Pan Powder--Load Powder

[HOGGHEAD]

Swiss vs Goex in 4F priming powder. Which powder do you prefer for a priming powder in a FL?? And how about 3F for your load?? Tom.

 

[rabjr]

I have heard good things about Swiss Null B for priming and if your a target shooter you may want that. I prefer to use and prime with 3F for hunting myself.

 

[BrownBear]

Take it as a measure of my shooting skills, or lack thereof. But I use whatever I have for main charge for priming too. I just don't see any difference in ignition time, though match shooters assure me it's there. Heck, I use 2f Goex for prime all the time. Or 3f Goex. I just carry one horn into the field and use what's in it. I've been tinkering with 1f with shot loads in a Bess, and that big old lock doesn't seem to know the difference with a pan of it rather than something faster.

 

[ebiggs1]

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that 4f is faster than 2f or even 3f as prime. I imagine Swiss Null-b is faster yet but I have not tested any. Now whether that small difference makes any difference in actual shooting, is another subject.
When I load a rifle and do not tell either of my two sons how it was primed they can tell with close to 100% accuracy if it was 2f or 4f. The percentage is not as good with 3f vs 4f but still better than 50%.
Either they are good guessers or you can tell the difference in actual shooting. If it makes a difference to the target, who knows, maybe to some it does.

 

[David W.]

Swiss is really good powder. As far as Swiss 4F being better than Goex 4F, I can't tell the difference. It would take a test from Pletch to say if the Swiss is .0006 seconds faster or not. NullB, haven't tried it because I have 3 and 1/4 pounds of Swiss 4F.

 

[Jim/OH]

NullB is definately faster than 4F, but not by much. I notice it most in my flint pistol. But with the cost nearly twice as much, I only use it in serious compeition. :thumbsup:

See ya, Jim/OH :hatsoff:

 

[HOGGHEAD]

Normally I shoot 7F in the pan of my FL rifle. However I am getting ready to order 25# of BP and I was just wondering if I should just go ahead and get 1# of priming powder when I order this powder.

I need to check and see if the guy I was getting my 7F from still has some first.

But I was just wondering what you guys might think about priming powder?? I definitely do believe different powders are faster than others. You can noticably tell the difference between standard 4F Goex and the 7F pan powder that I purchase. Tom.

 

[nchawkeye]

I bought my first flinter back in 1977...It's all I used for about 10 years for everything from squirrel to deer to turkeys...

I went to my first muzzleloading shooting match back in 1983 or 1984...While on the line shooting and priming from my main horn a fellow walked up and explained how much better FFFF is for prime than the FFF that I was using...

I proceeded to win 1st place at 25 yards off hand and 2nd at 50, even though percussions were allowed at the 50...

I believe some may think finer priming powder is necessary but I've never had them prove it to me...

For hunting, I certainly prefer FFF over finer as it doesn't seem to absorb humidity as easily...

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Here is a number line with all the different powder granulations that I have tested over the years. Altogether, four different large Silers were used.

The year the test was done is inside ( ). Numbers in red is the average of the trials done, in most cases there were 20 trials.

You will notice that one of the tests was to time a mix of Null B and 7f. The net effect of this is to slow down the Null B. 7f by itself is closest to 3f in time.

The gap between the 2f and cannon grade scores is where I'd expect Goex 1f to be.

The purpose of this is not to persuade you to use any particular powder. It's just to give you an idea of their relative speeds. You have to be on the upper end of this chart before human senses can tell much.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[BrownBear]

Here is a number line with all the different powder granulations that I have tested over the years. Altogether, four different large Silers were used.

The year the test was done is inside ( ). Numbers in red is the average of the trials done, in most cases there were 20 trials.

You will notice that one of the tests was to time a mix of Null B and 7f. The net effect of this is to slow down the Null B. 7f by itself is closest to 3f in time.

The gap between the 2f and cannon grade scores is where I'd expect Goex 1f to be.

The purpose of this is not to persuade you to use any particular powder. It's just to give you an idea of their relative speeds. You have to be on the upper end of this chart before human senses can tell much.

Regards,
Pletch

Boy that's useful Pletch! I vote for you and Claude putting your heads together to make it a sticky or put it in the member resource section.

I'm grateful for this and not picking at all, but I wonder about a couple of variables that might or might not span the time of your tests. Relative humidity and time in the pan before firing are huge factors for me here in a wet climate. I swear up and down that on a wet day 2f seems faster than 3f.

Of course, I'm the guy who can't tell the difference using 1f for prime, so my swearing probably isn't worth spit! :rotf:

 

[paulvallandigham]

The Fastest burning "Priming powder" my brother has found was the residue of powder when he used his Graf & Sons, Powder screens, to sort 4Fg powder. He got about an Ounce of residue- "fines"- from that exercise, which he "loaned" to Phil Quaglino, when Phil forgot his priming powder on a trip to the range.

The first shot Phil fired with his new flintlock, caused him to turn and comment that "that was the fastest priming powder he had ever shot!" Then he asked Peter where he got it. He laughed when Peter told him what it was!

PHil is a old Champion Rifle and Pistol shooter who may still hold some National titles with the NMLRA. He serves as an NMLRA Field Representative for N. Florida. he is also a retired barrel maker, a gunbuilder, and designer.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

. . . .
I'm grateful for this and not picking at all, but I wonder about a couple of variables that might or might not span the time of your tests. Relative humidity and time in the pan before firing are huge factors for me here in a wet climate. I swear up and down that on a wet day 2f seems faster than 3f.

Of course, I'm the guy who can't tell the difference using 1f for prime, so my swearing probably isn't worth spit! :rotf:

All the test were done in an insulated garage. The 2005 tests were begun with the humidity at 64%with the AC on. 140 trials later it was 48%. Part of this was that I had to use an exhaust fan to get rid of smoke. The 2011 tests were done in winter with the thermostat giving 63 degrees. I would "guess" the humidity was lower. The test on Cannon grade was done in summer, probably with the AC on- I don't remember. The 3fg and 2fg were done on the same day in the 2005 testing. They were back to back, so they were quite similar in humidity. They were the last 2 sets of the day; my gut says 50% would be close.

The time in the pan was very short. We did our cleaning steps, primed the pan, and fired. The time would be similar to standing at the firing line, priming, and firing. Not at all like hunting.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[BrownBear]

Thanks for that detail Pletch, and it makes sense. I suspect continuity in test conditions would be 10x harder in the field, and in fact the closer controls you managed indoors are much more useful.

Speaking of smoke clearing, I've got tentative permission from our local shooting club to shoot muzzleloaders on their indoor range. They've got an HVAC air handling system, but I suspect my invitation won't include repeat visits! :grin:

 

[HOGGHEAD]

I appreciate you posting the chart. But in your opinion what does it mean in reality to a hunter like me??

When you post .03 are you saying 3 hundreths of a second?? versus .09 or 9 hundreths of a second??

If that is the case then I do not see how I as a hunter could tell any discernable difference. Or do your numbers mean something else?? There is no description of what the numbers mean??

If it is in hundreths of a second then I can't posibly see how anyone could tell any difference(hunting situation). Although in a CF rifle there are guys who pay big money to get faster "lock times" in their high dollar rigs.

But still very interesting. So thanks for posting it in my thread. Thanks Again, Tom.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Brown Bear,
You're right, I try to eliminate all variables - those same things that the hunter has to deal with all the time. You have to deal with cold, wind, rain, snow, humidity, freezing fingers - when I try to keep them out of the testing as best I can. In the 2005 test I delayed the test a few days and chose a day with fairly low humidity.

I appreciate you posting the chart. But in your opinion what does it mean in reality to a hunter like me??

When you post .03 are you saying 3 hundreths of a second?? versus .09 or 9 hundreths of a second??

If that is the case then I do not see how I as a hunter could tell any discernable difference. Or do your numbers mean something else?? There is no description of what the numbers mean??

If it is in hundreths of a second then I can't possibly see how anyone could tell any difference(hunting situation). Although in a CF rifle there are guys who pay big money to get faster "lock times" in their high dollar rigs.

But still very interesting. So thanks for posting it in my thread. Thanks Again, Tom.

Your have it right about the decimals: .03 or .0300 refers to 3 hundredths or 300/10,000th seconds. My computer will time to the nearest 10,000th second.

You are also correct that the differences at the left of the number line are beyond human senses. For 20+ years I have added to every article that human senses cannot tell these differences. You may have noticed that I mention,"You have to get to the upper end of the chart before human senses can tell much."

However the key issue is what is happening when you can hear a difference. If you can tell a difference with your ears, you just jumped in time to the high end of the chart.

As an example during a recent test, we recorded times from a low of .0230 to a high of .0674. To both Steve and I these all sounded the same. If we would have recorded a score in the .0700-0.800 range I am pretty sure we could have heard these.

So, how does this help? I think any information that helps you manage your lock and vent better is worth it. If you can hear differences, you can learn and improve.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[BrownBear]

However the key issue is what is happening when you can hear a difference. If you can tell a difference with your ears, you just jumped in time to the high end of the chart.

Wow! That's invaluable. It's something that any of us can watch for without a timer. Many thanks. :hatsoff:

 

[rabjr]

Man, all I ever used for prime is 3F.

I can feel the trigger trip the sear and a fraction of a second later I can feel the flint start to hit the frizzen, then I'm rocked with recoil. Happens so fast...I'd like to try Null-B once to see if I could tell a differance but I seriously doubt I could.

 

[hanshi]

I'm slow and don't like change and am a bit lazy so keeping things simple and uncomplicated is the way I think. I've always primed with 4f (Dupont then Goex) or 3f if I give out of 4f at the range. The day I can tell a .0396 from .0459 is the day I'll go back to cap locks exclusively.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

I'm slow and don't like change and am a bit lazy so keeping things simple and uncomplicated is the way I think. I've always primed with 4f (Dupont then Goex) or 3f if I give out of 4f at the range. The day I can tell a .0396 from .0459 is the day I'll go back to cap locks exclusively.

Hanshi,
You're right.
You're not alone.
And you'll be shooting flint a long time.

IMHO there is no ear on earth that can hear the difference between .0396 and .0459. But if you're used to those .0396s and you get an .850, you'll be able to hear it.

Some (too many) years back when doing a long series of testing, I would get bored and try to guess whether the trial just finished was faster or slower than the previous one. I was wrong most of the time. Our ears just aren't that good. (I'm better with the lock on the gun than I am pressing the spacebar on the computer. I guess the gun is a more intimate connection to the shooter than a spacebar is.)
Regards,
Pletch

 

[HOGGHEAD]

I went to the Track of the Wolf web site. I am getting ready to order some powder. So I was looking at the Goex and the Swiss powder. As well as the prices. I kept looking for a Swiss powder called "Null-B". I could not find it. What am I do wrong?? It was rated by "F's", just like the Goex. Thanks, Tom.