18th Century Powder

[xbowman]

I came across this with some kit information that may be interesting some new muzzle loaders.
"Research into 18th century records indicates the standard 18th century powder charge for a rifle was 1/4 the BALL weight. For example, a 50-caliber ball weighs 188 grains and therefore the powder charge should be 47 grains. In general, the use of significantly more powder simply wastes powder, increases recoil, and increases internal pressures in the barrel. Using more powder will not significantly increase muzzle velocity, effective range, or impact energy".

Any comments on this for all would be appreciated.

 

[Swampman]

Not very far off my 50 grains of 3F for a .50 and 55 grains of 3F for a .54.

I think almost everyone I know, uses loads that are way too heavy.

 

The almost universal standard in the 18th century was to supply half the weight of powder as lead--this is repeated over and over again in old lists, accounts, etc. That is, for example, 2 lbs lead and one pound powder. This implies that the maximum powder loads were under half the ball weights (allowing a few grains per shot for priming). So, a 178 gr ball might be loaded with a maximum charge of say 85 gr (allowing for priming)--in order for a supply of powder and ball to "come out even". In practice I believe Mark is right in that smaller charges were typically used, thus conserving powder for recovered balls (when possible, such as from game). The old time hunters did not think "ballistics" as we modern are accustomed to; they typically took close game shots; and in warfare found that moderate charges were sufficient to stop men. I use a little heavier loads than Mark, e.g., 70 gr in my .50, because that is what is most accurate for my rifle. I use only 75 gr in my .54. I have reduced my .45 load to 50 gr recently. You will find alot of modern hunters using nearly twice those loads!!!

 

The powder of today burns slower than those of yester years. Today's powders are glazed, wheras those of the past were not, being porous, there was more surface area to burn. Since modern factory made black powder is non-porous, there is no adiabatic heating of air inside the powder grains and, hence, a second fire front is created. So, the powder of today lacks the umph of earlier powders.

CP

 

"Research into 18th century records indicates the standard 18th century powder charge for a rifle was 1/4 the BALL weight.

"Grains" is a measure of weight, not volume like we use it in muzzleloading today.

in my opinion, back then, they weighed the powder prior to making a measure to hold a given amount.

Once you weigh the powder, you made a measure that held that amount. Since grains, is a measure of weight even today, how do you think people came up with using it as a volume measure, unless it started by weighing the powder first?

 

[Swampman]

A grain is still a measure of weight 1/7000th of a pound.

Black powder is so inconsistent in weight, it's a waste of time to weigh it.

 

[Slake]

I've learned the hard way to scale back on the amount of powder I use

 

[Zonie]

"...Using more powder will not significantly increase muzzle velocity,..."
__________________________________________

Just for giggles, some Lyman data for a .50 cal roundball using Goex FFFg:
40 grains = 1391 fps energy = 761 ft/lb
50 grains = 1481 fps energy = 862 ft/lb
60 grains = 1571 fps energy = 970 ft/lb
70 grains = 1655 fps energy = 1077 ft/lb
80 grians = 1739 fps energy = 1189 ft/lb
90 grains = 1844 fps energy = 1337 ft/lb

Between the 40 and 90 grain loads the velocity increase is only 453 feet per second for a 33 % increase. The energy increase is 576 ft/lb for a 76 % increase.
IMO, if your killing paper, the author of the quote may be correct but if your killing meat, that 76 % increase is worth thinking about.

Another thing to think about is the amount of drop with the different loads.
If the gun is sighted in to zero drop at 50 yards, the balls trajectory will cause it to drop 5.6 inches at 90 yards when shot with the 40 grain load.
The same ball, sighted in to zero at 50 yards will drop 1.6 inches at 90 yards with the 90 grain load

:hmm: Maybe that extra kick does have some value?

 

[TANSTAAFL]

Glazed powders are nothing new, Zebulon Pike spoke of graphite coated powder on his trip to the upper Mississippi in 1805.

 

[Old Ironsights]

So does anyone make their own, or have a favorite "recepie"?

 

[TANSTAAFL]

Any talk dealing with homegrown blackpowder is verboten at TMF.

 

[Old Ironsights]

Ah. Missed that in the FAQ. :redface: Good thing I didn't post mine eh? :winking:

 

[rebel727]

Maybe that extra kick does have some value?

It does. It makes a lot of difference in a hunting situation, especially when you get past 100 yds.

 

[faw3]

Think this must be a East vs West, North vs South thing whats a avg range at shooting lets say a deer up North/East? here in Texas it can be 100 on out I wouldnt want to use a 50/60 load in a50 or 54 cal that far away on anything but paper. The best today or then was Curtis and Harveys #6 , even when tryed today close to 100 yrs old it shoots better still in MOST rifles,it had a slow burn, stayed moist ,Goex caught on to the slower but more powerfull powder by the wood you use to make it , now they have Express , they did a lot of looking back and kicking the idea around to come up with something close. Pope and all his shooting buds swore by it Im not one to ever say that the man that put 10 out of 10 thru the same hole at 200yds was wrong about nothing about shooting. Makeing your own BP? DONT. You wont save a cent and it can get you killed or worse de-handed ,blind, ect. FRED :hatsoff:

 

[Old Ironsights]

I seem to recall that at the "end" of the commercial BP period (when everybody was just starting to manufacture nitro-powders) there was somthing called "Brown" powder, which IIRC used not-fully-carbonized wood dust rather than charcoal. It was supposed to produce longer pressure curves and higher velocities.

 

[Old Ironsights]

Here is a document from 1894 that discusses Brown powder:

Division of Military Engineering of the International Congress of Engineers. "Explosives," by W.R.Quinan. Columbian Exposition (1894), XIX. ; [Includes: Explosive Mixtures for Industrial Purposes, Gunpowder for Military Purposes, Sodium Nitrate for Brown Powder, Smokeless Powders, Sporting Powders, High Explosives for Industrial Purposes, Guncotton, Picric Acid, Etc., Materials Used, Gelatin Dynamite, Ammunium Nitrate]

Amazing how what goes around comes around...