Why do some folks use 3f in large caliber guns? In my circle of aquantences we stop using 3f in 40 caliber guns. I use 2f in everything above a 45 caliber rifle, yet, I notice that there is an abundance of those that shoot 3f in guns of 50 caliber. Why is that? :huh:
-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
Why 3f and not 2f........
- Thread starter BLAHMAN
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Guest
When I first got into MLing (ca. 1970), the "experts" advised us to use fffg up through .45 and ffg over .45. I had by 1980 a .36 and .45, in which I used fffg, and a .58, in which I used ffg. Everything fine. In the original Lyman BP loading manual (late 1970s?)they used fffg in tests for large calibers, but I ignored that. In the last few years, however, many people have recommended fffg in up to at least .62 (in smoothbores). I started using fffg in my new .50 so I could load and prime with the same powder. I have tried it in my 20 gauge (.62) but have not found an accurate load and may go back to ffg. Some folks say the fffg burns cleaner, but you do get higher pressures and I think loads should be reduced if you switch from ffg to fffg for larger bores.... :imo:
The reason I use Goex 3F in everything I can is because it's faster and produces less fouling.
All my RB target and hunting loads in .45/.50/.54cal are 3F...I use 2F in the .58/.62cals.
For shot loads in my .62, I've used both 70grns 3F and 80grns 2F, same results
FFFg burns cleaner and as a result, less fouling to contend with...
Just like FFg burns cleaner than Fg...
However, FFFg will generate higher pressures than FFg and it is faster burning...
FFFg will have more powder grains than FFg in a pre-set measure tube, the grains are smaller and pack in tighter, thus more of them, so a 10-15% reduced "volume" charge is needed of FFFg to yeild the same results as the same charge of FFg...
There is no set rule, some use a one horn method, main charge and prime from FFg...
Now, having said that, it would not me wise to use FFFFg as a main charge, too fast and violent...
Just like FFg burns cleaner than Fg...
However, FFFg will generate higher pressures than FFg and it is faster burning...
FFFg will have more powder grains than FFg in a pre-set measure tube, the grains are smaller and pack in tighter, thus more of them, so a 10-15% reduced "volume" charge is needed of FFFg to yeild the same results as the same charge of FFg...
There is no set rule, some use a one horn method, main charge and prime from FFg...
Now, having said that, it would not me wise to use FFFFg as a main charge, too fast and violent...
Bushwhacker
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2004
- Messages
- 146
- Reaction score
- 0
I use FFF for everything in my 45 thru 62 cal. Lot's less fowling and you get more bang for the $$$. Use it for prime also. :redthumb:
A long time ago an older shooter(now I'm one)gave me a general rule of thumb as a STARTING place. Under 50 start with 3f, a 50 can go either way and over 50 start with 2f.
I have found this to be(FOR ME) a very good bit of advice.
I have everything from a 32 through a 62 and I have tried 2f and 3f in all of them. All 4 of my 50's prefered 2f over 3f(but not by much). My littler cal's all liked 3f much better than 2f. My larger guns all were more accurate with 2f. I personally never found any difference in the fouling, however I live out west where humidity isn't a problem. I also know a number of shooters who use 3f in all their guns, including the larger cal's. So maybe there's a mental aspect(read personal feelings) to this 3f VS 2f issue along with a particular gun's preference.
I have found this to be(FOR ME) a very good bit of advice.
I have everything from a 32 through a 62 and I have tried 2f and 3f in all of them. All 4 of my 50's prefered 2f over 3f(but not by much). My littler cal's all liked 3f much better than 2f. My larger guns all were more accurate with 2f. I personally never found any difference in the fouling, however I live out west where humidity isn't a problem. I also know a number of shooters who use 3f in all their guns, including the larger cal's. So maybe there's a mental aspect(read personal feelings) to this 3f VS 2f issue along with a particular gun's preference.
I tried FFFg in my .75 as a main charge, no matter what I lubed the patch with, I burnt through them...
Dropped to FFg and there has been no problem since...
My bess likes Fg as well, but is it ever dirty...
Swiss makes a 1.5 Fg, perhaps I'll try that in the future...
Dropped to FFg and there has been no problem since...
My bess likes Fg as well, but is it ever dirty...
Swiss makes a 1.5 Fg, perhaps I'll try that in the future...
When using the old DuPont shiny black I appied the 2F/3F rule, but have found no present day BP that even comes close, so I use 3F in everything, including up to the .62 fusil.
Have not tried the Swiss, heard nothing but good about it, so may have to go back to the old rule with it.
Have not tried the Swiss, heard nothing but good about it, so may have to go back to the old rule with it.
A fella told me once that fffg in larger calibers would erode the breach area of the barrel because of the higher presure and tempeture. Now I don't know if that's true or not but the benefits I get from fffg in my .54 outweight any shortened barrel life.
Britches
Britches
I'd have to see the test results on that one. Powder is sold by weight, but dispensed by volume. A measure that dispenses 100 grains of FFFg might only hold 94gr of FFg.
And FFg burns slower. The fastest loads in cartridge rifles are the ones that burn the slower powders, so that the pressure is nearer max as the bullet reaches the muzzle and is not coasting/dragging the last two feet.
I am going to say, seat of the pants emphirical observations, that you get 6% more by volume in a can of FFg (more trapped air), but you will need 6% more FFg to equal FFFg velocities, so they give equal equivalent shots per pound.
That's an interesting observation concerning leaded barrels, when you say soft, describe that. How soft, by what standards. Is this 'leaded' steel used today. There was a heavy controversy concerning 12L14 barrel steels. I think that deserves another post.
Lead is added for the ease of machinability factor, and the steel is soft.
The only barrel maker I am aware at present of not using leaded steel is Caywood, his are of a pretty high carbon. That is why Caywood states it is not necessary (read verboten) to use a liner in his barrels, the touchhole will not quickly erode as with the leaded steel barrels.
At one time I internally coned touchholes, I have found with the leaded steel, this practice is less than desirable, the unlined touchhole does erode, rapidly.
The only barrel maker I am aware at present of not using leaded steel is Caywood, his are of a pretty high carbon. That is why Caywood states it is not necessary (read verboten) to use a liner in his barrels, the touchhole will not quickly erode as with the leaded steel barrels.
At one time I internally coned touchholes, I have found with the leaded steel, this practice is less than desirable, the unlined touchhole does erode, rapidly.
So what you are saying is that Caywood is operating their own barrel manufacturing plant, right? I still have'nt gotten a clear answer to the question: how 'soft'. I know lead is added to help with the machining process.
Now the question is: how much lead is added to the steel and what other elements, other than iron ore are added to the alloy.
In other words, is a pound added per ton? Two pounds per ton?
I become skeptical when I hear "a leaded barrel is soft (read 'unsafe')" or so and so's barrel has "high carbon" (read 'safe') simply because at my stage of life (through my occupation) I know the BS that manufactureres use to enhance their product at the same time they debase their opposition. Simple marketing.
I think I will post a question concerning this in the Builders forum.
Now the question is: how much lead is added to the steel and what other elements, other than iron ore are added to the alloy.
In other words, is a pound added per ton? Two pounds per ton?
I become skeptical when I hear "a leaded barrel is soft (read 'unsafe')" or so and so's barrel has "high carbon" (read 'safe') simply because at my stage of life (through my occupation) I know the BS that manufactureres use to enhance their product at the same time they debase their opposition. Simple marketing.
I think I will post a question concerning this in the Builders forum.
Here are 167,000 hits for leaded steel, enjoy.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=leaded+steel&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=leaded+steel&btnG=Search
BM,
1 - When I first started shooting 10 years ago, I read, & was advised to use 3F in .45/.50 and smaller, and 2F in everything above .45/.50, which I religiously followed.
2 - My only variance to this has been with my DP 12guage Mortimer shotty; this has always given me a headache when shooting shotty events (15/25 birds) with 85gns Pioneer/Wano 2F, so a year ago I thought perhaps 1F would have less of an impact on my head (no I don't hold the butt to my head!). I tried it; no headaches! So I have been useing 90gns Pioneer/Wano 1F for the last 12 months.
3 - Recently, somewhere on TMF I noticed in several threads that members use 3F (for example) in everything, so I accidently stored this in my brain.
4 - A couple of months ago I found some Goex 5FA (firecracker powder) at home which I had forgotten about so I thought I would try it in a new Euroarms 1858 2 bander which I recently purchased; I thought as I was only breaking the barrel in, any powder would be OK. The rifle grouped almost perfectly, but it may also have with 2F.
5 - Keeping 3 & 4 in mind, on Saturday just gone, my club had a 15 bird shotty event, this time I thought why not try 80gns 3F (and damn the headache), which I did; results??? I hit (virtually dusted) the first 13, missed the 14th, and dusted the 15th!
I have not done ANY sighting-in for the Euroarms 1858 2 bander, but I will in May; I will be using 3F only.
(6 - I have always used 2F in the various 45/70's I have owned over the years, with the RCBS 45-500-BPS projectile, which does not leave much room for powder. For the last 2 months I have used Swiss 1-2F (50gns by weight). How can I get more powder in tha case? Well da! yesterday I just realised why not change to Swiss 2 or 3F! Next month).
I am amazed that after 10 years BP shooting (paper punching only, no hunting) I am still learning, and that I should not be afraid to try different things in order to improve accuracy. Who cares what powder grade you use in what caliber? (with the exception of 4F, priming only) as long as it gives you the accuracy you are happy with!
:thumbsup: :results: :imo:
PS :blah:
1 - When I first started shooting 10 years ago, I read, & was advised to use 3F in .45/.50 and smaller, and 2F in everything above .45/.50, which I religiously followed.
2 - My only variance to this has been with my DP 12guage Mortimer shotty; this has always given me a headache when shooting shotty events (15/25 birds) with 85gns Pioneer/Wano 2F, so a year ago I thought perhaps 1F would have less of an impact on my head (no I don't hold the butt to my head!). I tried it; no headaches! So I have been useing 90gns Pioneer/Wano 1F for the last 12 months.
3 - Recently, somewhere on TMF I noticed in several threads that members use 3F (for example) in everything, so I accidently stored this in my brain.
4 - A couple of months ago I found some Goex 5FA (firecracker powder) at home which I had forgotten about so I thought I would try it in a new Euroarms 1858 2 bander which I recently purchased; I thought as I was only breaking the barrel in, any powder would be OK. The rifle grouped almost perfectly, but it may also have with 2F.
5 - Keeping 3 & 4 in mind, on Saturday just gone, my club had a 15 bird shotty event, this time I thought why not try 80gns 3F (and damn the headache), which I did; results??? I hit (virtually dusted) the first 13, missed the 14th, and dusted the 15th!
I have not done ANY sighting-in for the Euroarms 1858 2 bander, but I will in May; I will be using 3F only.
(6 - I have always used 2F in the various 45/70's I have owned over the years, with the RCBS 45-500-BPS projectile, which does not leave much room for powder. For the last 2 months I have used Swiss 1-2F (50gns by weight). How can I get more powder in tha case? Well da! yesterday I just realised why not change to Swiss 2 or 3F! Next month).
I am amazed that after 10 years BP shooting (paper punching only, no hunting) I am still learning, and that I should not be afraid to try different things in order to improve accuracy. Who cares what powder grade you use in what caliber? (with the exception of 4F, priming only) as long as it gives you the accuracy you are happy with!
:thumbsup: :results: :imo:
PS :blah:
