Reloading software

  • Last Post 14 April 2011
wdyasq posted this 09 November 2010

I am considering the purchase of reloading software. I THINK the two major programs are “Quick Load” and “Load from a Disk".

I'd like to hear from folks who use either or both and their opinions on each before I throw the cost of several pounds of powder and maybe a few thousand primers at a computer.



Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
cityboy posted this 09 November 2010

I have used QuickLoad for a long time and like it. You will have to read the users manual if you want to understand what is going on. It does not just spit out numbers. It helps, too, if loading data are available to back up the calculations. I'm hoping the new Lyman CB manual reports pressure in PSI values and not CUP.

No matter  how good any computer program is, actual test data are better.


Attached Files

303PV posted this 10 November 2010

I have also used Quick Load . It is very good.

Attached Files

nobade posted this 18 November 2010

Quickload - I wouldn't be without it. The only thing is all my reloading manuals are just taking up space now, 'cos I never use them anymore.

Attached Files

Ranch Dog posted this 21 November 2010

I have both QuickLoad and Load From a Disk. Without a doubt QuickLoad. I don't know how I got by without it as a cast bullet shooter. Like nobade stated, my manuals gather dust.

Attached Files

Number19 posted this 11 April 2011

Since there are more than a few positive endorsements for Quick Load, I thought I'd reopen this topic. I've recently purchased this program and am thoroughly confused at my current level of understanding.

I run this program with a .224, 56.RWS TMS bullet; A 20” barrel; Selected cartridge is .22 Hornet w/ Pmax at 43,511 psi Accurate 1680 powder at 13.6grs.

This load producer a Pmax of almost 81,000 psi, with a muzzle velocity of 2745 fps and is labeled a dangerous load.

Actual field results showed this load to be an accurate and reliable load.

I can't explain the discrepancy in the SAAMI safe load and the incredibly high load actually shot. Any comments or explanations?

Attached Files

Clod Hopper posted this 12 April 2011

Are you running a 56 grain bullet in a Hornet with 13.6 grains of 1680? Here is the AA data:

22 HORNET (0.224 Diameter Bore) Barrel: 20” â–  Twist 1-14” â–  Primer: REM 6 ½ â–  Bullet Diameter .224” 5744 40 NOS B-TIP 9.2 2,092 9.8 2,307 48,734 1.855 5744 40 SIE HORNET 8.7 1,943 9.7 2,208 50,740 1.715 5744 50 HDY SPSX 8.1 1,717 9.0 1,951 50,032 1.780 1680 35 HDY V-MAX 12.1 2,516 13.5 2,860 49,442 1.775 1680 40 SIE HORNET 12.6 2,451 14.0 2,785 50,740 1.715 1680 45 NOS HORNET 11.1 2,194 12.3 2,493 48,026 1.720 1680 50 HDY SPSX 10.4 2,105 11.5 2,392 50,032 1.780

My guess is that load is WAY TOO HOT.

Dale M. Lock

Attached Files

Number19 posted this 12 April 2011

I agree that it looks way too hot. Here's what I'm talking about:

"...Right from the box my Standard grade Ruger Hornet wanted to shoot...One of the first things that surprised me about this rifle was it's velocity potential from a 20 inch barrel...Though I prefer a faster twist rate...the 1 in 14 twist of the Ruger rifling is fairly standard and will stabilize cast bullets all the way up to 56 grains...

For 9 years I was the Technical Editor for the bi-monthly magazine of the Cast Bullet Association. When you write for those boys you have to have your facts right. So I learned a great deal about cast bullet shooting. Their bench rest groups with cast bullets, rival jacketed bullet bench rest groups. One of the first things I learned was that there was a good deal of mis-information believed by many shooters about cast bullets...

...My fired and neck sized cases held 13.6 grains of my old 680 (now 1680)...putting the 56 grain Lyman over that load gave 2820 fps for the fastest load with the heaviest cast bullet!...This load hovers at 3/4 ths of an inch at 100 yards...but the nice thing is it keeps it's accuracy all the way out to 250 yards... 1.5 inches at 150 yards...2 and 1/4 inches at 200 yards and near 4 inches at 250 yards, off the bench. I like this load and bullet in this Ruger Hornet...">


Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 12 April 2011

Well, WW680 is not WW1680. The jacketed 56 grain RWS bullet is not a Lyman cast bullet. As for Paco Kelly's loads, I don't shoot anything he says is maximum unless I reduce it 15% to start with. But then again I am a conservative reloader. Your eyes, your fingers and your rifle. So you do what you think is proper. Ric

Attached Files

Number19 posted this 12 April 2011

You're not wrong, but I was comparing the old WW680 with AA1680. They're not identical (there's a lot of difference of opinion on this) but they are very close and their loads are considered interchangeable in the opinion of many.

You're also correct in that the internal ballistics of jacketed bullets is not the same as cast bullets, but again for my purposes the data was sufficiently indicative.

My point was that that this similar, if not identical, load, when you run it through Quick Load, produces pressure far in excess of SAAMI maximum. You can also run the numbers and get similar results of high pressures for the many claims of loading the Hornet with 13gr of Lil Gun.

A cardinal rule is to never start with maximum loads but to work up.

As a new comer to the art of reloading it is a bit confusing to read all the claims versus the manufacturers' recommendations and the industry standards. I'm a new comer, but my background is in engineering design. So yes, I'll do what I think is proper.

Attached Files

Ranch Dog posted this 14 April 2011

What OAL are you using with your set up? I will run it with my software as well as see what's up.

Attached Files