Thread: QuickLOAD just arrived!

Originally Posted by Flyblown

And the problem I have is what is real world velocity?

The values my two chronographs return at 15ft are never remotely close to what the validated trajectory function in Strelok says it should be. This from the measured drops data.

In terms of accuracy down range, the Strelok number is always bang on, when it comes to hitting paper, gongs and small goats at 600m. If I used the chrono numbers and dialled according to that data, I'd miss every time.

I find with Quickoad that I really have to concentrate on every assumption, and when I get them all right (or very close to) I generally get a velocity output that matches Strelok.

I think some of the ADI powder data is a little off, I contacted Helmut and he admitted he hasn't tested them, he's tested the Hodgdon branded stuff. There are always differences batch to batch and I suspect some of the ADI burn rates etc are a little off. Not by a lot though.

When it comes to validating velocity, I'd suggest you go (a) Quickload, (b) chrono, (c) drops data, (d) Quickload adjustments, if required. Works for me.

With just using Strelok I find it pretty good, I have never had the spare cash for a Chrony of my own nor the very highly rated Quickload, but in 4 calibers I reload for Strelok gives repeatable "come ups" for every situation. once a bit of work has been done on drop validation.

Thanks, I've read some of the OBT papers today and was just at the point of asking, 'well what do I do with it'. You just just sorted me out. Same back to you real soon @Flyblown.

Ah, one fone-a-friend question. I use a suppressor. So I treat barrel length as true barrel length and use my chrony to measure how the can is changing the velocity from whats been put in the books right?

Agree with advice, especially getting the H20 level right (a bump of water protruding) with an average of at least 3 fire rounds from your chamber. Use QL for powder selection as that is very helpful (most speed for equal pressure across all powders). Use the edit function if using a bullet not listed, eg ELDM is slightly longer than same weight AMAX. Use cartridge near your one if not listed and then adjust to actual H20 capacity, case length...eg 260 Rem for 260AI. Do not use QL as a reloading guide, use a manufacturers reloading data - QL is a model and all models are wrong. Set all your parameters up in QL to match your load (COAL, case length, etc) then chrony that load and compare average velocity to QL prediction - adjust Ba value to match velocity - this should then be close to real world. You can use the barrel time of projectile with the OBT method to see if you are near the predicted nodes for accuracy Optimal Barrel Time Paper.

I am still very new to QL and learning all the time.

@Gerardo (someone got the disc!)

Where is best place to get quickload program, order from UK or I seen some Aussie gunshops have it?

Here is the OBT tool for 20" barrels, note the time on Node 5:




Here is the QL data for RE26 (NB I have used RE17 Data and edited it to RE26 parameters but also adjusted the BA and weighting factor to best match observed speed (3157fps).



I have adjusted powder weight to reflect the nearest node (Node 5). So will load these up and try! Fingers crossed.

Originally Posted by jackson21

Where is best place to get quickload program, order from UK or I seen some Aussie gunshops have it?

I ordered from uk, took a couple weeks to arrive.

Mr. Longs optimum barrel time can be disproved by finding observations that disagree with the predictions of the theory. Accepting that it doesn’t works in some cases, it would have been nice if it was still useful as an aid in predicting accuracy nodes, but I have not found this to be the case. From the time the theory was first presented I have gone to some lengths to apply its predictions to my rifles & loads – including corresponding with the author to get clarification on the effects of barrel discontinuities, chamber length and the effect of this on the point of origin of the so-called shock wave - but when all was said and done I’ve never had any success in using it as a help in finding loads that shoot smaller groups. From the outset it seemed to me that if this approach was able to predict barrel behaviour, then it would be better applied in finding the barrel times to avoid than the opposite, but I haven’t found this to be true either.

QuickLOAD on the other hand is a wonderful thing that just has understandable modelling limitations.

OBT does seem too good to be true. But I'll give it a go!

Originally Posted by Puffin

Mr. Longs optimum barrel time can be disproved by finding observations that disagree with the predictions of the theory. Accepting that it doesn’t works in some cases, it would have been nice if it was still useful as an aid in predicting accuracy nodes, but I have not found this to be the case. From the time the theory was first presented I have gone to some lengths to apply its predictions to my rifles & loads – including corresponding with the author to get clarification on the effects of barrel discontinuities, chamber length and the effect of this on the point of origin of the so-called shock wave - but when all was said and done I’ve never had any success in using it as a help in finding loads that shoot smaller groups. From the outset it seemed to me that if this approach was able to predict barrel behaviour, then it would be better applied in finding the barrel times to avoid than the opposite, but I haven’t found this to be true either.

QuickLOAD on the other hand is a wonderful thing that just has understandable modelling limitations.

I found the same, over a reasonable sized sample I couldnt find anything usefull..
and I would put "modelling limitations" in bold print.

Originally Posted by Tikka7mm08

@Gerardo (someone got the disc!)

It will have to be the next buy I think!

Well I knocked up ten OBT predicted rounds this morning, the load is quite close to my OCW load which was a bit temperamental. Minor adjustments to powder charge and seating depth. I went out and checked zero at 200 yds (two shots, bang on, no change).

Then shot six shots into 0.88MOA at 287 yards in a dirty, gusty westerly blowing from 4 o'clock, to check the drops. If you remove the sixth and last shot that I called right the instant I fired it, it was 0.67 MOA. I used the last two shots at 100yds to check the height above POA, and put them on top of each other.

From a lightweight 18" .308 and my questionable reloading practices, that'll do, to be honest in these conditions I'm rapt with that. 165gr Speer BTSP, 44.4gr AR2208 (Varget), 2.900" COAL.

Most interesting of all, is the Strelok validated trajectory is exactly what Quickload predicted. Didn't take the chrono because it'll just get blown over.

Ain't gonna win any competitions, but for a lightweight carbine hunting rifle, continuing to cock around would be a waste of time. I can shoot deer with that to 400yds no probs, 500yds is pushing 1800fps so getting a bit slow.

Ive never had much luck with the free strelok past 300 yds it always fails to predict real world results with the measured data mv and manufacturers bc. The one i trust implicitly is an exel spreadsheet one by Professor Arthur Pejsa, a physicist who worked for honeywell and jpl and wrote a number of books on ballistics, it has predicted results for my 6.5x55, 308, and a friends 300 winmag out to 950 yards that have been verified with drop tests. Its only drawbacks are a) its in exel and you need to know how to use that, b) it stops at the transonic point, and c)my phone wont run exel, but the programs setup to print out drop charts in any increment and I carry laminated ones on the stock with 15 k wind deflections at 90degrees which i can fiddle in my head for different speeds and angles.

The pro version of Strelok is a big step up from the free. A lot more features.