (QL)? I know not totally on topic, but it's more on topic than it would have been in the other thread hopefully..

How would we know if the pressure readings are even right is what Im kind of wondering..

 

Engineers have been calculating pressure in pressure vessels for years why would this be any different? A cartridge is simply a pressure vessel?

 

You need a multi-parameter burning model of the powder being used.
After that it is standard time stepped engineering calculations for a pressure vessel with a variable size.
If you further adjust the model based on a strain gauge you can get very accurate predicti0ns.

 

As a matter of interest I have just plugged in some load data for local powders. I know they use the Piezo strain gauge but they only only the speeds per load. For this given load the load tables predict 2 616fps and when simulated in QL, QL gives 2 602fps.

 

One thing I must mention is that a given powder reacts differently under different conditions according to QL. So the same powder in a 6.5mm case does NOT burn the same as in a .375 case. Powder also burns differently at different pressures so a full case reacts differently to an case with less powder.

So when using Quickload one must take this into consideration. This is why we calibrate the burn rate which takes into consideration theses sometimes not so subtle differences. So when loading you have to establish a burn rate for a set of components at a specific speed.

 

The engineering staff of the consulting firm I work for (part time) have made several comparisons of real pressures and QL and found that QL predictions for bottleneck rifle calibers are remarkably close and consistent. Often moreso than data provided by MSMD loading manuals.

 

QL is making a prediction: a theoretical estimate based on calculations.

Such estimates will seldom be as accurate as measurements in instrumented barrels, but they are better than guesses.

 

I guess you were referring to what I said..I'm just saying we ("we" as in your everyday handloader) dont really have a way to double check a pressure reading.

I guess you may be saying it's probably not necessary to check since it's not that great of a mystery..?

Anywho, I'm checking out of this thread, I'll just get in the way, one last thing though, how much does the software cost? Or is it like a free download (yea right) or what?

 

$152.95 Read more here

FWIW, The formulas used are much more accurate for bottleneck cartridges than for straight wall cartridges. The developer knows this and the program is weighted to err on the conservative side for straightwall cartridges.

 

Thanks. Would've googled but wanted to be sure it was the one that everyone talks about and not a knockoff.

 

QuickLoad

If the data you enter into "QuackLoad" is not right, things may go very wrong. Almost - http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=552791

 

You always seem to find the worst case scenario to put up as an example. Why so pessimistic? For every major problem caused by user error there are probably hundreds of successes.

 

"...how QuickLoad calculates chamber pressure?..." Programmer magic. Far too many variables for any computer program to cover 'em all. Not many programmers actually shoot either.

 

And probably not many shooters know much about programming. Those that do both might have a leg up.

 

No matter which QL thread I post on (numerous forums), people have difficulty in believing the output, yet will believe published load data without question, notwithstanding the fact that in QL you can tweak for all the parameters that published load data does not allow for. I have no issue with published load data and will at times still use this as a start point for QL.

QL works, it correlates closely to standard load tables but allows you the ability to move loads up and down to meet specific barrel times, it allows you to simulate powders before buying them and wasting money, the same for bullets. It allows you to develop accurate loads with the minimal wastage of components.

The other thing that QL does it that it teaches you about internal ballistics, the ability to alter criteria in real time allows one to real time effects, this added greatly to my understanding of what affects what and by how much.

Is QL perfect, NO. Is QL better than conventional load tables, IMO significantly. Does QL add a new dimension to your loading, most definitely. Is QL worth the price, I suppose only the buyer can tell. The more calibres you load the more you can justify the expense.

Download the demo, I think it has three calibres you can play with?
http://www.neconos.com/details3.htm

QL is in a league of its own, you can even design your own wildcat cartridges, calculate recoil for each load, print and save data, store specific rifle data, and numerous other features I have yet to explore. Here is a full review from 6mmBR.
http://www.6mmbr.com/quickload.html

@Sunray. The bloke that designed the program is a Mechanical Engineer and a bench rest shooter.

A closing point. QL is not a miracle program where you plug in numbers and it spits out a magic load. You still need to take the normal care that you would with any reloading, building you load from low pressure. What QL does allow is for you to get there quicker and safer. Most QL users I know have not studied the comprehensive user guide and simply do NOT use QL correctly, I suspect that many of the naysayers on forums are no different. There is a specific process to be followed so if any here opt to buy QL then please follow the user guide.

 

That shouldn't be that big of a surprise, IMO.

You seem to be very sensitive about it, starting in post 3 in this thread.

And Im not trying to pick a fight, I didn't realize it was a sore spot.

 

I suppose a disclaimer would be in order. I have no vested interest in the promotion or the sale of QL software, I am however a satisfied QL user.

Potatohead, not sensitive, rather frustrated. I thought that I would lay my stall out early having sat on both sides of the fence.

I have spent hours on the net trying to help people who have bought QL as a quick fix which it is not. These users tend to be the most critical of the product but fail to appreciate that if you do not have the basic foundations of working up you own loads safely, QL will be a little beyond you. QL for me is aimed at a reasonably seasoned hand loader as you need to have a fair deal of loading experience to maximise the use of the software.

I started loading using Standard Load Tables and I had partial success, I then gravitated to Dan Newberry's OCW load development routine with more success and now the next stage of my loading development is QL. I would advocate each method to anyone based on your means, experience and ability.

My background as a QL user actually comes from variable local powders (we have none to extremely limited US powders here). We have 12 powders available to us, all from one manufacturer. We have about 7/8 rifle cartridge powders to choose from of which many a hand loader here will tell you, can vary significantly in burn rate. Additionally we have severe limitations in the quantity of powder we may keep at any point in time so we hardly get used to a load and the batch is depleted. The next batch of powder could be significantly hotter or colder, my shooting friends and I find QL especially useful when seamlessly changing from batch to batch. 3 shots over the Chrony, recalibrate the burn rate for the new batch and you are good to go.

I did not see you as picking a fight and yes, it is probably a sore point given my experiences here (S.A.).

 

Anything that goes against the mainstream or challenges old, established ideas is going to meet resistance and criticism. We see it in every "Glock vs 1911" or "revolver vs. semi-auto" thread.

With the powder shortage, I often find the only powders I can get are not listed in any manual for the cartridge I want to load. I use QL to give me any idea of how the available powders might work. Example: Hodgdon's data doesn't list W748 for 6.8SPC at all, but QL said it should be really good, and it has been. But I really need to get a chrony to make the best use of the program.

 

Hello,

I hope you won't mind my "two cents worth' on the QL issue. I suggest you call Ed Dillon at NECO since he can provide you with stated facts concerning the pressure issue. He can give you the real info as opposed to conjecture.

My work with QL has been satisfying in making the jump from projected computer data to real live usage with a rifle and chronograph. Maybe I was unique to using this program. I read all the reviews of it on the Internet and took notes and refer to them in adding exact specs to the QL formulations. I thoroughly read the 120 page documentation that comes with the software and highlighted items of particular interest to me. As result I saved the cost of the software program the very first time I used it. i was developing loads for a wildcat formed from shortened .308 brass. I started with 5 bullets and 7 powders and after QL applications ended up testing just three of the powders. I found a "sweet spot" rather quickly, tried many other combinations and returned to the original best load; saving a fair amount of time and money since I am pretty darn picky as to what I want shot in my rifles.

The single thing I have a problem with in this program is this. Primer specifications. As you know, different primers have different burning rates.some hotter, some cooler and more even in shot to shot uniformity as to velocity. With the wildcat brass I form I can obtain both small and large primer sizes in cases. That can show obviously when chronographing. QL doesn't seem to differentiate on this issue and it is the single "nit picky" thing I would change in an otherwise really special time saving ballistics program.

Thanks

Gene So

 

Fair enough, and understandable.