QuickLoad vs GRT

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • ToolAA

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 17, 2016
    10,500
    God's Country
    I had read about GRT (Gordon’s Reloading Tool) before but I have QuickLoad and have been pleased with the results so I never really considered investing further. However after reading Boule’s post in the LeverRevolution thread. I figured I would check it out.

    Just fyi. If the powder is not in Quickload, try GRT for a change. The two programs are not completely interchangable but often yield comparable results. Quickload is still curated but updates are slow, GRT is in development.

    First of all, I didn’t realize it is free. Maybe this is because it’s still under development. So if anyone else is interested I would encourage you to download it and check it out. It may not be free forever.

    Here is the link to the download. You do have to create an account before you can download the zip file. https://grtools.de/doku.php?id=en:doku:install

    If you are already familiar with Quickload the main screen is a bit nicer looking. It looks different but overall the main parts are somewhat similar. There is a module to open the cartridge database and if necessary make modifications to the specs. They have a fairly comprehensive powder database and projectile database. The settings are all metric but you can easily change those to more familiar non-metric units through the context menus or simply clicking the small measure icon next to the specific field that you want to change.

    Quickload Main Screen
    9a5eaad1ec16e494a411eee5a3f9519f.jpg


    GRT Main Screen
    49efb6bd88a117890b9a0cb30b30df66.jpg


    Like Quickload you grab the case, projectile and powder components from the drop down library tool. Unlike Quickload the output and graph curves update immediately with each change. No need to click the “apply and calc” button like QL.

    There are quite a bit more tools that I briefly checked out, but I have not yet had the chance to fully examine. These three features that I did explore are not included in Quickload.

    The Propellant Burn Rate Chart is pretty well organized and you are able to sort the list by Progressive Burn Rate, Brisance or a combined formula. They specifically note that these charts are GRT specific and may differ from other charts.
    aca44f6e924a632bd6e401047b16b4a0.jpg


    There is also a Parametric Powder Search Tool. I haven’t really messed around with it yet, but it appears that you type in the parameters that you desire for your load, and the program then pulls the powders which would perform similarly.
    1829e2d4ba2cdd735255eacd2c9b0d0c.jpg


    They also have an Optimal Barrel Time calculator. If you are not already familiar with OBT theories they rely on the physics calculations of the barrel harmonics and try to calculate the best “time” that the projectile should exit the barrel where it would be closest to the barrel axis. I ran the tool using a proven load and the result is pretty close to the charge that I use.
    387f08854c3288babdfa460ebc9f8bbb.jpg


    There are lots of other extras but I check those out later.


    Like I mentioned this examination all started from @Squaregrouper’s post to determine if LeverRevolution powder is a good suitable substitute for H4350 in 6.5 Creedmoor loads. So the first thing I did was enter my my own personal 6.5 Creedmoor proven load using H4350 and compare it to LeverRevolution.

    Here is the output for LeverRevolution
    d9b41271e8d1a360877173aad430722f.jpg


    Here is the output for H4350
    cc381d98223d0febc74c2ddfcfcfdba1.jpg


    So according to GRT these two powders using the exact same load are a bit different the LR seems to be about 12,000 PSI higher than H4350 producing a muzzle velocity about 120fps faster. That’s pretty substantial.

    This simple comparison however struck me as pretty strange because the MV reported by GRT was actually about 100fps faster than my QL data and also faster than my verified MV data which has been repeated over 400+ rounds.

    So there seemed to be some differences between the two. I did find a few small differences between the case dimensions and the projectile dimensions. These were very small but I changed the GRT values to match my QL numbers. The MV changed but only slightly. Then I noticed what appeared to be quite a few differences between the powder parameters.
    aeef5a277d96f9d2ba87b0d618d1df3e.jpg


    So after playing around with the GRT parameters I modidied each to match the default values from the QL database.
    ad77740cec360c68ccbb99b8920d1c26.jpg


    After making this change the two programs reported almost identical interior ballistic output.

    Quickload calculates 2779 fps
    5777ed7d4708e944f0074c538f7e5c8d.jpg


    Vs GRT which calculated 2772
    f0b5356dc1a9a052bb44ab6b0594ae88.jpg


    So in this example when all of the parameters for GRT are tuned to match the exact parameters in QL they report similar (almost identical) output. So my first question is to try and understand why the powder database within GRT is different from QL. Since my real chrono data is closer to QL I have to assume that the GRT data is wrong (or at least not accurate for my own conditions).

    I have quite a lot of verified loads in QL for .223/5.56 and 300BO. I’ll try to compare those side by side too. I’m interested to know if any other members have compared GRT to QL and their real world data, or who would be willing to do so and post here.
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    GRT makes no bones about their powder database needing some more maturity for certain powders. They don't even have a fair number of them (Lil Gun being one that I was wishing for tonight). Their bullet DB is obviously a little better.

    OTOH, I tend to do a quick sanity check by comparing book loads to GRT output, and if the numbers mostly match, I tend to regard GRT's numbers as PROBABLY being valid for those loads. Always work up when you're in this kind of unknown territory, etc.

    ETA: incidentally, you'd be the hero of the hour if you could figure out how to export some of those QL exclusive powders to GRT...
     

    ToolAA

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 17, 2016
    10,500
    God's Country
    ETA: incidentally, you'd be the hero of the hour if you could figure out how to export some of those QL exclusive powders to GRT...

    Here is the Lil-Gun parameters. Let me know how they compare to your book data.

    Qex = 4090 kJ/kg
    k = 1.2230
    Ba = 0.8550
    a0 = 3.0000
    z1 = 0.461
    z2 = (Not included in QL)
    Pc = 1570 kg/M^3
    Pcd = (Not included in QL)

    Maybe try these and see what happens.
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    pcd is 950 according to someone who claimed he got it from the manufacturer. No idea what z2 is supposed to be. I will say that messing with it didn't really lead to much in the way of velocity or pressure changes. I'm using .8328 because that was the default and the default z1 was pretty close to your number.

    Velocities don't quite match up for supers to the Hornady book, but to be honest, I frequently wonder about the Hornady book's accuracy for anything past "loads that won't blow up your gun". Subs seemed more in line with what I expected from other sources.

    ETA: according to the Discord, Lil Gun was added to the Patreon nightlies last month, and was apparently a real SOB to figure out due to inconsistency. Supposedly TrailBoss has many of the same problems but on a larger scale. I'll be curious to see how GRT configured Lil Gun vs how I did it...
     
    Last edited:

    Archeryrob

    Undecided on a great many things
    Mar 7, 2013
    3,064
    Washington Co. - Fairplay
    I like gordon's as it works for me, it is free and its pretty damn precise for Freeware. But I don't have many options with running a Linux OS. They are missing many American Powders and they have a section on the discord server stating how to gather the information with shots through a chronograph to add the powders to GRT.

    I have been messing around with it and the one time I used it and really learned something was trying to make a new load for 9mm. I am waiting on a Cast bullets group buy for MP 147grain mold and started doing the calcs based on that bullet. I noticed really quick the seating depth of that bullet, if sat lower, really spiked the pressures. I am using N320 for that and they have all of the V powders in there.
     

    lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,678
    I was just checking it out this morning. I've got 100 PPU 156gr SPRN .263" bullets on the way. I am going to try working up a subsonic load for my Howa 1500. See if it'll stabilize. Is it kind of stupid? Well yeah. At the same time, if I can get it running well, it'll be fun to plink with once my .30 cal can breaks NFA jail (I do not own a 300BO. TBH if I can get a reliable 6.5 grendel subsonic load working, that is good enough for me. The most I want to be using it for is quiet plinking to 100yds or less. Maybe some day it might be for quiet removal of groundhogs or something, but TBH that'll stay with my 10/22 and subs with my 22 can until I am somewhere with more property. Not so worried about a 45gr .223 bullet traveling 1000fps flying hither and yon. But a 156gr .264 doing the same...seems more dangerous and more likely.

    Though my ideal short range groundhog whacking setup would be a 10" SBR bolt gun firing 45ACP with some 230gr XTP pills loaded hot.
     

    ToolAA

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 17, 2016
    10,500
    God's Country
    I’ve been working up a 5.56 match load using Nosler 69gr CC’s with 23.8gr of IMR 8208XBR. When I developed the load with Quickload my actual MV was about 50fps lower then QL. I ended up messing with some if the parameters to get QL to match my results.

    I just now ran the load in GRT using the default parameters and only changing the charge weight to 23.8gr. The MV result was only 5fps faster than my actual chrono data.

    Very interesting
     

    GuitarmanNick

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 9, 2017
    2,221
    Laurel
    I have not tried Quickload, but have been happy with Gordon's so far. Very impressive for being freeware and still needing refinement in a few areas.

    As with all reloading, I check more than one source when possible and work up from a safe starting point.
     

    ToolAA

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 17, 2016
    10,500
    God's Country
    I have not tried Quickload, but have been happy with Gordon's so far. Very impressive for being freeware and still needing refinement in a few areas.

    As with all reloading, I check more than one source when possible and work up from a safe starting point.


    For plinking I just go with a published load. For match loads, I usually compare the Nosler and Hornaday book data with the powder data from the manufacturer and establish a first pass from there. Then I’ll compare with QL.

    The thing I really want to test is the Optimal Barrel Time module in GRT. My loads seem close to OBT but I may try to test out the exact recommendations from GRT and see how they compare.
     

    Seabee

    Old Timer
    Oct 9, 2011
    517
    Left marylandistan to NC
    I tried to install get on my Mac in a windows partition but haven’t been able to get it to install yet. I’ve noticed that the last east ql update is not as accurate as the earlier one. My son tested lever in his 6.5 cm and it shot better than 4350 with Barnes lrx
     

    Melnic

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 27, 2012
    15,282
    HoCo
    I"m new to using both. Quickload is an older design interface but works. If I"m off the trail or working on something new, I use both and just like looking up loads in multiple manuals, take each one with a grain of salt. One thing I like about the programs is looking at the% of powder burned. You don't get that in the manuals.
     

    Seabee

    Old Timer
    Oct 9, 2011
    517
    Left marylandistan to NC
    I’ve used ql for several years now and started using grt last week. With the last update of ql, I see my predicted speeds being off by as much as 200 fps off of measured speeds. Ql has also been way off with pressure too. Yes, I know, I’ve checked every detail time and again and still the same. This seems worse since the latest upgrade. Grt is giving me speeds within 17-20 fps every time in several cartridges and I find it more useful than ql. Grt is a well thought out program and a pleasure to work with. I’m done with ql for now. To each their own.
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    If anyone's got QL running, could you check out the pressure on this load for me?
    .308 Win
    150gr Hornady FMJ
    37.5gr CFE BLK (or AA1680) (NOT CFE 223, CFE BLK)
    2.65 OAL

    According to GRTools, this provides about ~2000fps velocity while retaining safe pressure levels (IIRC, like 35-40k psi). I am curious what QL thinks. I want to develop a good 150gr coated load that could cycle an AR-308, and I'm feeling like this might be the ticket.
     

    ToolAA

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 17, 2016
    10,500
    God's Country
    If anyone's got QL running, could you check out the pressure on this load for me?
    .308 Win
    150gr Hornady FMJ
    37.5gr CFE BLK (or AA1680) (NOT CFE 223, CFE BLK)
    2.65 OAL

    According to GRTools, this provides about ~2000fps velocity while retaining safe pressure levels (IIRC, like 35-40k psi). I am curious what QL thinks. I want to develop a good 150gr coated load that could cycle an AR-308, and I'm feeling like this might be the ticket.


    I’m at work but I can run them when I get home tonight, unless someone else does it first.
     

    ToolAA

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 17, 2016
    10,500
    God's Country
    If anyone's got QL running, could you check out the pressure on this load for me?
    .308 Win
    150gr Hornady FMJ
    37.5gr CFE BLK (or AA1680) (NOT CFE 223, CFE BLK)
    2.65 OAL

    According to GRTools, this provides about ~2000fps velocity while retaining safe pressure levels (IIRC, like 35-40k psi). I am curious what QL thinks. I want to develop a good 150gr coated load that could cycle an AR-308, and I'm feeling like this might be the ticket.


    Quickload doesn't have CFE BLK in the DB so I ran the numbers using AA1680.


    Cartridge: .308 Win. (SAAMI)
    Bullet: .308, 150, Hornady FMJ-BT 3037
    Useable Case Capaci: 47.949 grain H2O = 3.113 cm³
    Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 2.650 inch = 67.31 mm
    Barrel Length: 20.0 inch = 508.0 mm
    Powder: Accurate 1680

    Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
    incremented in steps of 0.886% of nominal charge.
    CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

    Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt
    % % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi %

    -08.9 74 34.18 2467 2027 44571 7304 99.4
    -08.0 75 34.51 2487 2060 45672 7357 99.5
    -07.1 76 34.84 2507 2093 46796 7408 99.6
    -06.2 76 35.17 2526 2126 47946 7457 99.7
    -05.3 77 35.51 2546 2159 49122 7505 99.8
    -04.4 78 35.84 2565 2192 50324 7551 99.9
    -03.5 78 36.17 2585 2225 51553 7595 99.9
    -02.7 79 36.50 2604 2259 52809 7637 100.0 ! Near Maximum !
    -01.8 80 36.84 2623 2292 54094 7677 100.0 ! Near Maximum !
    -00.9 81 37.17 2642 2326 55408 7716 100.0 ! Near Maximum !
    +00.0 81 37.50 2661 2359 56752 7752 100.0 ! Near Maximum !
    +00.9 82 37.83 2680 2393 58126 7789 100.0 ! Near Maximum !
    +01.8 83 38.16 2699 2427 59532 7825 100.0 ! Near Maximum !
    +02.7 83 38.50 2718 2461 60969 7861 100.0 ! Near Maximum !
    +03.5 84 38.83 2737 2495 62440 7897 100.0 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
    +04.4 85 39.16 2755 2529 63945 7932 100.0 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

    Results caused by ± 5% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
    Data for burning rate increased by 5% relative to nominal value:
    +Ba 81 37.50 2703 2433 61047 7611 100.0 ! Near Maximum !
    Data for burning rate decreased by 5% relative to nominal value:
    -Ba 81 37.50 2611 2270 52452 7873 99.6
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    Interesting! At 37.5gr of 1680 with your same values plugged in, GRT shows 54k psi with 2643fps velocity - so pretty close.

    With 37.5 gr of CFE BLK and my (shorter) coated lead FP bullet, I get 2413fps and 37k psi. Gotta think about this some more.
     

    Moorvogi

    Firearm Advocate
    Dec 28, 2014
    855
    i TOTALLY love this and cant thank you enough for sharing it w/ us! i've started doing more theory crafting in GRT. as well as updating my website to reflect each load's info. #1 sexy time. i still have to do more work on seating depth, case, cartrige length etc etc.. but ya.. #1 sexy time.

    300wm_220gr_4350.png
     

    Moorvogi

    Firearm Advocate
    Dec 28, 2014
    855
    I tried to install get on my Mac in a windows partition but haven’t been able to get it to install yet. I’ve noticed that the last east ql update is not as accurate as the earlier one. My son tested lever in his 6.5 cm and it shot better than 4350 with Barnes lrx

    I used bootcamp on my mac the other night just for this software. I also have it on my desktop but no issues for me on either OS using bootcamp.
     

    ToolAA

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 17, 2016
    10,500
    God's Country
    I used bootcamp on my mac the other night just for this software. I also have it on my desktop but no issues for me on either OS using bootcamp.


    I’m glad it’s working out for you. I have decided to use my Quickload data and run GRT. I compare both to my real world results and whichever one is closer, I’ll just keep using that program for the specific load.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,930
    Messages
    7,259,483
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom