4F Powder

[Snakebite]

When did FFFF come about? Was it commonly used as a priming powder back in the day or was it brought about in our modern times?

 

[[email protected]]

From this article http://footguards.tripod.com/06ARTICLES/ART28_blackpowder.htm, it seems like the granulation system was developed in 1825. I just skimmed the article so I'm not sure how types were labeled previously.

 

[buckskinner]

great question. i had the exact one this afternoon.

the article seems to note that 1825 is when the granulation system came into use, as noted by the previous post.

i will try to find out some more info

 

[paulvallandigham]

Since Black Powder has been used as a propellant since the 1300s, 1825 IS modern times! :shocked2: :rotf: :hmm: :surrender: :hatsoff:

You began seeing the sale of grades or sizes of BP granules after the advent of the Percussion ignition system. Before that, there was CANNON powder, and rifle/musket powder. Muskets could be fired using either Cannon or Musket powders. Manufacturing methods were fairly primitive until the industrial method was introduced, and the Western world of Civilization took a huge leap forward as the result of Eli-Whitney's cotton gin, and his inventing the concept of interchangeable parts. Making parts all the same is essential to manufacturing consistent granular sizes of powder. Once it was known HOW to do that, it was possible to offer governments, and the civilian market different grades of black powder for different uses.

Photography came into being about the same time, and a lot of light was needed to transfer images to the glass plates coated with chemicals. That was achieved using 7Fg "flash " powder, the forerunner to " flash bulbs". If you think 4Fg priming powder is small, wait until you see 7Fg powder!

Depending on the size of the explosion desired, Firecrackers and Fireworks consume a lot of flash powder, and is the main market for this product. Next time you have a small firecracker, slit it open and examine the powder within. That is 7Fg powder! Put a match to it in open air, and it will flare up at you immediately.

If you have every been to an historic sight where 19th century displays are available, there will often be someone taking old fashioned Tin Type photos for a fee. Often, if the ceiling is high enough, they will use an actually flash pan, help above the photographer's head, with the powder lit off by a friction device on the handle. The powder used is Flash Powder, too. :thumbsup:

 

[aap2]

Great answers above. Photoflash or flashpowder are generally not BP, they are a dangerous mix of aluminum powder and an oxidizer. Cut open most firecrackers and you will see this; its obviously not BP and not safe in guns. It leaves a metallic (shiny) residue on your hands. My 2 cents worth on 4f priming powder; I use it for priming my flintlocks and it's great. In the old days, I believe that most primed with the same powder as the main charge...that's why you won't see priming flasks in cased sets of high-quality pistols.

 

[paulvallandigham]

I have cut open a lOT of firecrackers over the years. You are partially correct. There are firecrackers using an aluminum alloy compound for ignition. But, I also saw lots of plain old, VERY FINE Black Powder used. Just remember that I began doing this kind of mischief as a kid before dirt was invented-- that's OLD! :shocked2: :rotf:

I have some firecrackers bought about 20 years ago in another state, and I will have to dig one out, cut it open to see what is being used these days. I remember the tiny "Lady Fingers" when I was a kid were so small that they used that powder with the shiney metallic powder. The the " Black Cats" used real BP. So did the M-80s, and Cherry bombs. Now, I had some M-60s that used some kind of yellow powder in them.... A friend I grew up with said the substance reminded him of TNT- dynamite---- and those M-60s had the power of a 1/4 stick of TNT, for sure!

 

[Dphar]

Since Black Powder has been used as a propellant since the 1300s, 1825 IS modern times! :shocked2: :rotf: :hmm: :surrender: :hatsoff:

You began seeing the sale of grades or sizes of BP granules after the advent of the Percussion ignition system. Before that, there was CANNON powder, and rifle/musket powder. Muskets could be fired using either Cannon or Musket powders. Manufacturing methods were fairly primitive until the industrial method was introduced, and the Western world of Civilization took a huge leap forward as the result of Eli-Whitney's cotton gin, and his inventing the concept of interchangeable parts. Making parts all the same is essential to manufacturing consistent granular sizes of powder. Once it was known HOW to do that, it was possible to offer governments, and the civilian market different grades of black powder for different uses.

Photography came into being about the same time, and a lot of light was needed to transfer images to the glass plates coated with chemicals. That was achieved using 7Fg "flash " powder, the forerunner to " flash bulbs". If you think 4Fg priming powder is small, wait until you see 7Fg powder!

Depending on the size of the explosion desired, Firecrackers and Fireworks consume a lot of flash powder, and is the main market for this product. Next time you have a small firecracker, slit it open and examine the powder within. That is 7Fg powder! Put a match to it in open air, and it will flare up at you immediately.

If you have every been to an historic sight where 19th century displays are available, there will often be someone taking old fashioned Tin Type photos for a fee. Often, if the ceiling is high enough, they will use an actually flash pan, help above the photographer's head, with the powder lit off by a friction device on the handle. The powder used is Flash Powder, too. :thumbsup:

You will find journal entries and such from the mid 18th century noting that the rifles need finer/better powder than muskets, "FF" is mentioned. So there really was no "rifle/musket" powder. Yes the rifle could use musket powder but it was likely to cause problems with fouling etc.

Dan

 

[paulvallandigham]

The rifles I referred to existed BEFORE finer grades of BP came on the scene.Most were large calliber guns- .65-.75 caliber guns where the barrels often started out as smoothbore muskets and were rifled later. Its only when armorers tried to produce rifles that were smaller in diameter that the build up of residue became a problem. That is what drove the invention of smaller granular sizing in powder. And, all that occurred in the early years of percussion ignition, when existing " New " flintlocks were being converted to Percussion actions at government armories.

If we use the 1842 " Mississippi" rifle as the First True Rifle made by the U.S. Government for military use, in percussion action, then all the period from when the percussion system first appeared in Europe, and then began to be used here in the States - about 20 years--- fits right in with both the reduction in bore diameters, And the availability of finer granulations of BP.

I believe that 4Fg powder was nothing more than a bi-product of producing both FFg and FFFg powder in the mills. 3Fg powder was quickly recognized as the way to get more power out of revolvers and pistols. The fines left over from screening out 3Fg became the 4Fg priming powder sold.

4Fg powder was first seen as a faster way to fire cannons, with the old-fashioned Touch holes. The fine BP would ignite the powder faster than any fuse being used in the day. This was first deemed necessary for naval cannons, due to the rolling and pitching decks during sea battles. When you could be assured of almost instant ignition of a cannon charge, it make aiming the cannon at an enemy ship much simpler.

Application of 4Fg powder for priming flintlocks was simply and adaptation made by flintlock shooters who saw a way to speed ignition in their old guns. We all understand that the "Rock-lockers" of old simply refused to convert, or give up their trusted flintlocks, and that they survive today because of that same determination of value as a firearm. We have discussed on this forum, and the Bevel Brothers tested for Muzzle Blasts, the use of 3Fg powder and 2Fg powder for priming flintlocks, vs. 4Fg. We are doing nothing more than coming full circle back to the realization that for most hunting applications, the same powder you load down the barrel will serve well enough as your priming powder, too. We really don't need 4Fg for priming the pans, IF everything else is done correctly, save for fine target shooting, where every "edge" you can give yourself means the difference between winning a target match, and being an also-ran. :hmm:

 

[Dphar]

The rifles I referred to existed BEFORE finer grades of BP came on the scene.Most were large calliber guns- .65-.75 caliber guns where the barrels often started out as smoothbore muskets and were rifled later. Its only when armorers tried to produce rifles that were smaller in diameter that the build up of residue became a problem. That is what drove the invention of smaller granular sizing in powder. And, all that occurred in the early years of percussion ignition, when existing " New " flintlocks were being converted to Percussion actions at government armories.

If we use the 1842 " Mississippi" rifle as the First True Rifle made by the U.S. Government for military use, in percussion action, then all the period from when the percussion system first appeared in Europe, and then began to be used here in the States - about 20 years--- fits right in with both the reduction in bore diameters, And the availability of finer granulations of BP.

I believe that 4Fg powder was nothing more than a bi-product of producing both FFg and FFFg powder in the mills. 3Fg powder was quickly recognized as the way to get more power out of revolvers and pistols. The fines left over from screening out 3Fg became the 4Fg priming powder sold.

4Fg powder was first seen as a faster way to fire cannons, with the old-fashioned Touch holes. The fine BP would ignite the powder faster than any fuse being used in the day. This was first deemed necessary for naval cannons, due to the rolling and pitching decks during sea battles. When you could be assured of almost instant ignition of a cannon charge, it make aiming the cannon at an enemy ship much simpler.

Application of 4Fg powder for priming flintlocks was simply and adaptation made by flintlock shooters who saw a way to speed ignition in their old guns. We all understand that the "Rock-lockers" of old simply refused to convert, or give up their trusted flintlocks, and that they survive today because of that same determination of value as a firearm. We have discussed on this forum, and the Bevel Brothers tested for Muzzle Blasts, the use of 3Fg powder and 2Fg powder for priming flintlocks, vs. 4Fg. We are doing nothing more than coming full circle back to the realization that for most hunting applications, the same powder you load down the barrel will serve well enough as your priming powder, too. We really don't need 4Fg for priming the pans, IF everything else is done correctly, save for fine target shooting, where every "edge" you can give yourself means the difference between winning a target match, and being an also-ran. :hmm:

Actually the Hall breechloader was the first percussion in wide use by the US Military.

"A large number of provincials are armed with grooved rifles, and have their molds. Lead in bars will suit them better than bullets-likewise the indians-, but they also need fine powder FF." Colonel Henry Bouquet, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. 1758.
From "The Frontier Rifleman" by LaCrosse pg 76.
Lewis and Clark, while much later, also took both "Musket" and "Rifle" powders on the expedition.
So apparently there were different granulations well before the advent of the percussion system.
Also cannon granulation, at least as made today, is far too large in the grain to give reliable shooting is small arms. It is several times larger than FG.

Finer grades of BP have been around a long time since it was not even granulated when first used as a propellant.
Later it was granulated by being forced through a screen while still wet. But assuming the same granulation was used for all small arms even then is probably not documentable. Gunpowder was of strategic importance and a lot of research and development was put into it until the adoption of smokeless as a propellant by the major powers.

I would have to dig for the approx date for press cake powder but I suspect that powder made in the US at the time of the revolution was all pressed though screens then dried and was not a "hard granulated powder". European powder was likely better but again I don't have the date handy for press cake powder and have little interest in looking it up.

Dan

 

[paulvallandigham]

Come on, Dan. The Hall saw limited production, and was never a popular arm. Yes, it preceded the 1842 rifle, but it had real problems.

The 1842 had a traditional looking side lock action, a nipple mounted in a bolster, attached to the back of the barrel. The stock, lock, buttplate, and barrel bands( or rings) saw little change until the .30-40 Krag rifle was adopted, as the design survived several model changes in percussion, and then managed to be the major influence for the Springfield Trapdoors that followed in cartridge rifles.

 

[Dphar]

Come on, Dan. The Hall saw limited production, and was never a popular arm. Yes, it preceded the 1842 rifle, but it had real problems.

The 1842 had a traditional looking side lock action, a nipple mounted in a bolster, attached to the back of the barrel. The stock, lock, buttplate, and barrel bands( or rings) saw little change until the .30-40 Krag rifle was adopted, as the design survived several model changes in percussion, and then managed to be the major influence for the Springfield Trapdoors that followed in cartridge rifles.

Still the Hall was in service for decades and they made something like 24000 Hall's in flint and percussion. It predated the other percussion military arms by about 10 years IIRC.
Its just a fact.

Dan

 

[paulvallandigham]

And how many thousands of 1842 model rifles were made??

How many of the Halls were flintlock, and how many were percussion? I have seen pictures of the flintlocks, and read about the percussion versions, but they were not well received by either officers, or soldiers. There were just too many small muscle, and fine motor coordination skills, required to remove,clean, load, and put back the breech then cap cock the hammer, and fire the guns to expect soldiers to be able to do this during the heat( and terror) of battle. On top of all that had to be done with the block, the soldiers still had to clean the barrels, too. The powder chamber limited the powder charge that could be held in the gun, and the design precluded increasing the charge. As a rifle, it was far more inflexible to load and fire than any flintlock, or percussion side lock rifle. If you dropped the block while handling it, it got covered with dirt and debris, that may keep it from going back into the gun without stopping to clean it. The rifle was very bulky, and lacked the clean lines of even the centuries old Brown Bess. Machining equipment did not allow a good seal between the block and the barrel, so that powder residue blew up in the face of the shooter, and coated the block, front and sides.

If the Hall design was so wonderful, it would have been IMPROVED, not replaced, by the Army Ordinance department.I suspect that the Hall saw very limited use in combat over its life span. After Andrew Jackson won the Battle of New Orleans, and the end of the War of 1812, you see only Indian "Wars", and pirate suppression actions by the Navy until the Mexican War in 1845-6. The Government moved the Eastern Indian tribes West of the Mississippi in 1836, ending all hostile actions in the developed areas of the country at that time. The next 10 years were spent establishing both trading routes, and migration routes from the East to the Pacific coast states, with forts constructed along the roads to protect settlers. Not a lot of organized combat.

 

[Dphar]

And how many thousands of 1842 model rifles were made??

How many of the Halls were flintlock, and how many were percussion? I have seen pictures of the flintlocks, and read about the percussion versions, but they were not well received by either officers, or soldiers. There were just too many small muscle, and fine motor coordination skills, required to remove,clean, load, and put back the breech then cap cock the hammer, and fire the guns to expect soldiers to be able to do this during the heat( and terror) of battle. On top of all that had to be done with the block, the soldiers still had to clean the barrels, too. The powder chamber limited the powder charge that could be held in the gun, and the design precluded increasing the charge. As a rifle, it was far more inflexible to load and fire than any flintlock, or percussion side lock rifle. If you dropped the block while handling it, it got covered with dirt and debris, that may keep it from going back into the gun without stopping to clean it. The rifle was very bulky, and lacked the clean lines of even the centuries old Brown Bess. Machining equipment did not allow a good seal between the block and the barrel, so that powder residue blew up in the face of the shooter, and coated the block, front and sides.

If the Hall design was so wonderful, it would have been IMPROVED, not replaced, by the Army Ordinance department.I suspect that the Hall saw very limited use in combat over its life span. After Andrew Jackson won the Battle of New Orleans, and the end of the War of 1812, you see only Indian "Wars", and pirate suppression actions by the Navy until the Mexican War in 1845-6. The Government moved the Eastern Indian tribes West of the Mississippi in 1836, ending all hostile actions in the developed areas of the country at that time. The next 10 years were spent establishing both trading routes, and migration routes from the East to the Pacific coast states, with forts constructed along the roads to protect settlers. Not a lot of organized combat.

I'd rather talk about powder granulations.

How many 1841s were made, what they looked like or how good they were matters not the least. They were *not* the first percussion US military arm issued and used the 1833 Hall was. How good or bad the Hall was, who liked it or not, how much combat it saw is completely irrelevant to that fact. You can't rewrite the facts just because you want the 1841 to be the first percussion arm. It was not and no amount of dancing around will change this fact.
Hall's were used in the Mexican War a Sharps shooter shot a Mexican Officer with a "Hall's long range rifle". It was used by the 1st Dragoon's, all over the frontier and used in the Seminole war in Florida.
Frankly I never paid much attention to the Hall and like a lot of other people thought the 1841 was the first percussion arm for many years. If we look at "Firearms of The American West 1803-1865" we see Harpers Ferry ceased all Hall production in 1843 but North was still getting Gov't orders for carbines in 1850 and deliveries continued until at least 1853. So it was not exactly dropped like a hot rock in 1841 as you seem to think. All the early breechloaders had problems. The Hall was further hampered by the apparent refusal of some ordnance officers to do the periodic repairs needed when in heavy use. The Hall in its various models remained in continuous use for at LEAST 30 years by the US Army.

Dan