can i use goex 4f in

[tippyguru]

Hello , i am new to the blk pwdr scene and powder is hard to get here in Tasmania .goex 4f is on the shelf here and there but no other grades ; so much contradiction locally and differing opinion otherwise on actually loading with it .I am assured it will be fine in an old army and my Traditions 50 cal - 10 to 12 gn and 30 to 65 gn respectively . can some thoughts / information or light be shed on wether to or not and or some loadings any suggestions welcomed , thanks . T

 

[paulvallandigham]

4Fg powder is for priming only. You are going to have to get some other powder- I think Wano is available in Australia, according to other comments- to put down that barrel for a load.

 

[Arrowstorm]

I wouldn't use the 4f. If worse comes to worse, use pyrodex.

I don't know why, but when I hear people talking about using 4f as the main charge, they always sound spooked....

I think it has something to do with it burning way quicker.

 

[Blizzard of '93]

I have experimented with using 4f in my Rem. '58 and Ruger Old Army but just as a 'booster' charge under the 3f - I use a .32 acp caseful under the 3f charge. I tryed this since I'm certain that both revolvers will easily handle the pressure (my ROA is stainless) and there is a slight but noticeable increase in recoil compared to using a straight 3f charge. I haven't screwed up the nerve to try working up full loads with 4f, so I urge caution, but doubt that 12 grs. of 4f would be dangerous in the ROA. You will have to use some sort of 'filler' such as cornmeal on top of the 4f to have the slug or ball seat at the right height in the cylinder.

 

[rice1817]

With all due respect to Paul, who has forgotten more about muzzleloading than I will ever know, I have read where light charges of 4f will work OK in a well made firearm. There was recently a thread on this forum, or maybe it was an article in Muzzleblasts, regarding that very issue. As I recall, there is a ton of fouling to deal with, but for short range paper punching, no harm is done provided that very light loads are used. 40 -50 grains in a 58 caliber rings a bell. I have plenty of 2f and 3f, so have not tried this.

 

[faw3]

Ive put this up before about the man that ran the ads for 4f shells with ball he used in his CVA Mountain rifle, he sold a booklet that I cant find now on how to do it, he had some great speed and range BUT you had to weigh it or blow you and your gun up. Im thinking the top wt was 45 grs NOT volume. If your new to this you really shouldnt try it. Ive been at it since 71 and the blast and penatration I was getting and less foulig was great but I like my head to much. If I find the guys name and address Ill PM you with it and you can write him but he was in his late 60s 10 yrs ago I belive. The only time I use it now is in the small Rem since it only holds 10 grs Vol I use a bit less 4 for more punch.(so far after 100 or more shots no problem) But You should stay away from it, if you dont stay way down below that wt and shoot BALLS only ( I think after yrs of people wanting him to come up with a way to use some other bullet maybe why he wont answer the phone or mail anymore Fred :hatsoff: /////he holds a handfull of patents on this ,,so it must of worked well enough :hmm: but I dont know how that works.

 

[BEP]

As far as the ROA pistol goes, the Lyman Black Powder Handbook that I know and love does list some 4f loadings for this gun. With a .457 RB, Lyman lube and Remington caps, they tested charges of 31 and 41 grains. Muzzle velocity and muzzle energy for the 31 grain load was 964fps and 381 ft./lbs. For the 41 grain load it was 1036fps and 440 ft./lbs. So your 10 to 12 grain loads should be fine. As stated before, weigh the charges - don't go by volume.

Can't help you with the rifle, but I personally would hesitate to use it without some concrete data. Good luck.

Best,
sneezy

 

[rice1817]

Here is the thread I mentioned in my earlier post.
[url] http://www.muzzleloadingforum...98884/post/323450/hl/"4f+powder"/#323450[/url]

 

[faw3]

Since Im on AL I cant go back more than 30 days but another post told about this guy too. Thanks for the one you dug up. Fred :hatsoff:

 

[roundball]

I personally ran tests using up a full pound of 4F in TC Hawken Flintlocks, 30/40/50grns at a time in .45/.50/.54/.58 calibers with PRBs.

Accuracy was outstanding, fouling was almost non-existent, only began to notice any recoil at 50grns, and that was mainly in the smaller calibers, but never-the-less I settled on 40grns as a good all-around 4F powder charge for playing at the range.

Note 1:
Have to control the amount of compressed air from seating a patched ball or most of the very fine 4F will blow right out of the vent hole;

Note 2:
I only ran the tests because I had a can of Elephant 4F that I had no use for, and to see if there was anything to the generalized alarms about using 4F as a main charge.

Note 3:
Like most things they get repeated a lot, the blanket statement 'not to use 4F as a main charge' is just that...a generalization...when 4F is used judiciously with regard to it's faster burn rate & pressure curve it can be used as a main charge like any other granulation of BP.

Note 4:
I would not recommend it for hunting as I'm sure some of the 4F would either trickle out of the vent and/or be affected by humidity, as it does in the pan.

But for cautious use at the range, go for it...worked fine for me as noted above with PRBs in TC barrels.

 

[paulvallandigham]

WADR. While Roundball is technically correct, the effect of using 4Fg powder as a main charge in a particular gun depends on its age, condition, construction, and the projectile used. Smaller bores generate pressure quickly, more quickly than the larger bores. Using a fast burning black powder in the smaller caliber rifles will generate huge spikes in pressure. New guns, built with new steels, are likely to be able to withstand dangerous pressures. However, an old original rifle made of questionable grades of hammer forged iron, may come apart.

That is the sole reason that everyone says " Don't use 4Fg powder in the main charge ". Roundball talks about using up to 50 grains of 4Fg powder in his guns, but that is not the load he uses in his .32 caliber rifles! In percussion guns, for instance, in addition the quality of the steel in the barrel, the quality of the threads for the breechplug and the nipple can make a difference.

My brother has a .40 cal. rifle he bought years ago, that blew a nipple out of the gun with a very modest charge of 3Fg powder. It turned out the thread on the nipple did not match the thread in the breech- one was English, and the other metric-
which accounted for that lost nipple, and flash cup that disappeared. Only the skirt of the hammer kept it from coming back into his face. I was standing behind him when the gun blew, and I could not see where the parts went.

So, please pardon us old guys when we give you blanket advice against using 4Fg powder in your barrel. We don't know the gun you are shooting, or its condition. We don't know the condition of the threads. We don't know how you are measuring your powder, or even if you are using a scale that measures Grains or Grams! We don't know the diameter of your bore, or the diameter of the ball you intend to shoot. We don't know how you are going to load the gun, and what little surprises you do that you never mention to us. What we DO KNOW is that we don't want you to get hurt, or hurt anyone around you. We don't want you to blow up a gun, or blow parts of it out of the gun, because you misunderstood what we tell you.

Most cans of 4Fg powder will contain an admonition or warning that the powder should be used for priming your flintlock's flashpan, only. That is the company's way of creating a defense to lawsuits by people who ignore the warning. Our interest is not in saving the company from a lawsuit, but in saving you from injuring yourself, others, and destroying a fine gun.

Have fun. But use FFFg, or FFg powder in your barrel.

Paul

 

[Runner]

Air space becomes more important, so patent breeches should not be used with 4F at all. If it takes 25 grains to fill the breech and then 20 more to fill the area under the ball, then that is your bottom load for that gun. I know guys get away with less volume than that with slower powders, but it is a critical issue with faster powders. Roundball, we seldom disagree about the shooting subjects, but this time you are almost dead wrong. A 20 grain load of 4f in the breech and an airspace under the ball is a very good way to ruin a gun. The pressure will vary greatly from shot to shot making it hard to achieve any decent results anyway. Customs can have coned breeches that not only allow less to be used, but also allow the ball to sit on that smaller amount of powder. When the guys at the gathering are talking about what is and isn't safe to do, a lot of those things do not apply to the patent breech as used in most of today's factory guns.

 

[Blizzard of '93]

And for sure don't be passing around 'joy juice' when you are loading this 4f in a muzzler :haha:

 

[roundball]

Air space becomes more important, so patent breeches should not be used with 4F at all. If it takes 25 grains to fill the breech and then 20 more to fill the area under the ball, then that is your bottom load for that gun. I know guys get away with less volume than that with slower powders, but it is a critical issue with faster powders. Roundball, we seldom disagree about the shooting subjects, but this time you are almost dead wrong. A 20 grain load of 4f in the breech and an airspace under the ball is a very good way to ruin a gun. The pressure will vary greatly from shot to shot making it hard to achieve any decent results anyway. Customs can have coned breeches that not only allow less to be used, but also allow the ball to sit on that smaller amount of powder. When the guys at the gathering are talking about what is and isn't safe to do, a lot of those things do not apply to the patent breech as used in most of today's factory guns.

First of all, it's really not in good taste to tell someone they're "dead wrong" about anything.

It's made particularly worse when that statement is incorrect and without merit.

I suggest you reread my post, turn up the comprehension level, and rethink your position.

No apology necessary...just learn from it.

PS:
In addition, it's common practice to work 15-20 grains of 4F under a dry-ball and bloop it out...not enough pressure to do anything to any modern barrel even if there was an air space.

:thumbsup:

 

[Runner]

If dead wrong bothered you, I apologize. Was ment as polite discussion. 2 grains of 4f will push a ball downrange hard enough to bounce back to the line off a 20 yard wooden block. Been there, done that. 20 grains to remove a dry ball is crazy, in my opinion. On the other issues, we will continue to disagree. Your claim that I am wrong is supported by your experience. Mine is supported by several ringed or bulged barrels and my experience. In truth, the odds are that it would be ok most of the time. You do some nice stuff with TC guns. You may get away with it forever, but the odds are high that if it was a general practice that people would get hurt. If you think I am wrong, ask some of the builders here about using 4f in a patent breech gun. I would enjoy the discussion. I am not offended if someone adds info that proves me wrong, or that sheds light on questions.

Take a deep breath and relax dude!

 

[Darkhorse]

I would like more details on your test please. Sure 4FG will work as will 1FG if all your testing is to see if the gun goes off.
But the issue with 4FG is not getting a gun to go off, the issue is safety.
Exactly how did you perform your pressure test?
I've been reading about this test for a year or so now and I already know the answer. You didn't test for pressure.
Except maybe the gun didn't blow up at whatever charge you stopped at. That's not a very scientific test.
Maybe a better test would have been to keep adding powder until one of those TC's blew up in your face. At least then you would have established a baseline for your experiment.
You could always add a disclaimer for later legal charges to the effect: "Warning! Test data only applies to Thompson Center Hawkens. Data not proven for CVA, Lyman or leaded steel barrels."

Personally I think it is irresponsible to keep posting this 4FG main charge test on the World Wide Web. Someone might read it and think they can substitute 4FG for 2FG because Roundball said he did it.
Now a question; Say a newbie reads this test and proceeds to blow his face off. Who then is responsible for the familys lawsuit? The tester and poster, or the Forum who allowed this unscientific test to be repeatedly referred to?

 

[roundball]

I would like more details on your test please. Sure 4FG will work as will 1FG if all your testing is to see if the gun goes off.
But the issue with 4FG is not getting a gun to go off, the issue is safety.
Exactly how did you perform your pressure test?
I've been reading about this test for a year or so now and I already know the answer. You didn't test for pressure.
Except maybe the gun didn't blow up at whatever charge you stopped at. That's not a very scientific test.
Maybe a better test would have been to keep adding powder until one of those TC's blew up in your face. At least then you would have established a baseline for your experiment.
You could always add a disclaimer for later legal charges to the effect: "Warning! Test data only applies to Thompson Center Hawkens. Data not proven for CVA, Lyman or leaded steel barrels."

Personally I think it is irresponsible to keep posting this 4FG main charge test on the World Wide Web. Someone might read it and think they can substitute 4FG for 2FG because Roundball said he did it.
Now a question; Say a newbie reads this test and proceeds to blow his face off. Who then is responsible for the familys lawsuit? The tester and poster, or the Forum who allowed this unscientific test to be repeatedly referred to?

None of the above...my post is very clear about what I did, and in what firearms, nothing more.

If someone "decides they can use 4F in place of 2F" has no bearing on anything I (or this forum) said or did, that's strictly a case of their own reading / comprehension skills.

I think your reaction is way over the top...it's sort of like worrying: "what if they used Dupont 700X instead of 2F"...it's also a powder and it happens to be black in color.

Tired of seeing it...simple solution, don't open my posts...seriously...don't open any more of my posts.

:v

 

[Darkhorse]

Answer the question.
The pressure problem has merit.
Give some proof you know what your talking about.

 

[Joel/Calgary]

Every time this comes up, the discussion gets heated, in part because there are respected blanket recommendations/admonitions accepted as absolute truth, when they are actually simplifications, possibly oversimplifications, of the chemical thermodynamics involved. IIRC, the relevant difference between powders of different granulations is that each "F" increases the specific surface area by a factor of (approximately) 2, e.g a charge of FFFg has twice the surface area of the same charge of FFg. You are unlikely to blow up your .75 just by using 3F instead of 2F or 1F, but the maximum safe load of each will be progressively lower as grain-size decreases, and dynamics suggest that an accurate (or good patterning) load of a faster powder will LIKELY use a smaller charge than a slower one. Individual combinations of barrels, components, and techniques being as ideosyncratic as they are, YMMV, and the resulting load may or may not be suitable for your purposes, but that does not make a judiciously developed load with fast powder (for the bore size) necessarily unsafe.

The same applies to using 4F in a charge, even with nominally-4F powder that is process tailings rather than a specific size range. The burning characteristics are not different in kind, only in degree, and a similarly proportional reduction in charge is all that needs be observed. As with many things in shooting, the relevant dangers lie not in the different powder granulations _per se_, but in ignorance of the actual differences.

I wish the Mad Monk would chime in here with some specifics.

Joel

 

[CrackStock]

Joel,

I think that you are right about some people simply accepting the old platitudes regarding powder levels while others will others test rules and limits. But then, this is the nature of dealing with people. Some accept and others test.

I have used 4f to get dry balls out and this has worked well. I can also see where using light 4f loads in a small bore might give good results, but I would want more information before making a pracice of it. I also would likely prefer to control the air space if using a patent breech.

I sure hope that we can stay civil with this discussion since we are conveying data and opinions rather than emotion.

I hope that we are all friends here.

CS