Black MZ Range Test.

[dtknowles]

I got a pound of Black MZ at Sportsman's Warehouse last week for $9.99.

I tested it in my Ruger Old Army. Compared to FFG and 777,

at 30 gr. measured not weighed

145 gr. Hornady Round Ball .450

BLK MX - 688 fps
FFG - 761 fps
777 - 859 fps

at 40 gr. measured not weighed

145 gr. Hornady Round Ball .450

BLK MX - 1109 fps
FFG - 971 fps
777 - 1159 fps

at 30 gr. measured not weighed

225 gr. Cast Lead Semi Wadcutter .451

BLK MX - 923 fps
FFG - 783 fps
777 - 983 fps

Extreme spreads were similar with BLK MZ and FFG and were less than with 777.

Will think about a corrosion test, BLK MZ is claimed to be noncorrosive.

Anyone use 777 or FFG and can confirm my numbers.

Tim

[dondiego]

I wouldn't count on the "non-corrosive" part. I got some.

[GoexBlackhorn]

I wouldn't count on the "non-corrosive" part. I got some.

Correct! Their website states ''virtually'' non-corrosive - which means nearly, but not completely non-corrosive.

[FrontierMuzzleloading]

its pretty good though. I shot my canon at the beginning of the year and very little rust spots inside of the bore at the muzzle. Most likely caused by the muzzle cap falling off during a storm. I do suggest you clean at the end of the day but a few days certainly won't hurt.

[Hellgate]

Tim,
Aren't you s'posed to use a .457 diameter ball in that ROA?

Thank you for running the numbers on that powder. I tried some in a 45/70 trapdoor and it seemed pretty stout at 55gr volume and a 405gr LEE HB soft lead bullet. The same load with FFg was not as stout and the bullets keyholed. I suspect the Black MZ might have a faster ignition and bumped up the bullet to engage the shallow riflings.

[dtknowles]

Tim,
Aren't you s'posed to use a .457 diameter ball in that ROA?

Thank you for running the numbers on that powder. I tried some in a 45/70 trapdoor and it seemed pretty stout at 55gr volume and a 405gr LEE HB soft lead bullet. The same load with FFg was not as stout and the bullets keyholed. I suspect the Black MZ might have a faster ignition and bumped up the bullet to engage the shallow riflings.

In my gun you would have trouble with .457 dia balls. I did not measure the Hornady balls I have but the box is marked .450 and they shave a lead ring when seated in the cylinder.

I was wrong, my round balls are .457

Tim

[rodwha]

???

My ROA has 0.453" chambers, which is what I've read about them. I use 0.457" balls and 0.456" boolits. I also use them in my Pietta NMA that has the chambers reamed to 0.449" and these load easily enough. These diameters are what Ruger states in the manual.

[dtknowles]

???

My ROA has 0.453" chambers, which is what I've read about them. I use 0.457" balls and 0.456" boolits. I also use them in my Pietta NMA that has the chambers reamed to 0.449" and these load easily enough. These diameters are what Ruger states in the manual.

Every manufacturer has tolerances. That in the manual they might err on the high side would make sense as using too small a ball would be worse than using too big of one. My Old Army is not my first cap and ball revolver.

It shoots well, if it did not I would slug the bore and if it was more than .451 I would ream or lap the chambers to match.

This post is not right and I was wrong, my round balls are .457

Tim

[45 Dragoon]

The main reason for the .457 ball is give it a longer bearing surface more akin to a bullet. The barrel has a "normal " 1/18 twist which is a bullet twist (it's a blk.hwk. barrel).
You would probably get better results (velocity and accuracy) with the heavier/longer .457

Mike

[rodwha]

If your chambers are 0.453" nothing short of the 0.457" ball would do a good job under recoil I wouldn't think.

[dtknowles]

I have to apologize, I said my round balls were .450 but they are .457 and the comments of others are more correct than I indicated.

Tim