|
Post by rangeball on Sept 2, 2010 9:07:34 GMT -5
Is there any reason why a barrel shouldn't shoot just as good sabotless if it has a QLA?
Anyone have a QLA and shoot sabotless?
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Sept 2, 2010 10:36:44 GMT -5
Range........... Thats a good question? I only played with the QLA once and did not see much difference. Then again, that was with a Savage .50 barrel and all results were just mediocre With my Pac-Nors, I have made up an aluminum adapter that slips over the muzzle with a very close fit (no wiggling) and have about one inch extending past the muzzle. This is bored out to be right at .450" and slicked up. I use this adapter when cleaning/cooling and, to align my bullet or bullet/sabot combinations. So for me, this is a removable QLA and if I had my druthers, I would prefer the bullet to cleanly exit right at the "real" muzzle. Richard
|
|
|
Post by rangeball on Sept 2, 2010 10:42:57 GMT -5
I have one on my SMI and get good accuracy sabotless with the thors. I love it for ease of loading, and am contemplating having my .45 barrel done the same way. The removable concept sounds interesting, but one more thing for me to lose in the woods I guess if it causes problems, I can whack it off and re-crown.
|
|
|
Post by onecardchuck on Sept 2, 2010 14:47:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by smokeeter on Sept 2, 2010 16:05:11 GMT -5
It's also a waste of good barrel length.
|
|
|
Post by edge on Sept 2, 2010 17:39:42 GMT -5
IMO, it might depend on what type of bullet your use.
If you use a near slip fit, like a Parker or a mushroom shaped bullet that slips most of the way in the bore then it probably would be of little use. However, if you use a highly knurled bullet that requires a short starter and you run the risk of canting the bullet then it may be worth while.
edge.
|
|
|
Post by rangeball on Sept 3, 2010 9:31:27 GMT -5
I plan to shoot saboted .40s and sabotless .45s, like the barnes TEZ or parker BE. The depth of the QLA on my SMI is 3/4" and only bore width. I really like it. Chuck, after I posted that I went home sick. I must be better, cause reading your response made me LOL Hey, weren't you going to post about some more sabotless testing? I didn't miss it, did I?
|
|
|
Post by onecardchuck on Sept 3, 2010 11:38:38 GMT -5
rangeball,
Sorry I just couldn't pass that up and sorry to hear you were feeling ill. I hope all is well with you now.
Not a sabotless range report but a saboted 300 grain over 2500 fps duplex range report hopefully coming next week.
|
|
|
Post by rangeball on Sept 3, 2010 12:14:07 GMT -5
Feeling much better, thanks Looking forward to the report, as always
|
|
|
Post by moto357 on Sept 3, 2010 13:17:07 GMT -5
my first .45 barrel from SMI had the QLA. shooting sabotless was OK, although not what I had hoped. the second barrel, all else being the same, had no QLA and shot sabotless much better than my expections. not sure any internal differences between the barrels, but this was my experience with sabotless and QLA
|
|
|
Post by rangeball on Sept 3, 2010 13:44:34 GMT -5
Interesting. Did you feel you were getting similar loading pressure sabotless between the barrels?
|
|
|
Post by superkirby on Sept 4, 2010 8:19:26 GMT -5
I don't know about any of the smokeless companies, but I believe T/C had a problem with getting the QLA centered and bored straight, especially with their Omegas. So there was some obvious accuracy issues there.
|
|
|
Post by chuck41 on Sept 5, 2010 9:31:07 GMT -5
QLA? Come on guys. Give us dummies a break! What is QLA? I even tried to look it up and I found: QLA= Quality Lab Accessories? Quark License Administrator? Quality Life Association? Lasham Airfield (QLA) airport code? QCD Linear Algebra? Trademark of QLogic Corp? Quirky Little Acronym?
|
|
|
Post by dave d. on Sept 5, 2010 9:40:01 GMT -5
chuck t/c I believe had the patent and I think it stood for quick load accurizer.
|
|