2F Instead Of 3F

[FishDFly]

In talking with several people lately I have been surprised how many are shooting 2F in 45 cal and smaller. It seems like the rule of thumb was 2F in 54 cal and over. Now I am seeing quite a few shooting 2F in 36 and 40s.

Thoughts?

RDE

 

[Soinkuhndog]

I was always told that .45 was on the line ff or fff.
Anything larger was usually = ff; smaller = fff.
So I shoot fff in my .45.
Having said that, Dixie Gun Works has a table for 'Standard Muzzleloading charges" for original guns.
There's a .54 U.S. Mississippi Rifle with .535 ball and 75 fffg charge (and a couple other larger cal. with fffg).

 

[arquebus]

I use Goex 2Fg in my .451 bullet gun & Swiss 3Fg in my .56 & .58 Rifle-Muskets. Plus, I use Goex 2Fg in my .54 RB rifle, & Goex 3Fg in my percussion .33 caliber pistol & .36 caliber C&B revolver.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Try them both in your gun, and see which seems to give the most consistent velocities. Use a chronograph. For some people, it comes down to which powder seems to leave the most " crud " in the barrel. Since I clean the bore after every shot, this factor is not important to me. Other people have other ideas about cleaning, so it becomes a concern to them. There are few things more frustrating to BP shooting than geting a ball stuck half way down the barrel!

 

[Many Klatch]

I use 2F in My .715 Bess, and 3F in my .54 Rifle and my .64 pistol. Still trying to see what my new 20 ga smoothbore likes, 3F may not be its friend. I prime with whatever powder I put down the bore.

Many Klatch

 

[Slake]

I use both. For awhile it seemed like the biggest reason was what I could get when I needed it. I've even mixed a bit of each for a few shots when a can was nearly gone. I got to say in my 50 cal's I don't see a huge difference. In my 45 {Kentucky rifle} I think I send some 3f down the barrel to burn away in the grass and 2f burns or explodes better. That sounds wacky but I swear my 45 seems to do better with 2f
Overall I don't see a huge difference in the holes in my targets

 

[roundball]

IMO, black powder is black powder...it's use is not formally dicated by caliber...burn rates and projectile weight affect pressure and recoil so it that regard I think the caliber segregation ideas got started...but if the simple industry rule of thumb is followed which is to reduce the 2F load data by 10-15% when substituting 3F there's no excess pressure, no excess recoil, etc.

I like to use Goex 3F for main charges in everything I possibly can regardless of caliber as it's faster, cleaner, and usually more accurate...I just reduce the charge amount.

I do use Goex 2F for .58cal & .62cal RB loads as that's what I originally sighted them in at, and I have a half dozen cans of 2F left so I'm not going to bother rezeroing them...don't shoot high volumes of those calibers anyway.

 

[Slake]

I should have said that...I also slightly decrease my charge with 3f....I started using 3f exclusively awhile back and then I got a handful of cans of 2 marked down cheap and I was amazed at the lack of difference...I should add having said all this, I use Goex almost exclusively. Once in awhile I might aquire a can of Swiss

 

[Joel/Calgary]

...but if the simple industry rule of thumb is followed which is to reduce the 2F load data by 10-15% when substituting 3F there's no excess pressure, no excess recoil, etc.

Does anyone know the source for this "reduce by 10-15%" rule of thumb, or has anyone seen any data verifying it? The reason I ask is that I've never seen anything, and the rule of thumb back when I first got interested in the late 60s was to go up from the 3F charge by 1/4-1/3 to get the same velocity from 2F. That is consistent with the data in the Lyman handbook: where they compare GOEX to GOEX, up from the 3F charge by 1/3 (=> down from the 2F charge by 1/4) gives about the same velocity, with the 3F charge having 10-35% higher pressure, and the percentage difference in pressure increasing as the charges go up. If this is the case, dropping back from the 2F charge by only 10-15% should result in a higher velocity than the original load and pressures differences possibly even higher than those above with heavy charges.

Unfortunately I don't have any other (or more recent) references available on that at the moment.

Roundball, this is not directed at you individually. Your's was just the most recent citation I've seen of the 10-15% rule of thumb.

Joel

 

[roundball]

...but if the simple industry rule of thumb is followed which is to reduce the 2F load data by 10-15% when substituting 3F there's no excess pressure, no excess recoil, etc.

Does anyone know the source for this "reduce by 10-15%" rule of thumb, or has anyone seen any data verifying it? The reason I ask is that I've never seen anything, and the rule of thumb back when I first got interested in the late 60s was to go up from the 3F charge by 1/4-1/3 to get the same velocity from 2F. That is consistent with the data in the Lyman handbook: where they compare GOEX to GOEX, up from the 3F charge by 1/3 (=> down from the 2F charge by 1/4) gives about the same velocity, with the 3F charge having 10-35% higher pressure, and the percentage difference in pressure increasing as the charges go up. If this is the case, dropping back from the 2F charge by only 10-15% should result in a higher velocity than the original load and pressures differences possibly even higher than those above with heavy charges.

Unfortunately I don't have any other (or more recent) references available on that at the moment.

Roundball, this is not directed at you individually. Your's was just the most recent citation I've seen of the 10-15% rule of thumb.

Joel

Not a problem at all...there are too many old wives tales running amuck in this grand sport as it is...unfortunately, "rules of thumb" are just that and rarely even scientifically documented somewhere.

But I too like verification of things like this so when I first heard it years ago I picked up the phone and called TC, asked them point blank...they didn't even hesitate and said yes, 10% (10%) reduction is the rule of thumb to keep pressures is the same ballpark. (didn't even say 10-15%, just 10%). So, assuming companies like TC, who always have an interest in liability, would be reliable in this regard and I've never thought twice about it...have employed it with perfect results ever since.

Today, years later I'm even better off than just having heard it as a "rule of thumb' because I now have my own years of experiences using it in various calibers, with various projectiles, etc.

Remember, it's purpose is in regards to safe pressures...not as direct translation to get the same precise velocity when substituing 3F for 2F load data...it's simply about pressure and the rule of thumb works as advertised...others on this Forum will probably chime in as well.

 

[Joel/Calgary]

Estimating pressure is always a problem where we lack a brass case to read pressure signs from. Very few of us have pressure barrels, and installing a piezoelectric transducer is complicated by (often) octagon barrels, possibly with minute bore runout, and the lack of a reference "cartridge" to calibrate it to.

Lacking a chronograph (I know - they're getting fairly affordable nowadays), even estimating muzzle velocity from downrange impact can be difficult because of differences in barrel dwell time and harmonics possibly changing the precise angle of launch. One needs to fire at multiple distances over fairly extended ranges and do some serious calculation, and many of us lack the circumstances and/or time and/or energy.

So many interests, so little time.....

Joel

 

[roundball]

Estimating pressure is always a problem where we lack a brass case to read pressure signs from. Very few of us have pressure barrels, and installing a piezoelectric transducer is complicated by (often) octagon barrels, possibly with minute bore runout, and the lack of a reference "cartridge" to calibrate it to.

And while that's true, that's all modern related stuff...compared to a 50,000 PSI .264 Win Mag round, pressures are so ridiculously low in black powder muzzleloading that none of that is even close to necessary...remember, in this sport we're basically measuring powder with a teaspoon...just kind of ladeling it in...not using a powder trickler to tweak one last kernel down onto the scale :grin:

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

Others have said it well: shoot what ever does the best job for you!

That being said, and because I don't own anything bigger than a "smokin .50", I choose to use only 3F goex...just to lazy to worry about it and the 3F works really good in the trade rifle and the revolvers too. :winking:

All the best, Dave

 

Alot of folks used to follow the old rule of ffg above .45 and fffg in .45 and below. Now most folks seemingly (from the amount of posts on the matter) use fffg for everything. This only gets dangerous if you use large charges of fffg in big bores--and is dangerous if you are shooting a marginally or unsafe gun--not all of the early imports were breeched very well. HOWEVER: numerous target shooters have found that ffg is more accurate than fffg in their particular rifles no matter what the caliber--and that is why you will see posts about using ffg in .45 or under rifles--as well as > .45 rifles. You should try both and see what works best. I personally have seen little difference in fowling between ffg and fffg, the usual reason given for using fffg [in addition, in flinters you can use fffg for both loading and priming with indistinguishable loss of ignition time cf ffffg]. I use ffg in my rifles/guns over .50.

 

[PreglerD]

I use in all my rifles 2FF and I have a .45 GPR, .50 Deerhunter and .54 Lyman/Investarm Hawken. Works pretty well in all three. I always use a spittled or lubed wad between PRB and charge. that helps to keep the fouling soft and even away. Groups are very good, especially with the GPR and the Deerhunter (see the post at perc.rifles).

 

[paulvallandigham]

The rule of thumb about reducing your loads 10% when using FFFg instead of FFg can be verified with a chronograph, although it only measures velocity and not pressure. FFFg burns faster, creating more pressure( trust the factory figures on this) and more velocity. But, several things can also increase velocity, even using the same powder. Using a better wad, like an over powder card wad will generally increase your velocity, and also make velocities more consistent. Using fillers over the powder and behind the PRB will also increase velocities. Both wads and fillers seal the bare better in both smoothies, and rifles than just using a PRB. Using a lubed cloth patch will give you slightly higher velocities than a dry patch. Again, this is because the fresh lube helps seal the bore from gas " blow- by ", or gas cutting, as its called in modern guns. You can also lube the barrel after seating the PRB on your charge and see an increase in velocity, as well as a reduction in your SDV. The one advantage I have found for lubing the barrel after seating the ball is that the ball tends to shoot to the same POI as does subsequent shots, where as the first shot down a dry barrel tends to hit at a different poi than the next rounds do.