Using Quick Load to find accuracy nodes

[Highbrass]

I have an method for finding accuray nodes using Quick.Load and so far it works about 80%. Since consistency matters all components match as closely as possible. As much as practical all known info is plugged into QL Sucha as case length , case H2O capacity etc. Then i set the powder search function to look for a powder that @at least 95% fill also gets close to 100% burn and is still within safe pressures. When i find a likely load i make that my start point and make.5 rounds and several @ .3 gr increments.
I used this method just a few days ago on a new R700 Sendero 300WM QL said R26 @ 79 gr shooting 165 grSierra GK HP.
I hit the node at .3 over the start. This was almost too easy

 

[want2learn]

interesting.....curious to see if others have had similar experiences with this method.

would you perhaps be willing to share which other calibers you have you tried and succeeded employing this strategy?

 

[Highbrass]

This is just my observations from using QL for several years. Patterns started to surface and I have one of those minds that tends to see patterns in chaos.
Like i said it is not 100% but seems to be fairly predictable. it also seems to work better with larger capacity cases and mid to heavy projectiles.
I have used the formula most recently on a Weatherby Vangaurd in .270 win and had good results ...But I had to go thru several bullets to find one that grouped consistently well. I also have some data on 6.5 Grendel and 7mm-08
I had less than good luck with 30-30 but my rifles are older and slow twist
I am still working on .308 Win and 30-06
My next caliber to work on is 300 RUM. I haven't looked at QL data on it yet but I'm not looking forward to the punishment either.
If anyone is interested i can go into a bit more detail

 

[Milo 2.5]

I have been contemplating this for a day, I really don't think you are on to anything. Yes, you have stacked the deck with powder fill and burn pct, but you still had to test.
I think to build a specific load one and done in QL, you would need to employ a couple other theories as well, mainly optimal barrel time.
IME with larger cases in QL, the more capacity they hold, the greater chances of calcs being off, especially in the amount of powder needed, 28 nosler and 300 Norma mag come to mind, even 338 Lapua.

Now again from experience, Norma MRP used in a 6 creed, 105 bullets, this powder brings the heat, my test sample accurate as all get out. You will never get a 100% burn, case fill at 100%, and the ballistic efficiency numbers look like crap. Off track here, but one reason it may work is the powder is clean burning.

By all means keep utilizing QL, fantastic tool, but I think you are reading something into something that is not there, sorry.
Edit: One more, I had a failed project this summer, 25 saum, 131 ace, in QL, VV N565 the quintessential powder. NO. I have 14 lbs of it, idle, lol

 

[Highbrass]

Milo
I got started on the accuracy quest finding loads for my friends hunting rifles. They usually wanted a specific bullet ot type that shot well in their hunting rig. The goal was to quickly find a loading they wanted that shot well. That is how this started. As i stated it is not a 100% given but more an observation of what seems to work for me. I usually will tweak the results to get better accuracy and performance. The end game is never an absolute.

 

[Milo 2.5]

Milo
I got started on the accuracy quest finding loads for my friends hunting rifles. They usually wanted a specific bullet ot type that shot well in their hunting rig. The goal was to quickly find a loading they wanted that shot well. That is how this started. As i stated it is not a 100% given but more an observation of what seems to work for me. I usually will tweak the results to get better accuracy and performance. The end game is never an absolute.

I hope I did not come across as rude to you, not the intention. I feel that you are just using extreme common sense in your approach, and QL is an aid. For all of us 95% fill ratio guys, there is a Varget in creed or Lapua x47 guy, that busts the myth.
Guy on here, skookum, says find pressure, back off 2%. I used to say close to the same, but I said back off 3% if you like upper end charges. And like you, I analyzed data and thought there should be an easy formula for this.
I actually shoot a lot of RL 16 these days, you can achieve case fill with moderate loads and still get a 100% burn.

 

[Hunt]

Interesting thread. I have been doing something similar with Gordon's Reloading Tool (GRT). With water volume of a fired case, barrel length, case length and loaded projectile OAL, GRT will provide OBT for several nodes that you can find. Having gone back after finding my load on paper/chrono, I ran the numbers and GRT recommended the same load the majority of the time. I'm still playing with it and learning more and more....GRT is free and the end goal is to burn less powder to find the load.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

80% of the time it works 100% of the time. Except when it works less than 80% of the time.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Milo
I got started on the accuracy quest finding loads for my friends hunting rifles. They usually wanted a specific bullet ot type that shot well in their hunting rig. The goal was to quickly find a loading they wanted that shot well. That is how this started. As i stated it is not a 100% given but more an observation of what seems to work for me. I usually will tweak the results to get better accuracy and performance. The end game is never an absolute.

You can make any load shoot well with seating adjustments. And unless it’s some new wildcat no one has messed with, you can find the general area where people are getting good numbers with a simple google search.

Nowadays it’s as simple as running a few rounds in .2 or so increments over chrono within the usual powder charge most people are using. Then tweaking with seating depth after.

This works 100% of the time and takes 5 min to research and an hour or so at range.

 

[Highbrass]

80% of the time it works 100% of the time. Except when it works less than 80% of the time.

Even A blind Squirrel ... Ya know!

 

[Cascade Hemi]

Even A blind Squirrel ... Ya know!

For well known cartridges and powders QL works pretty well. However, if you stray very far from the beaten path QL has trouble. I find it useful for diagnostic purposes as well as for examining viable component alternatives. Predicting nodes with QL is probably as meaningful as guessing which color car will turn the corner next.