Traditional Muzzleloading Association

Shooting Traditional Firearms and Weapons => General Interest => Topic started by: nessy357 on April 19, 2009, 06:27:56 PM

Title: FFg in a small bore ?
Post by: nessy357 on April 19, 2009, 06:27:56 PM: Anyone ever try FFg in a small bore ?
I have a .32 and a .45 that maybe the report and the recoil might be better for younger grandkids ?
I've reduced the charge for my grand-daughter (5yrs) down to 10 grs of FFFg in her .32 CVA . and the "crack" bothers her more than the kick.
Wondering if anyone had tried FFg in the smaller bores?
Cheers nessy.
Title:
Post by: jbullard1 on April 19, 2009, 06:45:20 PM: I havent tried it in a 32 but have shot some in a 45 with decent results
Title:
Post by: Riley/MN on April 19, 2009, 06:57:58 PM: Yeah, I shoot ffg in my .45, too. No .32 at my house though...
Title:
Post by: Gordon H.Kemp on April 19, 2009, 07:40:35 PM: I use 2ff in my .45 and have good performance.I don't own or have the use of a .32 so can't comment on it. Are you using ear protection for the youngster? Thn muff type seem to do a better job than the plugs.
Title:
Post by: nessy357 on April 19, 2009, 08:21:17 PM: Thanks, on the replys , the young'uns wear the earmuffs, maybe they don't seal as good as an adult ?

Cheers Bob.
Title:
Post by: Ironwood on April 19, 2009, 09:54:10 PM: Nessy, you might want to try some soft ear plugs along with the ear muffs. I have a .32. If I get a chance this week I'll run up to the rifle range and try some ffg. It's a flinter and I usually use fffg for the main charge and the pan. I would say if ffg works good in a flinter it should work just fine in a percussion. Will let you know.
Title:
Post by: nessy357 on April 19, 2009, 09:57:28 PM: Thanks , good idea, never thought of that, I'll look for some softer ear plugs to double up.

Cheers Bob.
Title:
Post by: Chairslayer on April 19, 2009, 10:47:12 PM: If they're using muffs and glasses they won't get a good seal. My grandsons use plugs. If the muffs aren't sized for kids they won't seal well either.

Dan, who has to take a hearing conservation class every year for work.
Title:
Post by: Roaddog on April 20, 2009, 06:02:37 AM: I have used ff in my 32 and that was on paper. It was ok but I wasn't trying to poke a squirrel in the eye either. As far as the crack or recoil went there wasn't much different.
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on April 20, 2009, 09:54:26 PM: Quote from: "nessy357"
Thanks , good idea, never thought of that, I'll look for some softer ear plugs to double up.

Cheers Bob.

Kids have small ear canals and need close supervision or even an adult to insert ear plugs, especially if using foam puffs.

I disremember the brand name but there's a brand that look like little yellow christmas trees. Those are much better for the sprog contingent.

I can't tell you the number of times I've seen both adults and kids with ear puffs propped crossways in the horns of their ears. I gave up trying to show 'em how to do it properly. Any more I just tell 'em how rilly, rilly kewl it is to be deaf and they're on the right track. It's really too bad for the kids, but that's what happens when you pick morons for parents.

Wait, I'm so so sorry, "morons" isn't sufficiently sensitive, I meant "Intellectually Challenged." Or perhaps "IQ deficient".

There, now the idiots won't know I'm talking about them.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: Trois Castors on April 20, 2009, 09:58:19 PM: I've used 2f in .44 .........it worked,
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on April 30, 2009, 04:56:10 PM: Over the years I've learned to regard the maxims of 2F, 3F and 4F and the uses thereof to be taken only as benchmarks of opportunity.

Black powder guns seem to be individualistic in their powder preferences and think rules exist to be broken.

My much loved and often used T-C .50 Hawken has a decided preference for 3F powder, my good rondy buddy's Lyman .50 cal. percussion GPR does markedly better with 2F. My .50 smoothy likes 3f, so I'm lucky not needing multiple grades of powder on hand.

When I shot my T-C Hawken as a flinter, it fired much more reliably when primed with a few flakes of 3F than 4F so there's another case of an individual rifle standing firm in the face of common wisdom.

The lesson I take from this is that each rifle needs to be tested until one finds what works best for that rifle, be it powder, patches, lubes or muttered supplications to whichever spirit we hope blesses our efforts.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: nessy357 on May 05, 2009, 02:18:35 AM: Thanks again, I took my daughter-in-law out to the range today,to try out her new rifle 50cal CVA. She couldn't really tell the difference between FFg andFFFg. The rifle shot real well with the FFg (3" vert. string @n 50 yds) so that's what we'll go with.
One thing I am going to do is put on a set of California matched sights, and get rid of the one on there.
Cheers nessy.
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on May 05, 2009, 03:47:05 AM: Quote from: "nessy357"
Thanks again, I took my daughter-in-law out to the range today,to try out her new rifle 50cal CVA. She couldn't really tell the difference between FFg andFFFg. The rifle shot real well with the FFg (3" vert. string @n 50 yds) so that's what we'll go with.
One thing I am going to do is put on a set of California matched sights, and get rid of the one on there.
Cheers nessy.

Which model CVA? Not one of those horrid inline abominations I hope.

Check out the article on priming horns in By Peter Alexander in the current issue of Muzzleloader Magazine. Some interesting history on Black Powder in there. 3F and 4F apparently weren't available until about 1930, so 2F would have had to be the powder of choice even in .28 cal squirrel rifles.

Mr. A. asserts that since the fine grained powders didn't exist, there would be no use for priming horns and most if not all antique small horns were actually day horns, used for short hunts and day trips. His argument is very compelling.

I have two small horns that I won and don't use. I think I will cut one down to about a 4 ounce capacity to use with my new .32 Crockett squirrel gun. 1/4 of a pound still gives me 70 25 gr. charges for that rifle. That's enough for almost any day shoot, even a rondy. Like he says, why carry a whole pound of powder when a fraction is plenty. I have enough weight hanging on my shoulder as it is.

I'll set up a day horn and a small shooting bag to use with both my .32 Crockett now and my .40 cal. Seneca when it's ready to shoot.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: Captchee on May 05, 2009, 10:10:03 AM: i read that Three hawks and about fell out of my chair
i think what happened was Peter was miss proofed by the editor
Now im going from memory but If I recall correctly , even thought the 1930 date seems kinda late .
Anyway the point is , I think peter was trying to say there was no 3F because there was no grading system calling different sizes . 1 F , 2F. 3F

See today we use a screen system to size . However historically , that wasn’t the case . In their process powder were produced all the way up to what we would call today 10F or photography powder . This very very fine grade was used a lot in the late 19th century in flash trays .

So how did they get different sized powder .
Whelp as I understand it by sedimentation caused by vibration .
I think it was Pope who profiled this in a chapter of one of his table top books which included period diary accounts and such to support his findings .

Basically when the powder back then was ground , it wasn’t then screened as we do today . So
what would happen was that once the powder was barreled up , it was loaded into wagons for delivery . Prior to leaving the powder kegs were marked on all the tops ..
As the wagons bumped and jumped down the road , the vibration transferred into the keg/ barrels thus making the bigger grains come to the top . Separating the powder into cannon , musket and rifle powders
The kegs would then be opened accordingly as to intended use .
So in reality the rifle powder was a mix of everything from very fine to course powder .

I also believe peter was trying to get across that there is basically 0 documentation for a priming horn in and of itself when used in context for a rifleman .
As such when a rifleman loaded a pan from the main horn . What was in the pan , wouldn’t have been all the size of 2F or 3F but a mix of fin and course powder

Later in the late 18th century and early 19th century , powder was put in smaller kegs as well a lead canisters but for easy of transportation and distribution.

now we can suport this becouse every now and then old cashes of suplies are found here in the west , dating to the early western fur trade . the powders in those cashes from those i have talked to who have found them , say the powder is a mix of what apears to be 4-2 F

So were there smaller sizes of powder,,,,,, yep .
But was it call 3 or 4 F nope
Title:
Post by: nessy357 on May 05, 2009, 02:53:29 PM: Which model CVA? Not one of those horrid inline abominations I hope.

What's an inline ?
It's a CVA "Plainsman" I wouls say it's the forerunner to the Traditions "Deerslayer" possibly a heavier barrel.I would hazard a guess that it had never been shot.

Cheers Bob.
Title:
Post by: Trois Castors on May 05, 2009, 06:03:14 PM: Quote from: "nessy357"
What's an inline ? :roll eyes
Title:
Post by: Riley/MN on May 06, 2009, 09:45:02 AM: Yep, I love my inline Jeep 4.0L
Title:
Post by: James Kelly on May 13, 2009, 06:14:10 PM: You might find that Swiss FFg is fast enuff to suit well in a small bore. Works fine for me in my .40 flint Pedersoli.
At the same grain size, Swiss is a faster powder than is GOEX.
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on May 13, 2009, 07:05:27 PM: Quote from: "nessy357"
What's an inline ?
Cheers Bob.

It's the biggest internal combustion engine in the world. 2 cycle Turbocharged, 14 cyl. 1M bore, 3M stroke. 108,920 bhp at 102 rpm max. Weighs in at a svelte 4,600,000 pounds. Burns a bit less than 1500 gals. of diesel oil per hour and is the most fuel efficient prime mover on the planet.

Gerry
Title:
Post by: nessy357 on May 13, 2009, 07:55:39 PM: Yoy guys got to get out more , I seen one of the inlines with the "sympathetic stock" didn't get too close to it, poor guy looked like he was ashamed of it

Cheers Bob.
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on May 13, 2009, 08:03:48 PM: Quote from: "nessy357"
Yoy guys got to get out more , I seen one of the inlines with the "sympathetic stock" didn't get too close to it, poor guy looked like he was ashamed of it

Cheers Bob.

As well he should be.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: Mike R on May 14, 2009, 11:00:11 AM: I am with Captchee on the Alexander article--while I buy most of his argument against priming horns [and for day horns, etc] I think his dates are off a bit. They had different grades [sieve size ranges] of powder way back. However, ffg or its equivalent was called "rifle powder" into modern times. It is comparatively recently that fffg has taken over among modern shooters for most rifle bores. In the 18th cent, which alot of us are interested in as reenactors, the standard or common powder for rifles and muskets was like a mixture of what today we'd call fg and ffg according to some accounts. It was used for loads and priming. I think DuPont had standardized the f series grades in the early 19th cent? But ffg was still "rifle powder". It works in all calibers, but may not give the best performance [in modern standards] in all rifles...
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on May 14, 2009, 05:57:55 PM: I converted to 3F in my .50 T-C Hawken after I ran through two pounds of 2F trying to get the best accuracy I could. I ran out of powder at a rondy and could only get 3F. I filled my horn, went to the sight-in range and proceeded to find a load that far surpassed any I got with 2F after only five shots. It made me a believer. It's also the load I shoot to this day, 50 gr. 2F, .490" rb, .015" cotton patch greased with 1K Wonder Lube, Lard, or Crisco.

That's also when I began to understand that rifles tend toward individuality and really should have a load developed for each one.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: James Kelly on May 15, 2009, 09:16:17 AM: May I respectfully note that there is of course a difference in burning speed between FFg and FFFg; there is also a considerable difference in speed between Swiss and GOEX of the same granulation.
IMHO it might be nice to note the brand of powder involved, as well as the number of "F's"
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on May 15, 2009, 03:31:00 PM: Quote from: "James Kelly"
May I respectfully note that there is of course a difference in burning speed between FFg and FFFg; there is also a considerable difference in speed between Swiss and GOEX of the same granulation.
IMHO it might be nice to note the brand of powder involved, as well as the number of "F's"

Good point. As the only powder available to me is Goex, that's what I shoot.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: Sir Michael on May 15, 2009, 08:42:06 PM: Regardless of all the theoretical and mathematical data available, whatever works best for each person is best for them no matter how odd or improbable it may seem to the rest of us.

Just remember that no mater how you crunch the numbers a bumble bee CAN NOT fly. And yet there they are every summer doing just that.

Never get trapped by preconceptions or the philosophy of "Don't confuse me with facts my mind is made up." :bl th up :hey-hey :toast :toast
Title:
Post by: bluelake on May 15, 2009, 09:56:09 PM: Quote from: "Sir Michael"
Regardless of all the theoretical and mathematical data available, whatever works best for each person is best for them no matter how odd or improbable it may seem to the rest of us.

Just remember that no mater how you crunch the numbers a bumble bee CAN NOT fly. And yet there they are every summer doing just that.

Never get trapped by preconceptions or the philosophy of "Don't confuse me with facts my mind is made up." :bl th up :hey-hey :toast :toast

That reminds me of a sign a colleague of mine put up about twenty-some years ago, which read, "Those who say something can't be done are usually interrupted by those doing it."
Title:
Post by: James Kelly on June 16, 2009, 10:45:25 AM: Don't like the valve on my brass priming widgit, have to clean it out daily to keep from leaking. Don't like leaky powder containers around my flintlock & uncomfortable with strongly made brass powder containers (very bad if go boom). Decided I'd make me an Authentic Priming Horn. After some study, including looking at photos of "priming horns" with measure & pick attached, decided I already have an authentic priming horn. It is about 12" long & contains, from time to time, either FFg or FFFg modern du Pont or Swiss. Not as fast as NullB but guess if I want fast I'll bring my .22 Yeah, I do well agree with above posts.
Title:
Post by: Sir Michael on June 16, 2009, 03:06:45 PM: Pics James?
Title:
Post by: James Kelly on June 16, 2009, 03:33:17 PM: ahhh, Sir Michael I was being facecious, just prime from my regular horn. A Pennsylvania style bought from TOW. I doubt that there were such things as priming horns until the 20th century guys started shooting flintlocks again. Do have a couple very small old horns, last one I bought for use as a priming horn.
Title:
Post by: snake eyes on June 17, 2009, 07:48:49 AM: I can only say what works for me and my rifles. I have adapted to using 3fff in all my rifles. I use it in my .32,.36,.45,.50 and .54
all of which are percussion.I also have a .50 F/L that I use 3fff
as the main charge but grind it down a bit for the pan.I have never
had an ignition problem.I use to keep 2ff,3fff and even 4ffff....I have
been able to work with 3fff Goex in all applications....and only
Goex,but that is a personal choice.
snake-eyes