My gun loves 2F? Bah! Humbug!

[George]

Well, everything is being thrown into the mix, including the kitchen sink. Maybe we can simplify, think a little about just one factor.

I think the only crucial thing is the velocity at the muzzle. I don't think anything which happens inside the barrel has any bearing, only the muzzle velocity. Some obviously think it matters how that velocity was arrived at, I don't. Anyone who has ever figured out even the most simple ballistics trajectory will know that it starts with muzzle velocity, and you don't have to know how that velocity was arrived at. It's just pretty basic physics.

Spence

 

[gl1200a]

Spence, I thought like you did.
Get same muzzle velocity out of whatever powder you use and performance "should" be the same.
I've been going nuts the past few months testing everything I can possibly think of.
Example. Say your using 3f Goex at 2000 fps and getting great groups.
Figure out a load with Kik at 2000 fps logic would say your groups "should" be the same.......
Nope. Nada. Zilch. I've yet to duplicate groups with different powders. Each is unique. I have no explanation. Just I have not been able to duplicate it. I have convinced myself muzzle velocity is NOT the determining factor, like I thought it would be.

I was just using Goex and Kik as an example. What I've tested is Swiss, Goex, Shuetzen, Kik and Black Diamond. Shooting the same muzzle velocities with each of these powders will produce different groups.

The more I learn the more confused I get!

 

[Grizzled Roberts]

2F don't recoil as much as a 3F load of the same measure. 2f is dirtier than 3f if you shoot the same powder measure and the same number of shots. I also notice it takes more 2f powder to get the same point of aim as a 3f load. When when I say shots I am talking about a 20 shot woodswalk not two or three rounds. I had one rifle gun that liked 2f powder. I sold it so I use just one powder for my main charge. But thats just me!

 

[fyrfyter43]

One factor I see playing a role...is the ball still accelerating when it reaches the muzzle, or is it already decelerating?

 

[necchi]

The more I learn the more confused I get!

Yeah, it can be a tough one to wrap yer head around.

It's the same as 1/4mile Drag Racing.

How can a hobby stock small block go through that 1/4mile "Quicker" with a lower end speed than a big block.
Car "A" get's a 5.6 second at 99mph
Car "B" get's there in 6.1 but is doiing 105mph.
:idunno:
Is it the driver or the mechanics of acceleration?

 

[George]

When someone tells me one granulation is more accurate than another, it seems fair to assume he has tested both equally. That means he has worked with ball size, type and thickness of patch, type of lube, loading pressure, etc., etc. to get the best accuracy possible from both. If he has, then all those factors can be ignored. There may be different requirements for each granulation, but once those are met, once you have worked through all the problems that go with a particular granulation, is there still a difference which is entirely due to the difference in granulation, nothing but the granulation?

I think it's important to remember that in these discussions, we need to assume a kind of laboratory mindset. Such factors as shooter ability must be eliminated. If you are to look for differences, everything other than the variable you are investigating has to be made the same, as much as possible.

Spence

 

[BrownBear]

There may be different requirements for each granulation, but once those are met, once you have worked through all the problems that go with a particular granulation, is there still a difference which is entirely due to the difference in granulation, nothing but the granulation?

Now I think you're down to the question.

In my case some practical matters enter, but they could just as well be called laziness. Even if 2f could be made to shoot more accurately with some oddball patch, ball diameter, loading mallet, swabbing between all shots and lube, is the accuracy difference enough to be worth the trouble for "hunting" accuracy in a hunting gun? Personal call, but for me the ease of use in the field is worth the sacrifice of a quarter or half an inch on a group that a range shooter might struggle to achieve.

If I can achieve comparable accuracy simply with a powder change and not resorting to "extreme" measures from the range, practicality will win every single time.

 

[hanshi]

Honestly, I've used 3F and 2F interchangeably in those times I had to take what was available to me. Given a choice I've always chosen 3F for a number of reasons. Among these reasons are more shots to the pound, a "perception" of it being less dirty, higher velocity and accuracy that satisfied me plus it works in all my guns.

Let's say, for example, 2F will give 1" groups and 3F will only give 2" groups. Friends, there's no way on this green earth I will be able to tell the difference. Tiny bores, .32 and .36, do seem to be at their best with 3F; or at least I float around that 2" group or tighter at 40 yards more often than, say, 3" groups. I just can't shoot or even see the sights well enough to tell much difference. So for me - maybe after I get my cataracts fixed - it's moot and I rely on the other advantages of 3F with the MAIN one being that I don't have to deal with more than one grade.

I've never missed anything because of the powder; it's always been my shooting, nothing else. Our ancestors usually had to use what was available and didn't always have a choice. My motto: If it shoots, use it!

 

[garandman]

I know the powder choice / weight of charge can make a HUGE difference in my smokeless guns. And its not a psychological difference, its a REAL difference. From groups of 0.50" at 100 yards to groups of 1.25" at 100 yards.

Different charges of the SAME powder can also make a difference.

I am a beleiver in a simpe rule - what is best for your gun is the thing that works best for your particular gun. Its every bit as much art as science.

 

[garandman]

Honestly, I've used 3F and 2F interchangeably in those times I had to take what was available to me. Given a choice I've always chosen 3F for a number of reasons. Among these reasons are more shots to the pound,

I don't belive that is true. Measured by volume, I beleive the coarser 2F will give you more shots per pound, as the larger sized granules pack looser / with more voids, and therefore you are using less powder (measured by weight) for the same measure of powder by volume.


Stated another way, at least theoretically, the same volume of 2F and 3F, the 2F charge will weight less, because it has more / bigger voids. That is, provided the density of the powder is equivalent.

Practically, they prolly give pretty close to teh same # of shots.

 

[hanshi]

Honestly, I've used 3F and 2F interchangeably in those times I had to take what was available to me. Given a choice I've always chosen 3F for a number of reasons. Among these reasons are more shots to the pound,

I don't belive that is true. Measured by volume, I beleive the coarser 2F will give you more shots per pound, as the larger sized granules pack looser / with more voids, and therefore you are using less powder (measured by weight) for the same measure of powder by volume.


Stated another way, at least theoretically, the same volume of 2F and 3F, the 2F charge will weight less, because it has more / bigger voids. That is, provided the density of the powder is equivalent.

Practically, they prolly give pretty close to teh same # of shots.

Indeed, something to think about. However, I still stick by my claim of being a lousy shot.

 

[Cheyenne]

I agree withg Stronics & dcriner in that the difference is in the harmonics of the barrel....different powders/loads would affect this.

 

[Golfswithwolves]

I've always given my guns the chance to speak for themselves, shooting them with both 2f and 3f, and more recently with 1f in 54 cal and larger. I sure see better groups with one or the other in many of my rifles. In both 54 and 58 caliber, which I have five of each, some shoot tighter with one or the other. The exceptions are one in each caliber that doesn't care. More shooting required with 1f to say much about it in rifles.

BTW- The differences don't appear significant at 25 and 50 yards, but at 75 and 100 yards it's clear.

But in shotguns with shot, whooeee. I'll take 1f over either 2f or 3f any day in my 20, 12 and 10 gauges. There's a decided improvement in patterns, both in density and "evenness" around the fringe when using the 1f. And 2f is better than 3f.

Blanket statements "agin" something worry me as much as blanket statements "fer" something. I gotta test them to my own satisfaction, and almost always find the blanket has holes in it.

I also feel that Fg powder is working better for me in my 12 gauge. FFg takes a bit less powder but recoils more. When I use FFg I believe that the standard equal volumes of powder and shot are right on, but with Fg I like about 10 gr. more powder than shot. This seems so far to give me the best patterns.

 

[Billnpatti]

Well, Spence, I'm not sure why you posted your question on the Forum if you are not willing to accept the answers you get. It sounds to me as if you suscribe to the position of "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up." The fact is that different guns prefer different loads and you just have to figure out what your particular gun wants. One of the outstanding experts on muzzleloading accuracy is a fellow by the name of Dutch Schultz. His method for finding the most accurate load for your rifle is predicated on these various differences in rifles and what they like. If you can't accept this fact, and there is no obligation to do so, then just do as you wish.

 

[gmww]

I can tell you that in small bore rifle competition, we would find a lot of Elley ammo that best shot in our guns. Then used that and didn't mix lots. It actually made a difference.

As to my ML, I have noticed a difference between 2f and 3f shooting off a bench. Of course different brands also make a difference also.

 

[George]

Well, Spence, I'm not sure why you posted your question on the Forum if you are not willing to accept the answers you get. It sounds to me as if you suscribe to the position of "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up."

Oh, I thought it would be interesting to see what people thought about the question. I've spent a fair amount of time considering possible factors over the years, and have my own ideas as to what the situation is. I thought I'd pick some brains, see if there was a consensus. Talking about such things, who knows, we might learn something.

Spence

 

[Rifleman1776]

then just do as you wish.

I am sure that is exactly what he is doing and will continue to do, with or without your approval. Just as the rest of us are.
In fact, doing yer own thing, is the essence of this avocation.

 

[Dphar]

The skeptic in me occasionally rears his ugly head concerning some of the accepted "facts" we all know and love. The latest rearing was triggered by a couple of threads about 3F vs 2F powder. It is frequently stated that a particular gun "likes" 3F or 2F, but not the other, that one granulation always shoots more accurately in that gun than the other, and no one quibbles.

Let's quibble. Shooting a specific rifle, what could possible be a real-world cause for a difference in accuracy between different granulations of powder?

I'll state my case first. I don't believe in the difference. The way I see it, inside the barrel, the ball is accelerated to a specific velocity. It leaves the muzzle traveling at a certain speed, and it leaves everything that happened to it inside the barrel behind it. It doesn't matter what method is used to get to that velocity, 2F, 3F, compressed air, etc. It doesn't matter if the velocity was gained slowly or quickly, with higher pressure or lower. There should be no difference in accuracy between granulations so long as the amounts are titrated so that precisely the same MV is achieved, and that is repeated with every shot.

Next?

Spence

You need to do more experimenting.
I shoot a lot of FFF.
I also use FF
When I shoot BPCR I generally use 1.5 F of F.


One must remember that FF is twice as fast as F and so on. While this does not translate into massive pressure spikes as it can with smokeless, unless shooting FFFF in cartridge guns, it will effect the speed at which the projectile is accelerated initially. If shooting long bullets with a streamlined shape as in a BPCR used on competition. The stronger initial acceleration can seriously deform the bullet.
In a PRB rifle the faster initial acceleration may reduce the velocity variations, or it might not depending the patch/ball fit in the bore and how deep the grooves are.
A lighter charge of faster powder could blow the patch. A heavier charge of coarser powder might not.
What does the change in pressure rise do for harmonics as the projectile starts down the barrel?
Rifles can be very individualistic. From what I read here many people shoot less powder than I would in a given bore size.
But then I shoot guns that I know how they are assembled and what they are made of.
The starting point for a 45-50 caliber RB rifle should be about 1/2 ball weight of powder. Smaller bores may need a higher ratio. A 54 might do with less but I had a 54 percussion that shot poorly with anything less than 120 gr of FFF. Which is a tad over 1/2 ball weight. Larger bores can use a smaller ratio. My 67 caliber rifle does very well with about 1/3 ball weight (140 gr of FF and a 437 gr ball).
I have friends who report really nice accuracy with 1.5f in 45 caliber rifles.
I built a 50 cal smooth rifle and did well with 90 gr of FFF it seemed to shoot best with 100 gr of ff Goex.
Dan

 

[Dphar]

...All I'm asking is whether there are any real physical effects which might make one granulation more accurate than another.

I think it's just one of life's little mysteries.

Although due to forum rules I shouldn't say it, all top target shooters using a .22 LR know that different cartridges shoot differently even though they are the same weight slug, same velocity, same bullet material and the same size in the same gun.

It's no surprise to me that your gun shows no preference between 2Fg and 3Fg powder but Bills or Joes or some other folks seemingly identical rifle shows a marked difference.

I switched boxes of CCI Green Tag. I finished up the old box on sighters then when the match started used the newer stuff, different lot. Accuracy was crappy for 10-15 shots and REALLY screwed up my aggregate. Second target was better.
Why did it improve? Probably some difference in the LUBE and the bore finally became conditioned to it. Next time I buy Green Tag I will buy 500-1000 of the same lot.
People who think this is silly need to do more research. Relubing 22 match ammo can make such a difference that in some matches its illegal. Why? Someone shot the match with relubed ammo (SPG bullet lube IIRC) and won and as a result the practice was banned.
We know almost nothing about BP internal ballistics compared to smokeless.

Dan

 

[Billnpatti]

...,and there is no obligation to do so,... .

Yep, as you can see, I completely agree with you.