4f or 3f for priming powder?

[Whitedog]

Long, long ago, in 1965, when I was about 11, an old timer once told me that the little horns that some considered "Priming horns" were nothing but horns that men took out with them on day hunts. The larger horns often found were for longer periods in the field and for resupplying the smaller horns. He said that the hunters didn't intend to use two separate horns and that having to deal with a separate horn getting in the way didn't make any sense. He said that the small horns could be carried in a pocket or a pouch easily enough. Interestingly, this bit of information was also recently mentioned to me by another person from another forum. The old man also told me (and my grandparents) that the practice of using the same grade of powder for priming and loading was the rule as it'd "been the way since the beginning" as was the practice while using Paper cartridges with Muskets. Sounded good to me then and still sounds like good advice. He died at the age of 103 when I was 13, so that would've meant he was born in or around 1864. I remember him telling my grandparents this and other things at their house over dinner when my grandpa, who was born in 1896, showed him a small horn that gramps had hanging from a nail by a wire for years from the basement stair case wall.

[Mustang]

I use 4f to prime. It is faster and there are two ways to confirm this. First read Larry Pletcher's article on priming powder done with his sophisticated timing equipment. The differences are small, OK, I grant that. Second test, I have two sons that shoot muzzle loaders with me and for an experiment I loaded their guns without telling them what prime I used. We shot a few dozen times. Now either they are fantastic guessers, nearly 100%, or you really can tell the speed difference between 4f and 2f. Their accuracy was not as good with 4f vs 3f but still way above just guessing. Try it yourself. Use what you want but it's a fact 4f is faster than 2f, and even 3f.

BTW, Null B was the fastest. You may still say the difference is small but all your loading techniques are cumulative.

[B.Habermehl]

For hunting I use either 4f or 3f depending on the expected weather. I really don't see a significant diffierence. Granted I use a large Chambers Round faced English lock on my primary deer hunting rifle. Big lock, big flint lots of sparks. I have found in my expierence 4f will cake or mush quicker than 3f. Just my 2 cents.

[Dphariss]

4f or 3f for priming powder?
thanks

FFFF no question. Used it for decades. Several advantages. Such as it will flow through the vent if the ball is loaded without powder so 10-15 grains canbe trickled through with a little help from a vent pick or tooth pick and the "dry" ball shot out in a minute or less. FFF may do this but is tougher to do unless the vent is large.
If there are moisture problems its generally from FOULING. Fouling sucks up water like a sponge at over 30% humidity and at 90+ the fouling will liquify. The presence of fouling will cause the priming to be exposed to water with the obvious result. In low humidity this is little concern even over an hour or so. In high humidity the fouling in the pan  can liquify while the barrel is being loaded.
So the barrel and pan must be CLEAN of all fouling if to be left loaded very long.

Dan

[Dphariss]

4f or 3f for priming powder?
thanks

FFFF is also faster is actual electronic tests.
This should be in one of the tests or articles  at http://www.blackpowdermag.com/featured- ... art-ii.php

Dan

[Dphariss]

Long, long ago, in 1965, when I was about 11, an old timer once told me that the little horns that some considered "Priming horns" were nothing but horns that men took out with them on day hunts. The larger horns often found were for longer periods in the field and for resupplying the smaller horns. He said that the hunters didn't intend to use two separate horns and that having to deal with a separate horn getting in the way didn't make any sense. He said that the small horns could be carried in a pocket or a pouch easily enough. Interestingly, this bit of information was also recently mentioned to me by another person from another forum. The old man also told me (and my grandparents) that the practice of using the same grade of powder for priming and loading was the rule as it'd "been the way since the beginning" as was the practice while using Paper cartridges with Muskets. Sounded good to me then and still sounds like good advice. He died at the age of 103 when I was 13, so that would've meant he was born in or around 1864. I remember him telling my grandparents this and other things at their house over dinner when my grandpa, who was born in 1896, showed him a small horn that gramps had hanging from a nail by a wire for years from the basement stair case wall.

The squirrel rifle/day horn is obvious its much larger, 2-3 times larger in capacity.
The hunting pouch of David Cooke 1761-1842 has both a salt horn and a priming horn.
See pg 257 of Kentucky Rifles & Pistols 1750-1850.
This was/is one of those "your mileage may vary" things and this continues to this day. Its a choice.
In my experience priming with the main horn is nothing if not a major PITA.  I use a smaller horn with a smaller spout since I like finer prime and it also results is less waste/over priming that occurs with the larger end of the main horn.


Dan

[Whitedog]

Thanks for the information. That sounds good to me. I've primed with a large horn and also a small horn and I believe the small horn dispensing FFFg is preferable.  FFFg is what I use as my primary charge too since I load a .380 ball. I'll be using the small horn anyway because my two bloodhounds tried to chew the end of my antique, large New England horn off. ouch!