Ive been teasing the idea of getting this software for a while now.  It produces gobs of interesting info, 

im not sure yet, though, how to take the info from the software and use it in my loading process - what changes does to tell me to make, and what kind of accuracy or financial impact can these changes have?

I load 80% of my non-personal-defense ammo, mostly for matches and blasting,

its about $150 - is it worth it?  Why or why now?

I like it but would never pay for it.

It was gifted to me.

Great tool with a long list of useful tools packed into it.

All guesstimates are based on predictable numbers from the manufacture componets and the software does the math.

Pretty good at it too.

It's no reloading book substitute and there are plenty of warnings about it to the effect if you do use it as a manual your going to get hurt.

It's definitely not necessary, but can be quite useful for compiling "what if" senerios without wasting componets and range time.

I've done write-ups on a method using Quickload, the OBT calculator spreadsheet, and Magnetospeed chronograph.  I've used this method for about 3 years, and it's amazing how quickly I can develop an accurate rifle load.

Here's the basic outline:
1.  Use the OBT (Optimal Barrel Time) calculator to calculate nodes for your barrel length.
2.  Input your powder, projectile, estimated case volume, etc. into QL.  Manipulate the charge until you get a load whose barrel time matches one of the nodes from #1 above, but that is not at max pressure.  I suggest the load whose pressure is the highest without going over max.
3.  Load 3 rounds at something below the charge you came up with in #2 above.  For .223 size cases, probably 1gr low is low enough.  For .308, maybe 2gr low, 300WM maybe 4gr low.  The point in creating these loads below the charge in #2 is that QL has made a prediction and that is not based on any actual empirical observations - so it could be wrong - and you don't want to start at some high pressure.
4.  Shoot your 3 through the Magnetospeed, noting the MV.
5.  Measure you fired case capacity.
6.  Tweak your QL model for this load that you just tested, inputting your measured fired case capacity, actual charge weight, ambient temperature.  If the QL velocity does not match your measured MV, then tweak the 'Ba' burn rate factor in QL until your model matches your observations.  Now your model is tuned to the load you just tested.  Look at the barrel time from this tuned model and compare to your target barrel time from #1 above.
7.  If you're not at the target barrel time, then adjust the charge weight in the model until the barrel time matches your target barrel time.
8.  Load up 3 more at this new charge weight.
9.  Repeat 4-8 until your load gives you the barrel time you were looking for.
10.  Congratulations, you have a load that is on the node for your barrel.  It will probably be pretty accurate.  You can adjust seating depth to tune the load for maximum accuracy.\

Using this method, I can normally get on the node for a particular rifle in somewhere between 6 and 12 shots, which is a lot fewer shots than the OCW or ladder test methods which are both great methods of course.

I have only personally used QL for pistol loads so far.

It provides a good starting point, but in my experience it over estimates pressure and velocity, meaning I end up with softer loads than predicted. Even when mocking up book loads, generally speaking, QL will err on the side of caution.

I have found it helpful to get a sense for relative change (ie, if I reduce COAL by 0.01", is my pressure going to increase by 2%, or 10%?), as well as how powders perform relative to each other (is Power Pistol a better choice for this application, or Bullseye?).

I assume with some tweaking I could get the predicted velocity closer to my real world data, but I'm not really sure which values to change.

Now, I did some workup stuff for my buddy's 300BLK rifle, and he did mention that the numbers I gave him were "really close" to what he saw on the chrono, but I don't have any specific data. The dope chart I sent him based on the load data was also "really close".

I will probably be doing more rifle load development this spring and summer, so I'll be able to get a better feel for how QL works for me in that realm.

After you have good chronograph data, you will need to measure the capacity of your fired cases (in grains of water).  It's easy:  weigh the case, fill it with water just barely overflowing (wipe off any drops on the outside), weigh again, subtract.  You now have the capacity of your fired cases.  I'd do at least 3 cases and average.  Input this value as your case capacity.

Measure the ambient temperature.  Input this value as the temperature.  (you will need to click on the little thermometer icon on the powder portion of the screen to be able to enter temperature and also the next parameter).

Click 'recalculate' and see if the predicted velocity matches your chrono data.  If not, you will need to tweak the burn rate factor (Ba) up or down, hitting recalculate, until the model matches your chrono data.  Now save this with a good filename that has something like 'actual' in the name so you know this is actual data - not a prediction.

Congratulations, your QL model now matches your observations.

Is the guidance helpful compared with other methods?

Is the guidance worth the cost of the software?

Thanks in advance.

I've always been interested in Quickload as well. I'd be interested to try it out, more from the stand point of just being able to get a better starting point. Getting to the range is becoming harder and less frequent for me. Wondering if QL could help me get more out of my range trips?

Work up a load, back off and do the test for input and go from there.

Kind of sucks to spend 150 to find out you don't like it though.

Maybe I haven't stated my case plainly enough, so I will try again.

Quickload is a modelling software.  It's only as good as the data you include in your model.  

When you first start off, and have no chronograph data, and no fired case capacity, then it will only be coincidence if the model is accurate.

But as you test your loads, and get chronograph data, and measure fired case capacity, and ambient temperature, and manipulate the case capacity, temperature, and burn rate factor (Ba) variables into your model, and make the model match the chronograph data - now your model matches your observations.  It's no longer theoretical.  Your model now matches your observations.

To recap:  At first, the model is only theoretical.  But as you manipulate the variables to match your test observations, the model becomes an actual/practical representation of your load.

You had a very good write up, thanks for that.  I have had quickload for years but never really used it in the manner you have mentioned.  I use it for oddball cartridges and combinations as a pressure sanity check.  Time for me to explore your process to cut down on load workup in several of my rifles.

Agreed, but the initial shot pressure is kind of an unknown unknown that has a large effect on the output data, but you have no objective way to measure.

Unless the guideline data is pretty universally accurate (I have no idea), but I would think it varies pretty substantially based on seat depth and distance off the lands.

I don't recall if this variable does anything besides add to the calculate pressure though -- does it affect predicted velocity?

The velocity is the integral of pressure as the bullet travels through the barrel.

Anything that alters pressure will alter the predicted velocity.

OK, so I just went through and measured some fired 9mm cases.

My cases had an average capacity of 14.06gn H2O, and the default QL value was 13.30gn

Making this one adjustment lowered my max pressure by around 5000psi, which also lowered the velocity.

I did change the temperature (it was 80F the day I collected these chrono readings), but that increased the expected velocity in the model (insignificantly -- 3-4fps)

I'm still getting a slope difference between measured data and the model though -- changing burn rate will move the intercept but won't change the slope.

I can start a new thread if need be -- I don't want to totally derail this one, but I think at this point it is still educational/relevant?

Attached File

Attached File

Very helpful.  Thank you.

Should you be using fired case capacity or resized case capacity?

Now that you have these data, how does QuickLoad help from here?

Thanks in advance.

Double Tap.  Sorry.

I used fired case capacity, but that is a good question -- I don't know if that is correct or not.

ETA: The help bubble in QL says "water capacity of a given case when trimmed to the specified length -- for high pressure loads, measure after firing in a typical example of the specified chamber (case not resized)", so to me that means fired and unsized, since 9mm is a 35000 PSI spec? I would guess 45ACP would be a sized case since it's only 15000 PSI?

 Ah, you don't need to do that.  It's not a derail, it's on topic and interesting.

I there a version of this software for testing where I could try a 8x56r model and see if it works for me? i'd gladly plop down the cash if I could prove it out with something I load for. I don't recall the example I downloaded years ago, I think it was .308 which I don't load for.

im about to do a workup on 308, Lapua brass, fed 210m, Varget, Berger 185 juggernaut out of a 26" bolt gun. 

If there's a demo version that does 308 I'd love to try it out.  If not, maybe somebody here can run a load for me and either post or pm/email me the output?  I'm intrigued by this software.  If it really gets me close in half or fewer rounds, I'm in.

So I watched a few videos on YouTube about quick load. I can see the benefits of it, I can see what it does.

But I can't really nail down exactly what I would need it for? I guess that means I don't need it.

I mean, if I plug in all the information, Quick load will tell me what the pressure and fps of the round should be, and you can decide from there it's a safe load. The only thing I can think of is that if you're trying to push every around as fast as you possibly could, this would be a good way to figure out where you might be at. But you'd still have to make up some rounds and test them, but that doesn't mean they would be the most accurate round in your gun?

So I guess my question is, how does Quickload help attain accuracy? And how do you replace an OCW test in finding out what the most accurate load for your rifle is?

How does hanging a suppressor off the barrel effect node timing? Like if I have a 16" barrel with a 10" suppressor, is it equivalent to a 16", a 26" or something else?

None of the above.

Look into the normal vibrations for a cantilever and then add a weight on the end.


It moves the vibration nodes completely.

It is possible to produce a node at the barrel end if the added mass is NOT  bore diameter.
Like a suppressor.

Otherwise there is NEVER a node at the end of the barrel.

Reread colt933 original post now that you have watched the video and it will make more sense. you use it in conjunction with the OBT calculation.

Once you have input your experimental data such that your model matches real world data, you make powder adjustments until the load matches the barrel time calculated in the OBT calculation. Once you have an accurate model for the powder, primer, case combo you can also introduce new bullets and get pretty close until you can redo a model for the new bullet.

I use this method and it is actually very helpful in finding an accurate load pretty quickly.

Its important to remember that any new component you introduce needs a new model. You can use existing models as a good starting point (eg, burn rate for a specific powder) but you will eventually need to update the model for it to be accurate.

I think it is important if you using factory rounds but are altering the parameters established by SAAMI. Using 223 in F Class comp is an excellent example, the 223 Remington is no longer the same cartridge envisioned by its creators or SAAMI. I was launching 90 gr SMKs at 2760 fps from a 30" barrel. I am off the plantation in loading data and the guidance I am using is coming from guys plugging my data into Quickload.

That is weak sauces compared to some pushing similar bullets seated out to almost 2.7" at velocities approaching 2900 fps and competing successfully against 308s at 1000 yards. It ceases to be a "223" at some point.

See #3 in my first post in this thread.  It takes into account your concept of 'initial shot pressure' by stating that you should try your first shot at something below the prediction in #2.




Yes, case capacity is a huge part of the equation.  Changes in seating depth will change the usable case capacity and will change the model.



What's the difference?  All things being equal, pressure and velocity are tightly coupled.  More pressure = more velocity (again, all things being equal).

It's only for you to decide whether you need it or not.

My initial post in this thread describes a method that can be used instead of OCW or ladder testing, to arrive at a load that will be on the node of your rifle in 6-12 shots.  Normally, it takes me 9 shots to get on the node with this method, but sometimes more or less, depending on how lucky I get.

I've been trying very hard to make my statements as clear as possible.

BOOM!  This is the only point I have tried to make in this whole thread.  Thank you.

Thank you for the amazing and illustrative post.  I think you will find that pressure/velocity are not linear - the slope is not linear.  As the pressure goes up, Ba does too.  Run several models, changing the charge weight, click 'calculate' and then note how QL changes the Ba number with each successive charge weight.  The best you can do with QL is to intercept your actual measurements.  

See how the method I describe is iterative?  If everything was linear, there would be no need for the iterative process, no need to fire 9-12 shots.  You would be perfectly on the node with your second load (shots 4-6) if everything was linear.

I don't have a perfect answer for you, but I am happy to share my observations.  

I use the actual barrel length in the OBT and QL models.  I have no idea what I would include in QL for the fact that the suppressor is there, so I just don't do anything about it.  But I typically do my load testing with the suppressor attached.  When I get on the predicted node (for the barrel length) using a chronograph attached to the suppressor, the resulting load is typically very accurate.

I think the fact that the bullet passes freely through the suppressor, as opposed to it not passing freely through the barrel, means that the node is really for the barrel.  The bullet has exited the muzzle when it enters the suppressor, so the node/shockwave of the barrel is no longer a factor.

You definitely have me interested in getting more real world data with this method, @colt933 . I need to make time to do more objective testing.

I sent OP some data from the node spreadsheet you referenced, with Quickload data for his bullet and load -- hopefully he gets a chance to test it and post his results.

No I understand, I think you've been very clear, and I appreciate you taking the time to explain it. It just comes down more to that I don't understand exactly what it's doing.

The way I look at it, you would put in your information, fired case capacity, powder, primer,  bullet, all that. The program is really about trying to time the bullet exiting the barrel when the barrel harmonics are prime.I guess that would be the question I ask here, are you using Quickload to get the bullet exiting the barrel timed appropriately that it's giving you, or getting you close to the accuracy node?

I just am trying to learn something new here. Previously all I knew about achieving accuracy was to actually go out and "work up" to a node. Just kinda fascinates me to think that you can achieve accuracy from any given barrel from a computer program, and a few test shots to get input from that barrel.

I have to go back and reread your original post, do some reading at the QL site, re-watch that YouTube video.

I have been using QL since 2012.

A video I produced on water case capacity.

Importance of knowing your water case capacity

Read up on the theory of OBT. The idea is that there is a longitudinal pressure wave that goes down the barrel that is simply a function of the barrel length. If you know your barrel length, there is a given barrel time that accounts for when the pressure wave has gone to the muzzle and moved back to the breach and the harmonics are at a minimum (if I understand it correctly).

So to answer your question, yes its all about shooting a few tests shots, trueing your model, then adjusting your charge to match the predicted OBT for your given barrel length.

Once you run the numbers, you simply have to do a few tests groups around that calculated value to verify the accuracy.

When I worked up a load for my 308 it predicted a value within the 0.5gr of the loads I tested. In other words, I had great accuracy with loads that bracketed the calculated values.

Here is the OBT paper if you haven't read it, great read.
http://www.the-long-family.com/OBT_paper.htm

I have dabbled in looking into OBT, Just enough to know what it is. I got halfway through the article, needed to finish My school work before tomorrow. I'll try to finish reading it tomorrow.

Great video, must have been shot before the bench got messy. I like Your spreadsheet, I'm going through a class on Excel right now, working on a template for a class project.

This is precisely what the method I have described does.  QL gives you the barrel time.  I am matching the OBT barrel time to the QL barrel time, and matching the model to the empirical observations.  The end product is a load that is on the barrel time you have chosen.

I use the chronograph to measure the velocity.  I match the model to the velocity.  Now I compare the QL barrel time to the OBT barrel time, and I adjust teh charge weight, try again, and eventually (6-12 shots in my experience), I get a load that is at that barrel time (on the node).

I don't try to get close.  I try to get it right on the OBT.  Occasionally you will have to adjust the seating depth to account for not quite being to hit .00001 second right on the dot, with a limitation of .1gr increments.  Pressure and volume are related, so changing the seating depth changes volume which changes pressure.

See #6 and 7 in my original post.



Disclaimer:  I am a hobbyist, not an engineer or interior/exterior ballistics scientist.  The method I have described works for me.  Others say it works for them too.

When it works for you, do you end up with a load as good as OCW, but in fewer test rounds?  Better than OCW regardless of number of rounds?  Better than ladder?

I've struggled w/ OCW -- where other people see patterns, I just see bullet holes.  My home range isn't long enough to adequately perform a ladder test. 

I end up just shooting for groups.  Once I took some test loads to a LR F-class match

Thanks for that info.  If the weather holds out this weekend I'll test it out.

I believe I end up with the OCW load but in fewer test rounds.  I don't think it's better than OCW or ladder.  I think it arrives at the same place you would arrive at using OCW or ladder.  However, I do think that one might find more places using OCW or ladder - find more accurate loads than just typically two that you will find with the method I describe.

I say you will find two loads, based on two consecutive OBT nodes, one below max pressure, and one probably above it by a small margin.

The OCW method describes a figure-eight or infinity symbol pattern, that the muzzle moves through, as the shockwave goes from muzzle to breach and back.  The OCW subscribes to the thought, that on the up swing, the point of impact is going to be very similar as the muzzle approaches, reaches, and then leaves the highest point in the upswing.  It's kind of like when you spray paint an object - you spend more time on the sides than you do in the middle.  You're passing through the middle, but you approach a side, reach it, and then turn around and go back, so you've spent more time in the general area of the side than in the middle.  OCW describes that a load that is above or below the exact top of the loop, by some small margin, results in all shots hitting the target in the same relative place.  So your OCW load is tolerant of variations in pressure (resulting from variations in charge weight, seating depth, friction, etc.)

I used OCW a lot before I got QL and the Magnetospeed.

OBT seeks to time bullet exit to the point when the muzzle is at rest, and the shockwave is at the breach.  If you're not a mechanical engineer, I wouldn't spend too much time poring over the details of the OBT white paper.  Instead, I'd just download the spreadsheet, put your barrel length into it, and use QL to isolate OBT times that you might actually be able to achieve within your pressure limits (a bit above and below SAAMI max).  There's no point in developing an OBT that is super slow, nor one that will trash your brass on the first shot.

Give it a try.  All you have to lose is 6-12 rounds of ammo and a bit of time.

tag.

“Since all models are wrong the scientist cannot obtain a "correct" one by excessive elaboration.

On the contrary following William of Occam he should seek an economical description of natural phenomena.

Just as the ability to devise simple but evocative models is the signature of the great scientist so overelaboration

and overparameterization is often the mark of mediocrity.”


George E. P. Box (October 18, 1919 – March 28, 2013) Science and Statistics (1976), p. 792


I have used QuickLoad for many years now.

If you have velocity data (and measured pressure data is very useful also) you can adjust parameters and get very accurate results.

I use it to help with old cartridges that have limited modern CUP or PSI data.

It is well written software.

Easy to see what is doing what and when.

I have an older computer dedicated to running an older version I keep around.

It still has a 5 inch floppy drive.

Probably about time to get a new version.

I have become a believer since buying QuickLoad.

I back tested proven accurate loads and found they were very close to OBT nodes.

From my experience, I can add three  things I learned.

1.  Before firing any load, I do a sanity check against loading manual data.  Even the best models can have errors.  COAL does make a huge difference however.

2.  I'm finding one of the biggest unexpected benefits of QuickLoad is the ability to check pressure/velocity using other than my original powder choice.  QuickLoad has lead me to powders that produce significantly greater velocity with less pressure.  Important for hunting loads or extreme long range for caliber.  

3.  I have a Magneto Speed on order but the predicted velocities for three loads were correct lo 600 yards.  Pretty amazing.

I am finding it worth the $150 and very educational for anyone interested in external ballistics.

i just went through the process described in this thread for a known good shooting load I have that was developed in cold weather and then I cranked the temp up to 90 and it probably would have cause some damage to the cases if not the rifle itself. I think I might have to tone down the charge a bit.

Download OnTarget program to your computer and upload pictures of your targets. It has a calibration tool to help you mark what 1" is so the program can correctly scale the picture. Then mark your bullet holes and it will calculate the center of the shots and group size.

It really does help you see the nodes with the OCW method. One thing with OCW too is you kinda need a pretty wide range of charges to really see the nodes. If you start with charges that are too close together you may not see it the nodes.

WOW I'm pretty impressed after running some numbers on an OCW load I did.

For my 7mm-08 AR10 22" barrel.

44.4 grs H4350
162gr Hdy Amax
2.830" OAL
Chrono Avg 5 shots 2606 fps.

Optimum barrel time per chart is 1.202 ms and using quick load and modifying case capacity to match my fps reading I found 44.3 gr is actually my optimum charge weight for this combination with a optimum barrel time of 1.202 ms at 2601 fps.

This is a near max load, so as always work up to it.

I've used QL for years, and have found that I can make excellent loads in far less time than by just using loading manuals and testing.  I still use the manuals and testing, but along with QL which equals fewer rounds shot.  QL paid for itself in a short period of time by saving me from larger batches of test loads and shooting all those components to get results.

One observation of mine: QL saves the most time/components with long established cartridges and powder; e.g. 30-06 and IRM4350 have been around for a long time and accurate loads are well established.  Introducing a newer powder like RL17 or a newer cartridge means more work to find a load.  QL still helps tremendously.

I use both OCW and OBT to find a load.  An example would be 308 with RL15 and 175gr SMK.  A well known load with that combo is ~43.1 grains.  Try an OCW test (I did) and it will be very close to the accuracy you're looking for, and QL helps get the charge weights dialed in closer to the end result without having to start at the very low end.  The reason I use OCW is that a good load using that method works well in different environments (temperatures/elevation).  I still start low and work up, but not nearly as low as a manual recommends.

Then I take the data from the OCW and re-enter it in QL, and as others have said QL can be tweaked to match your actual shooting data.  From there you can tune into the OBT.  I've had phenomenal results in many cartridges using both methods.  For me though, instead of adjusting the Ba function, I hit the hand icon to the left of the powder drop down field; another icon pops up below it, right above the "Apply & Calc" button.  This allows you to input the ambient temperature when you were shooting.  By manipulating the temp, you change the psi and mv of your load to match your data, and it also changes the "Pmax to muzzle" output; aka OBT output.  Then I play with seating depth to get the right OBT, and - for me - it matches each and every time.

When I shoot the rounds I've made after that, they group tight in summer and winter.  I haven't shot them at different altitudes though.

Without actually verifying the evidence and truing the model, I'm not sure you've actually accomplished anything here.  Your load may not actually be that high pressure at the higher temperature.  Only one way to know for sure.

I describe inputting the fired case capacity, ambient temperature, and tweaking Ba in my original post above.  The only way to input ambient temperature is the method you describe.