Can anyone here use Quickload??

[MilGunsmith]

Numbers, models, brands, spreadsheets etc mean NOTHING when improperly applied.

If you're losing Fury cases at "83,000psi" your tests are irrelevant, poorly structured and a slap in the face to Sig Sauer.... the insinuation that we've a world-renowned company releasing a system into the general public and attempting to supply our military men with a new paradigm while operating within 4% of catastrophic failure is demeaning to all concerned.

"Calibration" requires deep understanding......

Instead of telling me to "calibrate" it may well be hoovis upon you to take the time to question your own methodology. UNDERSTAND the facts already presented, the work that's been done, the results documented. I got this exact same drivel from "Varmint Al" back in the day until I was finally forced to ask Mr Al to please refrain from telling thousands of people to stop what they were doing because of his wet dreams.... that in fact the very stuff he was calling impossible was in common daily practice and had been for decades. That perhaps instead of telling Drs Pindell and Palmisano they were WRONG, maybe he, Mr Al, should seek understanding.

Again, if you're destroying this case at 83,000psi ya might wanna' turn 'er over, you're doing it wrong!

We are doing it right. We are one of the US Army R&D facilities and our methodology is the same as the rest of industry. Some of our technicians and engineers have been doing this for over 40 years, going back to the days of copper crushers at Frankford Arsenal. None of us use strain gages for chamber pressure. We use the industry, SAAMI and NATO standard Kistler 6215 or 6213 gages https://www.kistler.com/INT/en/cp/h...10000-bar-145000-psi-6213b/000000000018005965 calibrated before each test using a Harwood dynamic calibrator. Then each test setup is proofed using 20 rounds of a NATO standard reference ammo. This ammo has been shot at multiple test centers to prove out the pressures that it is giving. After the test the same ammo is shot again to ensure that the equipment is still functioning properly. We have tested strain gages against piezo-electric gages and found that the strain gages are not consistent and gave varying pressures on different barrels and steels. We know what we are doing.

 

[alinwa]

We are doing it right. We are one of the US Army R&D facilities and our methodology is the same as the rest of industry. Some of our technicians and engineers have been doing this for over 40 years, going back to the days of copper crushers at Frankford Arsenal. None of us use strain gages for chamber pressure. We use the industry, SAAMI and NATO standard Kistler 6215 or 6213 gages https://www.kistler.com/INT/en/cp/h...10000-bar-145000-psi-6213b/000000000018005965 calibrated before each test using a Harwood dynamic calibrator. Then each test setup is proofed using 20 rounds of a NATO standard reference ammo. This ammo has been shot at multiple test centers to prove out the pressures that it is giving. After the test the same ammo is shot again to ensure that the equipment is still functioning properly. We have tested strain gages against piezo-electric gages and found that the strain gages are not consistent and gave varying pressures on different barrels and steels. We know what we are doing.

Again with numbers and "validations"... I don't engage in pee-further contests, I deal in real-world facts.

So who's right here?

The product is in the market and safety rated over 80,000.... the fact that Sig has already released loaded ammunition rated at "over 80,000psi" and yet you've tested it to show failure at 83,000, doesn't raise flags??? Is your company calling Sig out? Or do you consider a 4% margin to be adequate for safety?

I didn't run strain gages on my stuff because I didn't feel it would be useful but my empirical RESULTS definitely indicate pressures well north of 100,000psi and no failures of any sort.

But then I'm not claiming expertise, just raw results.