4f as a main powder charge

[George]

I think I'm in Zonie's camp on this one...

Life is full of choices, some are easier than others.

Maybe you can provide Zonie with some of the evidence I asked for. We've been having this same conversation for seven years, I've been asking for evidence all that time, I'm still waiting.

Spence

 

[Ray-Vigo]

Is this the IraqVeteran8888 video? I thought that was a decent video. They tested the barrel remotely and played around with a double charge/double ball, barrel full of powder, smokeless loads, obstructions, etc. The test showed that smokeless loads and obstructions are probably the fastest way to serious injury and barrel obstruction, which makes sense.

But it also showed there was a safety margin built in that barrel they tested, provided you had a blackpowder charge situated in one place rather than a short-start or a short-start with smokeless load. I would not want to try it with a 150 year old muzzleloading shotgun barrel though.

And they do say not to try this at home, several times.

I actually like that sort of video.

 

[coloradoclyde]

I understand the point you're trying to make.....and it's a valid point.....But, I also hope I never find the evidence you're looking for....Especially first hand... :v

 

[meanmike8665]

So, CC I am a little surprised you missed the obvious answer. Most people read the manual and stay with in recommended loads. I have never seen a manufacture manual recommending 4f as a main charge in anything. As for custom builders, why would anyone recommend 4f when even powder manufacture don't.
Spence if you shoot alone do what ever floats your boat, but not where the safety of others is at stake. In my humble opinion, the pressure could very easily blow a drum or nipple out of your gun.
Michael

 

[George]

Spence if you shoot alone do what ever floats your boat, but not where the safety of others is at stake. In my humble opinion, the pressure could very easily blow a drum or nipple out of your gun. Michael

Michael, I am not advocating anyone use 4F in a long gun, have never done it, won't ever do it. I also don't load any of my guns to extremes, use only 2F and 3F, round ball, etc. My heaviest load in a smoothbore was 80 grains 3F Goex and 2 ounces birdshot, in a rifle, a plains rifle with a 1" Green Mountain barrel, it was 110 grains 3F Goex. My point is that others have done it, as tests to destruction in several cases, and couldn't break a barrel no matter what they loaded it with so long as it was loaded normally. I...personally, for my own education... take that to mean that I need have no fear of a normal heavy load. There are people in the hobby, though, and on this board, who get their hair on fire over what they consider heavy loads and pronounce predictions of doom. I think it's a serious disservice to the hobby, I think the evidence for their point of view is not there, and I think it's time for a better understanding of what is really going on.

One of the problems with these public forums is that people tend to read what they want to hear, not what you write. I posted info above about tests done by Sam Fadala which included one of an Italian replica Morse 50 caliber rifle loaded with 300 grains 4F and 3 maxis separated from the powder, it didn't blow up. In response, Zonie said, "Well Spence, why don't you stoke up one of your rifles with 400 grains of 4F under a patched roundball and let us know how well the gun took it when you touched it off?" I don't normally shoot destructive loads, so I declined, but the idea that anyone would interpret my posting a description of the test as an indication I recommended it as a load and then suggest I try it shows that we don't always have adult discussions on this or any other internet board.

Back under my bed.

Spence

 

[meanmike8665]

Which of Sam's books are you quoting? Just curious, I have several, btw not my favorite author, I have read most of his stuff. Just because someone is an English professor does not make them a black powder expert, just saying and no offense to English professor's.

Michael

 

[George]

Mine is The Complete Black Powder Handbook, 1979, chapter 22, page 136.

Spence

 

[meanmike8665]

Thanks, I will go read that chapter, again.

Michael

 

[Twisted_1in66]

I can tell you with 100% confidence that if you use smokeless powder in a Pietta 1860 Army black powder revolver, it will blow up.

I can atest to this fact because my younger brother decided to load his with smokeless powder when he ran out of black powder. We're not talking many grains here but geometrically higher pressure spikes. It absolutely shredded the barrel and also split the cylinder.

So, whatever crazy things everyone decides to do, for heaven's sake don't ever put smokeless powder in a black powder firearm. No question...the results ain't pretty. :youcrazy:

Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:
Dan

 

[varsity07840]

Spence said:

My point is that others have done it, as tests to destruction in several cases, and couldn't break a barrel no matter what they loaded it with so long as it was loaded normally.

Excuse me, but what's normal about "no matter what they loaded it with"?

 

[swathdiver]

I have never seen a manufacture manual recommending 4f as a main charge in anything.

The earlier Ruger Old Army manuals listed it.

We shoot 4f in some cap and ball sixguns as it closely replicates Hazard's Pistol Powder of the 1860s. The powder charge is 1/10th of bullet weight.

In a Remington New Model Pocket revolver, it's 9 grain charge of 3F usually sends the ball back at us if someone hit the metal frame. With 4F that trouble is resolved and the gun made mightier. When one uses 4F in a .31 caliber revolver, now they now why it was the most popular caliber during the percussion era.

As for rifles, I don't see the point except for maybe a .28, .32 or .36.

 

[coloradoclyde]

I posted info above about tests done by Sam Fadala which included one of an Italian replica Morse 50 caliber rifle loaded with 300 grains 4F and 3 maxis separated from the powder, it didn't blow up.

What was the point of the test?
Was he scientifically trying to establish measurable safety limits?
Was he trying to instill confidence in Italian guns?

Or, was it merely sensationalism to generate conversation about his book among shooters?.... :hmm:


I think it is worth mentioning that Fadala was a writer....He also titled one of his books calling himself the "Dean of Muzzleloaders".......I'm not sure what message he intended to send when he chose that moniker, but it makes him sound "full of it " to me....

 

[George]

Excuse me, but what's normal about "no matter what they loaded it with"?

No matter how many projectiles or how much powder, but loaded with the projectiles seated on the powder, as you normally load.

Spence

 

[George]

It doesn't matter what Fadala's reasons were. It doesn't matter that people think the two fellas who filled the barrel with powder were idiots. What does matter is that none of those barrels blew up.

I give up. I don't know what to say to anyone immune to evidence.

Sayonora.

 

[Billnpatti]

Ah well, so much for the various arguments that are unrelated to the original question.

4f as a main charge in a pistol is, in most cases, acceptable. It is also acceptable in reasonable amounts in small caliber rifles such as a .32 cal. but, I would never use it as a main charge in anything much larger than a .32 cal. rifle. Some would, but not me. It develops a pretty high breach pressure and could be sufficient to over pressure a larger caliber barrel. Having said that there were some cases in which it could be used as a main charge, if it were me, I'd reserve it for use in a flintlock pan and use 3f for my main charge in anything up to and including a .54 caliber. For shotguns and calibers larger than .54, I'd use 2f. But that is just me. I like to err on the safe side.

I know there are experiments where 4f was used to excess in a larger caliber barrel with no apparent ill effects. But, wisdom and common sense says not to do this. I wouldn't do it, I do not wish to risk my limbs, my life nor my gun just to see if 4f will work in my gun as a main charge. But, like I say, I prefer to err on the safe side.

 

[coloradoclyde]

Even if the gun doesn't "blow up" it could still be damaged, as was the case in the youtube video.

 

[Billnpatti]

Well, by golly, Clyde, my friend, I think we are on the same page with this subject. :thumbsup: :hatsoff:

 

[Col. Batguano]

Metal when it is stressed, can and does fatigue over time. While the first or 10th shot at over-pressures may not make the part fail, the 1000th at the same load MAY make it fail. At "normal" pressures, it may take in to the many millions of shots before the metal becomes so fatigued it is no longer safe. I don't know about you guys, but I don't think I can live long enough to ever reach even 100,000 shots out of a single muzzle loader. Even 10,000 would be pushing it for me.

 

[coloradoclyde]

Even if the gun doesn't "blow up" it could still be damaged, as was the case in the youtube video.

Just to clarify my comment....
Even 1 "Magnum" or overcharged shot could damage the stock, lock , hardware, or strip screws..
I've even seen barrel liners slip.....

 

[Grenadier1758]

While paper cartridges have been examined, old Lyman Black powder Loading Manuals listed loads with 4f, Swiss 4f shows a pistol, and Sam Fadala listed a 4f pistol load, pressure measurements show a high pressure spike in use. 3fg powder can be used with little loss of performance. There's no good reason to use the extra fine pedersoli granulations as a main load in any black powder firearm.

Let's take advantage of 50 years of measurements and usage to select loads that perform well and are safe to use.