Oh, ok... you mentioned the NAR, so I figured they had "turned over a new leaf" and were doing something useful... Guess I expected too much LOL:)
Like I said I thought it was always pretty ignorant to not release the information on the MESS forms to the rocketry community at large... the statistics could be very useful for research or, as you pointed out, personal decision making.
I know I learned the hard way to not trust a model you really like to the Quest motors-- their "flea fart" ejection charges dislodged the nosecone on a couple of flights but wasn't enough to push out the laundry, and I ended up with some damaged rockets because of it. Not quite "lawn darts" but not far from it either!
IF I had but KNOWN that Quest ejection charges were SO limp, I would have packed the rockets differently. I guess most folks (me included) have gotten used to the Estes "shotgun ejections" and pack accordingly, and the Quest "flea fart" ejection charges just don't cut it.
Similarly, the Quest motors, while "longer burning" also have a lot less "oomf" off the pad, and aren't suitable to larger/fatter/heavier/draggier rockets that would fly fine with an "equivalent" Estes engine. I learned that the hard way too. One other thing on the Quest motors-- the things have THIN casings and get scalding hot due to the longer burn. The first Quest C motor I ever flew came back with the white label completely CARMELIZED (turned the paper brown from the heat cooking the paper label) and was ALMOST burned through in several spots-- you could literally feel the "mushy spots" on the casing surface with your fingers, and dissection of the case after the flight was recovered verified that the interior of the casing, especially the lower half, was SO charred on the inside it was very nearly burned through!
I bought a bunch of Quest motors, and they fly nicely (in the right rocket) and do okay on ejection (if you take account for it and pack the wadding and recovery device so it practically FALLS out of the tube!) BUT, they're more for "sport rockets", ie the little "3FNC" type rockets that are sleek and light and just made to go "woosh, pop". If you're like me and you like the cooler-looking sci-fi rockets, semi-scalers, and other such "bigger, heavier, draggier" rockets, the Quest motors will put in some hairy flights at best... Estes motors have more "oomf" because they're burning the same propellant in a shorter time, so more "kick" off the pad, but burn shorter so less total altitude because of lower peak velocity. Longer burning Quest motors will accelerate a lightweight streamlined rocket to a higher speed and thus a higher altitude than an equivalent Estes motor. Both have their place, but for me the Estes motors work better. If I flew a lot of light weight 3FNC's, I'd probably favor the Quests...
Later! OL J R