Priming powder-make a difference?

[TNHillbilly]

It seems from what I read FFFFg is generally used in primer pans. Is there a noticeable in using 4F vs 3F? If so, I guess the question then, is why?

 

[William Joy]

Never really saw a difference in speed. However I find that in hunting conditions the FFFFg seems to absorbs moisture faster and then is very unreliable. I now use only FFFg as main charge and priming powder.

 

[roundball]

It seems from what I read FFFFg is generally used in primer pans. Is there a noticeable in using 4F vs 3F? If so, I guess the question then, is why?

Different powder granulations have different burn rates...ie: 4F burns faster than 3F burns faster than 2F, etc...I choose to use 4F for prime because its faster and want every millisecond of ignition speed I can get from every component in the ignition chain.
Hunting with 4F prime is no problem at all, just dump it out and refresh the prime every half hour/hour depending on the humidity...never had a hunting failure with 4F prime yet.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

It seems from what I read FFFFg is generally used in primer pans. Is there a noticeable in using 4F vs 3F? If so, I guess the question then, is why?

Different powder granulations have different burn rates...ie: 4F burns faster than 3F burns faster than 2F, etc...I choose to use 4F for prime because its faster and want every millisecond of ignition speed I can get from every component in the ignition chain.
Hunting with 4F prime is no problem at all, just dump it out and refresh the prime every half hour/hour depending on the humidity...never had a hunting failure with 4F prime yet.

Roundball is right. I timed Goex ffg and fffg, Two different lots of Goex ffffg, and two different samples from Swiss: ffffg and NullB. The results were published in April 2005 of MuzzleBlasts. The fastest trial of ffg was slower than the slowest trial of the Swiss samples. There really is a difference. BUT human senses can't tell the difference. Human senses are a terrible tool to use for such short elapsed times. I started timing flintlocks and flint vents in the late '80s. I have a video of two vent ignitions where one was .030 seconds while the other one was .058 seconds. They sound identical, but one was almost twice as slow.

My philosophy is like Roundball's. I prime with the fastest powder I can and dump and replace prime as often as necessary to keep it fast in humid weather.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[TNHillbilly]

Interesting, not sure how one times such things but interesting comparison. Part 'B' of the question would go to probability of ignition. That is, would a weaker spark ignite 4F easier than 3F? Maybe that's not answerable question?

 

[William Joy]

I can see how that makes sense. If shooting competition I think an exact amount of FFFFg as priming powder is a plus. I am also an avocate of a loading funnel, short starter, extra cleaning and loading rod with muzzle guard and so on.
For hunting and reinacting however I prefer a more traditional approach. Slightly "looser" ball/patch combination, FFFg powder only. Even though I agree that dumping your primer charge so and so often during the day will give positive ignition and in our modern time and short hunting seasons is a good way for success, I can't bring myself to just dump powder ( even a few grains). I also don't want to carry extra priming powder, a short starter, cleaning patches,....But then I am also a weirdo......
You guy's are right. 4F is faster - I personally just can't see the difference....

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Interesting, not sure how one times such things but interesting comparison... .

It's done with a high school physics interface connected to a computer. A photo cell is connected to the interface - it "looks" at the pan. A solenoid is mounted under the sear. The computer "fires" the solenoid and starts a machine language timing subroutine. When the pan flashes, the photo cell is tripped and shuts off the timing routine.

Timing vents uses the same equipment but in a slightly different way. Photos cells are used at the pan and at the muzzle of a VERY short barrel. The computer records the difference between the two photo cells.

That's the short version. It's easier to show than tell.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[mazo kid]

depending on the humidity...never had a hunting failure with 4F prime yet.

Yeah....depending on humidity. When hunting it is often hard to determine when your prime (4fg) is too damp to ignite readily. It is one thing to say change prime every half hour and another to find out that you should have changed every 20 minutes! By using your main powder charge granulation for prime also, you reduce the amount of moisture absorbed and also eliminate one more component in the loading sequence. I like to use 3fg for both in hunting situations; target shooting is something else and 4fg is then regularly used for priming. Emery

 

[wulf]

OH!!!???!!! Ofcouse!

 

[tg]

You will have yto try both yourself, many including myself use the same powder to charge and prime, less moisture sensitive and only one horn to carry are the pros of one powder, 4f is measurably faster but not likely noticably faster, give them both a try and make your choice no right or wrong answer on this one.

 

[shmrck1]

TN Hills guy,
I have personally been successful with
both.Like stated my brain does not know the
difference between 1/4 second and a 1/2.I prefer to use 4ffff but would not hesitate to use fff.
The only real advantage as I see it,is you only
have to carry one powder. Just my HO.
snake-eyes :hmm:

 

[roundball]

depending on the humidity...never had a hunting failure with 4F prime yet.

When hunting it is often hard to determine when your prime (4fg) is too damp to ignite readily.

I change it periodically, but I check it often while sitting on a deer stand...the simple way I use to tell if 4F prime is beginning to suffer from the effects of humidity is if it moves easily or not.

Normally, fresh dry prime in my pans just slide / slosh back and forth freely as I gently rock the flintlock left and right...but if I open the frizzen and have to tilt the rifle a lot more than usual before the prime begins to move and slide towards the vent, I refresh it no matter how long its been since the last time...flip it out of the pan, pan primer out of a shirt pocket, only takes a few seconds...have always had the same ignition speed in the woods as I do at the range...won't accept anything less

 

[David G]

I pretty much do the same thing as roundball as far as checking prime. I really like the Swiss NullB for prime and never had a problem with ignition in the humidity of Georgia while hunting. However, I think it's critical in any case to make sure that pan is clean and bone dry before you prime. It's the burnt prime that's left after firing that seems to really suck the moisture out of the air. So if you add fresh prime to that it ain't gonna last long. :thumbsup:

 

[thewho66]

In my short time of using a flinter I would say no. I normally us 4f, but on my last trip out i left that at home and used 3f. worked like a charm and didnt seem to any slower to light.

 

[Cutfingers]

I have not performed any "scientific" tests, but since switching from FFFF to FFF in my pan I have had, in my opinion, much better ignition.

 

[roundball]

I have not performed any "scientific" tests, but since switching from FFFF to FFF in my pan I have had, in my opinion, much better ignition.

Curious to know if your shooting conditions have usually been under high humidity which might have effected 4F if it wasn't refreshed periodically...otherwise I can't imagine what would produce the results you mentioned...unless maybe the 4F was a bad batch or something.

For example, its one thing for the average human to say he can't tell a difference between 4F and 3F ignition speed...but this is the first time I've ever heard somebody not only say they can tell a difference but that the difference was in reverse of the norm...that 3F was faster than 4F.

If that's the case there has to be some reason acting upon the 4F because there's no question that 4F granulation burns faster than 3F granulation...like 5F and 7F burn faster than 4F, etc

 

[flintlock75]

I have always used 3f in the main charge and pan for my flinters. Since i hunt with a flinter, the fall seasons can be rainy and damp as well as morning fog, 4F does not like dampness. The reason is that 4F powder is raw and uncoated, this means it will suck moisture from the air. 3F has a coating that is much more resistant to moisture. If you look at 4F it is a dull greyish color, Look at 3f and the grains are shiny and black. As others have said why carry 2 horns of powder. Every gun is different, just as you work up a load for a particular gun to find whats best, do the same with priming powders. I know a guy who shoots a Mortimer F/L rifle, the lock is small and 4f works better, 3f just dosent ignite reliably in his gun. its all about trial and error to find the best combination.

 

It seems from what I read FFFFg is generally used in primer pans. Is there a noticeable in using 4F vs 3F? If so, I guess the question then, is why?

THG,
4F is faster for sure, but you have to look after it more. 3F is a bit more durable.
When i started reenacting i would experiment with everything -- double-ball, double-charge, no prime, too much prime etcetera.. i got into the habit of priming once and forgetting about it, as an experiment. once, traveling all day, setting up camp, then next morning heading out and mid-morning i tried and my rifle went Bang!. i was impressed (i live in a very dry climate).
While in the field, the only flashes ive had were while using 4F because 4F is more hygroscopic, i believe, so 3F is what ive evolved into using (simple-one horn!) and cant notice a change in speed (Pletch is right) plus it is less hygroscopic, therefore more durable. Please note: i rarely shoot at a sanctioned shooting range but am usually in the woods, so my opinion is based on that experience.
:v

 

[paulvallandigham]

Actually, the small " g " after the 4 " F's" means that even FFFFg powder is coated with Graphite. However, because the granules are small, they also bump against each other with more effect than do the larger granules, and that knocks off the graphite, making the FFFFg granules more susceptible to absorbing moisture from the air.

For Years I did as Roundball describes- using FFFFg for prime at both the range and when hunting, checking the prime, and changing it. I dry the pan after dumping my prime, so I don't have a thin layer of wet dust on the bottom of the flashpan to corrupt the new priming powder.

However, a couple of years back, I tried FFFg first at the range, and then later during a hunt. It worked just fine, and I found it took twice as long for it to get to that state Roundball describes so well- it won't slide back and forth in the pan easily-- compared to 4Fg priming powder. I know that the FFFFg powder burns faster than 3Fg powder does, but its measured in milliseconds, and I can't hear the difference. I know I can't move the sights off the target in that small amount of time, so any shooting errors are my fault, and not the size of the priming powder I use.

So, for now, I will continue to use my 4Fg powder to prime at the range, and at target shoots( until I use up the pound of 4Fg powder I now have), but I will use my 3Fg powder to prime when hunting. Once I use up the 4Fg powder, I doubt I will buy any more. If I were into benchrest shooting, I would use 4Fg powder exclusively for priming my flintlocks. However, I rather enjoy the hunt too much, and even foggy or damp weather won't keep me out of the field when there are pheasants to flush.

 

[Cutfingers]

Don't recall my saying FFF was faster than FFFF, only that I have had better ignition. Seems like there is less of a tendency to clog the touch hole with FFF and I have experienced fewer missfires. Once again, I have not conducted any scientific experiments, just personal opinion. Also, I don't recall the old timers carrying two priming horns. They primed from their main horn. If I'm mistaken, please correct me as I'm always eager to learn.