Smokeless in a BP rifle = Big Kaboom

[madsenshooter]

https://www.facebook.com/icodistrict7/photos/a.1495098270766083.1073741828.1495007814108462/1510799485862628/?type=1&fref=nf&pnref=story

[waltherboy4040]

Can someone screen shot and post it on here?

[madsenshooter]

Best I could do, looks like he was using a heavy bullet too. I can't say if that bullet was still in the bore then removed and sat there, or if was just one added for the pic. I can't get much magnification via facebook, oh wait, dummy you downloaded it, just use your picture viewer. (Pay no heed I often talk to myself). I don't see any rifling marks on the bullet

[RED333]

News story
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2014/12/09/indiana-shooter-loses-fingers-rifle-explodes/20137443/

[Nobade]

No matter how many times it's written not to do that, people will always try it anyway.

-Nobade

[nhrifle]

Hey y'all, watch this!!!!

[triggerhappy243]

I saw this on a cartoon and wanted to try it............. lmao, what a maroon.

[John Allen]

Some people really scare me.

[NoAngel]

I don't feel sorry for anyone this stupid.

Play dumb games, win dumb prizes.

[waltherboy4040]

Thanks, wow that looks really bad.

[pietro]

Hey y'all, watch this!!!!

Yep - a new take on the Big Bang Theory.............. :2 drunk buddies:


.

[starmac]

I have always said everyone should have the right to own firearms, but not everybody should. I hope this clown gets out of the game.

[dagger dog]

I'm not a native Hoosier, really:veryconfu.

[bedbugbilly]

Some people shouldn't be trusted with matches or sharp instruments . . . at least I know where the "village idiot" is . . . our's has been missing for a while.

[dlbarr]

It ain't really funny, but I can't stop laughing!! :mrgreen: [smilie=w:

[bangerjim]

And to think..........that moron could be standing next to you at the range!

banger

[Tackleberry41]

Stupid seems to be a universal constant. Friend works at a gun range, there are always those that come in around hunting season with a rifle or muzzle loader they picked up somewhere. Last time I was there guy had a scope with some mounts still clamped in the rings and a muzzle loader. He wanted to go hunting, wrong mounts, no idea what might have gone to, no screws to mount them if they were right. We all know the wide variety of screws holding such things together will drive you crazy. A good candidate for using some smokeless because he didnt figured it mattered.

We have all met these people at the range. Last time I was there I didnt shoot very long. Went down to the rifle section, nobody there, good. Went down used some staples from a target w holes in it, got ready to shoot. Guy shows up, did you take my target down? Ummm what, oh he just went to the shop to get the screws tightened on his scope, he was coming back. I would somehow know this.

[bigted]

Darwin is proved rite often huh? ... just weedin out some weeds so the fruit can flourish. :popcorn:

[bob208]

some fool did that a few years ago near me. they had a home made cannon. well they were firing it and all was well. then it gets strange one story is they ran out of black powder. the other is they thought smokeless would give a loader boom. either way one dead two hurt bad.

[Hardcast416taylor]

Maybe he was using a duplex load? You know the load with 60 grains of 2400 and 60 grains of 4F black powder. Can`t understand what went wrong, I was using a Mag cap for ignition? "This is meant as a JOKE and not a SERIOUS LOAD!!!" It is outright stupidity on a scale like this blowup and other smaller yet still serious accidents that keeps me far away from any sort of shooting range!Robert

[zuke]

And I bet he's reproduced

[johnson1942]

I had a modern custom inline muzzle loader built for my son that recommends smokeless powder but I wont let him use it, that is smokeleass powder. it shoots great with the 209 powder and I would have no peace if I let him use smokelss. why risk it as I consider it a risk. some guys are headed for a brick wall with no breaks at 150 miles and hour and for some it takes years to get to that wall. some guys cant rest untill they are layed to rest.

[Hickok]

Probably had a cousin who told him, "he had a friend who had an uncle who did it all the time in his muzzleloader!!!":violin:

[cpileri]

what about the black powder equivalent load of 30% by weight of 4198? would that be safe?

not that im interested in trying it, and obviously the blowups aren't using equivalent loads.

just asking?

[mooman76]

what about the black powder equivalent load of 30% by weight of 4198? would that be safe?

not that im interested in trying it, and obviously the blowups aren't using equivalent loads.

just asking?

What is the apple equivalency when making oranges? There is NO equivalency when comparing BP to smokeless powder. That's the point that lefty made!

[triggerhappy243]

the way I see it.... using smokeless powder in a muzzleloader is like catching a live grenade with pin removed and putting it in your shirt pocket. NO GOOD OUTCOME CAN BE HAD.

[fouronesix]

Yep, I think it's been the point of all the 24+ replies since the pic of the kaboomed Knight? inline was posted. Actually that pic reminds me of several of the kaboomed "so-called" smokeless muzzleloaders I've seen.

Since all smokeless powders, by weight, carry very similar (and LARGE) amounts of stored chemical energy (some burn faster and some burn slower, but that stored chemical energy is similar) …. it seems obvious to me why they are not for any muzzleloader and show zero tolerance for miscalculation. Example: a load of 7 gr Bullseye in a 357 handgun releases a lot of poop. Increase that to a similarly measly 12-14 gr and see what happens!! (don't even think about doing it as it will likely result in a big kaboom- have witnessed it a couple of times with double charges of BE in the 357).

[DCM]

Stupid is as stupid does!

[cpileri]

there seems to be some science behind the idea of equivalency:
http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=27410#p339567

FWIW
C-

[fouronesix]

Well yah. It is the "science" that clearly suggests it's not a good idea… but more like the idea of non-equivalency.

I screen shot one of the graphs from that forum that is most instructive. Using the shotgun data indicated on the graph, add maybe 4 gr of the smokeless and risk kabooming the shotgun. Add 15 gr of blackpowder to the BP load and it would be hard to tell the difference. Adding a bunch more of the BP will likely only yield an increase in recoil, noise, smoke and a poorer pattern.

[johnson1942]

shooters, you want to avoid the people who always say, ya but. ya butters never learn, never listen and are a danger to them selves and every one around them. they are short wired in their brain, just stay out of their way so when they hit the wall your not their with them.

[triggerhappy243]

got that right. I dont want to be within grenade distance of them

[koehlerrk]

Folks keep forgetting the basic rules of gunpowder chemistry.

Black powder has a burn rate controlled by grain size. Pressure has very little to do with the burn rate, so it is predictable.

Smokeless powder is not controlled by grain size, it burns based on the retardant coating and available pressure. More pressure makes it burn faster, which generates even more pressure, and this keeps accelerating until either you run out of powder, or the container vents, by way of the bullet exiting the barrel or the barrel rupturing.

[Geezer in NH]

Lucky man to live.

Blame it on Savage IMHO who made the Smokeless ML Note they don's any more.

STUPID STUPID STUPID.

[Nobade]

They posted that pic over on Accurate Shooter's daily bulletin. Said the shooter lost two fingers when that happened.

-Nobade

[Screwbolts]

Lucky man to live.

Blame it on Savage IMHO who made the Smokeless ML Note they don's any more.

STUPID STUPID STUPID.

Ignorance can be educated, there is no fix for Stupid.

There are still several custom makers of smokeless muzzle loaders out there. They are not Stupid, they work great.

Henry Ball designed the guns Savage built and sold under licence. I believe Bill Ball will still gladly build you one.

My first smokeless build utilized a Rem #5 RB action.

Smokeless powder is the original BP substitute, period.

Ken

[dtknowles]

Folks keep forgetting the basic rules of gunpowder chemistry.

Black powder has a burn rate controlled by grain size. Pressure has very little to do with the burn rate, so it is predictable.

Smokeless powder is not controlled by grain size, it burns based on the retardant coating and available pressure. More pressure makes it burn faster, which generates even more pressure, and this keeps accelerating until either you run out of powder, or the container vents, by way of the bullet exiting the barrel or the barrel rupturing.

"Smokeless powder is not controlled by grain size" This is not accurate, use the IMR powders as an example and compare the fast IMR stick powders to the slow IMR stick powders and you will clearly see the fast ones have very small grains and the slow ones have much larger grains.

Tim

[NSB]

Lucky man to live.

Blame it on Savage IMHO who made the Smokeless ML Note they don's any more.

STUPID STUPID STUPID.
Savage didn't have anything to do with this. A very stupid person put smokeless powder into a muzzle loading rifle not designed to use smokeless powder. The gun that blew up wasn't a Savage. Not only was he ignorant for doing it, other people don't seem to understand the real cause and blame it on something that had nothing to do with it. Savage got out of the smokeless muzzle loading business due to sales figures that dropped off due to market saturation. Let's blame it on the real cause, the person who loaded the gun incorrectly. Too many "experts" out there that don't have a clue what they're doing.

[fouronesix]

Yep, while burn rate, coatings, granule surface size, chemical composition, etc. influences how the burn proceeds- I think the big difference between BP and smokeless is the amount of stored (potential) chemical energy in each type.

[StratsMan]

Ignorance can be educated, there is no fix for Stupid.

There are still several custom makers of smokeless muzzle loaders out there. They are not Stupid, they work great.

Ken's statement is the best in this thread...

I can't believe some of the 'generic' statements in this thread, along the line of "never put smokeless in a black powder gun'.... People on this forum do it all the time!!! I have a Trapdoor (designed for black powder) and I have no trouble finding published, smokeless loads for that black powder rifle. And it's not just about muzzleloaders... it's about following the #1 rule of reloading: Don't overpressure the barrel....

Don't get me wrong, the guy who did this made a stoopid mistake... But it wasn't just using smokeless powder; it was using the wrong smokeless powder, and way too much of it.... I read the statement from the responding officer.

“The man who fired the gun loaded the muzzleloader with smokeless powder which had been taken from 20 gauge shotgun shells,” Doane said over the phone. “He had run out of black powder and had actually cut open the shells and ended up pouring 75 grains of powder into that muzzleloader. Once again, smokeless powder is several times more powerful than black powder, so it would be like putting a 300-grain charge of blackpowder into a muzzleloader.”
http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/2014/12/16/muzzleloader-explodes-like-grenade-takes-shooters-fingers/

He cut open some shotgun rounds and used that powder... 75 grains of it!!! I wouldn't want to be around a Rem 700, Savage Axis or any other modern rifle that had roughly 75 grains of any shotgun powder crammed into a cartridge....

This was not just about using smokeless in a BP gun... This was about being stoopid...

[Ballistics in Scotland]

One golden rule of the internet is never to believe anything on social media, unless it is backed up by some sort of reputable source. Andy Warhol said that in the future everybody will be famous for fifteen minutes, but some people will stage anything, by any stratagem, to make it happen now. Still, this one is backed up, and two fingers seems a pretty reasonable tariff for what he did. It could take years for him to disappear altogether.

All firearms propellants depend to a great extent on grain size to control their burning rate. They burn in layers from the outside to the inside, like peeling the skins from an onion, and peeling, say, a 1/10in. thick skin from a large onion will inevitably produce more of whatever it turns into than 1/10in. from a small onion. T

The only case in which this doesn't apply is a high explosive. Blasting gelatin, for example, has a far higher ratio of nitroglycerin to nitrocellulose than any powder, and as a result, if ignited violently, it ignites as the shock wave travels through it, at a far higher speed than any propellant. It will cut steel even if unconfined. But even this will only burn if ignited with a match. I wonder if anybody, short of propellant pellets for an inline muzzle loader, has ever tried a bit of gelignite? My guess would be about a 25% chance of being a miserably weak propellant (due to the primer being a very poor substitute for a blasting detonator), and 75% chance of being a lot more than two fingers; worth of grenade.

Returning to propellant powders, you can see the difference in the speed large grains burn, compared with small ones, if you ignite a little in a saucer. That goes for black or smokeless alike, and both burn for far longer than the bore time of any firearm. Grain size for grain size, the black powder will burn away much faster. But that is only at atmospheric pressure. Confinement increases the burning rate, no matter what kind of powder you use.

The difference is that with black powder the burning rate is approximately proportional to pressure. Multiply that atmospheric pressure a hundred times, and the gas supply becomes about a hundred times faster. Put simply, anything that increases pressure will increase it a lot more with smokeless than black. In the case of our unfortunate amputee, these included quantity, extremely fast shotgun powder, and using smokeless at all. That is assuming he didn't, overcome with his own ingenuity, accidentally load two bullets.

In slow rifle powders the burning rate can indeed be adjusted by perforations and/or retardant coatings. The latter is particularly important with ball powders, in which the gas supply declines more than it does with sticks or flakes. But I think grain size is more important. Perforations incidentally (increasing the internal burn surface as the external burn surface reduces) were invented for the plum-sized moulded black powder grains used in the largest sizes of cannon. But nobody misses them in firearm black powder.

The idea of 30% of the BP load in 4198 isn't a bad one, if applied to a fairly late and non-notorious cartridge BP firearm in good condition. For the cartridge maintains a given space behind the bullet. Loading density is one of those factors which matter much, much more with smokeless than black, and the person who merrily rams a muzzle-loader bullet down on top of smokeless is joining a guaranteed 100% loading density (or more likely compression) to the wrong type, the high speed of shotgun powder, and possibly other things I haven't thought of yet.

In theory it is possible to make a muzzle loader cope with smokeless. I seem to remember one was made in Mexico a long time ago. It may have been in the days when a little more violent death in Mexico was unlikely to be noticed. Nonsense to complain really. But my guess is that besides greater strength than a BP muzzle loader, it had a shoulder in front of the chamber, to guarantee the powder space. But that wouldn't make it safe if the powder charge extended beyond that shoulder, or the wrong type of smokeless was used.

[mooman76]

Actually you can't compare it to 300gr of BP. BP get's very inefficient with massive loads and BP rifles have been test fired with double or even triple max loads. It would not like blow up a BP rifle and there are some that say you could fill it all the way up and it's wouldn't blow up. The majority of the BP wouldn't even burn inside the rifle. That's why you don't shoot smokeless powders in guns designated for black powder only use. That's a warning straight from the manufacturers. And I am not talking about old cartridge rifles made for loading BP. I have two that I have used smokeless in myself but I was using published load data that has been verified by powder manufacturers that can test loads safely.

[Geezer in NH]

Ignorance can be educated, there is no fix for Stupid.

There are still several custom makers of smokeless muzzle loaders out there. They are not Stupid, they work great.

Henry Ball designed the guns Savage built and sold under licence. I believe Bill Ball will still gladly build you one.

Ken

Gee I would hate to pay their insurance costs. The NMLRA said it was stupid and so did most writers. Ignorance?? Just stating real world, good lick defending smokeless powder in todays litigious society.

I held an 07 manufactures license for 15 years and trust me insurance is expensive.

Standards of common knowledge are NO smokeless in a ML push the envelope and good luck to you sir I hope you don't learn the hard way.

[mooman76]

Another accident but this time trying to shoot out a short started ball. http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/292783/

[dtknowles]

Another accident but this time trying to shoot out a short started ball. http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/292783/

It says I don't have permission, Premium Member Info.

Tim

[dondiego]

I logged in and then it opened for me.

[triggerhappy243]

yes, you need to be signed up as a member.

[Screwbolts]

:violin:[smilie=s: :violin:, ignorance, IMHO, is failing to learn, but ignorance can be conquered by a free willingness to learn.

An old geezer willing to still learn,

Ken

[pworley1]

That is why they write "black powder only" on the barrel.

[Tar Heel]

It can be done if you follow this formula precisely.

125572

[triggerhappy243]

Do you follow it left to right or right to left...........oh-oh or is it top to bottom or bottom to top......... Im so confused.

[725]

If the instructions are too hard to follow, you shouldn't play the game.

[opos]

Old man here....still got all my digits...I quit experimenting with things when I was a kid and my cousin handed me a lit 5" salute and said to point it like a roman candle....I have hearing in one ear and just a wee bit in the other...and it took months of pain and work to get the hand back to where it works fine....I trust nothing that I read on the internet unless I know a little more about the person posting...Were I new to reloading or to firearms in general and came upon a "pro and con" thread where seemingly knowledgable folks were discussing using smokeless powder in a b/p rifle...I might read and try to understand what these "experts" were saying and it might sound fun.

I might just try a little of the experimenting with dire results. I read "pet recipes" all the time on the web and I got a serious doubt about the actual experience of the keyboard commando that does the posting..I think some of the "loads" would be safer using C-4 as a propellant than what they swear is their "tack driver"...

I may be an old fuddy duddy but if a weapon says black powder only...that's what it's going to get fed....just like if a recipe from a manual says 10 grains of X YZ powder I'm not going to "substitute" some slow burning rifle powder with Bullseye to see if it's going to work...I'd hate to lead some newcomer down the path getting into the technical details that are so confusing to someone and have them "jump" to the end to get the results and hurt themselves...I am not "my Brother's Mother but I might be his Keeper".

[dtknowles]

Old man here....still got all my digits...I quit experimenting with things when I was a kid and my cousin handed me a lit 5" salute and said to point it like a roman candle....I have hearing in one ear and just a wee bit in the other...and it took months of pain and work to get the hand back to where it works fine....I trust nothing that I read on the internet unless I know a little more about the person posting...Were I new to reloading or to firearms in general and came upon a "pro and con" thread where seemingly knowledgable folks were discussing using smokeless powder in a b/p rifle...I might read and try to understand what these "experts" were saying and it might sound fun.

I might just try a little of the experimenting with dire results. I read "pet recipes" all the time on the web and I got a serious doubt about the actual experience of the keyboard commando that does the posting..I think some of the "loads" would be safer using C-4 as a propellant than what they swear is their "tack driver"...

I may be an old fuddy duddy but if a weapon says black powder only...that's what it's going to get fed....just like if a recipe from a manual says 10 grains of X YZ powder I'm not going to "substitute" some slow burning rifle powder with Bullseye to see if it's going to work...I'd hate to lead some newcomer down the path getting into the technical details that are so confusing to someone and have them "jump" to the end to get the results and hurt themselves...I am not "my Brother's Mother but I might be his Keeper".

So where do the people who would use a black powder substitute like Pyrodex or 777 or the many others safely discuss using those powders. How is a novice to know how fundamentally different H110 is from 777 or Pyrodex is from Lil Gun. This is the internet and visitors need to take everything a little bit skeptically.

Tim

[starmac]

I sure didn't have internet when I bought my first black powder rifle, but I was lucky in the old days they had black powder only, stamped right on the barrel, there were also books you could buy at an unbelievably low price, especially compared to losing fingers.

As a teenager, when I bought my very first lee loader, I had no mentor and had never heard of any internet. I don't recall even having a proper manual, but belive it or not a guy could make safe ammo that got the job at hand done with the instructions that came with the loader.

If the guy used shotgun powder in his muzzleloader, and is somewhere between 15 and 80, he needs to get out of the shooting game.

[Lead Fred]

Now you know who buys inlines

[oldred]

there are some that say you could fill it all the way up and it's wouldn't blow up. The majority of the BP wouldn't even burn inside the rifle.


I have seen this done! About 10 years or so ago my BIL and one of his buddies was arguing this very point and while the BIL (who was saying it could be done) would not hold the rifle he did load an old CVA to within a couple of inches of the muzzle with one patched round ball. He strapped the thing to an old tire and fired it with a string, not very much happened except for a huge belch of smoke and fire most of which occurred as powder burned outside of the barrel. It didn't even make any more noise than a regular load if as much, this was FFG black and I have no idea what would happen with one of the subs.


Those who will stupidly argue that smokeless can be used in any amount in a muzzle loader meant for BP are failing to consider all the variables, there is FAR more to consider than just the strength of the steel the gun is made from although in most MLs that a serious consideration by itself! To argue that it's ok because it's done all the time with cartridge BP firearms fails to consider that the gas is contained and thus sealed by the cartridge case unlike the loose powder with the nipple sealed only by the thin foil of the cap (T/C included this very warning with it's MLS), the purpose built smokeless MLs have a very different ignition seal than most MLs.


Also there are far to many variables such as powder compression (consider how critical seating depth can be when handloading cartridges) with some smokeless powders to make any kind of volume comparisons such as that 30% 4198 to BP suggestion, that's just the sort of suggestion that leads to the kind of thing we end up reading about and discussing what happened!

[M-Tecs]

the way I see it.... using smokeless powder in a muzzleloader is like catching a live grenade with pin removed and putting it in your shirt pocket. NO GOOD OUTCOME CAN BE HAD.



Standards of common knowledge are NO smokeless in a ML push the envelope and good luck to you sir I hope you don't learn the hard way.

I would recommend doing some research on smokeless powder breech systems. With the proper breech system and barrel material smokeless is safe in ML's designed for smokeless. You can use smokeless,sub or black in them. I am currently using both the Savage type I and type II breech systems with sabots. My next one will be with large rifle primers and sabot less bullet. You use a full form bullet sizing die made from the barrel so it is a modern false muzzle used in a press to size and pre-rifle the bullet.http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13487/building-full-form-bullet-sizing (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13487/building-full-form-bullet-sizing)

Good info here on smokeless ML's

http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/ (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/)

http://smokelessmz.com/index.html (http://smokelessmz.com/index.html)

http://www.richardscustomrifles.com/custommuzzleloader.htm (http://www.richardscustomrifles.com/custommuzzleloader.htm)

http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/12570/bp-design-eventual-rifle-build (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/12570/bp-design-eventual-rifle-build)

http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/10847/idea-smokeless-muzzle-loader (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/10847/idea-smokeless-muzzle-loader)

http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13487/building-full-form-bullet-sizing\ (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13487/building-full-form-bullet-sizing/)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmG2p2am6F0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmG2p2am6F0)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-qrmu4XlI8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-qrmu4XlI8)

http://www.prbullet.com/700.htm (http://www.prbullet.com/700.htm)

http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/6553 (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/6553)

http://www.dsscustomguns.com/custom-smokeless-muzzleloaders.aspx (http://www.dsscustomguns.com/custom-smokeless-muzzleloaders.aspx)

http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13224/new-dd-rem-700-plug (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13224/new-dd-rem-700-plug)

[oldred]

JMO,and everyone knows what that's worth, LOL! The Savage and a few custom built smokeless powder MLs should be as safe as any other gun provided they are loaded properly and I'm willing to bet that the Savage blow-ups were the results of "operator error" otherwise the product liability shyst,,,,,,err, lawyers, would be having a field day with Savage! However these things are purpose designed for smokeless and the problems with smokeless in conventional MLs have been addressed in the design. There simply is no safe way to use smokeless in a conventional ML, sure it has been done without maiming/killing the shooter but then people have played Russian Roulette and lived to tell about it. The problem with conventional MLs is that while under SOME circumstances with all the variables within just the right limits it MIGHT not blow up (that time anyway) the constraints are much to narrow to risk and sooner or later, probably much sooner, it will Ka-Boom!

I can't help but think again about the statement earlier "What about the black powder equivalent load of 30% by weight of 4198"! WHAT black powder equivalent load of 4198? Where does this come from and how could such a thing even be possible? Sure there may very well be a certain 30% load of 4198 that equates to a given BP load but change just ONE thing such as bullet weight or even seating depth/pressure and that equivalency goes right out the window! Let's assume an example of a 90 grain load of FFG BP with a 300 grain bullet and a 30% by weight load of 4198, example only I have no idea how close that would be but let's assume for discussion that it's a safe load. With the only difference being the powder type and with bullet weight, etc being the same, this may be a safe load but change both bullets to 400 grain and see what happens! With the BP there likely would be slightly more recoil and slightly more pressure but 100 grains additional bullet weight with the 4198 smokeless load could easily become a bomb! So how could there be any kind of "equivalency" conversion using 4198, or any other smokeless, to BP?

The flaw to this kind of thinking should be obvious, BP is going to burn at a given rate regardless of pressure so while the heavier bullet may cause a slight pressure rise due to increased resistance the burn rate will remain relatively constant but that's not true with smokeless. Pressure rise can be compounded with smokeless, that is if the pressure rises due to increased bullet weight the powder burn rate will change drastically leading to even more pressure and to prevent these pressures from becoming catastrophically high requires tightly controlled conditions such as bullet weight, seating depth/pressure, etc. That's why ANY changes in already established smokeless load data must be approached slowly and with caution and why it is simply impossible to have a safe "equivalent" smokeless load vs a BP load. That "30% by weight" of 4198 might be close to some BP loads but it could be a bomb at the same ratio under other conditions, besides there is still the problem of the ignition system gas seal on conventional MLs.

[waksupi]

I've been shooting muzzleloaders for over 40 years. In that time, I have double charged several times. It's like dry balling, there are those who have, and those who will. Someone who gets a modern smokeless approved ML is most likely not an experienced ML shooter, and is more likely to double charge. An accident waiting to happen. Then when they blow a rifle, they will blame everything but their own negligence.

[opos]

So where do the people who would use a black powder substitute like Pyrodex or 777 or the many others safely discuss using those powders. How is a novice to know how fundamentally different H110 is from 777 or Pyrodex is from Lil Gun. This is the internet and visitors need to take everything a little bit skeptically.

Tim

Right off the Hodgden web site for Pyrodex...they go in depth about 777 and Pyrodex...that would be a start.

http://www.hodgdon.com/ml-warning.html

[dtknowles]

I've been shooting muzzleloaders for over 40 years. In that time, I have double charged several times. It's like dry balling, there are those who have, and those who will. Someone who gets a modern smokeless approved ML is most likely not an experienced ML shooter, and is more likely to double charge. An accident waiting to happen. Then when they blow a rifle, they will blame everything but their own negligence.

Maybe I am not typical but I bought my Savage 10ML after shooting muzzleloaders for 30 years. My first pistol was a kit built .45 cal. single shot percussion pistol. The Savage was my fifth muzzleloader. I have since bought my sixth a Ruger OA. I think that your generalization is not well founded.

Tim

[dtknowles]

Right off the Hodgden web site for Pyrodex...they go in depth about 777 and Pyrodex...that would be a start.

http://www.hodgdon.com/ml-warning.html

Yes, if the novice is wise he would go there before he came here and I think it is fair to talk about subs and smokeless here without worrying about novices getting the wrong idea. This thread carries enough warnings that the novice should not get the wrong idea.

Tim

[waksupi]

Maybe I am not typical but I bought my Savage 10ML after shooting muzzleloaders for 30 years. My first pistol was a kit built .45 cal. single shot percussion pistol. The Savage was my fifth muzzleloader. I have since bought my sixth a Ruger OA. I think that your generalization is not well founded.

Tim

Well, you've been shooting them 30+ years. Have you ever double charged, or dry balled?

[opos]

Yes, if the novice is wise he would go there before he came here and I think it is fair to talk about subs and smokeless here without worrying about novices getting the wrong idea. This thread carries enough warnings that the novice should not get the wrong idea.

Tim


I agree that the novice should not get the wrong idea and I'm not a "chicken little" kind of person...but I read lots of posts on lots of sites for loading, shooting and for other hobbies I engage in that can be equally as dangerous if not properly approached. For some reason there seem to be a bunch of new folks in the shooting hobby/sport that simply insist on "pushing" the envelope at every turn and now and then they get a big surprise...I guess my point was probably placing too much "responsibility" on the folks doing some posting and having a conversation and trying to be "mother hen" to the guy that just got the new ML for Christmas and goes looking for how he can make it into a Sako high power..they are out there...I know a couple.

I do a lot of single action Ruger shooting and love to load for them...I am constantly amazed at how many newer single action shooters come on a site and the very first question is "can I push the Ruger only loads" in my New Vaquero? "they should know better but the push seems to go on and on"...then the "arguments" begin among folks that have "slapped the bull on the nose" and been lucky and how if it says Ruger "it's a Ruger"....There is a lot of information that says just don't do it..but new folks continue to think this is a new fangled hobby and they know better.

Hope I was not overly "protective" of people...like I said in my earlier post...I had to hold onto a big firecracker when I was a little kid to find out you don't hold on to a firecracker and you damn well don't trust your older cousin..Somehow we all survive and enjoy our hobbies

[dtknowles]

Well, you've been shooting them 30+ years. Have you ever double charged, or dry balled?

Waksupi, you trying to jinks me? As a kid I dry balled the 45 pistol. I was able to dribble enough powder in thru the nipple seat to clear the ball. As far as I know I have never double charged on either double powder or double projectile. I shot the 45 pistol a lot (it was my only pistol for years) and my 36 cal cap and ball revolver. The rest I have only shot enough to get a working load and prove reliable function. I have not had the ROA a long time and have only had it to the range once. Double or dry ball is not much of a problem with the cap and ball revolvers as long as you don't follow the squib without clearing it (just saying not had the pleasure).

Tim

[dtknowles]

I agree that the novice should not get the wrong idea and I'm not a "chicken little" kind of person...but I read lots of posts on lots of sites for loading, shooting and for other hobbies I engage in that can be equally as dangerous if not properly approached. For some reason there seem to be a bunch of new folks in the shooting hobby/sport that simply insist on "pushing" the envelope at every turn and now and then they get a big surprise...I guess my point was probably placing too much "responsibility" on the folks doing some posting and having a conversation and trying to be "mother hen" to the guy that just got the new ML for Christmas and goes looking for how he can make it into a Sako high power..they are out there...I know a couple.

I do a lot of single action Ruger shooting and love to load for them...I am constantly amazed at how many newer single action shooters come on a site and the very first question is "can I push the Ruger only loads" in my New Vaquero? "they should know better but the push seems to go on and on"...then the "arguments" begin among folks that have "slapped the bull on the nose" and been lucky and how if it says Ruger "it's a Ruger"....There is a lot of information that says just don't do it..but new folks continue to think this is a new fangled hobby and they know better.

Hope I was not overly "protective" of people...like I said in my earlier post...I had to hold onto a big firecracker when I was a little kid to find out you don't hold on to a firecracker and you damn well don't trust your older cousin..Somehow we all survive and enjoy our hobbies

I don't have a problem with people pointing out the hazards to novices? I just don't think we should not talk about some things just because a novice might get the wrong idea. That said, I would not talk about how to use smokeless powder in a modern firearm marked for black powder only in any public forum it is too much of a hazard to anyone trying and to the people around them. I feel the same way about threads about making priming compounds, some things should require some sort of hurdle before access is granted.

Tim

[waksupi]

Waksupi, you trying to jinks me? As a kid I dry balled the 45 pistol. I was able to dribble enough powder in thru the nipple seat to clear the ball. As far as I know I have never double charged on either double powder or double projectile. I shot the 45 pistol a lot (it was my only pistol for years) and my 36 cal cap and ball revolver. The rest I have only shot enough to get a working load and prove reliable function. I have not had the ROA a long time and have only had it to the range once. Double or dry ball is not much of a problem with the cap and ball revolvers as long as you don't follow the squib without clearing it (just saying not had the pleasure).

Tim

Heck, I've probably saved two or three pounds worth of powder by dry balling over the years. :bigsmyl2:

[opos]

I don't have a problem with people pointing out the hazards to novices? I just don't think we should not talk about some things just because a novice might get the wrong idea. That said, I would not talk about how to use smokeless powder in a modern firearm marked for black powder only in any public forum it is too much of a hazard to anyone trying and to the people around them. I feel the same way about threads about making priming compounds, some things should require some sort of hurdle before access is granted.

Tim
Besides shooting and loading I'm much involved in restoration of turn of the century farm engines and equipment...been doing it since I can recall...100 year old cast iron...brittle and like shrapnel if it breaks under load...new folks finding a crack in a 200# flywheel and "deciding" to weld it up....near impossible...looks good...might hold for a while but when they let go while spinning, people get hurt or die...it's a common thing on the old engine boards for the discussion to drift over from should it be done to "how someone heard that someone else did it" or how someone did it and has gotten away with it for years...then it gets dangerous...not unlike the low number 1903 Springfields with the heat treat problems....lots of folks shoot them and lots get along ok...but there is the occasional newcomer that thinks because someone got along ok...that they can go to a 60K pressure load with no problems...it's all about willingness to listen and to learn from those that go before that have wisdom

[waksupi]

Besides shooting and loading I'm much involved in restoration of turn of the century farm engines and equipment...been doing it since I can recall...100 year old cast iron...brittle and like shrapnel if it breaks under load...new folks finding a crack in a 200# flywheel and "deciding" to weld it up....near impossible...looks good...might hold for a while but when they let go while spinning, people get hurt or die...it's a common thing on the old engine boards for the discussion to drift over from should it be done to "how someone heard that someone else did it" or how someone did it and has gotten away with it for years...then it gets dangerous...not unlike the low number 1903 Springfields with the heat treat problems....lots of folks shoot them and lots get along ok...but there is the occasional newcomer that thinks because someone got along ok...that they can go to a 60K pressure load with no problems...it's all about willingness to listen and to learn from those that go before that have wisdom

The only shop in the country I know capable of repairing the old equipment properly is Lang Machine Shop, Hector, Minnesota.

[Charlie, AKA The Deacon]

Heck, I've probably saved two or three pounds worth of powder by dry balling over the years. :bigsmyl2:

I have never done that!!!:shock: and I also do not flinch when on a pistol course, :oops:

[NavyVet1959]

I don't own any blackpowder firearms, but *if* I was extremely desperate to try a smokeless alternative to blackpowder, I would probably start my testing with the slowest powder I could find -- maybe the 20mm or .50BMG pulldown powders.

Maybe someone with Quickload could run the numbers on a .45-70 with 70 gr of H870 (assuming Quickload doesn't have WC860, WC870, or WC872 data) to see what the pressures would be? I'm *assuming* that you can put 70 gr of these powders in a .45-70. That's probably a bit higher than will actually fit though.

[oldred]

I don't own any blackpowder firearms, but *if* I was extremely desperate to try a smokeless alternative to blackpowder, I would probably start my testing with the slowest powder I could find -- maybe the 20mm or .50BMG pulldown powders.

Maybe someone with Quickload could run the numbers on a .45-70 with 70 gr of H870 (assuming Quickload doesn't have WC860, WC870, or WC872 data) to see what the pressures would be? I'm *assuming* that you can put 70 gr of these powders in a .45-70. That's probably a bit higher than will actually fit though.


45/70 or other cartridge gun that has the brass cases sealing the gas maybe but not in a ML for the reasons already mentioned, while strength of the firearm is of course a big concern it's not the only reason not to try this!

[NavyVet1959]

45/70 or other cartridge gun that has the brass cases sealing the gas maybe but not in a ML for the reasons already mentioned, while strength of the firearm is of course a big concern it's not the only reason not to try this!

I was suggesting it since Quickload can handle it and it would give a rough estimate of the possible pressures that could be experienced if this was used in a traditional muzzleloader. Since these are the slowest available powders, it's kind of best case scenario. If Quickload show this powder as having too much pressure, then no smokeless powder could be a one to one replacement.

[NavyVet1959]

Here's the numbers with a full case of that powder.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?260129-45-70-with-other-pistol-powder-beside-Unique&p=3048732&viewfull=1#post3048732


I have a very recent copy of QL, Version 3.8, and I can't find either WC872 nor WC867. I did however have listed Hodgdon H870, US 869, and 50BMG powders. I am not responsible for any misuse of this data - just presenting here for a comparison.

This data is NOT for actual use - just for comparing powders.
At 100% load density, using a 405gr cast bullet, OAL=2.550", 20" barrel length:
H 50BMG = 50.59gr, 925 fps, 770 ft-lb, max pressure = 9263 psi, 24% of the powder burnt
H US 869 = 53.08gr, 908 fps, 742 ft-lb, max pressure = 9032 psi, 24.7% of the powder burnt
H H870 = 51.46gr, 927 fps, 773 ft-lb, max pressure = 8946 psi, 26.4% of the powder burnt

on the other extreme, just for comparison at also 100% load density:
IMR Trail Boss = 16.79gr, 1129 fps, 1146 ft-lb, max pressure = 28208 psi (!!!)


Again, the data above is NOT for actual use - just for comparing powders.

So, max pressure is less than 9300 psi. What pressure does black powder generate? From what little I've seen posted on the web, it can generate a lot more than this.

[oldred]

That may be in a brass case BUT that ignores the fact that those numbers are all dependent on critical factors, such as seating depth, etc being closely maintained when the case is loaded. There simply is too much room for error in controlling critical factors, for example when ramming a bullet down the barrel as opposed to precisely seating it in a case with a loading press! With BP or one of the subs bullet seating won't make much difference as long as the air space is eliminated but not so with smokeless, change that seating depth or powder compression by just a little bit and those QL pressure numbers go right out the window. I don't see what's so hard to understand here but while most folks do understand some just don't seem to get the fact that smokeless has critical factors that MUST be met when the components are assembled and if loaded outside of these parameters the pressure can and sometimes will GREATLY exceed anything possible with BP! You can't look at how the pressure acts in a properly assembled brass cartridge and apply that to a projectile with loose powder rammed down a barrel from the muzzle end! The bottom line is that BP is going to burn a constant rate regardless but ANYTHING that causes smokeless to increase in pressure will compound itself by causing the powder to burn faster which in turn causes even more pressure, pressures that can far exceed anything possible with BP. ALL the factors concerning loading smokeless must be tightly controlled to maintain the proper pressure curve which is easily done when loading cartridges on a press but not so with a ML.


Think about this one example, it's a well known fact that lever guns need a heavy crimp to hold the bullet in the case and blow-ups have happened because recoil forced bullets in a tubular magazine deeper into the case causing a pressure increase but it wouldn't have mattered if BP were being used, and this is just one of the things that can go wrong. The bottom line is that as long as the air space is eliminated BP is going to be limited as to how much pressure it can produce but even small otherwise low pressure charges of smokeless can and will reach extremely high pressure levels if any of the factors governing cartridge loading are not strictly duplicated, in a ML this is sometimes all but impossible to do! Then there is the problem of the gas seal of the ignition system, serious accidents can happen with escaping gas at pressures that might not yet be high enough to take the gun apart.


We can go on all day with the "yeah buts" and it will not change anything, the fact is that for years people have insisted on the very thing you are trying to say and the results are well documented! Unfortunately some folks will keep right on insisting that smokeless can be used by simply looking at what they THINK are low pressure loads but totally failing to understand (or simply refusing to accept) all the factors involved! Because of this we will keep right on seeing pictures like the one of that inline and many others and we will continue reading about missing fingers, mangled hands, etc. Thinking a safe load in a properly assembled cartridge is going to act the same if loosely loaded in a ML is pure folly that ignores not only warnings from those who do understand but also it ignores past and painful history!

[oldred]

Here's the numbers with a full case of that powder.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?260129-45-70-with-other-pistol-powder-beside-Unique&p=3048732&viewfull=1#post3048732



So, max pressure is less than 9300 psi. What pressure does black powder generate? From what little I've seen posted on the web, it can generate a lot more than this.



This is an apples/oranges comparison, apparently the reasoning that since the "Max" pressure with that load is even less than BP it would be safe right? The problem is that "Max" pressure rating is the max for that load in THAT CONFIGURATION but that same powder charge with the same weight bullet could be drastically different under different circumstances! That's why you can't look at any given cartridge load and compare to BP pressures if that same load is used in a different manner.

By your logic this example should be safe, a certain 410 shotshell factory load was/is around 12,000 PSI which should be well under most BP loads so how could it be dangerous? I use this as an example because this very load had got a fellow I worked with hurt some years ago when he used the same reasoning. This happened to him before I got acquainted with him but he described what he did and what happened, he took what would have been a safe pressure loading in a shotshell and broke it down then loaded the components in a 45 caliber ML (IIRC he said it was a Navy arms) just as they came out of the cartridge. Upon firing this thing the results were not nearly as catastrophic as that inline but the barrel split about an inch right at the breech plug and several small pieces became shrapnel, while his hands received only minor injuries he had a rather nasty eye injury and hearing damage to his right ear. The shape of the chamber/powder column/bore diameter, etc all combine to change flame travel and pressure rise so what could very well be a low pressure in one configuration could easily be a bomb in another with smokeless powders!

[johnson1942]

i cant see what is so special about smokeless in a muzzleloader. their are people who are constantly trying to kill them selves and fancy them selves leader of learning new thing. then their is those with commom sense. just let me know when your going to put smokelss in your muzzleloader so i wont be their. knew a guy over 30 years ago who got away with it over and over again but i never stood close to him. he had a thompson hawken .45 roundball gun. shot shotgun powder in matches all the time and won. i think he died of natural causes but he was lucky. maybe all these guys who want to figure out the best safe smokelless powder load for their side lock are trying to get cast in the next ******* movie. good luck on both.

[cold1]

Unfortunately some folks will keep right on insisting that smokeless can be used by simply looking at what they THINK are low pressure loads but totally failing to understand (or simply refusing to accept) all the factors involved! Because of this we will keep right on seeing pictures like the one of that inline and many others and we will continue reading about missing fingers, mangled hands, etc. Thinking a safe load in a properly assembled cartridge is going to act the same if loosely loaded in a ML is pure folly that ignores not only warnings from those who do understand but also it ignores past and painful history!

Its not thinking about max pressures. Its a line of reasoning. Here it goes:

"A 45-70 was originaly a BP cartridge. I have shot my 50 cal ML with 150 grains of BP and everything is OK. I should be able to take any 45-70 smokeless load and duplicate it in my ML since it can handle twice as much BP as the original BP load."

Not getting into the different pressure levels of the 45-70, but alot of people will use a similar line of reasoning on loading their ML. If you have not done any research and are new to the gun world, this sounds like a reasonable argument for duplicating a smokeless load in you ML.

[NavyVet1959]

Its not thinking about max pressures. Its a line of reasoning. Here it goes:

"A 45-70 was originaly a BP cartridge. I have shot my 50 cal ML with 150 grains of BP and everything is OK. I should be able to take any 45-70 smokeless load and duplicate it in my ML since it can handle twice as much BP as the original BP load."

Not getting into the different pressure levels of the 45-70, but alot of people will use a similar line of reasoning on loading their ML. If you have not done any research and are new to the gun world, this sounds like a reasonable argument for duplicating a smokeless load in you ML.

I'm just saying that if you have a .45 caliber muzzle loader and a loading for a .45-70 that takes a full case of powder (i.e. the bullet is seated directly on the powder) and the pressure for that .45-70 loading is less than what a BP loading would be, then it should be possible to use that in the BP firearm. With the powder that I suggested though, it would probably have less velocity than the BP though. According to Quickload, less than 25% of that powder actually gets burned. Using a shotgun or pistol powder would be dangerous though. In fact, most rifle powders probably would also be dangerous. The .50BMG and 20mm powders, probably not since they are so slow burning.

[mooman76]

I'm just saying that if you have a .45 caliber muzzle loader and a loading for a .45-70 that takes a full case of powder (i.e. the bullet is seated directly on the powder) and the pressure for that .45-70 loading is less than what a BP loading would be, then it should be possible to use that in the BP firearm. With the powder that I suggested though, it would probably have less velocity than the BP though. According to Quickload, less than 25% of that powder actually gets burned. Using a shotgun or pistol powder would be dangerous though. In fact, most rifle powders probably would also be dangerous. The .50BMG and 20mm powders, probably not since they are so slow burning.


Well let us know how it goes...if you can.

[oldred]

I'm just saying that if you have a .45 caliber muzzle loader and a loading for a .45-70 that takes a full case of powder (i.e. the bullet is seated directly on the powder) and the pressure for that .45-70 loading is less than what a BP loading would be, then it should be possible to use that in the BP firearm. With the powder that I suggested though, it would probably have less velocity than the BP though. According to Quickload, less than 25% of that powder actually gets burned. Using a shotgun or pistol powder would be dangerous though. In fact, most rifle powders probably would also be dangerous. The .50BMG and 20mm powders, probably not since they are so slow burning.


The flaw to your line of reasoning seems to be that if that particular 45/70 load produces that amount of pressure as it is loaded in the 45/70 case it would produce that same pressure if loaded in a different case or loaded loose in a ML, unfortunately it doesn't work like that! You are getting your terms confused, that QL "max" pressure is not the MAXIMUM" pressure that amount of that powder with that weight bullet is capable of producing it's QL's prediction of what it should make IN THAT PARTICULAR CARTRIDGE AND IN THAT CONFIGURATION! That amount of powder, unlike a given amount of BP, is very much capable of producing a lot more pressure than what QL is predicting as the top pressure under those circumstances, change anything and even QL will tell you those numbers then become meaningless and the pressure could easily go through the roof! What's so hard to understand? A certain amount of a given smokeless powder in a specific case and bullet weight can and will act very differently if used in a different case with a different volume/shape just as it would behave differently if removed from that brass case and dumped into a BP rifle chamber, that 9,000+ PSI is NOT the max that charge is capable of! That powder charge could probably make many times that pressure just by changing a few factors, BP is very forgiving in this respect but smokeless most definitely is not.

Take that example I gave about the guy with the 45 caliber ML, he broke down a cartridge would have been well within BP pressures if fired as it was meant to be but when it was taken apart and reloaded into the ML the barrel burst at the breech plug. What you are trying to say is nothing new, people have been arguing that same line of reasoning for years and the results are well known!

[NavyVet1959]

Well let us know how it goes...if you can.

As I previously mentioned, I do not have a muzzle loading firearm (nor any particular desire to own one).

But, *if* I did and was inclined to try to find a smokeless substitute, I would start off with something like the extremely slow 20mm cannon or .50 BMG powders, not a fast pistol or shotgun powder.

The shotgun powders keep their pressure down in shotgun rounds because there is space between the charge and the pellets taken up by the wad in addition to being smooth bore. Unless you designed a muzzle loader barrel that could guarantee that there would be space between the powder and the bullet, using a fast powder like that would be dangerous since you cannot control the effective seating depth.

Loading a muzzle loading firearm is basically the equivalent of loading a really long cartridge. If you cannot be consistent in your loading technique, *bad* things can happen. Using black powder gives you a lot more margin for error, that's why loading smokeless in a muzzle loader can definitely be dangerous. Plus, most muzzle loading firearms are probably only designed to handle the pressure that black powder can generate and as such, you would have to be very careful in your choice of smokeless. It wouldn't be that difficult to design a muzzle loader that could handle smokeless. You would just need to have a "powder chamber" that was of enough of a smaller diameter than the projectile / bore that it was basically impossible for a person to push the bullet any further. Combine that with a barrel made to handle the pressure of smokeless (proper alloy of steel plus sufficient wall thickness) and it would be possible. Is it *worth* doing though? Not in my opinion, but it would be *possible*.

[oldred]

As I previously mentioned, I do not have a muzzle loading firearm (nor any particular desire to own one).

Some things are sometimes better left as they are.



It wouldn't be that difficult to design a muzzle loader that could handle smokeless.


You are not aware of the Savage 10ML????????

That one by Savage and a few custom built smokeless MLs do already exist but these are quite different than a conventional ML which has been the subject here, comparing these rifles to a conventional ML is another case of apples to oranges and even the purpose built Savage had a short and very questionable history. These purpose built MLs are built from modern high strength steels but just as importantly they have a different ignition system than a conventional ML, most of the customs are simply converted cartridge arms but either is very different than a conventional type.

[mooman76]

You are correct in saying "Is it *worth* doing though? Not in my opinion, but it would be *possible*." With all the new substitutes they have now, it just isn't worth the chance. I also could probably figure out some smokeless load that would work but it would take allot of testing and figuring but not worth the effort. Unfortunately there are allot of people out there either not smart enough or don't know any better because they have never did any reloading and don't realize how much danger and pressure is produced by even a small amount of powder. That is allot in why some have bought muzzle loaders approved for smokeless powders but didn't heed the warnings on powders to use and figuring they can go over the limit on powder thinking there is a big safety margin on the limit.

[mack1]

The problem with smokless in a muzzleloader begins with the nipple, savage found this out. Next and this is opinion the projectile is in he rifiing so it is loose and needs to bump up for accuracy which leaves you using powerbelts. Also compressing smokeless is a problem some sort of ring to stop compression would be needed. This is all speckulation on my part I haven't tried any of this.

[oldred]

It may be speculation but it seems to be spot on, especially the ignition (nipple) part because that's been established from the beginning.

[M-Tecs]

The problem with smokless in a muzzleloader begins with the nipple, savage found this out. Next and this is opinion the projectile is in he rifiing so it is loose and needs to bump up for accuracy which leaves you using powerbelts. Also compressing smokeless is a problem some sort of ring to stop compression would be needed. This is all speckulation on my part I haven't tried any of this.

The ventliners do erode but they are replaceable. None of the smokeless shooters use powerbelts since the belts are not tough enough and no ring is used.

http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/board/23/savage-smokeless-muzzleloading

http://smokelessmz.com/index.html

http://ridgerunner20.tripod.com/thesavagearchivepages/id19.html

[Screwbolts]

The problem with smokless in a muzzleloader begins with the nipple,"Well, smokeless MLs do not have nipples" savage found this out. "Hard to find something out that is non existent other than you speculation" Next and this is opinion the projectile is in he rifiing so it is loose and needs to bump up for accuracy which leaves you using powerbelts. Once again not true or relivent in Smokeless guns, I shoot water dropped smooth sided boolits out to 300 yards regularly. Also compressing smokeless is a problem some sort of ring to stop compression would be needed. Further speculation not based on any known facts, I want all the compression I can get on my smokeless load of my chosen powder. And this is with a tight fitted combination of sabot and projectile that reguires more than 40 lbs to slide down the bore. This is all speckulation on my part I haven't tried any of this. This last line says it all, at least you have added to you posts count.

M-Tech has posted good links for those that wish to learn.

Ken

[mack1]

M-Tech has posted good links for those that wish to learn.

Ken
Thanks for the links M-Tecs. I like the idea of SML I will enjoy the reading. I made my post as my own thoughts on the matter of SMl rifles I think that is what this board is for. After reading on the pressure and velocity listings on q loads it seems the rules for cartridge smokless and Ml smokeless are very different, the compression surprises me this is not good in a cartridge.
screwbolts the smoothsided waterdroped boolets you use are they gc or plainbase also what alloy or hardnsss are they, my concern is leading thanks for the comments this may be a fun project.
As for post count I'm not sure how much money that is worth but will gladly sell all of mine.

[M-Tecs]

With a ramrod in a ML you are hard pressed :bigsmyl2: to get 60 pounds of downward force. In a reloading press is it is easy to apply a 10 or 20 times that amount of force. Some powders should not be compressed but its recommended for most. I read this a lot. I think some are confusing compression with reducing volume such as setting bullets too deep in pistol cases with fast powders.

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-education/reloading-beginners/compressed-loads


Compressed Loads

Normally a pistol or rifle shellcase is considered full, or 100% loading density, when the powder charge sits at the base of the bullet when the bullet is fully seated. It is possible with some powders and cartridges to increase the powder charge slightly above this point, such that when the bullet is seated it actually compresses the powder charge slightly. This condition is known as a compressed load.
Hodgdon notes in its reloading data if the subject charge is a compressed load. A full case, or lightly compressed charge is an ideal condition for creating loads with the most uniform velocities and pressures, and oftentimes, producing top accuracy

http://www.shootersforum.com/handloading-procedures-practices/81468-compressed-loads-how-much.html

[Screwbolts]

Compressed is the correct wording, maybe with your ramrod you can only get 60, I regularly see 160+ on Mine. Yes I have and old bathroom scale below my loading bench that I often use to check how many pounds of pressure is required to push my chosen sabot and boolit combo down, then by placing any one of my custom made ball starters over the end of the solid aluminum ram rod, I seat the sabot on the powder with up to and beyond 160 pounds, This tightly packs and does compress the powder some. Yes a press is capable of crushing powder in heavily compressed loads, far beyond what is considered normal in smokeless Muzzleloading.

[M-Tecs]

I am just switching form sabots to full form bullets. After 40 pounds I haven't seen better SD's or accuracy with either but I have not tried anything close to 160 pounds. I am really liking the full form since you don't have the heat sensitivity of sabots.

[Screwbolts]

This discussion maybe should go to a new thread, I do not wish to hijack the OPs thread.

The alloy is WWs water dropped ( Verel Smith of LBT, recommended this alloy and WD, his LFN needs no expansion and he recommended 1500 to 1750 FPS tops for his Boolit design, I concur. ) in 2 weeks usually see 28 BNH. Please remember that the boolitz are shot in sabots, so no lead barrel contact occurs. Thus no barrel leading. The powders that are recommended for SML are the ones that only require -15K of pressure for complete burn. ( for guns built for smokeless use only! RE7, H4227 and IMR, IMR SR4759, AAC 5744 These are the most popular. )

This is a mold that I cut myself, It started life a a .45 Maxi mold, I shortened it and then using my own ground tooling, cut the cavity to drop a clone of the Hornady 250 gr XTP. this boolit is 265 gr. Never shoot a deer with it. It shoots great.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=af3e18b8a0&view=fimg&th=14ad13be417f606d&attid=0.1&disp=inline&realattid=1489868617142844789-local0&safe=1&attbid=ANGjdJ-0IAvIzYzvx-ODbggyleTBu0eoUl3joEyw2sjcaJz6yzKUnpUf1RAdvON1BbFc Yi7kJbDYYPjgt9tf-QAaCRTvxWKA1l8sirD4AgGt4nN7aoK25sx-IkEwRpo&ats=1420850228961&rm=14ad13be417f606d&zw&sz=w1566-h669

The previous mold experience led me to call Verel Smith of LBT, that call ended with, Verel, cut me a double Cavity of your recommendations for our use in SMLs. We talked of alloy and Velocity. He cut me a beautiful piece of art work that drops .452 LFN boolitz that tip my scale at 333 gr. with my alloy. They also fly like they have wings. My brothers prefer this one over my favorite a BRP design. This mold has cast thousands of boolitz.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=af3e18b8a0&view=fimg&th=14ad14993bce33bd&attid=0.1&disp=inline&realattid=1489869687195959296-local0&safe=1&attbid=ANGjdJ85ItOa94lYL7RkWZVFuBwVvyGNyBG9S0qNmPs BCa_kP3EP0VMOaF7gPM6eLdlSK4Iu-Vl-UWcogk7CjqHDP4nzsy2RKnoAYzZxaSXnQuWEnuGurkjxxT6MDY Q&ats=1420850747940&rm=14ad14993bce33bd&zw&sz=w1566-h669

With 5 Savages in the Family and my 4 Non Savage SML I needed another mold to keep them fed. Well BRP listed a 300gr ML BB design that he would cut a 5 cav for. This was a natural for me, I was spending to much time with a 2 cavity mold. I did return the mold to Bruce and he removed .025 from the base removing most of the Beveled Base. I found with smokeless the heavy Beveled base would allow the sabot to fail. What I ended up with is IMHO, perfect. a 288 gr FN boolit of .452 diam. A little smaller Meplat so it can be pushed faster without going over Verel SMiths DV criteria. I shoot them at 1950 FPS out of 3 Different SML guns. They fly like the have wings and Harvest deer nicely. I keep a couple 3 pound coffee cans full of these for a reason, Less recoil than the LBT, and saves a little alloy, I have never recovered one.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=af3e18b8a0&view=fimg&th=14ad15098847ca47&attid=0.1&disp=inline&realattid=1489870167632510976-local0&safe=1&attbid=ANGjdJ87P6XnNDfW2yXC04-hQ3hLu6cWzrfWFGEec2kTVJs8lILD-osPYKQqVwaMfxqGai8MbKenLCkFbi-TExU5s9SfLgfFOAVUD-DvRytNGpLOEHFLrAbpHgCQwu4&ats=1420851326029&rm=14ad15098847ca47&zw&sz=w1566-h669

This is the only LBT that has been recovered in eight+ years of Harvesting critters with them. It came out of a nice 9 Point, the deer was facing straight away at 225 yards, My brother Bryan hit it just low and right of its Brown eye.The boolit then Destroyed the Rt hip joint, but was not done traveling, it charged straight forward hitting the spine were it dips between the shoulders. It still wasn't done, it came to rest in the skin of the front of the neck just under the chin. Needless to say the deer was DRT. it started at 333gr and is riveted, and 297gr now. We like the FN boolitz, there is an unfired LBT to its left and a BRP to the right. Notice the very slight bevel on both the fired and un fired LBT. Hard boolits work for us. You milage may vary, but we in my family and group of friends will be hunting with a FN that is hard.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=af3e18b8a0&view=fimg&th=14ad1590e8cc01c6&attid=0.1&disp=inline&realattid=1489870752047955968-local0&safe=1&attbid=ANGjdJ-2Z2UyqxNMlS9v4kq19rJMZOQPDqR7CmUGebK2wxEgQLH7Pd4Lp 2QN_9rTXQB5q1K6jswfzDYdqLj4YeQgTNZkNJMGsUJ7cOGaSO_ sQtBo27EZPsKza6UsGWU&ats=1420851849972&rm=14ad1590e8cc01c6&zw&sz=w1566-h669

Several in my family by the Harvester Short Black sabots by the case from Graf and sons, I have a full case on hand at all times, there is 1 1/2 cases in the closest now, that doesn't count what I keep in my shooting box.

I use Winchester 209s in Breech plugs that I make for all of my SMls. Tight fitting sabots/boolit combo is a must with SMLs.

My first SML build used a Remington #5 Rolling Block action. 26" SS barrel 1x24 twist. My next 2 used Remington 700 ML actions. 1x28 Barrels.

Ken

[Screwbolts]

M-Tecs, ( sorry for bad spelling before, I am bad. )

The only time I have had sabots fail was if I used a boolit with a large bevel base. I believe if a boolit designed for a gas check is going to be used, it should be checked when fired in a Sabot with either BH209 or smokeless for fuel. I find the flat base full diameter supports the sabot better. This is also why I and my Family and friends use the Harvester sabot exclusively. I have also shot my BRP boolitz in .45 smokeless guns paper patched. Nothing wrong with full diameter Boolitz, IMHO.

Seriously, all of my loads that I shoot require both hands to load, with at least 60 lbs to slide down a clean or freshly fired bore. Then I seat on the powder with all the pressure I can apply. I put the ram rod in a hole in the side of the ball on my ball starters, or you could say I put the ball on the ram rod, either way it allows me to seat it heavily. I can not start my boolitz in sabots down the barrel without a short starter.

I make my own vent liners from 10-32 Halo Krome screws using .03125 cobalt drills, they sell these drills in packs of ten for a reason. Snap. I replace my vents when they erode to .036. Usually it takes more than 100 primers to enlarge to this. I like Re7 in my guns and I load to the equivalent of 105 gr of BH209. 1950 FPS over my crony. I also fit my Breach plug for a .0015 crush fit on the primer.

Smokeless MLs are not for everyone, I know that, attention to detail is a must with them.

Ken

[M-Tecs]

Ken

The issue I have with sabots is the decreased accuracy if I don't let the barrel cool. On hot days I have to wait 10 minutes between shots. The full form are jacketed but they have no loss of accuracy when the barrel gets hot. I still uses sabots in my Savage ML1. This is the orginal with the primer modules. In this one I use 300 grain Barnes Originals, Black Crush Rib Harvester sabots and 69 grains of H4198. I built a 45 cal for full form on a 700ML with a Kreiger barrel and a Savage Breach Plug.

[waksupi]

Ken

The issue I have with sabots is the decreased accuracy if I don't let the barrel cool. On hot days I have to wait 10 minutes between shots. The full form are jacketed but they have no loss of accuracy when the barrel gets hot. I still uses sabots in my Savage ML1. This is the orginal with the primer modules. In this one I use 300 grain Barnes Originals, Black Crush Rib Harvester sabots and 69 grains of H4198. I built a 45 cal for full form on a 700ML with a Kreiger barrel and a Savage Breach Plug.

One of these days, I am going to take the time to write a post on round ball, and why they are superior to any other ML projectile for hunting. Quite a few here already know, but it needs laid out.

[NavyVet1959]

One of these days, I am going to take the time to write a post on round ball, and why they are superior to any other ML projectile for hunting. Quite a few here already know, but it needs laid out.

A neighbor of mine had a hog hanging from a limb in a tree in his front yard the other night and he was skinning / butchering him. Asked him what he had shot him with and he said that it was a shotgun with "hog shot" -- basically three 0.625" round balls per 12-gauge shell. He was hunting with a buddy and they both shot at the same time. The hog was able to move into the brush and they had to search for him. When they finally found him, he was still moving, so they needed yet another round at basically point blank into his head. I saw one of the round balls as they were cleaning it and as far as I could tell, it was not even deformed. I think you could have reloaded it as is without recasting.

From what I could see of the carcass, they had shot him a bit further back than what I would have tried for. He looked to have been hit about halfway between the front and hind quarters and up towards the spine. I prefer a shot right around the shoulder, if not slightly forward. I'm too old to be chasing an injured hog through the brush, so if I don't think I can make a clean kill, I will pass on the shot.

[Screwbolts]

M-Tecs,

I do understand, you are traveling the correct rd for you, and that is great! Our choices on loads, and the criteria we set ourselves is different. I believe that is why some have sabot failure and others don't. Would you like to try some of my cast for paper patching experiments in your cannons?

I actually put a "ML I" together for my neighbor from parts. He already owned a 110 in 223, I found a take off barrel some were and he got from Savage one of the original modular breech plugs and 3 modules. We assemble it here and Neil shot it for a couple of years. He lost interest and sold the Barrel with accessories to a fellow that I think also belongs to this forum.

Because of my talking to Verel Smith and his cutting me that mold I throttled down my SMLs, That may be why we do not see the Sabot failures that you do/did. For youth hunters I recommend only 28-30 gr of SR4759, 1550-1650 FPS with the LBTs or BRPs, a deadly combo, shot all day with almost no barrel heat up. My hunting load is 52 gr of RE7 w/ the BRP only 1950 FPS , mimics 105 of BH209, No heat build up to speak of, Pleasant to shoot, sabots can and do get reused, not for hunting but off the bench, or out the back room window/bench. My brothers hunt with 38 gr of SR4759 or AAC5744 same amount. Pleasant to shoot. My Longest shot to date harvesting deer was 253 yards. One shot, one Kill.

Waksupi, I agree in a Black Powder gun properly rifled for shooting/stabilize a round ball, The sphere is PERFECT. But being perfect does not mean it should be every ones choice, Or be descibes as perfect by every one, that is Ok by me. We are human and we are different, we all walk different roads, That is why I also have RB, Maxi and REAL molds. I have a re barreled Numrich Arms Offhand underhammer that started life as a .45. I shot out the 45 barrel ( with round Balls ) 4000+ caps were fired on its nipple. I rebarreled it to 58 cal in the 98th year of the last century, that rifle has harvested a lot of deer, in both calibers. I shoot 65 gr. Pyrodex R-S, PRB in it now. Deadly combo, in 99 I harvested an Antelope with it at 125+ yards. The barrel was still in the white at that time. In a smokeless gun the PRB IMHO, does not allow sufficient resistance to light and get clean burn with my choice of the original BP substitutes.

No matter what we talk about or our own personal preferences on any subject, it is not hard to find someone that dislikes or does not understand our preferred choices. That does not mean anyone is superior, we all have personal likes and dislikes. Some people tolerate all choices, other tolerate all choices as long as they are the same as theirs. We see this so often in the world today.

Laus Deo,

Ken

[dondiego]

A neighbor of mine had a hog hanging from a limb in a tree in his front yard the other night and he was skinning / butchering him. Asked him what he had shot him with and he said that it was a shotgun with "hog shot" -- basically three 0.625" round balls per 12-gauge shell. He was hunting with a buddy and they both shot at the same time. The hog was able to move into the brush and they had to search for him. When they finally found him, he was still moving, so they needed yet another round at basically point blank into his head. I saw one of the round balls as they were cleaning it and as far as I could tell, it was not even deformed. I think you could have reloaded it as is without recasting.

From what I could see of the carcass, they had shot him a bit further back than what I would have tried for. He looked to have been hit about halfway between the front and hind quarters and up towards the spine. I prefer a shot right around the shoulder, if not slightly forward. I'm too old to be chasing an injured hog through the brush, so if I don't think I can make a clean kill, I will pass on the shot.

I don't believe this to be a failure of the ball, rather, a failure of shot placement.

[NavyVet1959]

I don't believe this to be a failure of the ball, rather, a failure of shot placement.

Agreed... That was what I was trying to point out.

Also, I noticed that the round balls did not go all the way through the hog since I only saw the tissue damage on one side.

[M-Tecs]

Ken

Sorry if I am coming off as disagreeing with you. That is not the case at all. Not too many of us that shoot SML. While I cast my first round ball in 1974 and I have been shooting ML's since 1972 the SML is relative new to me. I first started SML about 3 1/2 years ago. I like most forms of shooting and almost all types of firearms. As a toolmaker and a part time smith I enjoy building guns almost as much as shooting.

As I stated my experience level with SML's is relative low. The load I am using was recommended to me by Luke at Arrowhead. It has worked very well for me. I did try 5744 but the H4198 load is scary accurate for me but it does thump on both ends. The outstanding accuracy of this load ended my R&D on load development for the 50. Still playing with the 45 full form loads.

Depending on my mood you can find me ML hunting with a sidelock using a RB and real black to a state of the art SML. Same for handguns. Could be anything from a Ruger Old Army or a Colt 1873 Peacemaker to a state of the art scoped hand cannon. For centerfire my favorite rifles are Trapdoors or Highwall but that is not the only thing I hunt with or shoot.


Would you like to try some of my cast for paper patching experiments in your cannons?


Yes very much so but not until the weather gets better up here in the frozen north.

I attended my first Rendezvous in 1974 built my first BP kit gun in the same year. Built my first from scratch ML in 1978 and did a fair amount of Rendezvous in the 80’s but I ultimately got turned off by the BP crowds intolerance of anything not period BP. Still have my capote coat made out of a 6 point Hudson Bay Blanket. Wished it was still a blanket and not a coat.

[Screwbolts]

M-Tecs

I didn't think you were disagreeing, my last comments were about the round ball being perfect and some havn't learned that yet kind of statements.

Ken

[big bore 99]

Been following this thread for a bit and find it interesting. I have shot muzzleloaders for quite bit since about he 70's. I kinda gave it up in favor of the 45-70 single shots. As for doing smokeless in a muzzleloader, I'd be very reluctant except in a emergency/survival situation to give it a try. One might get away with it,99 out of a 100 times, then, boom and ouch.

[Screwbolts]

Big bore 99, there are guns made specifically for shooting smokeless powder. if you are unsure of what the gun your shooting was built for, to use for fuel that is, please don't use any smokeless in it for any reason.

Some people even load the 45-70 with smokeless powder.

[big bore 99]

My 45-70's are all modern manufacture, made for smokeless. I shoot mostly smokeless in them but have a time or two used black and the subs. I meant using smokeless in an older muzzle loader.

[M-Tecs]

Since you brought up the 45-70 let’s use that as a base. I just don't understand the apparent lack of understanding by some that you NEVER use inappropriate loads for that firearm whether it's a muzzleloader or a cartridge firearm.

I load 45-70 for Trapdoor Springfield's, Marlin 1895's (both original & modern), Winchester 1885's & 1886's and a Siamese Mauser. For the TD’s 28,000 PSI is max but most of my loads are 18,000 or under same as Lyman’s recommendations. The original Marlin 1895 is loaded same as TD’s. The Siamese Mauser is safe with 50,000 PSI. Some feel the modern Marlin 1895’s are safe up to 43,000 and the current 86's are safe up to 50,000. I keep loads for them under 35,000 psi.

A safe max load for the Siamese Mauser will take the TD apart. Same for the various levels I load 45 Colts to. The 1873 Peacemaker is rated for 14,000 psi max with Contender’s, Blackhawks, RedHawks (don't have one) and Win 1892’s on the other side. The S&W are in the middle. I have no doubt that my 92 loads will take a Peacemaker apart.

Since shooters have been successfully segregating loads for 45-70 and 45 Colts for a very long time how is using the appropriate load for the design of a muzzleloader any different?

My SAFE load for my SML will probably take my sidelock’s apart on the first shot. A SML designed for use with high pressure smokeless loads is very different from a ML designed for black or black subs.

[Screwbolts]

M-tecs, words well choosen, and very good anologys, I proudly stand with all your examples.

All forms of firearms need to be respected for what they are.

Ken

[oldred]

To be clear the OP is about using smokeless in a BLACK POWDER rifle and it's been pretty much established that trying to use smokeless in this type of ML is kind of like playing Russian roulette. The last few posts are about MLs designed and built specifically for use with smokeless powders and these rifles are in a class all by themselves, none of the warnings about using smokeless in a conventional ML are in any way negated by what can be safely done with these very different rifles.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

the recent explosion (pun intended) in stupidity in firearms is appalling.

Stupid is as stupid does...

[oldred]

I think there is a lot of ignorance with some of the new shooters, ignorance not at all being a slap at them or in any way meant to be insulting since ignorance simply means not yet familiar with the task at hand. Because of the internet there is LOTS of advice available with some of it being not so good and when this advice becomes dangerous it really needs to be addressed. To the experienced the difference between a purpose designed ML and BP only firearm is just a given and they are not likely to try the same loads in a BP rifle that the smokeless rifles use. To the uninitiated some inlines may look to them to be "modern" MLs because they look like modern bolt action rifles instead of side lock traditional types, I know this to be true in at least one case where a local guy (while admitting both were designed for BP) was trying to argue that an inline was at least "safer" than a side lock for smokeless use! That kind of talk plus suggestions on these forums that some smokeless loads are well within BP pressures in some cartridge loads is all that it might take to get someone to try it, unfortunately some are just going to have to learn the hard way!

[Tar Heel]

I would recommend doing some research on smokeless powder breech systems. http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13487/building-full-form-bullet-sizing (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13487/building-full-form-bullet-sizing)
http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/ (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/)
http://smokelessmz.com/index.html (http://smokelessmz.com/index.html)
http://www.richardscustomrifles.com/custommuzzleloader.htm (http://www.richardscustomrifles.com/custommuzzleloader.htm)
http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/12570/bp-design-eventual-rifle-build (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/12570/bp-design-eventual-rifle-build)
http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/10847/idea-smokeless-muzzle-loader (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/10847/idea-smokeless-muzzle-loader)
http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13487/building-full-form-bullet-sizing\ (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13487/building-full-form-bullet-sizing/)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmG2p2am6F0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmG2p2am6F0)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-qrmu4XlI8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-qrmu4XlI8)
http://www.prbullet.com/700.htm (http://www.prbullet.com/700.htm)
http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/6553 (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/6553)
http://www.dsscustomguns.com/custom-smokeless-muzzleloaders.aspx (http://www.dsscustomguns.com/custom-smokeless-muzzleloaders.aspx)
http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13224/new-dd-rem-700-plug (http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/thread/13224/new-dd-rem-700-plug)


I can't help noticing that none of the suggested links in your message are from actual firearms manufacturers.

The use of smokeless propellants in firearms designed for black powder propellant is not safe, nor is it prescribed or recommended by ANY legitimate firearms manufacturer. If I am wrong about this please show us a copy of the owners manual from a legitimate firearms manufacturer stating otherwise.

Google searches and internet forum activity does not constitute "research". Research is a scientific process and method which involves forming a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis under very controlled conditions, arriving at a conclusion, and publishing that data thereby submitting it for academic peer review. That is research and it has already been done by legitimate firearms manufacturers. The data has revealed that firearms designed for black powder propellant with its associated chamber pressures, and the steel used for those firearms, is UNSAFE for use with modern smokeless propellants.

I take exception to folks stating otherwise and quoting sources of "authority" which are not actually sources of authority nor vetted by the firearms industry. Telling new shooters that your information supersedes that of legitimate sources of information is not only dangerous, it is irresponsible. It also facilitates a lawsuit naming YOU as a defendant.

Let's instead refer new shooters to legitimate sources of information, suggest they read and comply with industry published safety information, and stop referring them to third and fourth party sources of information whose credentials are suspect - to say the least.

[M-Tecs]

I can't help noticing that none of the suggested links in your message are from actual firearms manufacturers.

The use of smokeless propellants in firearms designed for black powder propellant is not safe, nor is it prescribed or recommended by ANY legitimate firearms manufacturer. If I am wrong about this please show us a copy of the owners manual from a legitimate firearms manufacturer stating otherwise.
Google searches and internet forum activity does not constitute "research". Research is a scientific process and method which involves forming a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis under very controlled conditions, arriving at a conclusion, and publishing that data thereby submitting it for academic peer review. That is research and it has already been done by legitimate firearms manufacturers. The data has revealed that firearms designed for black powder propellant with its associated chamber pressures, and the steel used for those firearms, is UNSAFE for use with modern smokeless propellants.

I take exception to folks stating otherwise and quoting sources of "authority" which are not actually sources of authority nor vetted by the firearms industry. Telling new shooters that your information supersedes that of legitimate sources of information is not only dangerous, it is irresponsible. It also facilitates a lawsuit naming YOU as a defendant.

Let's instead refer new shooters to legitimate sources of information, suggest they read and comply with industry published safety information, and stop referring them to third and fourth party sources of information whose credentials are suspect - to say the least.


You would be wrong. Here is one for the Savage ML II. https://s3.amazonaws.com/savagefiles/manuals/manual_muzzleloader_10mlii.pdf

http://petesdiscountfirearms.com/manuals/10ML_QuickTips.pdf

Same for the Savage ML 1 or some of the smaller manufactures.

http://www.performancegunworks.com/Big-Dawg-Muzzleloaders.html

http://www.richardscustomrifles.com/custommuzzleloader.htm

http://www.badbullmuzzleloaders.com/

http://www.dsscustomguns.com/custom-smokeless-muzzleloaders.aspx

http://www.piercisionrifles.com/smokeless-muzzleloaders/

[dtknowles]

..........Research is a scientific process and method which involves forming a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis under very controlled conditions, arriving at a conclusion, and publishing that data thereby submitting it for academic peer review. That is research and it has already been done by legitimate firearms manufacturers. The data has revealed that firearms designed for black powder propellant with its associated chamber pressures, and the steel used for those firearms, is UNSAFE for use with modern smokeless propellants............

I agree with your points but I have a slightly off topic question. Can you provide links or copies of Research by Legitimate firearms and Ammo manfacturers related to sporting firearms? I would be interested in reading some such papers. I understand that some research is proprietary (done some of that myself but we still publish results with proprietary info withheld). I get tired of reading the same old stuff by media writers and would be interested in reading research by Engineers and Scientists.

Tim

[Tar Heel]

You would be wrong. Here is one for the Savage ML II. https://s3.amazonaws.com/savagefiles/manuals/manual_muzzleloader_10mlii.pdf

Same for the Savage ML 1 or some of the smaller manufactures.

The indicated firearms are DESIGNED for the use of smokeless propellants and can use black powder as well. I was perhaps remiss by not emphasizing the words designed for black powder. These discussions ultimately lead the new shooters to believe all BP firearms can thus use smokeless because one or another (by design) can.

They use the term "muzzleloader" and not "black powder firearm" which is a major part of the problem with the misunderstanding by most new shooters. The term "muzzleloader" used to mean black powder muzzleloader. Now we have two types of muzzleloaders: black powder muzzleloaders and newer inline smokeless muzzleloaders.

Please call the new guns designed for smokeless propellants "smokeless muzzleloading firearms" and do not group them into a common class convention of "muzzleloaders".

[Tar Heel]

I agree with your points but I have a slightly off topic question. Can you provide links or copies of Research by Legitimate firearms and Ammo manfacturers related to sporting firearms? I would be interested in reading some such papers. I understand that some research is proprietary (done some of that myself but we still publish results with proprietary info withheld). I get tired of reading the same old stuff by media writers and would be interested in reading research by Engineers and Scientists.

Tim

Tim, the manufacturers are not going to release their proprietary data because it's proprietary as you know, and because it contains data regarding their steel alloys and bursting pressures. That quest was fruitless for me and other designers. We had to perform our own tests on our own dime. The US Army Ordinance Center data however is available and I have some of it in printed form which I got many many years ago before the internet. I'll hunt this down online now and I am sure some of it, if not all of it, may be available online.

[dtknowles]

Tim, the manufacturers are not going to release their proprietary data because it's proprietary as you know, and because it contains data regarding their steel alloys and bursting pressures. That quest was fruitless for me and other designers. We had to perform our own tests on our own dime. The US Army Ordinance Center data however is available and I have some of it in printed form which I got many many years ago before the internet. I'll hunt this down online now and I am sure some of it, if not all of it, may be available online.

I think you misunderstood my request. The papers you find do not need to be on topic with this post and if you want to just point me with some search criteria that would be good. I was just looking for interesting and educational reading material.

Tim

[Tar Heel]

I think you misunderstood my request. The papers you find do not need to be on topic with this post and if you want to just point me with some search criteria that would be good. I was just looking for interesting and educational reading material.

Tim

Sorry about that. I guess I really don't understand the focus of the request then. Good general firearms, ballistic, metallurgy, and other firearm related information can be had in the NRA Firearms Fact Book. It's a good read and one that stays on the nightstand for me to refer to. It's got lots of general stuff in it.

[dtknowles]

Sorry about that. I guess I really don't understand the focus of the request then. Good general firearms, ballistic, metallurgy, and other firearm related information can be had in the NRA Firearms Fact Book. It's a good read and one that stays on the nightstand for me to refer to. It's got lots of general stuff in it.


You said "Research is a scientific process and method which involves forming a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis under very controlled conditions, arriving at a conclusion, and publishing that data thereby submitting it for academic peer review. That is research and it has already been done by legitimate firearms manufacturers." I am tired of things like NRA Firearms Facts book or Reloading Handbooks etc. Have read a lot of them and they are geared more toward people with less experience. I was thinking that "academic peer review"ed research papers by legitimate firearms manufacturers would be more informative. Best would be papers about the development and testing for new powders or bullets. Papers that publish the results of tens of thousands of rounds tested with tables and graphs, you know a real research paper not a magazine article.

If the research is about test black powder muzzleloaders using smokeless powder that would be ok, but not as interesting as what I posted above. I just don't know where to look for these kind of papers, google is just not finding them.

Tim

[dtknowles]

Sorry about that. I guess I really don't understand the focus of the request then. Good general firearms, ballistic, metallurgy, and other firearm related information can be had in the NRA Firearms Fact Book. It's a good read and one that stays on the nightstand for me to refer to. It's got lots of general stuff in it.

Maybe this will help. When we were evaluating the probability of penetration and no penetration from micrometeoroid and orbital debris on our spacecraft structures we were looking to get some testing done. I reviewed a number of papers of similar tests performed by both NASA and Independent labs. I could find and get copies of these papers because in talking to the labs they were glad to make the results of there work available to us unless it was proprietary property of a different company. I don't know anyone who works in the ballistics labs around the country to ask them for papers of their work so because you seem to be familiar with this kind of publication I figured it couldn't hurt to ask.

I did see one report on the FBI ammo selection testing and protocol, something like that is what I find interesting.

Tim

[NavyVet1959]

To find academic papers concerning firearm and powder development, you will probably need to find a university that offers a degree (and probably an advanced degree) in that subject matter. Considering how relatively few firearm manufacturers there are around and the fact that there really aren't that many new firearm models produced each year, I doubt that there would be many universities that offer such degrees. I suspect that most firearm designers start off with degrees in mechanical engineering and anyone designing powders probably starts off with a degree in chemical engineering. From there, I suspect that they get more experience while working at various companies, none of which would result in research papers being generated.

[Tar Heel]

Unlike medical research, ballistic research just doesn't hold the interest of a large portion of the society nor do the results of that research affect us like research into miracle cures would; ergo no significant funding. The research which has been done by private industry will remain under lock and key as proprietary unless it was funded by taxpayer money and published data was provided to the military sources. Having been duly declassified after a goodly period of time, we would have access to that information if we knew where the repository was.

Arguably, the firing of several thousand rounds of ammunition will not significantly change a statistical probability, in fact, the Z-Stat precludes precisely that. I can generate an average velocity of a batch of ammunition with 100 rounds where N=100 and n=50. Firing the remaining 900 rounds will not affect the Poussin Distribution of the data.

Of course the associated cost of those thousands of thousands of rounds for a engineering paper, would preclude the cost unless a significant result were realized. Unlike the loss of life potential with a NASA mission, group size reduction by .0001" is a ridiculous quest by comparison. Dare I mention the Challenger mission?

While the data would be informative, I think all of the manufacturers would need to provide all they have to some benign entity for data mining. Of course that simply won't happen and as one has mentioned previously, the data has probably been shredded by now due to lack of manufacturers with any continuity.

Were I going to seek this information, I would focus on military records which museums may help with. Locating an archivist with zing will be the key. I would NOT waste any time at the National Archives anymore. They went to hell in a basket 20 years ago.

[dtknowles]

Unlike medical research, ballistic research just doesn't hold the interest of a large portion of the society nor do the results of that research affect us like research into miracle cures would; ergo no significant funding. The research which has been done by private industry will remain under lock and key as proprietary unless it was funded by taxpayer money and published data was provided to the military sources. Having been duly declassified after a goodly period of time, we would have access to that information if we knew where the repository was.

Arguably, the firing of several thousand rounds of ammunition will not significantly change a statistical probability, in fact, the Z-Stat precludes precisely that. I can generate an average velocity of a batch of ammunition with 100 rounds where N=100 and n=50. Firing the remaining 900 rounds will not affect the Poussin Distribution of the data.

Of course the associated cost of those thousands of thousands of rounds for a engineering paper, would preclude the cost unless a significant result were realized. Unlike the loss of life potential with a NASA mission, group size reduction by .0001" is a ridiculous quest by comparison. Dare I mention the Challenger mission?

While the data would be informative, I think all of the manufacturers would need to provide all they have to some benign entity for data mining. Of course that simply won't happen and as one has mentioned previously, the data has probably been shredded by now due to lack of manufacturers with any continuity.

Were I going to seek this information, I would focus on military records which museums may help with. Locating an archivist with zing will be the key. I would NOT waste any time at the National Archives anymore. They went to hell in a basket 20 years ago.

This is very disappointing.

I was not looking for a paper where they shot thousands of the same load but more like hundreds of rounds of different loads in different condition and different firearms or some such for a totals of thousands of rounds.

Tim

[oldred]

All the discussion about smokeless MLs is just fine and Jim dandy BUT it is overshadowing the fact that the real problem is when discussing using smokeless in the FAR more common BP MLs! I don't think anyone is trying to say that shooting smokeless in a purpose built rifle designed for smokeless is dangerous but rather it's the suggestion that it might be safe to use certain smokeless loads in BLACK POWDER rifles based on those loads producing BP pressures or less in a given cartridge. THAT is the kind of misguided thinking that has, and probably will again, get people seriously hurt! Basically smokeless MLs are high strength cartridge guns that eliminate the casing for the powder and use a very different ignition system that is capable of sealing the gasses in the chamber, indeed at least some of these designs have used cut off brass cases for this purpose and to hold the primer. It makes no difference if a modern smokeless ML can be safely loaded with magnum loads of smokeless powder the real problem is when people start thinking they can use what is a relatively low pressure cartridge load in a BLACK POWDER ML!

The bottom line is that no smokeless loads of any burn rate can be safely used in a BP firearm no matter what the pressure might look like in any given cartridge. Besides that's only part of the equation anyway because of the ignition system and to make suggestions that it somehow might be safe enough despite past history clearly showing just the opposite to be true is being totally irresponsible!

[M-Tecs]

As I stated earlier you NEVER use inappropriate/ not recommended loads for a firearm whether it's a muzzleloader or a cartridge firearm. Very few firearms cannot be blown-up with inappropriate loads. Black powder and smokeless are very different in maximum pressures that can be generated in firearms by misuse. Black powder will max out at about 37,000 psi and smokeless can reach 200,000 pluspsi.

The village idiot really has to work to blow-up a firearm with BP. It can be done but they have to work at it. Smokeless is much less tolerant of double and triple charges/bullets or ramrods left in the bore.

Currently only one manufacture is producing a smokeless powder that is recommended for black powder only firearm’s. That is Western with Blackhorn 209. Western states that Blackhorn 209 is NOT smokeless powder but this does not jive with independent spectrographic and gas chromatograph analysis’s of Blackhorn209.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/blackhorn209_news_flash.htm (http://www.chuckhawks.com/blackhorn209_news_flash.htm)

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/06/11/is-blackhorn-209-really-a-smokeless-powder/ (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/06/11/is-blackhorn-209-really-a-smokeless-powder/)

http://www.theopenrange.net/forum/index.php?topic=6150.0 (http://www.theopenrange.net/forum/index.php?topic=6150.0);


Western has an interesting post on this. http://www.blackhorn209.com/nevada/ (http://www.blackhorn209.com/nevada/)

In September of 2011, the Board ofWildlife Commissioners specifically banned Blackhorn 209 because it was based on Nitrated Ester, which they believe made it a smokeless powder. This conclusion overlooked the simple fact that the powder base does not determine a powder's classification. It is the powder's burn characteristics.


Blackhorn 209 is nitrocellulose based powder with potassium nitrate and sulfur added for some smoke.

The original black powder substitutes were the bulk smokeless powders designed for volumetric measurement substitution for black powder starting the 1890’s and produced into the 1920’s. Du Pont #1 Rifle Smokeless and Du Pont Schuetzen come to mind along with Laughlin & Rand Sharpshooter. Since these powders have not been available for close to a hundred years until the introduction of Blackhorn 209 we had zero smokeless powders recommended for use with black powder only guns and BH 209 will only work firearms using 209 primers or in cartridges as a BP sub.

[oldred]

There is some disagreement as to BH 209's corrosive characteristics and it was addressed in at least one of the links above which said that due to the Potassium nitrate and sulfur it contains it has some of the same corrosive elements as real BP. That may very well be true but although it is hardly conclusive scientific testing I intentionally left an old CVA rifle and a cheap (junk actually) Cap&Ball revolver uncleaned for weeks at a time after using BH 209. All that happened was an odd grey-like coating formed that cleaned off with no apparent damage at all, I got a bit of corrosion around the nipples but the bores and cylinder were unharmed. While things very well may have been different had the humidity been higher I am sure that under the same conditions that Pyrodex, etc and even real BP would have ruined both of these guns.

Really good stuff except for the price!

[M-Tecs]

Same as you I don't consider BH 209 corrosive.

One of my dad's friends had a very large collection of old powder cans. In the later 60's I remember admiring some of his
Laflin and Rand Powder cans like these but Herb's looked like new. Herb started reloading about 1930.