Velocities with different powder granulations

[RADeO]

I have been curious about the different velocities one might realize using the various granulations of black powder, so this past Saturday I decided to do a small experiment using some on-hand supplies.

What follows is NOT a scientific analysis by any stretch of the imagination, but rather just a record of velocities achieved on one particular day of shooting. Any resemblance to an actual scientific test, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Due to time constraints, I decided to only shoot 5 shots with each powder type and load volume.

The first series of shots were loaded with 15 grains of powder and the second with 25 grains by volume, from an adjustable measure with a cut-off funnel. Measure was gently tapped 3 times to settle powder each time a charge was thrown.

Firearm: Traditions Pioneer pistol in .45 caliber percussion. Barrel length, breech face to muzzle, is 8-1/8”.
Balls: pure lead home-cast .440” weighing between 128.5 and 129.2 grains
Patches: .015” pillow ticking
Lube: Ox-Yoke Liquid Wonder Competition Patch Lube
Caps used: CCI #11
Powders:
1fg DuPont
2fg GOEX
2fg Swiss ”“ shown as 2fg S in table
3fg GOEX
3fg Triple 7
3fg Elephant ”“ shown as Eleph. In table - 25-grain test only
4fg GOEX
Chronograph: PACT Model 1. Velocities measured 12 feet in front of muzzle.

In each test, the 1fg was used first then the bore was swabbed with 1 damp and 1 dry patch. The 2fg through 4fg powders were used, then the bore was swabbed again, 1 damp and 1 dry patch, prior to using the Triple 7.

Sorry I can't get the figures to line up correctly. Can anyone tell me the correct way to post a table such as this? The dang thing looks almost unuseable. :idunno:

15 grains
Shot 1 2 3 4 5 Avg. High Low ES Sd
1fg 527 527 512 520 523 522 527 512 15 6.2
2fg 681 715 718 723 708 709 723 681 41 16.3
2fg S 769 830 783 781 827 798 830 769 60 28.1
3fg 820 832 868 882 803 841 882 803 79 33.1
4fg 850 759 927 681 981 840 981 681 300 122
777 875 887 903 861 899 885 903 861 41.3 17.2

25 grains
Shot 1 2 3 4 5 Avg. High Low ES Sd
1fg 760 674 724 699 692 710 760 674 86 33.5
2fg 796 876 894 855 856 855 894 796 98 37.0
2fg S 1063 1029 1017 920 950 996 1063 920 144 59.3
3fg 983 1023 1043 969 1006 1005 1043 969 75 30.2
4fg 1149 1174 913 1173 * 1102 1174 913 261 127
777 1112 1116 1112 1058 1175 1115 1175 1058 117 41.3
Eleph. 841 832 821 888 881 853 888 821 67 30.0
* didn’t have enough 4fg powder for a fifth shot. Average is for four shots only


I learned a few things from this test:
1 ”“ 1fg is REAL dirty, but the 15-grain charge was surprisingly consistent. Patches
showed more fouling from 5 shots of the 1fg than 20 shots of the other
granulations, not including the Elephant powder.
2 ”“ 4fg yielded wild velocity variations.
3 ”“ Looking at the variations in velocities I must not be able to load very consistently,
even using a marked ramrod.
4 ”“ Swiss powder wasn’t as consistent, in this test, as I thought it would be.
5 ”“ Elephant 3fg yielded about 16% lower velocity than GOEX 3fg, volume for
volume. This confirmed testing I did about 10 years ago. This powder was more
consistent than I thought it would be.
6 ”“ Sitting for 4 hours near the water, with the temperature in the low 50s, makes
me cold. (What do you expect from candy@$$ed Kalifornians who live near the
Frisco Bay?)

 

[paulvallandigham]

Didn't anyone tell you that 4Fg powder is for Priming ONLY?- you don't put it down the barrel. No wonder your velocities were all over the place with 25 grains of that powder! :shocked2:


Your 8 inch barrel is only going to burn 14-15 grains of powder efficiently, so the results for the smaller powder load are understandably better than the higher powder load. :hmm:

I also was surprised to see how consistent the velocities were shooting Fg powder. I know it burns slowly, but I was not expecting the low SDV. That large granular sized powder was intended to be used in cannons, shotguns, and very large caliber rifles or muskets- not in small caliber pistols. :idunno:

Its difficult to raise the pressure enough with such a slow burning powder to get it to shoot cleaner. If you intend to pursue using Fg powder in your pistol, try using an OP wad between the powder and the PRB and see if that doesn't help the barrel shoot cleaner. :hmm: :thumbsup:


Thank you for posting these test results. :hatsoff:

 

[GreyWhiskers]

That's a lot of testing. :thumbsup: I'm only suprised at the standard deviation figures being so high. But then I've never chronographed pistol loads. Maybe that's all we can expect. I doubt that it's your loading technique. Have you run your most accurate pistol load over the chrony?

Thanks for posting results. (from another candy-arsed californian)

And to Paul V - I have published 4fg pistol loads from more than one manufacturer.

GW

 

[RADeO]

Thanks for the comments guys.

Lon, I haven't yet clocked my most accurate pistol loads. Don't know why, just lazy I guess. My thinking thus far has been if it shoots accurately, who cares how fast (or slow) the ball is travelling? But now that I've gotten the cobwebs out of the chronograph I'll probably drag it to the range when the weather clears - and warms up - and see what results I get.

Paul, I do know that 4fg is for priming only and that 1fg is for cannons, etc. My intent was to merely satisfy my curiosity and thought my results might be of interest to others. Sort of a repayment, albeit in a very small way, to you, Grey Whiskers, and everyone here for the many hours of enjoyable reading and information sharing you all have given me. :hatsoff:

I did wonder about the effect an OP wad or some cornmeal under the ball might have on velocity. Perhaps next time. One thing is for sure though. I will be leaving the 1fg powder home. That stuff has always fouled heavily when I have used it my 12-gauge SxS shotgun. Haven't tried it in the .96-caliber wall gun yet, but maybe the pressure generated by pushing a 3-ounce ball down a 3-1/2-foot barrel will help the powder burn more completely.

 

[Dphar]

That's a lot of testing. :thumbsup: I'm only suprised at the standard deviation figures being so high. But then I've never chronographed pistol loads. Maybe that's all we can expect. I doubt that it's your loading technique. Have you run your most accurate pistol load over the chrony?

Thanks for posting results. (from another candy-arsed californian)

And to Paul V - I have published 4fg pistol loads from more than one manufacturer.

GW

There is a lot of very stupid/dangerous "published" loading data out there. Lyman had some pretty stupid loads for 45-70 until recently.
I have published data for 45-70 loads for the Trapdoor Springfield that run 27000 or so 300 grain bullet at near 2000 fps. But this is FAR beyond the actions design parameters. The early actions were not completely safe with the 45-70-500 BP load and the action was repeatedly upgraded though its service life.
The response from the powder maker who published this? "its SAAMI spec" unfortunately the TD Springfield pe-dates the SAAMI spec by decades and the spec is actually for the old HV smokeless load that used to blow up the BP guns.
So "published data" don't impress me much.
FFFFG causes very strange pressure problems when used as a propellant. While it was used in tiny cartridges like the 38 S&W (not even a full case) it causes REALLY strange pressure problems in larger cartridges. A *very* experienced friend tried making a 200 yard BP Schuetzen based on the 357 maximum case (think 35-35 Maynard). In trying to get enough velocity he tried FFFF had very nasty signs of high pressure.
Round balls are much lighter of course but its not really necessary to use powder this fine to get the performance needed. The spectre of a strange pressure "event" a few inches from my face if in a rifle just does not interest me.

I have no problem using FFF in most RB guns. But remember FFF is only about half as fast as FFFF.


Dan

 

[paulvallandigham]

My can of 4Fg powder from Dupont, ( now Goex)says its for use in priming flintlocks, only. I know there are loading manuals out there with all kinds of data that should not be there. I have been reading loading manuals for more than 50 years now. I don't throw the old ones out. You should see the changes that have been made by the same company, for the same cartridges and powders! One of my better sources of reloading information for BP cartridges, and firearms in general is Ken Water's Pet Loads, and the other being the Black Powder Cartridge Reloading Manual by Garbe and Venturino. I use the load data for some of the bigger BP cartridges to temper my considerations on how much powder to stuff into a MLer of similar caliber. I had the opportunity to shoot a friend's Sharps in .50-140-550, and that gun is about all the Fun I have any interest in having! I survived its brutal recoil by applying my isometric technique that I describe more fully in my article in Controlling Heavy Recoil, which readers can find under " articles" up in the Member Resources Section on the index page to this forum. :thumbsup:

I really don't care what some manual gives for loads of 4Fg. That is their liability if someone is hurt or killed as a result of that kind of advice. There is a reason that 4Fg powder is not used in the barrel of the gun, and this poster's findings on his chronograph mirror the result obtained by others who have tried it. If only 25 grains of 4Fg gives those erratic results, can you imagine what a 60 grain or heavier charge of that powder might do?? :shocked2:

 

[RADeO]

If only 25 grains of 4Fg gives those erratic results, can you imagine what a 60 grain or heavier charge of that powder might do??

You can rest assured that this lad has exactly NO interest in finding out! :shake:

 

[paulvallandigham]

ME TOO! :surrender: :shocked2: :hatsoff:

 

[Don]

Thanks, that was interesting. I also like to get my chroni out now and again to see how my bp guns perform. Some results are surprising. Most surprising is when I shoot modern stuff over my chroni, it almost never lives up to its advertised performance.

Don