Page 4, post 71. You guys and your hate for quickload and immediate dismissiveness is a bit unfounded if you know how to use the tools appropriately. We all know where "in the curve" we should see the gas port. Regardless of what any number software says, it's relative position is the clue since peak pressure is already known. We are keyboard theorists and can never determine with absolute certainty the case of failure, but we can use ALL of the tools available to get to the same conclusion faster with lack of additional evidence. In cases for load development, I have recently experienced both published load, quickload, and verified from others load involving TAC. If I fif not have my magnetospeed attached, I would have happily shot everything instead of stopping to say wtf. This was for .223 remington, where software and published loads should be most refined.
I dont trust the software with absolute certainty as I know these cases exist, but to say it's useless is simply not true. It has its uses (especially quicktarget) when applied appropriately.
Hell I don't trust anything basically until I've tested it for myself. I've been told way too many things that are simply not true I've adopted the stance that nothing is true until it is proven to be so.
I dont trust the software with absolute certainty as I know these cases exist, but to say it's useless is simply not true. It has its uses (especially quicktarget) when applied appropriately.
Hell I don't trust anything basically until I've tested it for myself. I've been told way too many things that are simply not true I've adopted the stance that nothing is true until it is proven to be so.