WidenersRepackboxMidSouth Shooters SupplyTitan Reloading
Reloading EverythingLee PrecisionRotoMetals2Load Data
Inline Fabrication
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 60 of 60

Thread: 4fg swiss BP and 45 long colt revolver

  1. #41
    Vendor Sponsor

    Chill Wills's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Was-Colorado, Wyoming now
    Posts
    3,151
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Gibson View Post
    As of late, in my travels, I have acquired a pound of GOEX FFFFg powder. I intend on pressure testing (Oehler M43 PBL and Contender test barrels) loads in the 32 S&WL, the 357 Magnum, the 44 SPL, the 44 Magnum, the 45 American, 45 Schofield and perhaps the 45 Colt.......pressures permitting. That should answer a lot of questions and prove suppositions right or wrong.
    I would be interested in the OP's subject load of 15-18 grains of FFFF with a filler under the bullet. I am guessing this would produce a very low pressure load. We'll see if you should decided to test it at some point.
    Last edited by Chill Wills; 07-01-2019 at 12:08 PM.
    Chill Wills

  2. #42
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    3,113
    Subscribing to see results of pressure testing.

    Kevin
    Knowledge I take to my grave is wasted.

    I prefer to use cartridges born before I was.

    Success doesn't make me happy, being happy is what allows me to be successful.

  3. #43
    Boolit Grand Master Good Cheer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    the Ark
    Posts
    5,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Houck View Post
    The following information come from this book: Lyman Black Powder Handbook,C. Kenneth Ramage, editor, 1975
    It would be worth peoples time and effort to get this book for their library. There is also a second edition out, but I've not been able to browse thru it for BP pressure data. Both books are available thru Amazon.

    It lists 3f AND 4f loads for 31, 36, 44 and 45 caliber handguns using C&H and Goex powders, with both RB and bullet. The 36 and 44 listings give pressure data. All pressures are so low that they were measured in LUP, ie lead unit pressure rather than CUP which is copper unit pressure.

    44 cal., 8" barrel, 155gr bullet #450229
    28gr. G-O 3f gave 861 vel, 8820 LUP
    28gr. G-O 4f gave 885 vel, 8480 LUP

    28gr. C&H 3f gave 785 vel, 6080 LUP
    28gr. C&H 4f gave 862 vel, 7220 LUP

    44 cal., 8" barrel, 138gr. RB
    37gr. G-O 4f gave 960 vel, 7420 LUP
    37gr. C&H 4f gave 943 vel, 6820 LUP

    45 cal Ruger Old Army, 7 1/2 barrel (no pressure data for this one)
    190gr. #45467, 33gr. G-O 3f gave 780 vel
    190gr. #45467, 33gr. G-O 4f gave 863 vel

    190gr. #45467, 33gr. C&H 3f gave 709 vel
    190gr. #45467, 34gr. C&H 4f gave 898 vel

    There is lots more data for the 31 cal., 36 cal., and the 44 cal., all showing the same low LUP levels for 3f vs 4f.
    So here is data from Lyman that supports using 4f powder in cap and ball revolvers.

    Hope this helps, Jeff
    Went and pulled out my copy...
    In 1981-82 my cat shredded the cover and a few pages for a baby nest. It was her first litter and the book smelled like me, so, I was out of town on business and she made herself a comfort zone.
    Any how, in looking through the data, did you notice the pressure and velocities' differences by brand of powder? It was about as significant as the granulation! About like Red Dot versus Unique or something. Gives me something new to think about when banging away with SWC's in the Walker.

  4. #44
    Banned

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    1,419
    Elmer Keith used to put 4F in a mortar and pestle to make it as fine as possible! Of course it was faster burning giving him higher velocities in 45 Colt but it also increased pressure considerably. After blowing a few Colt SAA's up he switched to the 44 spl and the new smokeless powders and the rest is history!

  5. #45
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,702
    Quote Originally Posted by smithnframe View Post
    Elmer Keith used to put 4F in a mortar and pestle to make it as fine as possible! Of course it was faster burning giving him higher velocities in 45 Colt but it also increased pressure considerably. After blowing a few Colt SAA's up he switched to the 44 spl and the new smokeless powders and the rest is history!
    Elmer was foolin around with 45/70 sized boolits in that colt that he blew up - t'wernt just the finer powder..

  6. #46
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    3,113
    Quote Originally Posted by smithnframe View Post
    Elmer Keith used to put 4F in a mortar and pestle to make it as fine as possible! Of course it was faster burning giving him higher velocities in 45 Colt but it also increased pressure considerably. After blowing a few Colt SAA's up he switched to the 44 spl and the new smokeless powders and the rest is history!
    EK blew up more than a couple of revolvers of all makes. Smiths, Colts, you name them. He was looking for a powerful cartridge and did not care what caliber or manufacturer.

    Kevin
    Knowledge I take to my grave is wasted.

    I prefer to use cartridges born before I was.

    Success doesn't make me happy, being happy is what allows me to be successful.

  7. #47
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    3,113
    Quote Originally Posted by indian joe View Post
    Elmer was foolin around with 45/70 sized boolits in that colt that he blew up - t'wernt just the finer powder..

    According to his story, the case head let loose and blew the gate of the Colt. He probably fixed it and continued using it.

    Kevin
    Knowledge I take to my grave is wasted.

    I prefer to use cartridges born before I was.

    Success doesn't make me happy, being happy is what allows me to be successful.

  8. #48
    Banned bigted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sweet Home Oregon
    Posts
    4,456
    Elmer Keith was a dangerous man! He published very dangerous loads including some 06 wildcats. The end results are legendary ... however I personally would NEVER load 45-70 loads he loaded AND published for the 1886 Winchester rifles.

    As stated ... his end results in the 44 Mag and the 338 Win Mag are legendary. His experiments however ... and ruined guns ... are a testament to God watching after screwball's and old folks.

    His crushing black powder to fine flour ... is today ... ludicrous.

    I always thought he pushed the limits too far ... but ... when he did it, there were not many to call him out on it nor a platform to do so as we have today.

    Some of his descriptions of his life experiences were/are a bit condescending to others that also lived the same time period and crossed paths with ol Elmer.

    Any rate, put the rope away, I am done diminishing the memories of a legend now. My apology to the Elmer fans.
    Last edited by bigted; 07-13-2019 at 09:38 PM.

  9. #49
    Boolit Man
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Pocatello, Idaho
    Posts
    76

  10. #50
    Boolit Master Oyeboten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    757
    I always took for granted that 4F would burn a lot faster than 3 F...

    That 3 F would burn faster ( maybe not a lot faster, but, faster how-ever much ) than 2 F...

    Etc...

    For the Pan of a Flintlock, the 4F is necessary for the smaller size particles to be carried in to the Breech through the tiny hole for effective ignition.

    It'd be very easy to load up some .41 or .44 Magnum, even using somewhat reduced charges ( as far as Case volume ) and deeper seated Bullet if one wanted, good compression, using 2 F, 3F, 4F...use right Lube so no fouling.

    Keep everything the same but for the F...

    Chronograph them.

    If no meaningful difference or meaningful steps of progression in FPS down through the granulations, then, I think we can suppose the pressures generated are not markedly different.

    I can try this sometime...with .41 Magnum Cartridges anyway...

  11. #51
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Emory,TX
    Posts
    942
    bigted which 45-70 load are referencing? The only load I remember was the 53 grains IMR3031 and a Rem 405 grain he recommended for the reintroduced Marlin 1895 and Win 1886. If so better not use Hodgdon’s data, they go to 55 grains with a 400 grain bullet.
    400 GR. SPR JFP
    Starting Loads Maximum Loads
    Manufacturer Powder Bullet Diam.
    C.O.L.
    Grs.
    Vel. (ft/s)
    Pressure
    Grs.
    Vel. (ft/s)
    Pressure
    IMR IMR 3031 .458" 2.540" 51.0 1,809 26,900 CUP 55.0C 1,971 37,300

  12. #52
    Boolit Grand Master Good Cheer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    the Ark
    Posts
    5,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Oyeboten View Post
    I always took for granted that 4F would burn a lot faster than 3 F...

    That 3 F would burn faster ( maybe not a lot faster, but, faster how-ever much ) than 2 F...

    Etc...

    For the Pan of a Flintlock, the 4F is necessary for the smaller size particles to be carried in to the Breech through the tiny hole for effective ignition.

    It'd be very easy to load up some .41 or .44 Magnum, even using somewhat reduced charges ( as far as Case volume ) and deeper seated Bullet if one wanted, good compression, using 2 F, 3F, 4F...use right Lube so no fouling.

    Keep everything the same but for the F...

    Chronograph them.

    If no meaningful difference or meaningful steps of progression in FPS down through the granulations, then, I think we can suppose the pressures generated are not markedly different.

    I can try this sometime...with .41 Magnum Cartridges anyway...
    I'm looking forwards to loading black with paper patched in my .41 single shot rifle.
    In the .45 Colt single shot rifle it works fine.
    Golly would love to have a 460S&W single shot to shoot black but will stick with the Colt.
    For hand guns any more I just prefer caseless ammo (percussion).

  13. #53
    Boolit Master Oyeboten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    757
    Some really good info here - just read on down a ways...it goes in to what the Powders were really about, for the Cap & Ball Revolvers following the Dragoon era.

    https://www.thehighroad.org/index.ph...iple-7.688517/

  14. #54
    Banned bigted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sweet Home Oregon
    Posts
    4,456
    Quote Originally Posted by LIMPINGJ View Post
    bigted which 45-70 load are referencing? The only load I remember was the 53 grains IMR3031 and a Rem 405 grain he recommended for the reintroduced Marlin 1895 and Win 1886. If so better not use Hodgdon’s data, they go to 55 grains with a 400 grain bullet.
    400 GR. SPR JFP
    Starting Loads Maximum Loads
    Manufacturer Powder Bullet Diam.
    C.O.L.
    Grs.
    Vel. (ft/s)
    Pressure
    Grs.
    Vel. (ft/s)
    Pressure
    IMR IMR 3031 .458" 2.540" 51.0 1,809 26,900 CUP 55.0C 1,971 37,300
    If you will re-read my post concerning the 1886 and his loads ... what I said was ... "I would never load and shoot his 45-70 loads in 1886 Winchester rifles" ... especially the pre 1897 model 1886's which he purported to be plenty strong for those 53 grain 3031 loads.

    I just have a problem trusting somebody that busted and blew up the guns he did while trying his hot loads.

    Nothing personal ... I just have belief system that the edge of the envelope in not needed ... nor in my view ... wanted nor desired. I am a cautious loader and my firearms are too hard earned to take reckless and needless chances with.

    To say nothing about the uncomfortable recoil generated. Want more horsepower ... get a bigger gun ... my words and thoughts.

    I just offer my sentiment. Maybe not for all ... but ... its mine!

  15. #55
    Vendor Sponsor

    Chill Wills's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Was-Colorado, Wyoming now
    Posts
    3,151
    Ted, If I may ask; what did Winchester do in 1897?
    Chill Wills

  16. #56
    Boolit Man
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Pocatello, Idaho
    Posts
    76
    http://www.ctmuzzleloaders.com/ctml_...p_burning.html

    The author of this article states in the conclusion: "One thing clearly stood out - black powder, contrary to many popular assumptions, is indeed as progressive-burning as smokeless powder,"......

    An excellent read, with direction to many more relevant articles as well.

  17. #57
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,702
    Quote Originally Posted by bigted View Post
    If you will re-read my post concerning the 1886 and his loads ... what I said was ... "I would never load and shoot his 45-70 loads in 1886 Winchester rifles" ... especially the pre 1897 model 1886's which he purported to be plenty strong for those 53 grain 3031 loads.

    I just have a problem trusting somebody that busted and blew up the guns he did while trying his hot loads.

    Nothing personal ... I just have belief system that the edge of the envelope in not needed ... nor in my view ... wanted nor desired. I am a cautious loader and my firearms are too hard earned to take reckless and needless chances with.

    To say nothing about the uncomfortable recoil generated. Want more horsepower ... get a bigger gun ... my words and thoughts.

    I just offer my sentiment. Maybe not for all ... but ... its mine!
    I will go along with that !!!!

  18. #58
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,702
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Houck View Post
    http://www.ctmuzzleloaders.com/ctml_...p_burning.html

    The author of this article states in the conclusion: "One thing clearly stood out - black powder, contrary to many popular assumptions, is indeed as progressive-burning as smokeless powder,"......

    An excellent read, with direction to many more relevant articles as well.
    another thing that sticks out is that Swiss is clearly a grade finer in granulation than Goex (and Elephant) so comparing these powders is like apples and oranges
    Swiss FF would be equivalent kernel size to Goex FFF according to this article??????

  19. #59
    Banned bigted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sweet Home Oregon
    Posts
    4,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Chill Wills View Post
    Ted, If I may ask; what did Winchester do in 1897?
    My impression is ... the date 1897 ... began the smokeless powder steel in firearms in general.

    Correct me if I am incorrect with this. I have always understood that there was a metallurgy change this year which made the use of smokeless powder with its higher pressures possible.

    Probably does not come through �� I am not a Keith fan. Nor am I a fan of magnum rounds. I really see no need for them ... that is just me tho.

    I will pipe down now. I offered my first post with just a personal note on my feelings ... which means not a thing.

  20. #60
    Boolit Man
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Pocatello, Idaho
    Posts
    76

    Red face

    Quote Originally Posted by indian joe View Post
    another thing that sticks out is that Swiss is clearly a grade finer in granulation than Goex (and Elephant) so comparing these powders is like apples and oranges
    Swiss FF would be equivalent kernel size to Goex FFF according to this article??????
    Yes, that's what I understood him to say as well. The Goex he used was PRE-Old Eynsford. So to compare Swiss to the old Goex we'd need to be using Swiss 2f to Goex 3F. I don't have these two powders on hand so I can't do a velocity comparison. I suspect that they'd be quite close though. I'd like to know how Old Eynsford would compare to Swiss.

    Wouldn't it be nice if this is the explanation of why Swiss is "more potent" than other powders. That it's as simple as we've been comparing 3F Swiss to 2F Goex? Is there anyone who can do the measurements on OE out there who'd like to try to do the measurements? Is there anyone who has both Swiss 2F and OE 3F on hand and would be willing to do a velocity comparison for us?

    You know that we are committing HERESY by comparing 2f to 3F and to say that BP is actually a progressive burning powder. It means that the "unwashed masses" may "burn us" at the stake rather than "blow us up" at the stake. Oh what a way to go!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check