Gun and Game Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
It's nice looking software but I don't like having to come up with my own powder information or depend on other people's powder data. They develop powder data using input from the users, I'm concerned that the powder data might have variations that aren't predictable. Quickload uses powder data developed by the author in a closed bomb tests, even if the data isn't perfect any error by the author will be consistent across all powders and comparing them to each other will be reliable. Any powder data errors in GRT would probably be more random and I can't predict which powders would be affected in what way.

The algorithm that GRT uses to calculate powder burn characteristics uses a slightly different format than Quickload which makes it appear that it can simulate the burn curve to a more precise degree but the average reloader doesn't have the ability to verify it's accuracy so it's not possible to verify that it accomplishes what they claim it does.

GRT has a more modern look but for me it is a lot of flash for no purpose. The data is more or less randomly presented as a long list rather than grouping related information together like Quickload does. GRT appeals to younger people that expect to see visually appealing computer displays while Quickload looks the same as it did a couple of decades ago.

I've tried both and they both provide better information than just guessing but I'm perfectly capable of producing good results with Quickload and I see nothing about GRT that makes me want to switch, being free doesn't mean anything to me since I don't trust their powder burn information and I don't like how they organize their data output. I think GRT is better suited to somebody who already has a firm grasp of the basics of internal ballistics while Quickload will help a novice learn the basics more easily.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,691 Posts
Have you tried Ballistic AE for iPhone? Seems pretty good to me. But then, I am not advanced enough to need or use ½ of the features so my opinion is light weight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
It's metric. I hate metric.
I am a well educated person. However, I too hate metric. For that very reason I refused to even shoot the wonderful 7mm mag. I own a pile of 9mm shooters and I really like the thump of the 10mm, just do not like the global move to that decimal system. And I do not care if it is easier and not sure it really is. Inches, feet and yards are American, like apple pie and Chevy. I came up with a slide rule, it does not care if it is metric or American.

I use calipers, they do not need metric to show me how long or wide something is. I use a ruler, it does not need metric to show me where to cut a board. All of my life I have been able to look at a bolt and know it was a 1/2 or 7/16 or 9/16. Pretty easy, trying to eyeball a 10,11, or 12 mm 8 side bolt head, not so much. It is so bad I have 2 tool boxes, one has metric wrench and sockets, the other SAE.

No I have not tried the Ballistic AE for the Iphone. I have lots of money just do not want to pay the bucks for Quickload that I might use once per year. Just saw the free one and thought it might be worth a try. Then when I think about the loads I have developed since 1972, I really have never needed that information. It does not matter too much because you are still going to start with a reduced load, then work up looking for pressure signs. So, even though I play with wildcats a little and create lots of "different" loads it now seems that even Quickload is more of a gimmick than needed when anyone can calculate reduced starting loads base upon case capacity and bullet weight. In the Lee loading book as I recall there is a chapter on developing reduced loads based on known pressure data. So, I think I will just scrap that idea.

My current issue is developing a high velocity load for the Smith and Wesson Governor which is one of the coolest toys I have found in a while, sort of a big snake shooter that also shoots 45 Colt and 45 acp. It is bassically a 25 yard gun that works excellent with four 000 buckshot coming out at 800 fps or so. The 45 Colt with 225 grain bullets also come out a little over 800 fps. When you moon clip the 45 acp velocity drops to about 700 fps. You can reload the 45 acp with moon clips very fast, but then your power level drops to about 250 foot pounds. So, my very strange plan is to beef up the weak cylinder of the gun by using 30-06 brass to fill the 3 inch long cylinder, use a slow powder to let the pressure peak much lower and velocity increase, much like they did with the short fat WSSM rifle rounds. Bigger case capacity gives lower pressure and more velocity. The cut down 30-06 military case is much stronger than the pistol brass also giving an added safety measure. So, I would end up with 6 long straight cases about 2 inches long with a 230 grain 45 acp bullet sticking out the front. The 6 cases would fit into the moon clip and hopefully get up to 200 fps more velocity which would take the power level from about 250-450 FPE, a respectable amount. If those worked out, then I might want to devolope a buckshot or bird shot load superior to the 410 rounds they normally fire. The value would be added power AND they would be loaded with the moon clips for quickly loading and reloading. Probably a solution to a non existent problem, but handy just the same.

Why do something like that? Because I like to create stuff that shoots in my guns. If it can be better or more functional that what I can buy at the store, so much the better. Anyway, that I why I was looking at the Quickload and similar software, just trying to see what the book value of pressure would be before I try them in my $800 revolver. I do have a buddy with QL, so I will just bug him for the data.

Great day to everyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky7

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,691 Posts
I am a well educated person. However, I too hate metric. For that very reason I refused to even shoot the wonderful 7mm mag. I own a pile of 9mm shooters and I really like the thump of the 10mm, just do not like the global move to that decimal system. And I do not care if it is easier and not sure it really is. Inches, feet and yards are American, like apple pie and Chevy. I came up with a slide rule, it does not care if it is metric or American....
LOL. Substitute "imperial" for American and you sound just like me.......except for the Big 7. I own two. That is, IMHO, the perfect elk cartridge. Not too small, not too big. It probably helps that mine are both custom rifles I put together and shoot bugholes with the right load. That, and the quick kills I have witnessed downrange. For some reason, I never cared for the .284 or the .280. Go figure. I have a .280 pre-64 waiting for a custom ? this winter. I have no explanation for that, esp. since the .280 is a very decent cartridge. Not on par with the Big 7, maybe, but very decent nonetheless and, as far as that goes, dead is dead whatever the MV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
LOL. Substitute "imperial" for American and you sound just like me.......except for the Big 7. I own two. That is, IMHO, the perfect elk cartridge. Not too small, not too big. It probably helps that mine are both custom rifles I put together and shoot bugholes with the right load. That, and the quick kills I have witnessed downrange. For some reason, I never cared for the .284 or the .280. Go figure. I have a .280 pre-64 waiting for a custom ? this winter. I have no explanation for that, esp. since the .280 is a very decent cartridge. Not on par with the Big 7, maybe, but very decent nonetheless and, as far as that goes, dead is dead whatever the MV.
My best bud had two 7s. One a stainless Rem 700 with a plastic stock is about 40 years old. It has taken 30 or more deer, won big buck contests and killed a bunch of goats as well. It is under moa and is the gun he loans to people who have problems with their guns. His second is a Thompson Center that he primarily uses for the black powder barrel. Both barrels wear the same scope, all his scopes are Leupolds. The TC has taken deer out to nearly 500. He is 75 and about 10 years ago I convinced him to try the 257 Weatherby, he bought the Vanguard and it is his primary deer gun now, except he never travels without one of his 7s as a backup gun. He swears by the 7. He does not hunt elk but we have both mule deer and whitetail where we hunt and only shoot the bigger deer.

I have no personal experience with the 280, 7mm Express or 284 or but buds who have them swear by them. I started out my big game hunting life with a 303, 243, 308, and 30-06 that never missed a deer or took a second round, that changed down the road when a bad scope ruined my streak. The 303 groups like a shotgun but was my first so it stays, maybe be buried with me. The first 308 is long gone and replaced with a Ruger RSI, Manlicher carbine, and the first 243 and 30-06 a post 74 model 70, both shoot well under 1 inch with most factory ammo. I have taken animals with the 243 over 400 yards and several over 500 with the 06. I am not a long range shooter, the shots were simply made when conditions were right. With 2 guns that good, I just do not shop around. I shoot a 300 Weatherby Mark V from the custom shop for elk, it was my best buds who died at age 50. It stays forever. I have killed a few deer with it, just as an honor to him. I play with lots of guns and collect several types, but those 2 are the go to guns. The 243 has been used by kids, grandkids and my brother to take their first game. Nobody can miss with that little gun. I killed my biggest mule deer with one shot from it and my 3rd biggest whitetail, so I am sold on the 243 for anything out to 300 or so, the 257 picks up there. Love them rifles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky7
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top