4f as a main powder charge

[azmntman]

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.

Well....I still plan to try it in my 1849 .31. I can fill that lil guy plum full of 3f and can see the ball sticking in the bark of the pine tree holding my target? If 4f will give me a lil boost Im pretty sure the metal in the gun can handle the extra pressure. If I suddenly am no longer posting you can assume I was in Err....(or got caught buying a .36 revolver :shocked2: )

 

[nkbj]

The British military must have had some really poor quality powder.

 

[coloradoclyde]

A military cartridge doesn't create a very tight seal, allowing lots of blow by. This reduces pressures and velocities.....To overcome this they increased the powder charge and decreased the granule size....IMO.

 

[varsity07840]

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.

Well....I still plan to try it in my 1849 .31. I can fill that lil guy plum full of 3f and can see the ball sticking in the bark of the pine tree holding my target? If 4f will give me a lil boost Im pretty sure the metal in the gun can handle the extra pressure. If I suddenly am no longer posting you can assume I was in Err....(or got caught buying a .36 revolver :shocked2: )

I guess he wants to kill the tree. I wonder how much it costs to have a tree mounted.

 

[swathdiver]

There's no good reason to use the extra fine pedersoli granulations as a main load in any black powder firearm.

:bull:

It's no wonder we have college age children eating cookies and coloring with crayons when confronted with... life.

 

[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 powder granulations as a main load in any black powder firearm.

I also dug into my old books.
Sam Fadala in his 1982 Loading Manual does not recommend the use of 4f as a main powder charge.
The old Lyman Muzzle Loading manual of 1976 does show charges only for revolvers of 4f and 3fg. The 4fg performance was slightly hotter than 3f for some of the tests. Later editions of the Loading Manuals do not contain any 4f loading data.

 

[azmntman]

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.

Well....I still plan to try it in my 1849 .31. I can fill that lil guy plum full of 3f and can see the ball sticking in the bark of the pine tree holding my target? If 4f will give me a lil boost Im pretty sure the metal in the gun can handle the extra pressure. If I suddenly am no longer posting you can assume I was in Err....(or got caught buying a .36 revolver :shocked2: )

I guess he wants to kill the tree. I wonder how much it costs to have a tree mounted.

It's a gun, should penetrate bark. Trees can be mounted rather cheaply if field dressed properly.

 

[rodwha]

That's pretty much the way I see it. With Olde Eynsford, Swiss, and T7 I don't need 4F. With standard Goex as the only option my decision might be different.

 

[hanshi]

I agree that with the availability of OE and Swiss, there's no need to burn 4F. Having said that, I will say that for revolvers of .31 caliber specifically, and even some .36 models, that I would feel comfortable using 4F. But if I used 4F in any .36 I'd start low and go up slowly; some models of .36 caliber revolvers probably would be better off sticking with OE and Swiss. The .36 pistols to be careful with would be the ones with large powder capacities.

 

[FishDFly]

"With standard Goex as the only option my decision might be different. With Olde Eynsford, Swiss, and T7."

Why and what is the statical/emperical difference between these powders and I would like to see your documentation.

 

[coloradoclyde]

That's pretty much the way I see it. With Olde Eynsford, Swiss, and T7 I don't need 4F. With standard Goex as the only option my decision might be different.

T7 doesn't make a 4f as far as I know... and Swiss and Goex use different grading standards.
Comparing any of them to Goex is inaccurate.IMO

 

[rodwha]

Agreed. A .31 of any flavor would almost certainly need a 4F powder. I can't count the number of claims a ball bounces off of wood with these and powders similar to standard Goex.

I need an Uberti Colt Police and would certainly try the 3F powders I have. I don't want to need a bunch of different powders. From another's chronograph results with an energetic powder this produces .380 ACP ballistics with a heavy for length (100 grns) conical. A bit marginal but doable in my opinion when you look at what a solid penetrates.

 

[rodwha]

Olde E, Swiss, and T7 give similar velocities (by volume) to each other.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tAt92F6gHa8

As you can see even a 15% reduced charge outperforms by a large margin standard Goex.

The 30 grn charge I use with my conicals likely performs at standard .45 ACP levels, whereas my ROA with 35 grns is a warm .45 Colt by comparison. With standard Goex I couldn't even break .44 Spl levels. It would be marginal at best to use for hunting whereas the more energetic powders perform so much better.

 

[rodwha]

T7 does not make a 4F granulation. But then they don't seem to need to either as 3F performs quite well.

All of the powder manufacturers use parameters, and those overlap each other by a great margin. They aren't that different. And as Olde E is made by Goex they no doubt use the same screens and therefor is an exact comparison. You certainly couldn't compare Swiss in a different granulation to theirs and get closer. It's as accurate as it can be.

 

[nkbj]

A military cartridge doesn't create a very tight seal, allowing lots of blow by. This reduces pressures and velocities.....To overcome this they increased the powder charge and decreased the granule size....IMO.

Read the article.

 

[coloradoclyde]

What article?

 

[RAEDWALD]

Perhaps we should address some basics then the advisability?

Cateris paribus, pressure is a function of the grain size. 4f will produce a higher pressure and a more rapid rise to that pressure than larger grains.

The charge will be burned out by 6 inches up the barrel. This has been found by cutting barrels progressively shorter. The gas continues to push the ball up the barrel as the ball accelerates slower than the gas pressure rises so, as it travels up the barrel, it will continue to accelerate until the gas pressure is reduced sufficient to match the friction of the barrel. From that length on the ball has been accelerated to as fast as it is going to get. That maximum length depends upon the charge, ball calibre etc.

Some claim that fouling is reduced by using finer granulations but this is found to be a result of the reduced mass of powder for the same velocity using finer granulations rather than a direct result of finer granulations.

Historically powder has been made according to price/function so a musket powder is cheap but weak and dirty. Rifle powder is more expensive but stronger and cleaner and sporting powder the most expensive, cleanest and strongest. All for the same mass of powder. In modern times the generally available powders are rifle powders with the cheaper end dipping into musket quality. Only Swiss is really the only true sporting powder on the general market at present. The relevance of this is that '4f' is a variable item. 4f musket powder is less powerful than a 3f sporting powder. 4f sporting powder produces way more pressure than a 3f rifle powder. This means that one cannot simply use '4f' as a consistent term. The difference in pressure between a cheap poor rifle powder 4f and a good sporting powder 4f is considerable.

Also different manufacturers (and their batches) differ in the grain sizes they deem 4f. The calibre of the rifle also plays a role and extremes in firearms range from a .31 pocket pistol to an 8 inch plus artillery piece. The latter kept the pressures down by using huge pellets and slow burning partially charred charcoal in barrels of many yards in length whilst the former used 4f in barrels of 3 inches or so with a gap between the chamber and barrel.

So, to address the OP. The (unsatisfactory) answer is that you will probably get away with a musket or rifle powder 4f in a small pocket pistol but in a full calibre rifle the mass of the charge and the length of time the pressure has to be retained make it an unknown beyond the parameters of any reasonable manufacturers. Whilst they should allow some leeway above their predicted maximums it is unwise to explore that leeway. In the USA your gun has not been independently proofed to way above the normal load unlike in Europe so your gun has never proved itself ever to have exceeded the recommended load.

Thus the final answer is that you will probably get away with it but do you only probably want to retain your eyesight, fingers or life? Or the shorter answer is no. Don't do it.

Very fine powders in historical cartridges were (one trusts!) the result of testing by the makers and formulated to be safe in the guns they were made for. The British service fine rifle powders for which the Baker rifle was made were at a point of improvement and the recommended charge was reduced later in their service and were rifle powders not sporting powders and they were coarser than modern 4f.

Would I use the extreme of a modern Swiss 4f sporting powder in a rifle? This is a choice for the individual and I cannot recommend it. But I would in a 0,32 inch calibre for a conical bullet in order for the very rapid pressure rise to obturate the soft lead bullet into the rifling as these small bullets have little inertia compared to say a .0,58 inch Burton bullet. It would not be for greater muzzle velocity as one can simply put more 3f in. I am satisfied that the thick walls in modern steel of even a Spanish 0,32 are more than adequate for the task but would still remotely fire it with a strong charge 5 times and then crack test it before using it. Even so I do not offer any suggestion that others might try it.

Did I say don't do it? I rather think that I did.

In a pistol one might note that the Swiss 4f carries a logo of two crossed pistols the larger granulations use crossed rifles. Their 4f is only recommended for pistols with the larger ones for long arms.

 

[RAEDWALD]

Too late to alter the above by editing but I am reminded that typical USA 4f is finer in grain than Swiss 4f. Swiss 5f is, of course, finer than USA 4f.

 

[nkbj]

What article?

Sorry, the article in the March Rifleman about the Baker.

 

[nkbj]

Too late to alter the above by editing but I am reminded that typical USA 4f is finer in grain than Swiss 4f. Swiss 5f is, of course, finer than USA 4f.

And then I've got 5F from the US that's both coarser and finer than FFFg. :redface:
Any more if it goes boom and hits what I'm aiming at I'm a happy kinda guy.