Doesn`t make sense ???

[LRRPF52]

Along with a bunch of broken bolts early in the evolution of this calibre.

I poured 28.5gns of Varget (AR2208) into a case and it comes up to the datum line of the shoulder. QL is correct, it is a seriously compressed load. Pressure aside, 5% unburnt powder is flames out the front and erosion of suppressors if used. Flames out the front is a recipe for inconsistent performance.

Once again we have the conflict-of-interest of a person trying to sell his loading book slamming the competition, a computer program. I put it to you that neither is perfect.

Nope. We have someone who keeps referencing demonstrably-proven bad data source (Quick Load) as a constant fall-back when there is known, pressure test breech data from multiple industry sources who have done that specific testing with 6.5 Grendel.

QL has zero pressure test breech testing with 6.5 Grendel, and is a theoretical internal ballistics engine lacking real world data to support the numbers it kicks out for this cartridge.

If you had looked at Alexander Arms data and noticed that they have the same load and bullet combo as the OP, rather than immediately going to QL, you would have asked,

“Hmm, one of these is way off from the other, which is correct?”

Again, why are you referencing disproven/invalid data sources when there are published, known quantities?

QL is invalid and off by thousands of PSI. Remember the last thread where we did this? It was off by a minimum of 9,000psi to over 10,400psi.

Where does it compute logically that anyone would want to use it as a reference after knowing that?