Gordons Reloading Tool (GRT)

SCC

Member
Out of pure interest I was checking the web for any free (and more modern) alternatives to the “QuickLoad” PC application and stumbled upon “Gordons Reloading Tool (GRT)”.
Although new and still very much being developed GRT appears to have a lot nice features already, and great future potential ...and its completely free.
I'm only just starting to reload and for me GRT seems ideal.

For anyone interested in GRT there is a small article and video published on The Reloaders Network
Gordons Reloading Tool (GRT), How to Start Using - The Reloaders Network

and the link to the GRT site ...which has a quick registration to get to the software download
Gordons Reloading Community

Appologies if this tool has been covered in another post that i have missed elswhere on the forum.

BR ...and safe reloading,
SSC
 

Yorric

Well-Known Member
It'll be good if this new software works. Then us with Quickload won't need to be providing load recommendations to people who are too tight fisted to buy it. LOL:evil:
Seriously, it is good to have a cross check tool in our arsenal, If results are comparable & common sense is applied it should provide an extra layer of safety.
I'll be giving it a whirl for sure.
Ian
 

SCC

Member
Appears to work ok for me. Was able to predict results for "my" specific barrel, cases and seating depth, powder temperature ect.
Max load warnings were roughly on par with bullet/powder manufacturers generic recommendation's (which gave reassurrance). If anything the max loads were calculated slightly less using GRT.
Plus it gave me a clue as to the efficiency of the ladder test loads, expected velocity etc.
Certainly can't complain ...since it costs nothing! (although having being so plesantly suprised with the software i donated a little to its upkeep/development).

Anyway, i'm a complete begginer to reloading so will be good to see how the experts here eventually rate it.

SCC
 

NigelM

Well-Known Member
I've done a little playing, comparing Gordon with QL. Here's what I found...

The Good

It's a much more modern interface, easy to use and clearly laid out. Unfortunately it still doesn't work on Mac unless you have a Linux interface so I used the Windows version.

I use OBT so the fact that OBT times and barrel times are in there and calculated, included in the results was a great bonus. It also has a recoil calculator built in which is also a nice to have.

In terms of the libraries it had all my chamberings included and all but one of my bullets (which isn't in QL either).

It also has a burn rate chart included in the libraries which is useful as well as a group analysis program that allows you to upload your targets, measure and record your groups.

On the surface it's much more polished than QL and easy to use. You don't have to out of the program to find data from elsewhere.

The Bad

I started running my 338 win mag with RL16. It's the latest development job I have done so fresh in my mind. I matched the data entry with my QL files so everything was exactly the same to try to compare the results.

Pressure was about the same as QL but velocity was 90fps down. The powder burn was also predicted at 89% whereas QL is 100%. Looking at the powder spec and comparing to the QL spec they are very different which explains the difference. QL wasn't accurate, but Gordon was way off. Easy to calibrate if you have a chronograph as I have done with QL, but it was too far out.

I ran again with the 6.5 Lapua, 123 Scenar and RS62. This was much closer. Velocity was within 1 fps, but pressure was lower by 1500 psi, barrel time was longer and powder burn % was again way out.

One of the tools I do use in QL is their calculation on optimum powder for your chosen cartridge/bullet combination. This does not appear to be included within Gordons and is a pretty big miss in my opinion.

Overall

Has huge potential. If the developers can get the powder data more accurate and add the optimum powder selector from QL they have a great system. It looks like the developer is very much of the same mindset as the guy who writes Strelok so there is every chance this will happen.

If you don't have QL then by all means try it, but I wouldn't entirely trust the results for the moment. Let's hope it's not long before it is a great replacement.

Hope that helps someone.
 

Hunter 6.5

Well-Known Member
I've done a little playing, comparing Gordon with QL. Here's what I found...

The Good

It's a much more modern interface, easy to use and clearly laid out. Unfortunately it still doesn't work on Mac unless you have a Linux interface so I used the Windows version.

I use OBT so the fact that OBT times and barrel times are in there and calculated, included in the results was a great bonus. It also has a recoil calculator built in which is also a nice to have.

In terms of the libraries it had all my chamberings included and all but one of my bullets (which isn't in QL either).

It also has a burn rate chart included in the libraries which is useful as well as a group analysis program that allows you to upload your targets, measure and record your groups.

On the surface it's much more polished than QL and easy to use. You don't have to out of the program to find data from elsewhere.

The Bad

I started running my 338 win mag with RL16. It's the latest development job I have done so fresh in my mind. I matched the data entry with my QL files so everything was exactly the same to try to compare the results.

Pressure was about the same as QL but velocity was 90fps down. The powder burn was also predicted at 89% whereas QL is 100%. Looking at the powder spec and comparing to the QL spec they are very different which explains the difference. QL wasn't accurate, but Gordon was way off. Easy to calibrate if you have a chronograph as I have done with QL, but it was too far out.

I ran again with the 6.5 Lapua, 123 Scenar and RS62. This was much closer. Velocity was within 1 fps, but pressure was lower by 1500 psi, barrel time was longer and powder burn % was again way out.

One of the tools I do use in QL is their calculation on optimum powder for your chosen cartridge/bullet combination. This does not appear to be included within Gordons and is a pretty big miss in my opinion.

Overall

Has huge potential. If the developers can get the powder data more accurate and add the optimum powder selector from QL they have a great system. It looks like the developer is very much of the same mindset as the guy who writes Strelok so there is every chance this will happen.

If you don't have QL then by all means try it, but I wouldn't entirely trust the results for the moment. Let's hope it's not long before it is a great replacement.

Hope that helps someone.
Good job Nigel, as always very helpful and informative
 

SCC

Member
Thanks for the honest review Nigel.
Getting the powder data correct appears to be their biggest job and i expect there will be many adjustments as each new version is released.

I'm running the latest "intermediate" version 2020.1653 (beta), released within the past few weeks (to donators) and the following powders have been modified.
- update powder model: Alliant RL-7
- update powder model: Alliant RL-15
- update powder model: Alliant RL-16
- update powder model: Alliant AR-Comp
- update powder model: Hodgdon H4350
- update powder model: Hodgdon CFE223
- update powder model: Hodgdon Leverevolution (LVR)
- update powder model: Hodgdon Titegroup
- update powder model: ReloadSwiss RS30
- update powder model: ReloadSwiss RS60
- update powder model: Lovex S062
- update powder model: Lovex S070
- update powder model: Lovex D060
- update powder model: Lovex D037.1
- update powder model: Vihtavuori N160
- update powder model: Winchester StaBall 6.5
- update powder model: IMR 4350
- update powder model: IMR 4451
- update powder model: IMR 4064

Its future definitely looks promising.
SCC
 

Alantoo

Well-Known Member
It'll be good if this new software works. Then us with Quickload won't need to be providing load recommendations to people who are too tight fisted to buy it. LOL:evil:
I resemble that remark!...and am very grateful to the people that have run powder and bullets through Quickload for me.... :)

Trouble is Quickload is Windows only. I am too tight fisted to buy a standalone copy of Windows plus the Parallels emulation programme on top of buying Quickload in order to run it on my Mac...

Which? lists a few Windows laptops for under £200 which is less than I would have to pay for Windows and Parallels...let alone buy Quickload on top

To that end if I was to buy a cheap Windows laptop specifically to run GRT...which one should I go for?

I am unfamiliar with PC brands having been on Macs for the last 30 years. We have had a few HP printers though and Which? has the HP Stream 11-ak (11-ak0502sa) as the cheapest Windows laptop with the highest score...Amazon have it for £180 (including Office 365 for 12 months which I don't need) would this be okay?...any other advice from GRT users?

Alan
 

Yorric

Well-Known Member
Alan, you could get hold of an old pc or laptop that has the operating system screwed up, Buy a SSD drive to fit it (this will speed it up & permit a new clean operating system load/build,& buy a cheap Windows 10 & activation key online & set it up. Not rocket science. You can download Open Office for free & that'll do all you need, wp, spreadsheets etc,
Lots of folk throw out their big old pcs out when the operating system screws up thinking it is the hardware that is at fault. The above should get you going for minimum outlay.
QL doesn't need a fast modern pc, just a reliable one to work well.

Ian
 

caorach

Well-Known Member
To that end if I was to buy a cheap Windows laptop specifically to run GRT...which one should I go for?
I don't know if you need to use a laptop Alan, and also I don't know the system requirements of the software but I often buy ex-lease PCs as they can be dead cheap and often still have enough life left in them. Something like this might do depending on the sys requirements of the software


or you can go right to something very high spec. just by browsing around that site.
 

SCC

Member
If anyone is failing to recieve the verification code email when first registering then go look in your email spam folder.
In general this is always the first thing to check if you are expecting an email (from anyone), but it never arrives.

BR,
SCC
 

Yorric

Well-Known Member
I downloaded it did the registration etc & tried it out. It seems to work fine. Now need to see if it agrees with QL.
For a freebee it is exceptional. Worth a contribution to encourage the development. I guess QL will be concerned. They will loose market share for sure!
Ian
 

Top