Mike OTDP
Member
Smokeless = KABOOM! Right next to your head.
Black powder and Pyrodex
- Thread starter tacxted
- Start date
- Status
Crawdad1
Member
tacxted, you're going to be very pleased how well these Lyman's shoot using black powder. That big fat round ball packs a wallop and does a lot of damage. 
EljaySL
Member
@Don McDowell - thanks for the historical insight.
Don McDowell
Member
You're welcome. If you get a chance pick up one of the reprints of Ned Roberts Schuetzen rifle books, lots and lots of great info in there. Some of the copies of the forerunner of the American Rifleman magazines , rather dry reading but the historical lessons to be learned there are fantastic. And you know those old Gun Digest and Shooters Bibles and such at garage sales that are 50 years old?? Those things have some really good articles.
BCRider
Member
tacxted, I've shot some Pyrodex in .357Mag cases for my cowboy action shooting. Trust me, it's not in any manner cleaner than real black powder. The bore still takes as much work to clean and uses the same "cleaner" as for real black powder.
You asked about the granulation size for various uses. The more "f's" the finer the grind.
Pans on flintlocks are primed with 4f or 3f so the pan powder ignites more easily. Using 2f in a pan would likely prove to be somewhat iffy for reliable ignition.
Patched round ball generally uses 3f up to around .50 to .54 caliber. These being the cross over sizes that can work with either 3f or 2f. 2f is then used for bigger bores up to where you need wheels to move the barrel around or for punt guns used for the old commercial duck hunting industry way back when. I haven't read around enough to know when to use 1f. But we're talking really coarse stuff at that point.
As suggested under no circumstances should you even think of trying smokeless in a muzzle loader.
Why? For a variety of reasons. First off is that smokeless produces a fast burn with a very much higher peak pressure. And that peak pressure can turn your barrel into a pipe bomb before the round ball can move out of the way and relieve the pressure. Second is that many smokeless powders will run up a much higher peak pressure if there's no initial expansion space between the bullet and powder. For example 34ns of Bullseye in a .38Spl case produces a low peak pressure of around 15K PSI. But that same charge in a 9mm casing with the greatly reduced volume is up around 28K PSI. And if there where NO air gap at all the pressure from such a powder would jump up exponentially. And finally because of how smokeless powders work like this we rely on the makers to provide us with tested information. They don't know how this stuff will perform either. They actually test it in special barrels set up with transducers that measure the peak pressure. And why the common advice is to never go over the stated loads. It's because the way the pressure ramps up is not linear or even close to linear. And why over charging can lead to catastrophic results in smokeless guns. Never mind muzzle loaders.
So yeah, just don't even think about going there.
You asked about the granulation size for various uses. The more "f's" the finer the grind.
Pans on flintlocks are primed with 4f or 3f so the pan powder ignites more easily. Using 2f in a pan would likely prove to be somewhat iffy for reliable ignition.
Patched round ball generally uses 3f up to around .50 to .54 caliber. These being the cross over sizes that can work with either 3f or 2f. 2f is then used for bigger bores up to where you need wheels to move the barrel around or for punt guns used for the old commercial duck hunting industry way back when. I haven't read around enough to know when to use 1f. But we're talking really coarse stuff at that point.
As suggested under no circumstances should you even think of trying smokeless in a muzzle loader.
Why? For a variety of reasons. First off is that smokeless produces a fast burn with a very much higher peak pressure. And that peak pressure can turn your barrel into a pipe bomb before the round ball can move out of the way and relieve the pressure. Second is that many smokeless powders will run up a much higher peak pressure if there's no initial expansion space between the bullet and powder. For example 34ns of Bullseye in a .38Spl case produces a low peak pressure of around 15K PSI. But that same charge in a 9mm casing with the greatly reduced volume is up around 28K PSI. And if there where NO air gap at all the pressure from such a powder would jump up exponentially. And finally because of how smokeless powders work like this we rely on the makers to provide us with tested information. They don't know how this stuff will perform either. They actually test it in special barrels set up with transducers that measure the peak pressure. And why the common advice is to never go over the stated loads. It's because the way the pressure ramps up is not linear or even close to linear. And why over charging can lead to catastrophic results in smokeless guns. Never mind muzzle loaders.
So yeah, just don't even think about going there.
tacxted
Member
Thanks for that very detailed explinaton. I use bullseye to reload my 9mm, and know about the dangers that over charging smokeless will bring.
I wanted to ask the question anyway, I wanted to be surprised and learn about some ancient loading technique.
Sounds like 3F is the way to go. I would like to buy and store only one type of black powder.
I wanted to ask the question anyway, I wanted to be surprised and learn about some ancient loading technique.
Sounds like 3F is the way to go. I would like to buy and store only one type of black powder.
If you are wanting just one powder (I'm with you on this) then 3F is the way to go as I've read on traditional forums that several guys do this. I have a .50 cal Lyman rifle and two .44/.45 cal pistols and don't want to need several powder flasks so I use just 3F.
You'd possibly need slightly less 3F over 2F for the same velocity too, which is a small bonus.
Pyrodex was given to me by my father when he gave me a ROA pistol. I hate the sticky fouling. I use Triple 7 or Olde Eynsford by Goex (real BP).
You'd possibly need slightly less 3F over 2F for the same velocity too, which is a small bonus.
Pyrodex was given to me by my father when he gave me a ROA pistol. I hate the sticky fouling. I use Triple 7 or Olde Eynsford by Goex (real BP).
EljaySL
Member
I use 3F for both the main charge and the pan and the reliability is fine but you shouldn't expect the absolute fastest ignition possible with a flintlock. For casual use it's fine.
BCRider
Member
I only recently split a can of 4f with a buddy so now I've got something other than 3f for pan priming. But like Eljay mentioned I can't say that I've had any problem with 3f for pan priming. And in fact the folks in the BP group say that 3f is actually a little better for damp humid days or light rain.
My first flintlock was an Armi Sport. Armi Sport is a sub label of Chiappa. DO NOT BUY ONE OF THESE USELESS ABUSES OF METAL AND WOOD! ! ! ! The gun looks great on the outside but the lock work is a total POS. it's badly designed, badly made where it counts and the badly made mainspring busted. Yeah, I could buy parts but I'd still have a badly designed and made bit of junk. And a new lock from a good supplier would cost as much as the original price. So it sits for now until I decide what to do with it.
My second flinter was a Lyman GPR. And what a sweetie it is. I thought I was having an issue with the frizzen but it's looking more now like I wasn't setting the flint correctly and that I was trying to get too much out of the edge before knapping it. You could do a LOT worse than getting a Lyman as your first flintlock. Mine is in .50cal which aids in keeping the cost of lead and powder down a little compared to a .54. But I don't hunt with mine. Just shoot paper and pesky steel rabbits, crows and horseshoes on my club's black powder trail. If I were hunting with it at all I'd opt for the .54.
I recently got a lovely old locally made flinter. I've used it for two of my club's BP days and I'm really liking it. This new one has a full length stock and a swamped barrel in .50Cal. So it's not as heavy to hold up like the GPR with its massive octagonal barrel. If there's any downside to the Lyman it's that heavy barrel that makes the gun overall a rather anchor like lump. I'd not want to pack it around the woods for long or up any steeper hills. But for the cost the Lyman simply can't be beaten. Sure the snazzy stuff from such places as Track of the Wolf and others are nice. But they come with a rather steep price if you want good quality lockwork and good barrels and a stock that fits well.
My first flintlock was an Armi Sport. Armi Sport is a sub label of Chiappa. DO NOT BUY ONE OF THESE USELESS ABUSES OF METAL AND WOOD! ! ! ! The gun looks great on the outside but the lock work is a total POS. it's badly designed, badly made where it counts and the badly made mainspring busted. Yeah, I could buy parts but I'd still have a badly designed and made bit of junk. And a new lock from a good supplier would cost as much as the original price. So it sits for now until I decide what to do with it.
My second flinter was a Lyman GPR. And what a sweetie it is. I thought I was having an issue with the frizzen but it's looking more now like I wasn't setting the flint correctly and that I was trying to get too much out of the edge before knapping it. You could do a LOT worse than getting a Lyman as your first flintlock. Mine is in .50cal which aids in keeping the cost of lead and powder down a little compared to a .54. But I don't hunt with mine. Just shoot paper and pesky steel rabbits, crows and horseshoes on my club's black powder trail. If I were hunting with it at all I'd opt for the .54.
I recently got a lovely old locally made flinter. I've used it for two of my club's BP days and I'm really liking it. This new one has a full length stock and a swamped barrel in .50Cal. So it's not as heavy to hold up like the GPR with its massive octagonal barrel. If there's any downside to the Lyman it's that heavy barrel that makes the gun overall a rather anchor like lump. I'd not want to pack it around the woods for long or up any steeper hills. But for the cost the Lyman simply can't be beaten. Sure the snazzy stuff from such places as Track of the Wolf and others are nice. But they come with a rather steep price if you want good quality lockwork and good barrels and a stock that fits well.
Jim Watson
Member
There seems a modern trend to use of a finer granulation of powder than our ancestors did.
3F instead of 2F or even 1F in medium-large bore rifles, for example.
The modern guns of modern materials will take the slight extra pressure and you can glory in the higher velocity.
I read a description of a Purdey V-pan flintlock recently. The originals were self priming, just drop the main charge, give the gun a little shake and the pan was primed. The very special Purdey designed pan and frizzen gave fast ignition even without fine priming powder. The guy building a repro omitted that feature for safety's sake; nobody these days wants to be loading shot into a barrel with the lock already primed.
3F instead of 2F or even 1F in medium-large bore rifles, for example.
The modern guns of modern materials will take the slight extra pressure and you can glory in the higher velocity.
I read a description of a Purdey V-pan flintlock recently. The originals were self priming, just drop the main charge, give the gun a little shake and the pan was primed. The very special Purdey designed pan and frizzen gave fast ignition even without fine priming powder. The guy building a repro omitted that feature for safety's sake; nobody these days wants to be loading shot into a barrel with the lock already primed.
tark
Member
I have heard that the old Brown Bess muskets the British used didn't require priming of the Pan, The soldier, after firing, would put the hammer at half cock and close the frizzen (is that the right word?) then as he loaded the main charge some of the powder would dribble through the oversized flash hole and automatically prime the pan.
Is this true? If it is, I wouldn't want to be standing to the right of the firer!
Is this true? If it is, I wouldn't want to be standing to the right of the firer!
Don McDowell
Member
It wasn't until about the time of the Civil War, that they made many different sizes of powder. Afterwards there was a plethora of powder sizes for different uses, the powder for cartridges was different than that intended for shotguns, and muzzleloaders used a bit different powder than the rifles..
So what we have today for translation is 4f for the pan, and the 1,2,or 3f for the main charge.. When working with the National Park Service in the 80's to test drive their living history programs we couldn't have any powder in possession other than Govt issued.. All they had was 1f, it is surpising how well those hunks of miniature coal did work in the pan, but it wasn't as fast as 4 f, and as a result accuracy suffered some.
So what we have today for translation is 4f for the pan, and the 1,2,or 3f for the main charge.. When working with the National Park Service in the 80's to test drive their living history programs we couldn't have any powder in possession other than Govt issued.. All they had was 1f, it is surpising how well those hunks of miniature coal did work in the pan, but it wasn't as fast as 4 f, and as a result accuracy suffered some.
Jim Watson
Member
I recall an old gunzine article recounting the mountain men at rendezvous in the 1840s paying the hellish price of a dollar a pound for English Diamond Grain powder for their Hawkens.
BCRider
Member
Someone told me a story about how deserters were easily spotted by the powder tattooing on their ears and left side of their face from receiving jet's of hot powder and gas from the fellow to their left. I don't know if it's true or not but it seems plausible.
- Status