Priming Powder

[rotag84]

Newb here. I only have 3f for my flintlock and know that it can be used for priming powder. Wondering if I can take small amounts and crush to finer grain in a ceramic mortar and pestal to create a finer priming powder. Is there an 'ignition hazard' in crushing small amounts of 3f? Anyone tried it before?

 

[Trench]

A stone mortar and pestle would have no ignition issues. I don't know if it would be worth it, though. Another member, Roundball, says he used to put some 3F in an old plastic film canister with a lead ball and shake it.

 

[nchawkeye]

No need to crush...It will work just fine as it is...

 

[Johnny Too-Tall]

Yes it will go bang the way it is..

 

[simeon england]

Howdy!

To answer directly, yes you can. Just dont smoke while your doing it. :wink: :grin:

To answer undirectly, you dont need to. You will find 3-F does just fine for prime, and will enjoy not having to have a separate horn or flask with the finer powder. I have an untouched pound of 4-F I purchased before I learned that lesson.

 

[ebiggs1]

In very controlled timing tests 4F powder is proven to be faster than 3F. But the difference is small and most will not be able to tell. But the difference is still there. The difference between 4F and 2F begins to become noticeable. I believe, if my feeble memory serves me, that Swiss ans some finer grins did show more of an advantage in speed. I don't use either of them and continue to use 4F GOEX.
The main issue I see is all the components of flintlock shooting is accumulative. I mean that if you use the slower choice of each loading component, you will notice a lag in shooting. So, I tend to use the fastest components at each location.

 

[sleeperNY]

I always use 4f to prime my flintlock when hunting. The only thing I do when hunting is dump and re prime about every hour. I found out many years ago that if I leave the same prime in all day and then have to shoot it has a much better chance of a substantial lag in firing. I have never had a misfire when hunting.

Jim

 

[Rifleman1776]

The other answers are on point and I agree. While I prefer 4Fg you can use 3Fg just fine.
Yeas ago there was a shortage of 4Fg and some companies sold devices for making priming powder out of coarser granulations. This one was from E. Christopher Arms in Ohio. Pretty useless as it made dust more than fine powder. But, I kept it as a novelty.

[/img]

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Once you crush the 3Fg or larger powder, the graphite coating is no longer reducing its tendency to absorb moisture from the air..., your 4Fg might be slower as it might be "damper" than commercial 4Fg

LD

 

[jamesthomas]

Ya beat me to it, cause I was gonna say the same thing and would also say that it will absorb moisture faster becoming usless. Stick with 3f for your prime I've used both an cannot really tell a difference.

 

[hanshi]

I use 4F for prime because of habit and the fact that I have a good supply of it. I've used 3F on occasion and found it does just fine. Take your pick.

 

[Zonie]

For what it's worth, William A Knight (Mad Monk, perhaps the most knowledgeable man alive when it comes to the subject of Black Powder) says in one of his articles:

"...The corning process produces a considerable amount of dust that is collected and reworked back into the powder press. Graphite is added to the powder, dusted on, to increase screening rates.
After the corned powder is tray dried it must be “polished” in the glazing barrels..."

(Boldface added)

It might be noted that nothing was mentioned about graphite preventing the absorption of moisture from the air.

 

[ncmtmike]

So 3F will do fine for both charges? :idunno:

 

[nchawkeye]

That's what we're saying...

 

[Stumpkiller]

That's what I do with my .54. I'm to lazy to carry two horns.

 

[Zonie]

A long time ago, I read of the marvels of 4F powder in the pan so I bought some.

I had been using 3Fg powder for my prime and thought, "Hot Dam! This is going to be great!"

I was sorely disappointed.

The 4F powder didn't seem to light any faster and it didn't make a larger flash than the 3Fg powder I had been using for years.

The only thing I can say in 4F's behalf is it works a lot better than 3Fg powder in one of those fancy little brass pan primers.

Whether this justifies spending $15+ for or not is up to the user.
For me, it isn't worth it but I still have well over 3/4 pound of it to burn.

 

[rotag84]

OK. Thanks for all the great info. Sounds like the 3f, as is, will work fine. I'll give it a try this weekend.

 

[ebiggs1]

It might be noted that nothing was mentioned about graphite preventing the absorption of moisture from the air.

I think the moisture grabbing ability of 4f black powder is greatly exaggerated. :hmm:

 

[LRB]

I agree, and burn time is faster with 4fg, whether it can be noticed by the shooter, or not.

 

[Robby]

I try to shoot at least once a week. I have and still do experiment with different combinations of many things along the way. I have experimented with FF, FFF, FFFF in the pan. Its all subjective, I don't have any cameras or technical equipment that would verify my findings, just the simple perceptions of a curious, poor, lost soul. FFFF is faster and I use it. Sometimes it IS almost imperceptible, but in the long run FFFF is consistently faster and I can tell the difference. But, people should use what suits them. :hatsoff:
Robby