FF vs FFF

[dlpowell]

Back in the 70's all the ml books recommended FF in cals 50 and larger. Now everyone is shooting FFF in 50s and 54.

Is FFF better? :hmm:

Personally, I prefer a little less recoil in my 54 cal GPR.

 

[bwhoffman]

I like 2F in my 50, but 3F shoots well also and I only need to stock one powder for my guns by shooting 3F.
2F gives a lower pressure which equates to lower felt recoil, which I feel gives better shooting. After sevaral years and many 1000's of round shooting trap, I understand recoil and pressures.
2F is my choice!
Granted, it doesnt flow from the horn as well and I give my rifles a good rap on the stock to settle the 2f,but I like it.
tried 2F in my trapper pistol, did not get a complete burn in the short barrel.
So I run 2F in my 50's and 3F im my pistol and my son shoots the 3F in his 50, but he doesn't have a say in the matter!

Shoot 2F in that 54!

Brett

 

[bpollock_sr]

3f may burn a bit cleaner,and give a bit more velocity,you can also reduce your load by about 15% therby getting more shots per pound of powder. BUT. Some rifles will shoot better with 2f, you will just have to try some and see which works best for you.

 

[roundball]

FWIW, I don't view 3F vs. 2F strictly on the basis of caliber...I make the selection based upon projectile weight / pressure.

I use 3F for PRB in .45/.50/.54

I use 2F for PRB in .58/.62

Occasionally I deer hunt with a .45cal/255grn Maxihunter and use 2F when I do.

 

[jtmattison]

Pretty much all I shoot is 3f in my .54's. I have loads worked up for PRB as well as heavy conicals.
I keep a couple cans of 2f around just for conical shooting only because of the less-sharp recoil.
IMO 3f is the best way to go. I really like the way it performs.

HD

 

This topic comes up periodically with attendant diverse opinions. Most folks are shooting fffg in everything these days--even .62s. Personally I use ffg in .54 and bigger guns. Some guns will shoot better (more accuracy, less recoil) with ffg than with fffg, but you can't convince some people to try it. The noted barrel maker Don Getz has remarked more than once about this fact. In modern well-made barrels you should be able to safely use fffg in big bores, but it may not always be the best choice. I have not noticed any difference in fouling between the two, which is often the reason given for using fffg ("cleaner"). fffg has the advantage of being nearly as good in priming as ffffg, so you only have to carry one type powder. That alone swings alot of votes.

 

[Rebel]

The only reason you would have less fouling with 3f than 2f is because you use less of it. You reduce the charge with 3f therefore less fouling. If you use 80 gr of 3f and 80 gr of 2f you should have the same amount of fouling. YES, NO, or MAYBE on previous statement?

 

[Landngroove]

The only reason you would have less fouling with 3f than 2f is because you use less of it. You reduce the charge with 3f therefore less fouling. If you use 80 gr of 3f and 80 gr of 2f you should have the same amount of fouling. YES, NO, or MAYBE on previous statement?

From my experience, with FFFG having a finer granulation, it seems to burn more completely, than the courser FFG. I use both FFFG, and FFG, depending on which ML, and load I am using. However, say I am shooting a PRB, and 80 grains of FFFG out of a certain ML, I can usually work up a load using FFG + PRB, with good accuracy, in the same ML, with a greater charge of FFG.

 

[LRB]

I'm with Mike. I shoot 90 gr. ffg in my .54, and recoil is not even noticed. I believe accuracy is better than with fffg. I tried it for a short time and could not get groups as good as with the ffg. I would have to think that the ffg, being slightly slower in burn rate is giving a longer and less violent push to the ball, much the same as smokeless in a modern rifle. You don't load a .270 with pistol powder, it burns up too fast and raises breech pressures. I also tried fffg as a priming powder. It works good, but I found it to be a tad less sure than ffffg. My opinion, my experience, others may vary.

 

[Rebel]

Not sure i was understood before. IF you use the same amount of 3f as 2f in your charge would not the amount of fouling be the same since 80 grs is 80 grs whether 2f or 3f? Does this make sense?

 

[john12865]

Not sure i was understood before. IF you use the same amount of 3f as 2f in your charge would not the amount of fouling be the same since 80 grs is 80 grs whether 2f or 3f? Does this make sense?

I think 3f burns more completely then 2f. I get less fouling. I suspect faster burning powder leaves less residue to clean out.
Maybe with the extra kick 3f delivers the fouling is blown it out the barrel? I don't know. :youcrazy:
I get less fouling with 3 f.

 

[roundball]

I always get less fouling from Goex 3F than I do from Goex 2F...the difference is not tremendously significant but there is a difference...

 

[Slake]

I've used both and don't see a huge difference. I use FFF in my 45 Kentucky rifle and FF in my 50 cals which are much shorter. I did notice once while shooting in the cold rain that I had little pieces of smoke coming up out of the grass with FFF and had another shooter say I was shootin too fine of a powder and sendin burnin powder out the barrel. I use Goex and for a bit I had trouble gettin it so I bought whatever I could get

 

[jtmattison]

I've used both and don't see a huge difference. I use FFF in my 45 Kentucky rifle and FF in my 50 cals which are much shorter. I did notice once while shooting in the cold rain that I had little pieces of smoke coming up out of the grass with FFF and had another shooter say I was shootin too fine of a powder and sendin burnin powder out the barrel. I use Goex and for a bit I had trouble gettin it so I bought whatever I could get

I get "smoking grass" in really wet conditions also. I get neat little smoke trails in the air also on wet days. It looks like little smoke streamers.
I don't think it has to do with granulation.

HD

 

[Landngroove]

Not sure i was understood before. IF you use the same amount of 3f as 2f in your charge would not the amount of fouling be the same since 80 grs is 80 grs whether 2f or 3f? Does this make sense?

Yes, I understand where you are coming from. I guess in order to answere, I would have to take the same ML, and have a shooting session using say, 80 grains of FFFG, and then starting with a clean barrel, have another session shooting 80 grains of FFG, and compare. In my actual overall shooting results shooting different ML's it seems the FFFG burns cleaner. Maybe it is because I use reduced loads, as compared to FFG, or because the granulation is finer, resulting in a more complete burn, or maybe a combo of both.

 

[Slamfire]

I'm shootin' Wano FFg in my .50 and .56 smoothie. They work good enough for me. My .35 don't care much for the FFFg, though. I'll have to git is some Goex. :hmm:

 

[LRB]

I would suggest that you not worry about fouling, and use which ever is more accurate.

 

[jtmattison]

I would suggest that you not worry about fouling, and use which ever is more accurate.

:thumbsup:

HD

 

[riverrat43]

Interesting thread. Some of the posts brought other questions to mind about 2F vs 3F. I noticed that most were comparing Goex to Goex, but at least one poster was talking about using Wano I believe. That brought another question to mind. Is all 2F and 3F equal? If you are using say 3F Goex, and you want to switch to say, Swiss, would you still use 3F? I've heard that if you switch from Goex to Swiss, a 15 to 20% reduction in volume should be made. Why would that be if the two 3F powders were the same? What if you switch from 3F Goex to 2F Swiss? Would you still reduce the load?

 

[MikeChapin]

When I switched from GOEX to KIK I went from 3F to 2F. The 2F KIK was the same as the same load of GOEX 3F.

In my smaller calibers the KIK 2F did not work well but KIK 3F behaved the same as GOEX 3F.