First off I'm NO expert in reloading.. I'm curious to what I'm doing wrong in QuickLoad to get wrong data. I'm working on a load for my 260 in QuickLoad - however it's tell me the load I'm inputting is WAY outside the range. So I calculated the load recommendation in Hornady's handbook, and it's say it's WAY outside the range.. What the heck am I doing wrong? I'm working up a load for Hornady 143 EXD-X the Hornady handbook says H1000 49.6gr is MAX. Quickload says I'll blow my gun up..

My first guess will be that you have a low pressure figure in the field I've circles in red. Are you getting a window with results similar to what I've posted here. or are you outputting a powder profile with a whole bunch of powders listed?

By the way, my bullet database does not include the new Hornady, so I plugged in another 140-grain bullet. Does yours contain the 143?

I'm also curious as to what you are interpreting to mean that "QL says you'll blow up your gun."

Yes I have the 143 in my list, I'll send a screen shot tomorrow. I'm not changing the pressure figure it is what pipped in when I choice the bullet and powder.

When I first starting shooting comps I shot a 260 Rem. I was determined to run a 140 grain bullet with a stiff load of H1000 powder in my 28" barrel and break all kinds of speed records with my 260. I ran the numbers in QL, reloading manuals, and figured it all up and came up with either a high 49 grain or low 50 grain powder charge as my max load with H1000. So I try to load it up. The most you can get into the case is about 47 grains, maybe 48 with a heavy compression and using a drop tube. And this was with Rem brass, not the thicker Lapua stuff now. Velocities were slow in the high 2600 to low 2700 fps range. Speaking from experience, H1000 and a 260 Rem with 140 grain bullets will not work! You simply can not get enough H1000 in the case to get your speeds up. I even tried H4831, and it did not match H4350. H4350 is a great powder for it. No matter what QL says, you can not reach a max pressure load in reality with H1000 and 140 grain in the 260 Rem.

The main things that will alter your pressures in QL will be seating depth, case capacity, powder selected, powder charge, and bullet weight. The rest is smaller details.

I stopped using QL a few years ago and just use manuals or manufacturers online data and work up. I see a lot of reloaders posting QL like it's gospel for both loads and velocity. I've used it enough to know the, just like manuals, the chronograph tells the truth. I've seen it way off on the 338 Federal Barnes Data. I'd be blowing up my gun according to QL. Sometimes it works the other way too.

It's a tool, like a manual but I don't think it's any better or accurate. JMO.

You're surely right about the chronograph, Scott. I would not use just QL without one, but i wouldn't give up either tool.

One of the things I really like about QL is the way you can weigh the effects of certain variances using it---and without putting a nice rifle at risk. I think its usefulness depends entirely upon rhe user's intent, though. If you're inquisitive and always looking for insight it has a lot to offer. If you're at the other end of the spectrum and just looking for recipes, then a couple of manuals or powder distributors' websites would probably serve your purposes.

RR,

We agree. The main reason I stopped using it is the computer I had it on crashed. I did like it. It was convenient. I just learned to live without it. Some people insist their load is going X fps because QL tells them. I never found it that accurate. When I used it, I found it was more accurate with extruded powders than ball powders.

^^^^ I fully agree.

Thanks to everyone for their input. So, are there manuals out there that will show all kinds of bullets with different powders? Barnes website only has a couple, and hodgdon's website doesn't have a good bullet selection. What do the masses recommend seeing that QL isn't the key? Time to get my Google-fu black belt going..

There's several places I look online, depending on what I need. Hodgdon online is a great source. You can piggy back the data with the same weight bullets to get you in the ball park. There are a few exceptions, and the Hodgdon 260 Rem data listed for the 142 SMK is WAY off. It shows 44.5 grains of H4350 with a 142 SMK. That will be a HOT load, especially at 2.780" COAL in most 260 Rem rifle's.

I also look at Alliant's site some, but not a lot. Nosler (see link below) is very resourceful. The link I posted is the 260 Rem link, and it shows H1000 at 50.0 grains as max, and 110% case fill (I don't think you can even get to that at the 2.800" length). Berger also now has some loading data on their site, but it is VERY conservative.

I also have multiple reloading manuals. This allows you to compare from each one. The only problem is when several manuals have drastic differences in powder charges with the same round and bullet.

I also use a burn rate chart all the time to figure out what powders are similar in burn rate to compare different rounds. When you start to play with subs, and tinker with different things, it helps to know what other powders are out there that may work for you in a certain cartridge.


https://load-data.nosler.com/load-data/260-remington/

http://www.bergerbullets.com/reloading-data/

Burn rate chart: http://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/Burn%20Rates%20-%202015-2016.pdf

So basically you have to research several places for information. Seems like you could find a site or manual with the majority of what a person needs. I've been loading for many years, so I know what I'm doing.. However it's frustrating when you find load information like on hodgdon website then it disappears a month later. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Yes, it can be frustrating at times. I research all the time when I'm trying a new combo or new powder. Sometimes the lack of info is good, since I will load up some test rounds to shoot at the range, and make up my own data. But you can get a good idea of powder charges by getting as much data as you can out there. I take loads posted by shooters on a forum with a grain of salt, since there are some weird or dangerous combos listed.

One resource seldom mentioned is loaddata.com. It's not free, but you can copy and paste a bunch of data off there. I did this for all the cartridges I loaded about ten years ago, but so much has changed. Maybe I'll subscribe again and harvest the available relevant data once again.

I found myself in this boat a few years back when LT32 hit the shelves. I wanted to try it in .222 Remington, but there was NO data available. After several days of considering the problem I came up with a plan which I then proposed to a very critical and experienced bunch of handloaders, and they found no fault with my reasoning and conclusions, and added food for thought also. The experiment was a success. Data is now available and it's very close to the estimates.

It's a great powder, by the way. My rifle LOVED it!

Very... I don't shoot comp, nor will I ever.. I just want good loads for my rifles that are safe and accurate. I load for 7 different rifles, the only one I'm changing up is my 260. I shot a buck at 215 yds with a 120gr Barnes TTSX(45gr-H4350 Lapua Brass) through the shoulders and the deer ran close to 100 yds.. That's why I want to see what the Hornady 143 will do.. My 260 shoots that load very well, however performance hasn't been the best. I'll ck out loaddata.com, I have no issue with paying for it..

Quickload though a very good tool is not the end all data source some might try to convince you of. I have seen some extremely accurate data from it and some that is crazy off. Overall I am pleased with the product but do not count on it exclusively for data even for some wildcats there is little or no data for.

One cartridge I load quite often it is almost spot on for velocity predictions but pressure is 9 to 10K higher than QL shows. We played with data from a pressure barrel for that one with lots of data from the pressure barrel data and got it close but still a little off the measured values. With those tweaks applied the other data for that round is darn close but only for that rifle.

Just part of those cases that remind you each rifle is different and to start low and work up loads for your rifle.

Armalite, if it's data you want there is another option...check out www.loadbooks.com.

Thank you sir..

Could be a couple of things but from the Hornady data, what cartridge OAL length is being used?

If the COAL is 2.800", measure the H20 capacity of your cases and see how it compares to the 53.50-grains used in the QL database. If you haven't done this before, it is pretty simple to get an average especially if you have an electronic scale. Using a fired case with the spent primer in the case, weigh it. Then, fill it with water. An eyedropper works best, I let a bead of water form on the top and then use the tip of a Kleenex to leach the bead flat across the mouth of the case. Then weigh case and subtract the weight of the empty case to get the water capacity. With the 260 Rem, you could probably do 5 cases at a time to get an average.

Next, when comparing published data make sure you are using the standard atmosphere temperature of 59° F in your calculations unless something else is listed in the data.

I've been a Quickloader for a long time and a RSI Pressure Trace shooter longer than that. I have found QL to be quite accurate when the specifics of your load is entered. I verify the average length and weight of the bullets, cases, and the specific gravity of the powder. The latter is the least important as it is going only influence the case capacity and not the burn. Rather than edit the QL files, I've created new files to keep the data in. This step will prevent your bullet, case, powder, and other files from being overwritten during an update.

So, what is the cartridge OAL that Hornady uses in their data & what is the H2O capacity of your case?

I'm still wondering how QL warns you that you'll blow your gun up. When does that happen, at 100 psi over SAAMI pressure? 1000 psi? 10000 psi?

Yeah, that it cannot do!

As a pressure trace shooter, I can also assure you that pressure is not a fixed figure with all the cartridges in a string creating the same pressure. Averages, SD, and ES are calculated and vary as much (%) as velocities do.

I know what you're saying. The more you dig in to the technical stuff, the more complicated it gets when looking at pressure specs. There are specifications for the variances, and allowable variances under different conditions and circumstances.

I've been digging for the real skinny (as in military documentation) on the .223 Remington vs. 5.56 pressure thing for a couple of years---and I don't just mean what Western Powders or Hodgdon lists as 5.56 loads. Even QuickLOAD shows some serious discrepancies that I believe are very misleading and potentially dangerous.