LONG BARRELS AND BP

[montanadan]

Barrels over 40inches. Let`s say 50cal,1 in 66 twist. Would 2fg bp be better than 3fg? My thinking is(here comes the brain cramp)that with 2fg you would get a longer burn time, resulting in more efficient charge do to the longer barrel? Or does it really matter? Old inquiring mind wants to know your thoughts on this...Respectfully Montanadan.

 

[musketman]

The longer the better I says... (maybe I'm compensating for something) :haha:

I think the old way of thinking was (Claude told me, he was there) that powder of the long-rifle era was not as refined as today's powder, so the longer barrels were needed to extract every bit of energy from the loads...

As the powder refinement increased in quality, the need for longer barrels declined and this ushered in the shorter barrels... :imo:

 

[CrackStock]

This decision is often driven by bore size rather than barrel length. Some say that you should not shoot 3f in anything above a .50. I have heard that you might experience some chamber erosion if using a steady diet of higher charges in .54s. However, some shoot target loads of 3f in .54s without any problem.

If you have a smaller bore than .50, try both and shoot the one that gives the best accuracy. If both are equal, toss a coin.

I think that the only advantage of a long barrel (beyond the fact that I love their look as MusketMan mentions) is in the long sighting plane.

From what I have read, powder did not improve greatly in the years when the long rifles started to shorten.

The barrel lengths began to shorten as people began to roam longer distances over open land and used horses to do this. Long barrels are a nuisance on a horse. I also believe that as sights improved, people realized the long barrel did not really help as much as they had thought and that sufficient accuracy could be had with shorter barrels.

I believe that it was a reaction to the changes in human behavior and an acceptance of a new style. Sort of along the lines of wide lapels and ties vs thin ones.

YMHS,
CrackStock

 

[RussB]

Good post CrackStock! Your reasoning sounds just about right to me.

Russ

 

[Flintleather]

I think 2f in long barrels fouls more than 3f.I like 3f in anything 50cal and under no matter what the barrel length. :m2c:

 

[Rebel]

I use both 2f and 3f in my 39" .62 smoothbore. The 3f does seem to foul less. The 2f seems to work better with shot loads though.

 

[Darkhorse]

About the only use I can see for a longer barrel is to give you a longer sighting plane, or to get the rear sight farther away from aging eyes.
While a longer barrel will give you longer burn time I don't really think it is relevant with black powder. The black explodes more than it burns.
After the initial explosion the longer barrel just adds friction to your projectile and will in some cases actually slow things down.

 

[Rebel]

May be, but a 28" tradegun just wouldn't look right. Would be almost like having a 28" Hawken rifle. ::

 

[BLAHMAN]

From what I understand, 3f when used creates a higher breech pressure. I use 2f in everything from 45 on up. The finer granulation of 3f allows it to burn quicker, faster and I understand this differnce is what causes higher breech pressure. :m2c:

 

[roundball]

From what I understand, 3f when used creates a higher breech pressure. I use 2f in everything from 45 on up. The finer granulation of 3f allows it to burn quicker, faster and I understand this differnce is what causes higher breech pressure. :m2c:

3F does burn faster and has a sharper pressure curve than 2F, similar to different burn rates & pressure curves of various smokeless powders.

But, I would add that it's a known difference in the powder industry and manufacturers state 3F can routinely be substituted for 2F just by reducing the 2F load data by 10-15%.

For example, 110grns 2F is a safe, published .45cal round ball load in TC's owner's manual, making the 3F equivalent load a 93.5grn charge...I use 90grns Goex 3F for my .45cal deer hunting loads (a 19% reduction).

I also use the same charge in my .50 & .54cal hunting loads...and even greater % reduction from their 120grn 2F max loads.

All are safe, legitimate, by the book, fast, clean, and accurate 3F hunting loads in all those calibers.

:redthumb:

 

[musketman]

I use both 2f and 3f in my 39" .62 smoothbore. The 3f does seem to foul less. The 2f seems to work better with shot loads though.

That's because the shot load has more bearing surface on the barrel than a round ball has, the FFg is restricted more by the shot column (over-powder card, fiber wad, shot, over-shot card) than a single ball, so it gets more burn time...

Whereas the single ball has just the circumference of the ball and patch to restrict the charge, it's out of the barrel before all the powder is consumed and the results are left behind in the form of more fouling...
:imo:

 

[Rebel]

And here it was cuz i thought the 3f developed more pressure faster and was blowing the pattern o ::r some such.

 

[musketman]

And here it was cuz i thought the 3f developed more pressure faster and was blowing the pattern o ::r some such.

Actually, if you want a tighter pattern, add a bit more shot or use less powder for a given load, adding more powder will blow a pattern wide open...

 

[Rebel]

Yep, i already knew that one. Actually i haven't even tried shot in the N.W. Tradegun yet, just in my double barrel .12 ga, Hope to try it in the Tradegun soon though. Have some paper shot cups with shot all made up ready to go, along with some paper rd ball cartridges.

 

[montanadan]

CRACKSTOCK-Excellent reply. Soooo...longer barrels with the new black powder makes no difference in performance? Just for looks...I tried 2fg shot the same just fouled more. I guess I will shoot 3fg and be happy. Thanks again...Respectfully Montanadan.

 

[CrackStock]

Watch in organized shoots. The long barrels often edge out the shorter ones -- even with the same powder.

You do not need 42 inches of barrel to burn the powder, but a well balanced long rifle feels steady and the long barrel will give a longer sighting plane.

On the other hand, these can be cumbersome to carry and a shorter barrel is quite a pleasure in some situations.

It is all about compromise whether you are wanting shot performance or ease of carry.

Or it can also be about your chosen time period and personna.

YMHS,
CrackStock

 

[montanadan]

CRACKSTOCK- Thanks again, majority of my rifles have barrels of 39 inches or more(Musketman-I must be copensating for something), I do not hunt anymore just shoot targets and primitive. Most of all just have fun, I am still new to this, and I appreciate all the help from everyone. Your reply made the most sense to me...Thanks again..Respectfully Montandan (who should have gone to his typing classes!)

 

[BrownBear]

For me it's a question of balance. I don't give a hoot about barrel length, so long as the gun hangs and shoots well in my hands. Too long or too short? Only if it affects handling.

I've recently taken a lot more interest in long barrels, simply to increase the sighting radius for these aging eyes. I still don't want a long barrel that carries or aims poorly, though.

 

[montanadan]

BROWNBEAR- thanks for resonding. I too have old eye snydrome, turn 60 in june. Sight radius does make difference to me as well. My 50 cal. 44 1/2 barrel(not swamped) is my wind gun. Just get it anchoed on target it pretty much stays there, of course weigth lifting may be my next hobby! Thanks again...Respectfully Montanadan.

 

[flaming canvas]

Seems I remember something about making Indians stack beaver pelts to the height of the rifle they wanted to trade for. Would have been early to mid 1700's Canada and Great Lakes area, not RMFT. That would also explain why Indians preferred short barreled fusils.