Rice Barrel Loads

I have a .50cal B weight swamped 38” Rice barrel with 1:66” twist. According to information on their website it appears that 80 grains of 2fg is considered maximum load.
I am interested in developing a hunting load, which will include large game (moose/elk) and am wanting to chase both 2f and 3fg Goex in this development with .490 prb.
Anyone out there have knowledge as to maximum loads with 3fg? I know I can reduce from 2f by 20% but am actually seeking input from those using higher end loads. Is the 2fg “maximum” more lawyer maximum?
Thanks
Walk

Rice roundball barrels are made of 12L14.
Jason’s bullet barrels are 4150.

Walkingeagle said:

Is the 2fg “maximum” more lawyer maximum?

Click to expand...

Simple answer is "yes". Rice Barrel Company is saying if you go over their recommended maximum you are doing it at your own risk and not theirs.

Lyman has published data on black powder loads in at least two books. One I have is Black Powder Handbook first printed in December 1974. Mine is the Tenth Printing in August 1992. It gives Copper Unit Pressures (CUP), Muzzle Velocity, Muzzle Energy, and Energy @ 100 yds for .50 caliber loads that range from 50 grains to as high as 170 grains of FFFg black powder in barrels that vary from 26 Inches long to 43 inches long and 1:66 twist. The barrels were Universal Test barrels with 1-1/8 inch outside diameter. That is important. They weren't taking the risk of testing 7/8 inch or 1 inch barrels with those heavy charges.

The data is presented so the reader can pick the pressure and velocity he/she thinks would be safe for their rifle. No body can tell you what the maximum load is for your rifle! That is your decision.

The other Lyman book I have is Black Powder Handbook & Loading Manual published in 2001. By that time In-lines and conical bullets were becoming more popular and the data for .50 caliber round balls is limited to 24 inch 1:48 twist, 28 inch 1:48 twist, and 32 inch 1:60 twist barrels. But they tested more powder brands and granulations. Similar data as the earlier book except that pressures are measured with piezo electronic equipment and reported in actual pounds per square inch (psi) units.

I suggest you obtain one of these books or something similar and read it so you can educate yourself from a reliable source. Asking "Bubba" on the Internet for critical information like maximum loads for your rifle is not a reliable source.

plmeek said:

Simple answer is "yes". Rice Barrel Company is saying if you go over their recommended maximum you are doing it at your own risk and not theirs.

Lyman has published data on black powder loads in at least two books. One I have is Black Powder Handbook first printed in December 1974. Mine is the Tenth Printing in August 1992. It gives Copper Unit Pressures (CUP), Muzzle Velocity, Muzzle Energy, and Energy @ 100 yds for .50 caliber loads that range from 50 grains to as high as 170 grains of FFFg black powder in barrels that vary from 26 Inches long to 43 inches long and 1:66 twist. The barrels were Universal Test barrels with 1-1/8 inch outside diameter. That is important. They weren't taking the risk of testing 7/8 inch or 1 inch barrels with those heavy charges.

The data is presented so the reader can pick the pressure and velocity he/she thinks would be safe for their rifle. No body can tell you what the maximum load is for your rifle! That is your decision.

The other Lyman book I have is Black Powder Handbook & Loading Manual published in 2001. By that time In-lines and conical bullets were becoming more popular and the data for .50 caliber round balls is limited to 24 inch 1:48 twist, 28 inch 1:48 twist, and 32 inch 1:60 twist barrels. But they tested more powder brands and granulations. Similar data as the earlier book except that pressures are measured with piezo electronic equipment and reported in actual pounds per square inch (psi) units.

I suggest you obtain one of these books or something similar and read it so you can educate yourself from a reliable source. Asking "Bubba" on the Internet for critical information like maximum loads for your rifle is not a reliable source.

Click to expand...

This is the manual you are referring (see below)? The one that shows 8500 psi for 80gr 2fg as maximum and subsequently less than 40gr. of 3fg to equal the same pressures? Rice barrels are unsafe for any 3fg loads??
How is it that everyone essentially says they use 3fg in their guns but now no comments?
Walk

Use 3f in my .40 cal swamped barrel but only up to 75 gr. also use 2and 3 f in my .54 up to 85 2f and 75 3f all the recoil I want.

Very interesting chart. I wish they had done 1F. In large bores 3F kicks much harsher than 2F. 1F can tame really big bores. The acceleration is slower. I wonder how much lower the pressure is. If the pressure maintained the 8600 PSI with say 110 gr 1F, the longer barrel could get higher velocity than the 80 gr 2F load. This is all guessing until someone checks it with a chronograph and a strain gauge.

80 grains 2F will get the job done. Balls decelerates quickly. A few FPS at the muzzle will be inconsequential at 75 yards. If you load hotter and faster the ball decelerate more quickly.

I use mostly 3F, and 70 grains in my Rice .50 barrel does everything I ever need to do.

Walkingeagle said:

This is the manual you are referring (see below)? The one that shows 8500 psi for 80gr 2fg as maximum and subsequently less than 40gr. of 3fg to equal the same pressures? Rice barrels are unsafe for any 3fg loads??
How is it that everyone essentially says they use 3fg in their guns but now no comments?
Walk

Click to expand...

Yes, that's one of the books I suggested.

You would have to ask Rice about the 3Fg load, I can't speak for them. But what you are seeing in the data is why any smart person would not try to tell you what maximum load you can use in your rifle.

Lyman measured that data in laboratory conditions, and they still get some unusual and sometimes conflicting data. That's very much the nature of black powder and muzzleloaders. Each gun is different. Each person loads differently with different patch material and lube and compression on the powder. Some swab between shots, some don't. There are too many variables involved.

What the Lyman data tells me looking at the results from the different barrel lengths and twists with 2Fg versus 3Fg is that one has a smaller margin of error with 3Fg and has to be more careful that they do not double charge or double load because of the pressure differences.

It's not so much a question of maximum safe load as potential consequences when an operator error occurs.

Scota@4570 said:

80 grains 2F will get the job done. Balls decelerates quickly. A few FPS at the muzzle will be inconsequential at 75 yards. If you load hotter and faster the ball decelerate more quickly.

Click to expand...

To Scota@4570's point, look at the data for Pressure and Energy @ 100 yds for 80 grs and 120 grs of 2Fg and 3Fg.

2FG
80 gr 8,500 psi 407 ft/lbs
120 gr 11,500 psi 502 ft/lbs

35.3% more psi gives only 23.3% more Energy @ 100 yds

3Fg
80 gr 10,900 psi 419 ft/lbs
120 gr 16,800 psi 525 ft/lbs

54.1% more psi gives only 25.3% more Energy @100 yds

A lot of people like using 3Fg in their .50 and .54 calibers because they don't have to use as much powder as 2Fg and it sometimes burns cleaner. I suspect these are mostly target loads. The number of folks that push the limit with hot 3Fg loads is probably a lot fewer.

Also, changing from 80 gr 2F to 3F gives a pressure increase of 28% and a 100 yd energy increase of 3%.

Agree with all of whats being said, have no issues with the feedback and data provided at all. I guess where I’m coming from was that 3fg, in my experience anyhow, flows better from a powder horn or flask, is far less fouling and also has provided exceptional accuracy with all my other muzzleloaders. I did research the data in the Lyman handbook prior to my question after having a look at the Rice website, and based on that data I was floored by their pressure data findings. If one is to believe it as gospel, then translate to the 80gr of 2fg which Rice lists as maximum, well then it appears the vast majority of us shooters are at risk from preferring 3fg.
Walk

In my first post, I tried to affirm that Rice's “maximum” is more a lawyer maximum, meaning that it is a conservative number.

Back in the 1970s, companies were less concerned about lawsuits and had higher maximum loads like these from Green River Rifle Works. Note they used 2Fg for their testing.


It is interesting that there seemed to be a lot more "blown" barrels mentioned in the press back then than now. The conservative recommendations like Rice's may be a factor. Another factor is that a lot of us BP shooters have gotten older and less recoil resistant. I rarely hear of anyone using loads as heavy as the GRRW recommendations now. In .54 caliber, their "Light load" is my hunting load, and I've never got even close to loading their "Moderate load" much less their "Maximum load".

We had a discussion on 2nd Edition Lyman pressure data back in the thread linked below. We were discussing the .54 caliber pressure data then, but saw some inconsistencies that were difficult to explain.

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/pressure-changes-by-barrel-length.115648/#post-1581583

I'm not sure we can take the Lyman pressure data as "as gospel", but unfortunately, I don't know of another source for BP pressure data, so we have to make the best of it.

One last thought, had you asked for people's hunting load rather than maximum load, you might have gotten more meaningful feedback and suggested loads. The term "maximum load" has safety implications, and therefore, liability considerations. And since I hunt with a .54 caliber only, I probably wouldn't have even entered the discussion.

WOW! Some of those loads are what I would consider alarming. 175 gr in a .54 PLUS 25 gr for vent loss? Not this puppy! No wonder they had so much vent loss. Flame-cutting erosion from near-or-full-proof loads!

I have used FFFg in my 2005 Rice barrel right along with no adverse effects. Mine is a .54 so my load would be no basis for your .50. But suffice it to say that 85 gr FFFg seems equivalent to 90 gr FFg as far as trajectory.

Rule of Thumb has long been to back of 10% BY WEIGHT when switching from FFg to FFFg. Note that a measure that holds the volume of 80 gr FFg will hold more than 80 gr of FFFg, so you want to weigh it when switching over.

plmeek said:

One last thought, had you asked for people's hunting load rather than maximum load, you might have gotten more meaningful feedback and suggested loads. The term "maximum load" has safety implications, and therefore, liability considerations.

Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct. My wording was misleading as what I was seeking was information, specific to Rice barrels of my specifications, around hunting loads with 3fg so as to not exceed anything while load developing. My apologies.
Walk