3F in .58 rifle?

[huntsman247]

I am sure I have seen it here before, but I just thought I would ask. Anyone useing 3F in their 58 rifles, RB, if so what kind of hunting loads are you useing and what kind of accuracy, say at 75 yards? Just curious, Thanks in advance.

 

[Swampman]

I'm working on a .58 and that's what I'll be using in it. I'll probably start at 70 grains. I don't shoot heavy charges, so I doubt I'll use more than 80 grains.

I use FFF in everything.

 

[Hamourkiller]

My .58 Chambers M.S. Virginia Flintlock likes 3F, my percusion TC Renegade and Hawkens with Green Mountain .58 drop in barrels like 2F. Go figure.

I have tried 80grs to 120grs +. Lubed wonder wads over powder and pillow ticking lubed with Hoppes BP Solvent patch lube. Hornady Balls.

My Chronograph tells me that past 120grs either 2F or 3F, I must use increasingly large powder increases to get an additional 100fps from my guns. My 32" GM barrels @ 120grs are running 1700FPS or so. My 42" Flintlock Barrel @ 120grs is running 1800 FPS or so. Both barrels with 100grs of powder are in the 1550 to 1650 FPS range.

In close woods hunting the 100 gr load (2F or 3F) will work well. For areas of forrest that have longer shots available I like the 120 gr loads.

A longtime, highly esteemed, member here "Paulvallandigham" has a formula for figuring the most efficient load for a given caliber bbl length combo.

Dia/2 = Radius
Radius x Radius = R Squared
R Squared x 3.1416 (Pie) = Area
Area x 11.5 = Caliber Coeficiant (CC)
CC x Barrel length = efficient load.

.58/2 = 0.29
0.29 x 0.29 = 0.0841
0.0841 x 3.1416 = 0.2642
0.2642 x 11.5 = 3.0383 (CC)

3.0383 x 32" = 97.3 grs
3.0383 x 42" = 127.6grs

In my .58 percusion TC GM barrels using 2F KIK powder, 100grs to 115 grs was where the velocity increases for powder increases started falling off. After 115grs almost no increase in speed for more powder, but the gun liked 120grs! So I stuck with 120grs for my long range load.

In my .58 Flintlock barrel, 120 grs 3F of KIK powder was still gaining velocity but recoil was bothersome and 1800 fps had been achieved which was my target. 100grs 3F is running 1600fps or so and the gun likes both loads. So I have my close and long range loads.

Pauls formula seems to have held for both barrel lengths.

My calculated Caliber Coeficients are as follows:

.54 = 2.63
.58 = 3.038
.62 = 3.472

Sorry about the long winded reply, hope the info helps.

 

[MikeChapin]

I use 3F in my .58 all the time. For 25 and 50 yard target work I use 50 grains. For 100 yard and hunting I use 90 grains. The hunting load will keep all shots inside 3" at 100 yards off a rest. That's about as good as I can discern with open iron sights. At that distance the 3" bull is covered by the sight and I am looking at a small blip in the middle of the front sight.

I haven't taken any game with this particular rifle but I used 80 grains in a .58 I had years ago and it would drop an elk in its tracks at 70 yards or so.

 

[roundball]

I use Goex 3F in everything I can, including shot loads in the .62cal smoothbore as it patterns better than 2F. But I still have several cans of Goex 2F left over from an early case purchase, so rather than rezero the .58 & .62cal RB hunting loads to 3F, I just settled on a midrange powder charge of 100grns 2F for close range deer hunting in thick woods...if I don't at least use some 2F for those loads then it would all just sit and go to waste...plus they're both extremely accurate and the extra fouling isn't an issue for a single shot while hunting so I'm not in search of a reason to switch them at the present time. I was hoping the 2F would work well for shot loads so I could use it up but that wasn't the case.

 

[Keppy]

I just recently got a 58 cal. Cabela's Hawken rifle. 1/48 twist, 29 inches barrel. I have found 70 grs goex fff worked well. I also tried 75 grs ff and also worked well. I will have to do more testing, but I also don't believe in heavy loads. I feel you can only burn X amount of powder in your barrel and midrange loads are normally more efficent. Thats a heavy ball your throwing out there,but you still have to put it in right spot.
I will do more testing and will post it. I have to get my chronagragh out Im very interested in fps on these heavy loads people talk about.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

My Chronograph tells me that past 120grs either 2F or 3F, I must use increasingly large powder increases to get an additional 100fps from my guns. My 32" GM barrels @ 120grs are running 1700FPS or so. My 42" Flintlock Barrel @ 120grs is running 1800 FPS or so. Both barrels with 100grs of powder are in the 1550 to 1650 FPS range.
/quote]
Wow, that 120 grain load is extraordinarily efficient. If we say 100 grains does 1600 fps and 120 does 1800 fps and a ball weighs 275 grains, the the energy gain is remarkable.
100 grains at 1600fps= 1564 ft.lb.
120 grains at 1800fps= 1979 ft.lb.
That is an energy gain of 415 ft.lb. or a 27% increase in energy from only a 20% increase in powder. Your .58s seem to like those heavier loads and are gaining in efficiency right to the last grain. It would be interesting to know what 150 grains would do but I'm sure recoil would be fearsome.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Those are good " Caliber coefficients", rounded off, or "up". I have mine figured out to 4 places beyond the decimal point. If someone needs a caliber coefficent for a different caliber, just send me a PT, and I can send you it back by mail. Then nice thing about having these "Caliber coefficients" is that you can determine the maximum efficient powder charge for any ROUND BALL load in ANY barrel length.

Charles Davenport, who came up with the forumla, was the Navy's master armorer, during both WWI, and WWII, when black powder was still used to fire all the large cannon shells. He was a life member of the NMLRA and would apparently walk the firing line at Friendship, asking men their caliber, and barrel length and then telling them their maximum efficient powder charge.

He always recommended that they reduce the charge by 10% in percussion guns to find the most accurate High-powered load for the gun. In flinters, you lose up to 10% of the velocity out the vent, so try the maximum charge for your barrel length, and go down from their if you don't see the best accuracy.

Of course, no matter what " rule of thumb" you follow, You are still better off working up loads using a Chronograph. With the cost of these becoming very reasonable, and the time and effort you save using them, there really is no excuse to do load workup any other way.

Remember that most rifles will shoot best with a load of powder about the same weight as the caliber of the ball, out to 50 yards. That is substantially less than the Maximum load for most barrel lengths.

 

[Hamourkiller]

Remember CoyoteJoe that the Flintlock is shooting 3F not 2F and has a 42" BBL. It definately uses large loads more eficiently than the 32" BBL.

The 3F seems to light off faster than the 2F in the Flintlock as a main charge.

In the Caplock TC 2F or 3F seems to shoot the same. For sure though it liked 120grs 2F vs 115grs 2F. I have yet to figure that one out.

Dealing with these larger bores I like 2F for the pushier recoil VS the sharp kick of the 3F. But in the end letting the gun tell you what it likes seems best to me.

 

[BPBill]

I have been shooting a 596 gr Minie over 60gr of FFF. The velocity from my Pattern 1858 rifle is 950FPS. The last deer I took was with that load at 50 yards. The bullet penetraited clear through and buried itself a foot into the riverbank in back of Bambi. He fell on the spot.

 

[Stormrider51]

Over the years, I've learned that powder granulation is one variable among many in shooting a BP firearm. The old rule of thumb is "under .50 cal use FFFg and .50 cal or greater use FFg". I can't prove that one either way although I have tried. FFFg burns faster than FFg and seems to leave behind less fouling. So why don't we all use FFFg for anything other than priming the pan of a flinter? Well in my case there's the .52 cal rifle that only gave me best accuracy when loaded with FFg powder. The same charge using FFFg was not as accurate. Changing charges up and down with FFFg didn't close the accuracy gap. The rifle liked FFg. I don't know why. I just went with what worked in that particular rifle. This is what is wonderful about muzzleloaders, they are the ultimate handloaders firearm.

Storm

 

[Swampman]

I use FFF for priming the pan of my flintlock too. I've been using FFF for everthing since I found out how well it worked in a Brown Bess many years ago.

A lot more shots per pound, and no fouling to speak of.

 

[huntsman247]

Thanks for all the feedback guys; quess I'll just have to go out and play, find what she likes.