3F in the Pan?

[Gene L]

I would like to blind test it to see if I can actually tell a difference. Could be I'm fooling myself but I don't think so.

Or it could be I've used some slow FFFg for priming.

 

[Billnpatti]

If there is no difference, it raises questions: why does 4F exist? And when in history was it invented and for what reason?

Why does 4f exist? :idunno: I have no real idea and can only offer wild guesses, what we call a WAG. Perhaps the fine stuff was what was left after the powder was sifted. The 1f, 2f, and 3f could be used in muskets, rifles and pistols. The fine stuff was, I guess, sold for use in the pan. That's my best guess and it's probably not worth a damn. Why do they continue offer it today? :idunno: Again, my best guess is just that, a guess, is that there is a demand for it. People want it so the manufacturers put it in a can and sell it to the folks who want it. If you can tell a difference, then they sell it and Null B so you can have the powder of your choice. Anybody got a better answer?

 

[M. De Land]

I believe you have the fine grain powder guess exactly right Bill! If it didn't produce revenue it would disappear.

 

[Gene L]

Can't buy the all BP is created equal belief. It stands to reason that if there's a difference in the detonation rate between 2F and 3F, then there must therefore be a difference between 3F and 4F. Few people recommend 2F for priming, although it will get the job done.

My theory is with finer powder grains, you get more of the surface of the BP to the spark. Just a theory, though.

 

[Trot]

When I used to hunt with a CVA, the fffg didn't sift out through the gaps as much as the 4f. I now use a gun with a properly fitted frizzen but still use the 3f, I think it is better in damp weather. I have had the same half can of 4f for years and just don't use it.

 

[Billnpatti]

Your theory is exactly right. The more surface area, the quicker it will burn. But that difference in burn rate is not perceptible, at least not to most people. As Pletch said, after doing his high speed photography evaluation of the relative burn rates of different powders, "The differences are measurable, but not with human eyes or ears.". In other words, if you use the right instruments, you can actually measure the different burn rates such that they are measurable but not perceptible to the human eye or touch. However, feeling that you can tell the difference is good enough reason to stick with 4f or Null B in your pan.

 

[Dphar]

The BURN rate is determined by the granule size. FFFF is twice the burn rate of FFF and so forth based on the SURFACE area of 20 gr of FFFF vs the surface area of FFF. This is when used a propellant.

GOOD BP made with the PROPER ingredients will not suck up excess water from the air. However, if there is any fouling near the priming it will wet the prime if the humidity is over about 30%.
I use FFFF because; 1. It propagates flame faster, builds heat faster and will thus is a little faster in ignition. 2. Its really easy to work through a vent if there is a loading error or other reason. 3. Priming from a full sized horn is a PITA in my opinion. Spout is too big unless priming a Brown Bess....
FF will light off in the pan if the lock makes decent sparks. But its definitely slower.
Dan

 

[Twisted_1in66]

I've used 3f in the pan except for a couple of times of 4f. I couldn't tell the difference in the 100th of a second difference that Pletch measured. Plus I was using it primarily for reenactments and a separate priming horn wasn't an option there.

I've never had a problem priming from the horn and the horn I use is a big F&I style horn. Guess I'm just used to using it. The rifle I use now has an L&R Queen Anne lock and will light as much or as little as I want to put in it. My previous rifle was a Traditions with the tiny pistol-like lock that really likes the pan to be just half-full or less. Priming from the horn worked fine for both. YMMV.

Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:'
Dan

 

[rick/pa]

I used to use 4f for priming but the more I read of historical topics the more I realized that there were no priming horns used. The small horns we see were what was called day horns, holding just enough powder for a days hunting around the farm. I've made several for hunting since one of my small ones holds about 800 grains or enough for more than 10 shots depending on the charge. Now I use 3f for both the charge and priming. Seems to work well and less fooling around with two horns.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I agree Rick and I don't know about you but for me it's also one less thing I can lose/drop in the woods. :shocked2:

LD

 

[Heelerau]

I just prime from the main horn, generally its FFFG or FFg, or even Fg in the Brown Bess. The main thing is follow through with your aiming when using a flintlock.

 

[hanshi]

A major reason I DO NOT prime from the main horn is I don't want that much powder near a rare but potential spark source. If I have to pour it in a measure; I might as well use another priming tool.

 

[Black Hand]

A major reason I DO NOT prime from the main horn is I don't want that much powder near a rare but potential spark source.

Rare is overstating the possibility by quite a lot in the same way that saying Mammoths living in Florida today are rare. In this case, the possibility of a spark being present in the pan is non-existent (unless your gun is on fire - then you have an entirely different problem)...

 

[tenngun]

:rotf:

 

[Einsiedler]

I dunno how many full pounds of DuPont FFFFG I've inherited over the last 50 years. I won't even count the Goex!

😂

 

[TJK]

Threef works fine for me. But sometimes it's just a psyche thing. If you feel the 4f is faster use it.

 

[Einsiedler]

Yeah I had to make a new priming horn today and start using up some of this FFFFG Ive collected over the years! 😁

Well that's a good excuse anyway.

 

[George]

If you are concerned about historical accuracy, 18th century priming horns are virtually non-existent.

And yet there is good evidence that priming powder and priming horns were used in the early 17th century by the English army and in the 16th century by the French army. If it's a fact that they were not used in the 18th century, but were used again in the 19th, then we have a gap in the story, and don't understand the proper sequence of events.

Spence

 

[MattC]

My Kentucky 50 will spark 3f just fine, but I had my 20g trade gun at the range last week and had a tough time. I got first spark about 1/2 the time. Fortunately another shooter had some 4f which solved the problem.

 

[Black Hand]

My Kentucky 50 will spark 3f just fine, but I had my 20g trade gun at the range last week and had a tough time. I got first spark about 1/2 the time. Fortunately another shooter had some 4f which solved the problem.

Dull flint or small touch-hole?