FFFg use with conicals

[Mad Professor]

Hi Everybody. I've seen a lot of discussion of the merits of using FFFg over FFg. The major benifits being less fouling and powder used per shot. I realize the general rule is to drop the charge by 15-20% when going to FFFg. Most of the threads have been limited to the use of patched roundballs.

Anyone use FFFg with conicals? I've not seen too much info on this and wonder if there are any issues with too much pressure using a heavy projectile. This is the general thought when going to a heavy bullet in centerfires; use (more of) slower burning powder.

Anyway if anyone has some experience with this I'd appreciate some insight (caliber, bullet/charge weight(s), accuracy, etc.....

I'm considering trying FFFg in my 50 cal to push a 385 gr buffalo bullet. The suggested load of FFg is ~ 90 gr so I'm thinking 70-75 gr FFFg. If this experiment works well may try it in my 54 cal (both rifles have GM fast twist barrels)

Thanks in advance

 

[Swampman]

I don't think you'll have any problems with that load. I've used more than that with no problem.

 

[papellet]

I use fffg exclusively in my muzzleloaders. I like the idea of carrying just one powder for the main charge and the pan prime. I shoot rb, buffalos (245 gr), and PA conicals. I have shot the bigger buffalos but like the lighter ones for some reason. The only thing I use ffg is in the ml new englader shotgun.

 

[jtmattison]

Check your rifle manufacturers recomendation on powder charges.
Lyman allows 90 grains of 3f with a 450 grain conical in their .54's.
I have tried 3f with 300 grain conicals so far and they shoot about the same as with 2f. I plan to test 380 grain, 430 grain, and 450 grain conicals with 3f this weekend.

Huntin

 

[faw3]

Weve run this before ..A guy was running adds for a booklet that used 4f, he was useing a CVA mountain rifle,this was RBs but last up date hed added cons too,why do it? clean speed range, hed spent years at it, I never tryed it, who wants to weigh out every shot? so ya you can use them with 3f. fred

 

[RiverRat]

I have used a 100gr charge of 3f under a 270gr Buffalo Ball-et with excellent results in my 50cal GPR.

 

[roundball]

FWIW, I don't use 3F vs. 2F based on caliber...I use it it based on projectile weight vs. recoli.
I use 3F with PRB is .45/.50/.54, but switch over to 2F in the .58/.62 mainly just to moderate the recoil with those heavier balls.

The only conical I occasionally use is the .45cal/255grn maxi-hunter, and I even switch to 2F in the .45 for that as well, because it's twice the weight of the .440 ball.

No unimpeachable science, just how I approach the subject

 

[faw3]

I do the same except till this year I hadnt used a rb in anything, a very short max or minie, then got this dang 48" barreled H+A uh and it will shoot the short REALs 45 but its a 1 hole at 50 with rbs,so I kind of started useing them in every rifle I liked the ? hardball? that had the sabot over a rb.( shooting from a wheelchair trying to just get up to get the powder to fall in right is a pain) I go up to 2f with my 58 +62. Fred :hatsoff:

 

[netoleon]

I worked up a hunting load for my .50 GPR with PA conicals ( 240 gr. ). I use 70 gr. FFFg behind them. I moved up from 60 gr. for no real reason. Either way, recoil is "enhanced" and projectile energy is more than adequate at 50 to 100 yd.s.

My unscientific test = damage to the 2 x 2 survey stakes I use for target posts. I hit the post at 50 with no big difference in penetration and exit damage between the 60 and 70 gr. FFFg loads. At 100 I got nuthin' but target. Now I'm curious ( Note to self: Project for Sunday - Get more data ).

I reckon 75 gr.,or more, of FFFg with the heavier ( by > 1/3 + ) Buffalos would be a good test load. Always pays to shoot it some before relying on it for anything important. Bon chance !

 

[strongarm]

I've used FFF with REAL bullets and found no big deal. The difference between FFF and FF is a 30% reduction in the charge. 70 grains is about right if you like shooting 90 with FF. YOur shoulder or your accurracy will tell you how close you are. If you can't hit the target where you want all the powder in the world isn't going to help. FFF was really made for calibers .50 and under but if you think it helps a .54 go and use it. By the way don't confuse pressure that you get with FFF to be the same as energy from FF. It is not the same. Sometimes it helps and sometime it doesn't! :hmm:

 

[Mad Professor]

I've used FFF with REAL bullets and found no big deal. The difference between FFF and FF is a 30% reduction in the charge. 70 grains is about right if you like shooting 90 with FF. YOur shoulder or your accurracy will tell you how close you are. If you can't hit the target where you want all the powder in the world isn't going to help. FFF was really made for calibers .50 and under but if you think it helps a .54 go and use it. By the way don't confuse pressure that you get with FFF to be the same as energy from FF. It is not the same. Sometimes it helps and sometime it doesn't! :hmm:

Point well taken concerning pressure vs energy. I've seen this with load tables for centerfires. In a .222 remington you can load IMR 3031 and get MUCH less pressure with no loss of velocity vs commonly used powders, accuracy does not sffer either.

It would be nice if similar info were availible for BP muzzleloaders (velocities AND pressures in a stepwise table), anyone know of a source for this data?. It would not be too hard to get velocity data if I had a chronograph but I've no way to judge pressures. I guess another problem here is there are so many variations specific to each BP gun (bore dia, barrel maker, etc....) and load (exact bullet dia., patch thickness for RB, wether a overpowder wad is used, etc...)

In ceterfires you can tell when you're reaching the limit on pressure with examination of the fired case/primer. How can you judge this with muzzleloading BP:
1) I've noticed as I increase charge you get to a point where the primer gets cleanly blown off the nipple, but this is well below published max loads with FFg.
2) Generated shoulder soreness?
Is there a better way without specialized equipment?

Too much of a slow burning powder is just wasteful of powder. You can tell this when shooting over freshly fallen snow; look for unburnt powder granules and drop down 5 gr at a time till they disappear. An old time shooter suggested this to me and claimed the most accurate load often occurs when the charge is just consumed before leaving the barrel, any one find this to be true?

In contrast too much of a fast powder can just be dangerous to more things than just your shoulder! Thus my caution and seeking everyone's wisdom , experience, and input.

Lastly another point well taken, (especially as I'm shootiong conicals and working up hunting loads here) it's nice to know what the "max" load is but an accurate reliable load is much more important. The conical will have plenty of wallop for anything I care to shoot at well below max. Even an accurate load is only as good as the shooter so practice offhand is needed when hunting as is learning proper shot placement and only taking a shot that can be placed in the vitals. I'm starting to get off topic here and don't want the thread to get bumped to the hunting forum.......

Thanks again!

 

[Mad Professor]

One more thing that I've noticed concerning pressure when working up loads I forgot to mention on last post.

When working up the load for my 54 (renegade w/fast twist GM barrel) using FFg and 425 gr Hornaday suggested max is 105 gr. At 100 gr (using thrown charge with TC brass measure) I noticed that not only was the cap completely blown off but the hammer "cocked on it's own" after some shots. E.g. after discharging shot pressure though nipple recocked hammer. Anyone notice this? Did not like this and settled back to 90 gr under wonder wad for an accurate hunting load. No more hammer blow backs with 90 gr.