Piece 1, Quickload, pressure, velocity

[joeb33050]

This, below, suggests that Quickload does not predict pressure accurately, sometimes; and that the pressure/velocity relationship is imperfectly understood-at least by me. I'm looking for more data.
Thanks;
joe brennan

Handloader, August 2005, "Velocity and Pressure" by John Barsness.
The author cites "Any Shot You Want", the A-Square loading manual concerning variations in pressure with changes in primer. From that manual, on pg. 65 the table "Primer Experiment" shows: 7MM Remington Magnum, 160 grain Sierra boat-tail, 66.0 grains of Hodgdon H-4831 and Winchester cases.
CCI 200 (standard) 3011 fps, 54,800 psi
Rem 9 1/2 M (magnum) 3041 fps, 59,300 psi
CCI 250 (magnum) 3039 fps, 61,500 psi
Fed 215 (magnum) 3036 fps, 61,400 psi
Win WLR (standard) 3024 fps, 64,400 psi
Win WLRM (magnum) 3045 fps, 67,600 psi

The author then performed a test on a ".300 Winchester Magnum with a 23-inch barrel, the load a 180-grain Nosler Partition with 75.0 grains of Hodgdon H-4831 in Winchester cases."
Fed 215M, 2924 fps, 63,800 psi
CCI BR2, 2920 fps, 55,800 psi
Win WLRM, 2991 fps, 70,100 psi

It is clear that pressure varies greatly with primer, while velocity varies much less.
This article suggests to me that Quickload maximum pressure data may be suspect in some cases.

[leftiye]

Back in the days of only the Powley computer being around, it (the Powley computer) posited that velocity would only increase at half of the pressure increase. This suggests that maximum pressure would still not mirror velocity exactly even if generally in these proportions, as other factors such as pressure curve shape (total of pressure/time) would also vary with possibly large effect on relationship to velocity.

We further get variations in velocity increase in relation to pressure increase as pressures get higher, and approach the critical pressure of the powder (when burning rate goes vertical on the graph, and detonation approaches). There are multitudinous references to this as an indication that "maximum" pressures are being approached- when a small increase in powder causes a large increase in pressure with a disproportionately lower increase in velocity. This may be the pressure curve developing a shorter, more peaked contour. When we add (which we can't because we can't calculate them anyway) all of the other variables that purther pollute this situation, it may well be surprising that we predict at all. Not to be defending Quickload, as I have no experience with it, but it is perhaps to be expected that it might fail in this respect, especially as factors relative to individual loads/guns/ temperatures/ primers/etc. come into play.

[Bad Flynch]

>It is clear that pressure varies greatly with primer, while velocity varies much less.
This article suggests to me that Quickload maximum pressure data may be suspect in some cases.<

Joe,
QuickLoad does not take into account the differences in primers and was designed with a fairly mild primer in mind. Be aware, however that velocity is not directly proportional to the pressure maximum (Pmax), but is more related to the area under the curve(AUC). The problem arises because while primer changes can produce changes in Pmax, the AUC remains fairly constant, the percentage change being small and, hence, the velocity change is small.

I read somewhere, years ago, where the velocity is proportional to the fourth root of the pressure area. Don't know, could have been the fourth root of Pmax. You might want to look into that.

QuickLoad was not designed to take every little variance into account. For example, it uses SAAMI case volumes, not individually measured volumes, although one can change that, if needed. There are only a few cartridges for which there are differences in case volum available; the .308 Win and 7.62x51mm NATO come to mind, but then they are tecnically different cartridges and the specifications for each are arrived independently. Specifically, the .308 Win uses SAAMI case volume standards and the 7,62x51mm NATO uses NATO spec. case volumes (and so on).

[Ricochet]

BF, I think that fourth root thing is for Pmax.

[joeb33050]

That's the point. If primer choice makes a lot of difference in pressure, and QL doesn't include primers in the calc, then quickload doesn't do a good job of estimating pressure.
I don't know about the 4th root of anything, but for a while thought that the area under the pressure curve determined V, now I'm not so sure. There's something about burning the powder in the first couple of inches of barrel, bullet velocity, the gas laws, etc. And I don't think it matters.
What does matter is change in V with change in primer, I think.
joe b.




>It is clear that pressure varies greatly with primer, while velocity varies much less.
This article suggests to me that Quickload maximum pressure data may be suspect in some cases.<

Joe,
QuickLoad does not take into account the differences in primers and was designed with a fairly mild primer in mind. Be aware, however that velocity is not directly proportional to the pressure maximum (Pmax), but is more related to the area under the curve(AUC). The problem arises because while primer changes can produce changes in Pmax, the AUC remains fairly constant, the percentage change being small and, hence, the velocity change is small.

I read somewhere, years ago, where the velocity is proportional to the fourth root of the pressure area. Don't know, could have been the fourth root of Pmax. You might want to look into that.

QuickLoad was not designed to take every little variance into account. For example, it uses SAAMI case volumes, not individually measured volumes, although one can change that, if needed. There are only a few cartridges for which there are differences in case volum available; the .308 Win and 7.62x51mm NATO come to mind, but then they are tecnically different cartridges and the specifications for each are arrived independently. Specifically, the .308 Win uses SAAMI case volume standards and the 7,62x51mm NATO uses NATO spec. case volumes (and so on).

[Bass Ackward]

Quickload does predict pressure accurately. But you have to learn to operate the software.

There are many instances besides primer:

Shot start pressure can be greatly effected by the seal of any bullet material in the throat because of how deep the bullet is seated. How large is the throat? What angle you have on the leade. And even bore diameter. It's going to take a little longer for a 308 bullet to seal a .309 bore, and because of that you are going to lose a little pressure if the bullet takes longer to seal. Then you have bore finish that it can't compensate for. And crown wear. A crown that is worn by a high pressure, over bore cartridge like a 7MM MAg or a 300 Win Mag may not actually have a 23" barrel if the seal is lost at 22 1/2". Add all this up and the software can be off

Then you have the option to change case volume. If your cases are not the same volume, your data is off. What about neck tension from dies? What? You have a gun where the barrel is chopped in two pieces? That isn't in the software! How wide is the BC gap in your handgun? And no one ever thought some idiot like me might put bullet lube on a jacketed bullet like a Barnes Triple shock.

I hope that I have made my point. You can't take a Nosler bullet the first time you try one and load it backwards and then say Nosler bullets suck at long range.

Quickload assumes a "perfect reload under perfect world conditions. If you want Quickload to track, you have to give it every chance by inputting all information that it allows for accurately. (here is the key) Then you will still have to make it reflect each individual gun.

The easiest way I have found is to chrono the load and simply adjust my barrel length in the program to what has been chronographe. The less ES for the load the more accurate. Then I stay within 50fps of what is chronoed / predicted for everything I have tested. I can only assume that at that point that the predicted pressure is proportional with the measured velocity because I am not set up to measure pressure.

As an example, my first Redhawk that has a 7 1'2" barrel and loads for it are set for a 5 1/2" barrel in the program. My 5 1/2" Redhawk has loads set for a 7" barrel. A complete flip flop, but that is where the program tracks.

[joeb33050]

If different primers change pressure a lot and velocity a little,
and if Quickload doesn't allow for changes in primer,
then QL doesn't predict pressure accurately.
The examples are above.
Is this wrong?
joe b.




Quickload does predict pressure accurately. But you have to learn to operate the software.

There are many instances besides primer:

Shot start pressure can be greatly effected by the seal of any bullet material in the throat because of how deep the bullet is seated. How large is the throat? What angle you have on the leade. And even bore diameter. It's going to take a little longer for a 308 bullet to seal a .309 bore, and because of that you are going to lose a little pressure if the bullet takes longer to seal. Then you have bore finish that it can't compensate for. And crown wear. A crown that is worn by a high pressure, over bore cartridge like a 7MM MAg or a 300 Win Mag may not actually have a 23" barrel if the seal is lost at 22 1/2". Add all this up and the software can be off

Then you have the option to change case volume. If your cases are not the same volume, your data is off. What about neck tension from dies? What? You have a gun where the barrel is chopped in two pieces? That isn't in the software! How wide is the BC gap in your handgun? And no one ever thought some idiot like me might put bullet lube on a jacketed bullet like a Barnes Triple shock.

I hope that I have made my point. You can't take a Nosler bullet the first time you try one and load it backwards and then say Nosler bullets suck at long range.

Quickload assumes a "perfect reload under perfect world conditions. If you want Quickload to track, you have to give it every chance by inputting all information that it allows for accurately. (here is the key) Then you will still have to make it reflect each individual gun.

The easiest way I have found is to chrono the load and simply adjust my barrel length in the program to what has been chronographe. The less ES for the load the more accurate. Then I stay within 50fps of what is chronoed / predicted for everything I have tested. I can only assume that at that point that the predicted pressure is proportional with the measured velocity because I am not set up to measure pressure.

As an example, my first Redhawk that has a 7 1'2" barrel and loads for it are set for a 5 1/2" barrel in the program. My 5 1/2" Redhawk has loads set for a 7" barrel. A complete flip flop, but that is where the program tracks.

[Ricochet]

You can't possibly know and account for all of the variables in your load and gun. Quickload's never been anything but an estimator. You have to measure the results, still. If the velocity very closely matches the prediction, the pressure likely does, too.

I think what the area under the curve of pressure/time correlates with is bullet momentum.

[Bass Ackward]

If different primers change pressure a lot and velocity a little, and if Quickload doesn't allow for changes in primer,
then QL doesn't predict pressure accurately. Is this wrong?
joe b.


Joe,

If your question is, is Quickload an error proof software capable of factoring in all the varibles I mentioned to include operator error, well then obviously not. The above data supports that although it doesn't proove it. I have never had a way off reading once I did what I described to you.

Garbage in, garbage out. Same as any other computer. And please don't try this with powder either. 50 grains of brand X in a 30-06 will not throw the same pressure in gun A as gun B. So do we say Brand X of powder is not capable of producing consistent results or throws erratic pressures?


Ric,

Correct. That's why adding to or shortening the barrel compensates. Change primer, and you should have to reuse the chronograph. Sound familiar to anything else in reloading? Change a variable or component, start low and work up.

[joeb33050]

You can't possibly know and account for all of the variables in your load and gun. Quickload's never been anything but an estimator. You have to measure the results, still. If the velocity very closely matches the prediction, the pressure likely does, too.

I think what the area under the curve of pressure/time correlates with is bullet momentum.

You missed the point. The Barsnesss data shows that pressure and velocity don't vary together, in the area tested. Then velocity can match QL, but pressure won't, as primers change.
joe b.

[Bass Ackward]

You missed the point. The Barsnesss data shows that pressure and velocity don't vary together, in the area tested. Then velocity can match QL, but pressure won't, as primers change.
joe b.


Joe,

And from that data you asked if drilling out flash holes made a difference?

But before you get too excited, Quickload predicted the 3011 fps for a 24" barrel. Exactly the same as that guy got with the standard CCI primer. Pressure predicted was 51,838 compared to his measured 54,800. (measured how exactly?).

Not far off what he measured either. But Quickload doesn't cover that. And sorry, I didn't adjust for Winchester brass or anything else.

So let's see what Mr Hodgdon says cause it's his powder. Oppps! This guy is GROSSLY OVER at 6 gains over Max and that 60 grains was roughly 49,800 CUP at 2717 fps. And Mr Hodgdon did use Winchester brass. My Lyman manual doesn't list a 160, but it does a 162. 3010 at 52,000. So that supports Quickload, but oh, it doesn't account for primer changes either. maybe they didn't see any in their gun at these pressures.

My point is that everything can be off and why it isa .... reference.

I feel fairly safe with Quickload and cast. (From that data you posted, you see why I like pistol primers for higher pressure cast huh?)

Think of Quickoad not as a guarantee, but as an unlimited reference manual with infinite possibilities for jacketed, and unlimited possibilities for cast, for each and every cartridge it lists. And now with the next generation software, cartridge specifications are listed too, I have no use for loading manuals because I start low and work up anyway. Go from load to trajectory software in the same program.

But as with any reference, start low and work up.

[Ricochet]

I didn't miss the point, Joe. The point is that Quickload is an estimator that can't account for all variables. It's a mistake to expect it to.

[Ranch Dog]

This, below, suggests that Quickload does not predict pressure accurately, sometimes; and that the pressure/velocity relationship is imperfectly understood-at least by me. I'm looking for more data.
Thanks;
joe brennan

Handloader, August 2005, "Velocity and Pressure" by John Barsness.
The author cites "Any Shot You Want", the A-Square loading manual concerning variations in pressure with changes in primer. From that manual, on pg. 65 the table "Primer Experiment" shows: 7MM Remington Magnum, 160 grain Sierra boat-tail, 66.0 grains of Hodgdon H-4831 and Winchester cases.
CCI 200 (standard) 3011 fps, 54,800 psi
Rem 9 1/2 M (magnum) 3041 fps, 59,300 psi
CCI 250 (magnum) 3039 fps, 61,500 psi
Fed 215 (magnum) 3036 fps, 61,400 psi
Win WLR (standard) 3024 fps, 64,400 psi
Win WLRM (magnum) 3045 fps, 67,600 psi

The author then performed a test on a ".300 Winchester Magnum with a 23-inch barrel, the load a 180-grain Nosler Partition with 75.0 grains of Hodgdon H-4831 in Winchester cases."
Fed 215M, 2924 fps, 63,800 psi
CCI BR2, 2920 fps, 55,800 psi
Win WLRM, 2991 fps, 70,100 psi

It is clear that pressure varies greatly with primer, while velocity varies much less.
This article suggests to me that Quickload maximum pressure data may be suspect in some cases.


300 Win Mag... 23" barrel... 75-grains H4831... 54.0K CUP (63

[Ranch Dog]

This, below, suggests that Quickload does not predict pressure accurately, sometimes; and that the pressure/velocity relationship is imperfectly understood-at least by me. I'm looking for more data.
Thanks;
joe brennan

7MM Rem Mag
Rem 9 1/2 M (magnum) 3041 fps, 59,300 psi
CCI 250 (magnum) 3039 fps, 61,500 psi
Fed 215 (magnum) 3036 fps, 61,400 psi
Win WLRM (magnum) 3045 fps, 67,600 psi

300 Win Mag
Fed 215M, 2924 fps, 63,800 psi
CCI BR2, 2920 fps, 55,800 psi
Win WLRM, 2991 fps, 70,100 psi

It is clear that pressure varies greatly with primer, while velocity varies much less.
This article suggests to me that Quickload maximum pressure data may be suspect in some cases.

I don't suspect it is any more "suspect" than the printed data...

I use Load From A Disk and here is what it came up with for matched loads of H4831...

7MM Rem Mag... 24" barrel... 66-grains H4831 = 45.1K (50.5K PSI) & 2800 FPS
300 Win Mag... 23" barrel... 75-grains H4831 = 54.0K CUP (63.0K PSI) & 3000 FPS

[Bass Ackward]

One last thing since Quickload users will probably read this, there has been a new release for Quickload. It's cost ? I had to pay $50 because my computer on which it is installed dumped. It is a one time load and I don't have a floppy on this system, so I needed a new CD. And everything uploads onto your computer now, so you don't have to keep a disk in your drive. BIG PIA with grandkids.

Anyway, there is a lot of new bullet and powder companies. And more of each from the ones we use. And the cast bullets are now measured when you call up a Lyman or RCBS so you don't have to run downstairs and pick up the verniers just to play around, but you will still have to measure if you are sizing. There is also a tab you click to drop down a screen that shows you a picture of the case with all the SAAMI dimensions like you would see in a loading manual.

I am sure that there is other stuff that I am not remembering, but just check it out and see if you need the upgrade.

http://www.neconos.com/

[Bad Flynch]

Joe,

Take a look at the following link: http://www.6mmbr.com/Quickload.html

It should help a little.

[mike in co]

"....and that the pressure/velocity relationship is imperfectly understood-at least by me."

that does not suprise me.

what copy of quickload do you own joe ???

did you get someone to read the instructions to you ??

it is a tool, just like lots of other tools used by competent ammo crafters.

no where on it does it say it is the bible of reloading.

yes joe , when you change part of a "load" the results change.....duh

i find it completely amazing that someone that claims to be a published author on reloading, that you completed missed that one must always start over if a single part of a "load" is changed.
quickload not only does not list primers, it does not list brass manufacture, nor what lot of powder was used, nor what gun/chamber was used.
any time you change one of the above you go back and start over/or reconfirm the load.
are you trying to tell us, that in complete contrast to every reloading manual ever published, that because quickload predicts pressure, that it is completely safe to start at max loads....'CAUSE QUICKLOAD SAID IT WAS SAFE !"....??????

at what point are you going to become a positive contributor to cast boolits and quit trolling for bits for your book ??

mike in co

and for the record i am quckload customer 424

[joeb33050]

Here's the deal.
We've got an article written by a (we hope) truthful gun writer that shows PRESSURE varying a lot, and VELOCITY not varying a lot; as primers change.
This, to me, suggests two things:
One, I don't understand the relationship between pressure and velocity very well, hence the "area under the curve" and 4th power guesses.
Two, since pressure can vary a lot and velocity not, and since Quickload estimates/forecasts velocity well, at least in my experience, then QL is maybe NOT a good estimator of pressure.

I'm looking for other data having to do with QL, primers, pressure and velocity.

If you have any, I'd like to see it.
If you want to write about other things, go ahead, but that ain't the question.
Moderator, moderate!
joe brennan

[Bass Ackward]

Here's the deal.
We've got an article written by a (we hope) truthful gun writer that shows PRESSURE varying a lot, and VELOCITY not varying a lot; as primers change.
This, to me, suggests two things:
One, I don't understand the relationship between pressure and velocity very well, hence the "area under the curve" and 4th power guesses.
Two, since pressure can vary a lot and velocity not, and since Quickload estimates/forecasts velocity well, at least in my experience, then QL is maybe NOT a good estimator of pressure.

I'm looking for other data having to do with QL, primers, pressure and velocity.

If you have any, I'd like to see it.
If you want to write about other things, go ahead, but that ain't the question.
Moderator, moderate!
joe brennan


Joe,

If you make up a chart with pressure vertically and velocity along the bottom, all powders will pretty much be linear through the useful pressure range with any particular powder range with a particular bullet weight. When they start to burn erratically on each end of the spectrum, the load manual stops at those limits unless it is for reduced loads. Have you ever wondered why a load manual only loads certain powders? Or why the same exact powders listed for the lightest bullet are not the exact same as with the heaviest bullet listed? Are those the same powder speeds selected between different companies manuals? Spend some time and look at powder selections for any caliber across differnt manuals paying attention not to just powders but burn rates of powders. Then you will understand why Quickload can't predict it.

This effect that you have asked about is because this fellow is reaching the point where the powder no longer burns linearly and starts to head straight up. The smaller the case volume the easier to observe this. The faster the powder in a normal case, the easier to see it. The heavier for caliber bullet, makes it more likely too. At some point the line will always break straight up. A lot depends on what pressure range a powder is designed to operate in. Shotgun powders can exhibit this effect much sooner than others because they are designed for low pressure which is why they can be tricky for cast.

I think that what is throwing you the most is that you see H-4831 and say, man that's a slow powder. It's ingrained in your mind that that is a slow powder. Not true in this situation. And when I see this happening as a reloader, it tells me I need to drop down in burn rate to lose this sensitivity. Because then things like temperature will also have a dramatic effect on what he is doing too.

I gave this same very example in the primer hole thread with a 30-06, 150 gr bullet and 4895. 46 through 49 grains in my rifle and you get 100 fps increase with each grain until you hit max at 49. 50 is only 30 fps faster and primers are flattening. The turn up was made. If you push it farther you get less fps increase.

If I substituted primers at that point as he did, I would see similar results. Then I would say primer makes a BIG difference. But when I drop to 4064 and use a max load I could probably switch primers and see little effect. Then my conclusion would be switching primer makes no difference. This was the effect I was also warning about with drilled out flash holes. That makes all your previous experience go out the window and you have to probe and learn these points all over again. And this is why since day one when you were a kid everyone in the world has told you that if you change any variable, drop down and work up.

So unless 4895 gave me great groups at 47 or 48 grains to leave me some temperature variation room, which it didn't, I dropped to Varget to avoid this situation. You will find this with every cartridge and every powder. Surprised you haven't recognized the situation yourself.

Once you understand this, you will also understand why opening flash holes can cause pressure problems. AS some argued, it is no different than changing primer. What I argued was that while true, it moves your frame of reference from operation zone that were safe before and makes you have to start all over. If you recognize that, you are safe. If you don't recognize that, then you can be in a world of hurt fast. the smaller the case volume, the more critical will be the danger point.

[waksupi]

Joe, as far as I see, you are the one pushing the terms of service at this time, by making a personal attack. I believe both of you could stand to tone things down a bit. I personally have been irritated at both of you.

[joeb33050]

The 7MM Magnum test is from the A Square book "Any Shot You Want", 160 grain Sierra Boattail, 66.0 H4831.
My Lyman 48th shows only one 160 grain bullet, a Fail Safe. The max H4831 load is 66.0 grains, 2848 fps, 59,800 fps.

The 300 WM test was done by Charlie Sisk, 180 grain Nosler Partition, 75.9 H4831.
Lyman 48th shows 180 HPBT max H4831 76.0+ means compresses charge, 2938 fps, no pressure recorded. And;
180 Barnes X, max 74.0 H4831, 2832 fps, 50,100 CUP.

Neither of the test loads seem crazy, they're right in the ball park for max loads.
It may be that this is the end of the linear pressure/velocity relationship. And it may not. Hence my request for data. I've got theory and opinion, I'm very short of data.
This has nothing to do with enlarged flash holes or any other question I've asked, as far as I know.
Got data?
joe brennan

[felix]

Joe, what have you contributed in terms of cash/physical-product to this board, Castpics, or any of the Honchos on this board? Have you run any programs, like QuickLoad or anyother computational program, for any requests from members on this board who are not as fortunate to have such a program? What about a cartridge drawing, or a boolit drawing? It seems, but correct me if I am wrong here, that you are a taker in principle, and not a giver at all. Just who is a fool here? Maybe you should leave on your own, rather than have a moderator come down on you. ... felix

[45nut]

Please state the reason this thread should not be locked down?
Tempted as I was to just shunt the entire thread to the trash, I slowed down and read through some of the replies and the content in some is very helpful and then others show no contribution to anyones senses.
BTW Joe..Waksupi was moderating,,he IS a moderator and the point he was trying for was directed at you for making a personal attack. Our Terms that you agreed to abide by in posting to this forum has no allowances for direct attacks.
We strive for information and insight in reading and taking our experiences to the next level,,not sinking to the lowest. Please calm down and relax ,,none of this will alter the course of the galaxy.

[joeb33050]

Please state the reason this thread should not be locked down?
Tempted as I was to just shunt the entire thread to the trash, I slowed down and read through some of the replies and the content in some is very helpful and then others show no contribution to anyones senses.
BTW Joe..Waksupi was moderating,,he IS a moderator and the point he was trying for was directed at you for making a personal attack. Our Terms that you agreed to abide by in posting to this forum has no allowances for direct attacks.
We strive for information and insight in reading and taking our experiences to the next level,,not sinking to the lowest. Please calm down and relax ,,none of this will alter the course of the galaxy.

I was hoping to get some other data concerning the question. Perhaps there isn't any.
Waksupi is a little late moderating. I have put up with personal attacks from Mike in co for months, with little moderating going on. His last attack, in this thread, was more than enough for me.
Where has Waksupi the moderator been? Why didn't he moderate?
Did you read mike's post?

I never realized that writing a cast bullet book would be resented so very much by so very many.
joe b.

[joeb33050]

Joe, what have you contributed in terms of cash/physical-product to this board, Castpics, or any of the Honchos on this board? Have you run any programs, like QuickLoad or anyother computational program, for any requests from members on this board who are not as fortunate to have such a program? What about a cartridge drawing, or a boolit drawing? It seems, but correct me if I am wrong here, that you are a taker in principle, and not a giver at all. Just who is a fool here? Maybe you should leave on your own, rather than have a moderator come down on you. ... felix

Felix;
For maybe three years I've spent an average of 5 hours a day, 7 days a week working on first the first edition of the book, and then-now the second.
The first edition was published by the CBA and given, free, to every member.
The second edition is up on the CB-BOOK site for anyone to read, free. We have ~120 contributors, ~300 pages, written and or edited by some of the most knowledgable folks in the CB world, including some from this forum.
I never gave any cash or physical product to anyone on this board, didn't know it was necessary. How much should I send to who?
I do not have Quickload, all my computational programs are up in the book.
I don't have much in the way of cartridge or bullet drawings; what I have is in the book, on the site, free.
I'm a taker, asker, consolidator, writer, BS detector, reviser and giver-on CB-BOOK, of the best CB book written in many years, maybe ever. Look at the list of contributors.
Maybe I should leave.
Just let me know;
joe brennan

[45nut]

As certain as the sun rises in the east it will be certain the not every post will be reviewed by a moderator but just as certain the use of some language will attract attention immediately. The use of capsin negative posts postively will.
None of the staff here is on a CB payroll and none have been under mandatory orders to read each and every post to discern whether content should be reviewed.
We are all volunteers and take our daily doses of life as everyone else.
I accept that some people have good days,,I rarely do anymore.
This board is not meant to drive wedges between fellow enthusiasts despite the outcome of assorted topics, rather we are here to draw from all points of views.
Some I like and participate in,,many others I do not.
Just as there are sized shoes for the different feet of the people that wander in, so should there be different allowances and we have made many attempts in soothing frayed nerves in the past. We are not going to debate further how so and so started and mommy said I could after daddy told me I couldnt examples of boorish behavior.
Finally, it does appear this thread has run it's course. I am locking it and will consider any further attempts at baiting our moderators to violently react as you appear to desire as a wish to be elsewhere. 12,000+ threads and 143,000+ posts and by far the membership get's along great. Why we have to endure this type over and over just baffles me. If we didn't all seek to enjoy the topics we are known for than why bother coming by? Lets try to see the bigger picture.