4F, Its Not Just For Priming Anymore

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Well over a decade ago I came across a Yahoo percussion handgun group, and in it was a fellow who had really researched the power of the Civil War paper cartridge company known as Hazards who was using what they called at the time a new Pistol Powder. This fellow got his hands on original paper cartridges in .44 cal and through testing found that it contained 4F powder and was as energetic as Swiss powder. The loading then was 36 grns of powder under a 211 grn conical. That’s pretty potent stuff and would have been hugely successful had they not made the conicals pointy.

I’ve seen the numbers on various .44/.45 cal revolvers using energetic 3F powder and always felt it was more than acceptable as a hunting sidearm. Of course the idea of seeing what 4F Swiss would be like is a little intriguing if I were to have some.

Recently I was directed to a black powder calculator for Swiss powders only called P-Max. It is very interesting. What really caught my eye were the pressure maxes and the power increase when using 4F. My 5.5” Pietta NMA loves 32.5 grns it seems, and I’ve been working on a universal bullet for it and my ROA as the excess chamber space is very similar with the Ruger liking 37.5 grns. This bullet looks to be about 230-235 grns so I used 230. With 3F it’s like the old 1911 ball ammo with 850 fps and 370 ft/lbs with 14k psi. Switch that to 4F and it showed 979 fps and 489 ft/lbs with 20.7k psi. Thing is my design has a long upper driving band giving it more friction than a typical bullet you see. And my design has a huge 0.375” meplat so there’s a lot of mass in a small place.

Long story shorter, a ball I’d have no issues with regardless of powder energetics, but with a bullet things can change drastically. And a most excellent example is the 285 grn version I made for my Ruger as black powder pressures aren’t a concern whatsoever. It was loaded with 52 grns of Pyrodex P and it blew the wall of the cylinder out on that Walker.

I have looked around trying to find information as to pressure testing of these repro revolvers, but haven’t found anything more than logical speculation I believe. With that in mind I wouldn’t use Swiss 4F with this bullet once created. Goex or any other non sporting grade powder I wouldn’t have so much concern. This fellow likes to make powders faster than Swiss.
 
I woods carry my ROA with 40g of 3F T7. Then a .457 round ball, topped with T17 lube. That is 5g over the can’s max load listing. Recoil is shall we say “brisk”… 🥺
That load will hole a 5 gallon bucket of cold roof patch, the long way. Have tested it against a feral boar (killed with a 7mm magnum) that was too large to process. Rib cage, clean entry, 50 cent piece sized exit. Neck shot, internal decapitation. Head shot, ever shoot a watermelon with a 20g?
Note, the cylinder on my gun is deeper than stock. Previous owner was a competitive shooter. 1st year (1972) blued and brass (SBH grip frame) with smooth scales. I would not use that hefty in a stainless or standard grip frame version.
4” N frame and NAA for scale.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0479.jpeg
    IMG_0479.jpeg
    1.3 MB
Just my opinion but 4F should give the most power one can squeeze out of a pistol. I even used Swiss 4F in my .32 SMR and even thinking of trying it out in my .36. Tiny rifles do well with small charges as squirrel size targets don't need power, but do need accuracy.
 
Just my opinion but 4F should give the most power one can squeeze out of a pistol. I even used Swiss 4F in my .32 SMR and even thinking of trying it out in my .36. Tiny rifles do well with small charges as squirrel size targets don't need power, but do need accuracy.
4F is phenomenal in revolvers. Was not worth a hoot in a caplock “horse pistol” I had over 30 years ago. Back then could get Goex easily or made my own.
Only “holy black” I would/will buy now is Swiss. Nothing else compares, it is hotter than Triple 7.
 
Back
Top