• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • 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

newbies like to learn thing from the masters, please forgive me.

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I know what the manufacturer of my rifle Barrel) recommends with FFg. They do not make a statement about smaller granules. I chronographed the best FFg load. When I switched to FFFG, due to availability, I loaded until I reached the same velocity. At one point I was out of powder except FFFFg. This is because I only used a little bit of it for priming my FL. Instead of putting my rifles away until I could find powder, I loaded FFFFg until I reached the same velocity. This was done volumetrically so I cannot say exactly (precisely) what the charges were. The FFg accuracy load was 95 grains on my measure. The FFFg load that produced the same velocity was with that measure set between 85 and 90 grains and with FFFFg it was set just below the 85 grain mark. No change in the point of impact with any of these. Eventually, and again due to availability I switched to FFFg for everything. I never noticed anything unusual loading with any of these granulations. The patches looked the same, the recoil was indiscernible as was the sound, and the accuracy and velocity were identical. I am all for an abundance of caution and I don't tell others how to load their rifle. For my own rifles I was totally comfortable with the methodical way I went about this and the results were more than satisfactory.
 
In my opinion you are not off topic, this is your thread and your topic. Somehow Reminiscing and Nostalgia fit in. Go for it.
 
First off. The comments on standard powder measures is correct.
Secondly, to stop spillage into the pan I plug the vent with a prick. Usually once some loading compression is applied the charge usually holds shape.

I have gone over this several times now and I hear the same old same old. I have repeatedly asked for controlled test results of gun failures from using 4f.
To this day none have come forward!
When I joined this board some condemned me for using 3f in shotguns but now that has changed! I was told it's dangerous and I should not encourage it, I was being reckless blah blah blah.

To this day I have not seen a can of 4f with any restrictions for its use.
There is historical evidence for its use.

Just this past weekend I visited 1f in my Bess and it is so inefficient I have to tip so much of the stuff in the gun it breaks all the standard rules of not adding more powder volume wise than shot.
With 4f I can go the other way. I can use 3/4 volume loads of powder and get good patterns with killing velocity.

For some bazar reason some think black powder will exceed what a barrel can take when loaded properly by using 4f.
It won't.
As long as the load moves off in unit with the charge the barrel will keep its integrity. Another aspect is the status of the loaded charge. It is compressed somewhat in battery, more so against the payload once combustion starts and being fine it compacts more than a course powder. Under huge compression forces it becomes a near solid fuel with a natural action of retarding the flame front.

People note it is cleaner burning fouling wise. It is and easy to understand.
When the progressing charge and payload has traveled the barrel some and volume has increased now the powder can consume itself faster and burn hotter and cleaner. It's still safe as everything is now moving.
Now the course fuels do the same but can not produce the same heat once all is moving thus resulting in a lot more crud.
4f is still slower than nitro and yields less pressure, oh and forget burning nitro and black side by side in the open air, it's not a fair comparison as they are not doing any work. Their true nature is apparent via work or payload moving abilities.

I have been using 4f for several years now with common sense (remember that? It use to be quite popular at one time), by starting with low end charges and listening to the gun or rifle. The firearm will tell you in good time if it is not happy.

Some will mock and that is fine but until that day comes whereupon evidence, real solid scientific evidence is presented that proves going from 3f to 4f turns a firearm into a pipe bomb I will continue using it. In fact if I went a store and they only had 1f or 4f I'll take the 4f!

B.
Brit I did come across a can of ffffg that does state restrictions for it's use. Should I post a pic??
 
I know what the manufacturer of my rifle Barrel) recommends with FFg. They do not make a statement about smaller granules. I chronographed the best FFg load. When I switched to FFFG, due to availability, I loaded until I reached the same velocity. At one point I was out of powder except FFFFg. This is because I only used a little bit of it for priming my FL. Instead of putting my rifles away until I could find powder, I loaded FFFFg until I reached the same velocity. This was done volumetrically so I cannot say exactly (precisely) what the charges were. The FFg accuracy load was 95 grains on my measure. The FFFg load that produced the same velocity was with that measure set between 85 and 90 grains and with FFFFg it was set just below the 85 grain mark. No change in the point of impact with any of these. Eventually, and again due to availability I switched to FFFg for everything. I never noticed anything unusual loading with any of these granulations. The patches looked the same, the recoil was indiscernible as was the sound, and the accuracy and velocity were identical. I am all for an abundance of caution and I don't tell others how to load their rifle. For my own rifles I was totally comfortable with the methodical way I went about this and the results were more than satisfactory.
Thank you for your courage, to speak out.
 
Sure, it maybe the only one!
DSC06793.JPG
 
As most of the powder was imported from England, the text below might give an indication
... In the United Kingdom, the main service gunpowders were classified RFG (rifle grained fine) with diameter of one or two millimeters and RLG (rifle grained large) for grain diameters between two and six millimeters.[104]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder - more information there.

Those sizes are considerably different than the sizes of the granules for the F rated sizes.

The RFG values of 1 to 2 millimeters equals .039-.078 inches.
The RLG values of 2 to 6 mm equals .078-.236 inches.

For comparison one source says:

Fg = 1.19-1.68 mm = .047-.066 inches
FFg = 0.59-1.19 mm = .023-.047 inches
FFFg = 0.29-0.84 mm = .009-.033 inches
FFFFg= 0.15-0.42 mm = .006-.017 inches

https://www.skylighter.com/blogs/fireworks-information/black-powder-grades-sizes-mesh

Another source says:

Fg = 1.7 mm avg. = .066 inches
FFg = 1.18 mm avg. = .047 inches
FFFg = 0.85 mm avg. = .033 inches
FFFFg = 0.47 mm avg. = .019 inches

http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2016/07/black-powder-iv-powder-grain-sizes.html
 
And no offense to anyone, no matter which side of the ffffg fence you are on.
 
I know this thread has been worn a bit thin with some semi off-topic posts, but to hopefully put the 4F part to rest, Sparkitoff's post (#61) seems to be a safe and logical solution to the "4F as a main charge" controversy. I'm no rocket scientist, but his experiment in using it seems to shed more positive light on the subject.
 
I know this thread has been worn a bit thin with some semi off-topic posts, but to hopefully put the 4F part to rest, Sparkitoff's post (#61) seems to be a safe and logical solution to the "4F as a main charge" controversy. I'm no rocket scientist, but his experiment in using it seems to shed more positive light on the subject.
So what you're saying is that evidence shows your gun won't blow up if you use FFFFg in the barrel in a reasonable way...?
Quite a departure from the "sky is falling" view most have expressed. :thumb:

Careful - you'll be considered a heretic like me and a few others.
 
Over a period of many years I've seen what seems to me to be significant evidence showing that's it's pretty well impossible to blow up a good barrel with black powder properly loaded. It is always shouted down, and usually in the total absence of evidence to the contrary. The series of tests run by Sam Fadala comes to mind, and, as usual, no one seems to give it any credence.

Dogma is a powerful thing.

Spence
 
Place a ball in your palm and when you get it covered with black powder, that is your charge.

Sound familiar?

Seems to me that we could put to rest these old wives tales in favor of scientifically proven fact.

I also notice NO WARNING on a can of 4Fg powder.

Now in this lawyer rich environment we live in, seems like there should have been THE test proof of undeniable fact on the uses of 4Fg powder ... and yet ... non exist.

PROOF FELLERS that is all anybody in their rite thinking mind can wish for.

Instead some get saddled with the old gossip tales so oft repeated so as to consider them some sorta written in stone information.

Who exactly started this dribble of ONLY USING 4Fg IN THE FLINTLOCK PAN? A name folks would be great. NO name? Then for gosh sakes stop repeating unfounded facts and unsubstantiated parables in reference to this yet ANOTHER handed down poo poo.

Lets get real with our utterances and demand written scientific PROOF before we continue to bash something that another uses successfully and apparently SAFELY.

We are all better then this
 
The past few comments that have been said are exactly what I have being trying to say for a couple of years only these have put it over way more elegantly.

Sometimes I wonder and think outside of my little box! Like blasting men to the moon! Wait a minute.....that's bloody dangerous! Strapping a feller to a huge rocket! Who in the right mind would think of doing such a thing?
Oh, err you Americans did.
But the little English guy using 4f, he is a RAVIN NUTTER!
Love the can photo by the way :cool:
 
I've never heard of anyone "blowing up" a muzzleloader due to an overcharge, or "over pressure" due to 3f or 4f powder. I'm interested in any true tales.
 
im in a really good mood this morning and im sitting here thinking that 18 year old boy,man, really started something back a few years ago with his cva flintlock. enjoy the replys and once in a while we get some real facts. i guess im old school. linen patches cut off at the muzzle and 4f in a reasonable load if i can shoot several round easily with less fouling. in all the powders ive tried their are only two that i think is worth anything. real black and for special guns, blackhorn 209. real black is real accurate. cant get around that.
 
Sometimes safety recommendations don't apply when you do everything right. They are intended for those times when you do something wrong.

Now that everyone has concluded they can shoot 4f in their gun and not die, perhaps we should examine why every manual places restrictions on grain size and caliber usage. I'll bet there's more to it than just dogma.
 
Back
Top