3F / 4F

[timothy.manngmail.com]

Why does it matter whether I use 3F or 4F powder in the pan and or barrel. What happens if I just use one or the other.

 

[Dane]

FFFg in the barrel and pan, no problem.

FFFFg in the barrel and pan, big problem. Pressures are much too hight for a ML barrel. Plus powder is so fine, it would be hard to get consistent loads.

Do yourself, and those around you a favor, use FFFg.

 

[Celt5494]

Good advice...........

 

[roundball]

Why does it matter whether I use 3F or 4F powder in the pan and or barrel. What happens if I just use one or the other.

4F is made as priming powder...its finer granulation is faster than 3F for that purpose.
As already mentioned, the pressure could spike too high/too fast if a large charge of 4F was used as a main powder charge...and in the case of Flintlocks, the air pressures from seating a PRB blows the fine 4F right out of the vent.

3F is an excellent main powder charge choice as it has good fast ignition and normally less fouling than the slightly slower/dirtier larger granulation 2F.

 

[timothy.manngmail.com]

Does the pressure concern hold true whether you are firing a round ball or firing without?

 

[roundball]

Does the pressure concern hold true whether you are firing a round ball or firing without?

If you mean simply firing a charge of powder like in re-enacting, or in a demonstration of some sort without a projectile of any kind, then it wouldn't build up any pressure since there's no weight to overcome.

 

[lakota]

I've been shooting flint for about a year now. I use 3F for my main charge.I have tried both in the pan and I honestly can tell the difference. When my can of 4F is used up I am going to prime and shoot with 3F. One less thing to buy!

 

[roundball]

I've been shooting flint for about a year now. I use 3F for my main charge.
I have tried both in the pan and I honestly can tell the difference.
When my can of 4F is used up I am going to prime and shoot with 3F. One less thing to buy!

I don't follow the logic of these statements.
Maybe you meant to say you CAN'T tell the difference?


I've experimented with both as priming powder at the range and WAS able to tell a slight difference. That...and the fact that 4F is indeed actually faster by virtue of it's size granulation...is why I always prime with 4F.
Personally, I'd want every few extra milliseconds of ignition speed possible whether or not my human ears could tell it but that's just me.
When I buy powder, I simply specify the number of cans of 2F, 3F, and 4F in the shipment...not burdensome at all.

However, having said that, everybody should use whatever they want / like to use regardless of any rationale...its only a hobby.

 

[lakota]

That was a typo on my part. I forgot the "t" in cant. I am sure that 4F is faster but I really cant see a difference in ignition speed priming with 3F

 

[paulvallandigham]

Can't, as you are using the word here, is a CONTRACTION OF two words, namely: Can Not. You also forgot the apostrophe.

I am not trying to bust your chops, here. :surrender:

CANT, as you typed, IS a word, but it means to TILT something from its normal position, such as "canting your barrel".

When you don't write a lot( and most of us don't these days), its easy to misspell, or mistype "Homonyms"- words that sound alike.

"Can't", and "Cant", are pronounced exactly the same. They sound alike.

The words "to", "two", and "too" are often used incorrectly here. They all sound the same.

The words "you", and "Ewe" also are pronounced the same and sound the same.


Then there are the "There's: "There", and "their". They sound the same, too.

These are just some of the common examples of Homonyms that we all stumble over every day.

When I read your post, I had to read it twice to figure out that you meant to say "Can't", instead of "can", because the sentence otherwise made no sense.

Don't sweat the typing, or the misspellings. You will either learn to do better- or not-- as you type more, depending on how interested you may be in doing better. :v :bow: :grin:

If you type something that doesn't make a lot of sense, someone here will ask you what you meant to type! :shocked2: :hmm: :idunno: :blah: :wink:

 

[lakota]

Is there any way to go back in and edit the spelling my post? I can't figure it out if there is!

Not only am I a horrible speller I am also damn near computer illiterate!

 

[caddo]

:surrender:

 

[ebiggs1]

I have done quite a lot of testing on how flintlocks work. I don't understand why people say I can't tell the difference between 4f and 3f so why use it? OK, I admit this difference is small but there is a accumulative factor and ALL the little methods used to load (and shoot) a flintlock can make a noticeable difference in ignition speed. So if you picked out just one to use or not to use, you may see no difference. But now when two or more get used together, there can be a difference.
Add the fact of several “myths” that abound in the flintlock world and it is easy to understand.
BTW, like Roundball, I always use 4f.

 

[Many Klatch]

I don't like fiddling around with different granulations and multiple horns. I carry one horn with my shooting pouch. I prime with 3F in my smaller bore guns and 2f in my Bess. I can't really tell any difference.

Many Klatch

 

[Grandpa Ron]

I use 4F or its even finer cousin Null-B for priming. I do not know how much faster it is over 3F but it is very reliable.

When I squeeze off a shot, I want as few variables a possible, especially when I am target shooting.

Now all that said, many others do just fine with 3F.

In a recent smoothbore match I ran out of priming and had to use 2F in the pan. It worked but a gong does not care if you hit the center or the edge. :wink:

Try both powders for priming and see if it make a difference to you. A lot of shooting is mental anyway.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Addressed to no one in particular:

Far many years I've tried to eliminate variables and try to measure locks, powders, and vents. The differences between the various priming powders is small but measurable. The difficulty with determining this on the gun is that one cannot be sure if a shot that seemed slow was caused by prime, sparks, vent, compression, etc. No matter how hard we try to manage all these variables, we can never be sure of the cause of a single bad shot.

Timing ignition off the gun removes the bulk of these variables. Over the years I've accumulated average times for all of the granule sizes of Goex, the Swiss priming powders, and a few others. The chart that follows shows these powders on a number line:

The one named Null B/7f is a 50-50 mix recommended by a shooter friend. One sub powder that I timed would be a ways off the chart to the right at .143. It was slower than Goex Cannon grade.

Recommendation? -- I have no dog in this fight. I recommend that you use whatever you like. Every grain size will work. I have a slow motion video of a Siler igniting Goex cannon up-side-down. The chunks were like coal - you needed to move them around in the pan to get the frizzen to close. Was it slower than Null B? sure

Regards,
Pletch

 

[Tommy Bruce]

I have 4f that I will use when plinking (have to burn it up sometime)but when I go to the field I use 3f. It's just simpler to have one horn and using a .45 rife it works well in the bore too. The finer powder seems to be more succeptable to moisture or damp weather for some reason as well.

 

[Dphar]

Loose powder will may actually ignite faster due to be spread in the bore and allowing faster flame propagation. I WOULD NOT use FFFF for blanks.
4f has 2 known uses. Priming fintlocks and it was used in small cartridges in small amounts. A friend had pulled apart a UMC 38 S&W and found it loaded with a less than full capacity charge of a powder eyeball identical to FFFF.

But this was probably not more then 12 grains at the most maybe less. I did not get to weight it.
The only time I use FFFF in a bore is when tricking 5 grains or so through a vent to get a ball out. This is the often ignored advantage of FFFF or Swiss Null B is that it will pass through a 1/16 or smaller vent easily.
This one reason I use FFFF or now Null B to prime.
BTW ground up FFF does not work as well as fine granulated powder does.
Dan

 

[matt denison]

When I startedd this hobby/obsession 20 odd years ago the greybeards in the club said "use 4F in the pan" so I did. Now I am a greybeard and I have learned a lot of things on my own. One thing that I've learnedd is that 4F is not necessary in the pan. I use whatever is in the horn for the gun I am shooting - 2F for my trade gun, 3F for my Henry trade rifle. They both just go bang when the trigger breaks. Any difference in ignition speed is undetectable. Pletch has scientifically demonstrated that the time difference between 4F and 2F is .0229 seconds. That is 2/100ths. Take ONE SECOND and divide into 100 pieces, now detect two of them with human facilities under practical conditions, no camera, lights or computer. Only the Princess and the Pea can tell the difference. Just MHO.

IF however your lock is throwing iffy spark and you need every possible advantage then 4F might help. I carry some with me on trailwalks for the same reason Dan mentioned, to trickle into the vent if needed for a dryball or a stubburn cap or flintlock that refuses to go off.

 

[ebiggs1]

Take ONE SECOND and divide into 100 pieces, now detect two of them with human facilities under practical conditions,

Pletch said,
The difficulty with determining this on the gun is that one cannot be sure if a shot that seemed slow was caused by prime, sparks, vent, compression, etc. No matter how hard we try to manage all these variables, we can never be sure of the cause of a single bad shot.

This is why you want every advantage you can do. When several things fall on the slow side of possible, it does become detectable to “human facilities”. Why do you think serious target shooters do all the stuff they do. They want every advantage.
And to say carrying that little priming flask is a burden? Really? Just my rationale cause I know all of it works.