I have a Traditions Kentucky Rifle kit flintlock. I had lots of 2F before for another gun, so that's what I'm using for both main and prime. Goes off reliably.
Prime with 3 or 4F
- Thread starter JoJoLesh
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
I use 4F mostly at the range and some shoots...depends on weather. The other times and hunting i use 3F or 2F and they work just fine!
I will never buy ffff again
One advantage of keeping 4F on hand is only it will go into the vent hole if you ever load a dry ball. I've also got a nipple trickler with 4F for percussion systems. Embarrassed to say I've had to use it for that! A lot easier than a ball puller, since you don't need a buddy to help pull!
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2014
- Messages
- 6,898
- Reaction score
- 10,018
It is historically correct to prime with the same powder as your main charge, been working for hundreds of years.
That said, 4f not only works for priming, but makes a dandy main charge load as well, burning cleaner with more energy and more shots per pound.
That said, 4f not only works for priming, but makes a dandy main charge load as well, burning cleaner with more energy and more shots per pound.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2016
- Messages
- 3,515
- Reaction score
- 3,804
Is there a conversion calculation to use 4f as a main charge? I have 2 lbs. I'd love to get a use for.
It is historically correct to prime with the same powder as your main charge, been working for hundreds of years.
That said, 4f not only works for priming, but makes a dandy main charge load as well, burning cleaner with more energy and more shots per pound.
How much 4f do you use as a main charge?
Is there some conversation formula?
So... I'm actually contemplating 2F (FF) for my pan this year, since that's what I pour down the barrel in my .54, and for another reason....
I started using FF because that's what I thought was appropriate in calibers > .50, and have been using FFFF in the pan, because that seems to be the usual approach.
All works well when at the range, and usually in the woods too, but my flash pan doesn't seal well when the frizzen is closed, and so I often have an empty pan when I check it... and I check it often! I'm not sure if it leaks out around the perimiter of the pan, or possibly between the edge of the lock and the edge of the barrel, but it's often empty when I check it.
It was suggested that I consider using my FF in the pan, hoping that the larger individual grains of powder may not leak out as easily.
Now I know what some of y'all are gonna say... A proper gun maker can fix that for ya. I know! I'm just not willing to pay the shipping fees back and forth, plus ~ $200 or so to make the repair on a commercially produced (Lyman) gun that's not worth all that much in the first place. I actually like the gun other than this problem, as a hunting tool, so if I can improve this aspect of things I'll be a happy hunter... until I get a custom-build.
So...unless I've distracted too much from the OP, in which case I apologize, What do you think of FF in the pan folks? I also have some FFF (for a pistol), so I could switch the rifle over to FFF and go with that, but in terms of my goal here (prevent powder from leaking out of the pan), FF is probably better at that.
I started using FF because that's what I thought was appropriate in calibers > .50, and have been using FFFF in the pan, because that seems to be the usual approach.
All works well when at the range, and usually in the woods too, but my flash pan doesn't seal well when the frizzen is closed, and so I often have an empty pan when I check it... and I check it often! I'm not sure if it leaks out around the perimiter of the pan, or possibly between the edge of the lock and the edge of the barrel, but it's often empty when I check it.
It was suggested that I consider using my FF in the pan, hoping that the larger individual grains of powder may not leak out as easily.
Now I know what some of y'all are gonna say... A proper gun maker can fix that for ya. I know! I'm just not willing to pay the shipping fees back and forth, plus ~ $200 or so to make the repair on a commercially produced (Lyman) gun that's not worth all that much in the first place. I actually like the gun other than this problem, as a hunting tool, so if I can improve this aspect of things I'll be a happy hunter... until I get a custom-build.
So...unless I've distracted too much from the OP, in which case I apologize, What do you think of FF in the pan folks? I also have some FFF (for a pistol), so I could switch the rifle over to FFF and go with that, but in terms of my goal here (prevent powder from leaking out of the pan), FF is probably better at that.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2014
- Messages
- 240
- Reaction score
- 589
I use 3F to prime, I Have never had a problem. I can load and prime frim the same horn.
I use 3F as the main charge in all my rifles from .32 up to .62. I only have two flintlocks, a .54 caliber made by an unknown maker and the .62 caliber smooth bore rifle made by F. Garner. I've only used 3F to prime the flinters and it has worked well in both weapons. Can't see any reason to change anything at this time. I'd say just use what is working for you regardless of what it is.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2020
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 182
Large cal muskets are usually and best loaded with 1 f o 2f powder and primed with the same.The larger size of the flint frizzen and pan And vent make muskets much more reliable in this regard as they were military weapons and were loaded with paper cartridges or bandolier s .How ever it is important to keep your pan lock flint and vent in good order on any firelock .The smaller locks require more diligent maintenance and 3 or 4 ffg powder to prime
I'm saying nuffin'
I have limited experience with my Pedersoli Bess, but have tried 2f and 3f as prime. Can't tell the difference. Both go off very quickly. My opinion may change with more experience though.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2014
- Messages
- 6,898
- Reaction score
- 10,018
Depends on the firearm/caliber as with any other powder granulation.
No there is no conversion formula. You start low and work your way up to the desired performance, as you would with any other powder granulation.
A chronograph helps.
appalichian hunter
75 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2018
- Messages
- 5,828
- Reaction score
- 9,476
Come on Brit might as well jump in the fire.
Not on yer nelly.....but I long for the day I see a can of 4f, I will snap it up and use it as a main charge in all my muzzleloaders because it would say on can otherwise!- Joined
- Sep 16, 2020
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 8
I always prime with 3F when target shooting...It gives quicker ignition. Is there any 18th century documentation for using priming horns??
Bob McBride
54 Cal.
Priming horns were used all the way back to the matchlock. Lots of documentation during that period, less so during the flintlock period as they ceased to be used by most militaries. Lots of vets who liked their priming horns of fine powder I’m sure. They weren’t always called priming horns during that early period. Notchy or someone will chime in. Use Google books and search “matchlock, priming”.
Last edited:
flintlock75
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2007
- Messages
- 609
- Reaction score
- 122
I always use 3f for both, never had any ignition problems. If i use a small pistol lock then maybe 4f, also 4 f is an uncoated powder, you will see that 4 f has a dull color, 3f and larger have a shiny finish. That is why 4f is more susceptible to moisture.
main charge load in what weapons?It is historically correct to prime with the same powder as your main charge, been working for hundreds of years.
That said, 4f not only works for priming, but makes a dandy main charge load as well, burning cleaner with more energy and more shots per pound.
