Thinking your only option if quickhull isn't good enough is cudahull if you want exact solutions. Although, even then you're only going to get about a 40x increase max (it seems).
I'm assuming that your the convex hulls you make each have at least 10 vertices (if it's much less than that, there isn't much you can do). If you don't mind "close enough" solutions. You could create a version of quickhull that limits the number the of vertices per polygon. The number of vertices you limit the calculation to will also allow for calculation of maximum error if needed.
The thing is that as the number of vertices on the convex hull approach infinity, you end up with a sphere. This means due to the way quick hull works, each additional vertex you add to the convex hull has less of an effect* than the ones before it.
*Depending on how quickhull is coded, this may only be true in a general sense. Making this true in practice would require modifying quickhull's recursion algorithm, so while the "next vertex" is always calculated (except for after the last vertex is added, or no points remain for that section), vertices are actually added to the convex hull in the order that maximizes the increase to the polyhedrons volume (likely by order of most distant to least distant). You'll incur some performance cost for keeping track of the order to add vertex's but as long as the ratio of pending convex hull points vs pending points is high enough, it should be worth it. As for error, the best option is probably to stop the algorithm either when the actual convex hull is reached, or the max increase to volume gets smaller than a certain fraction of the current total volume. If performance is more important, then simply limit the number of convex hull points per polygon.
You could also look at the various approximate convex hull algorithms, but the method I outlined above should work well for volume/centroid approximation with ability to determine error.