Originally Posted by
Bent Ramrod
Pyrodex is sold by weight but loaded by volume. A pound canister of Pyrodex gives more shots than a pound canister of black powder. Shot for shot, it is cheaper than all but the most bargain priced black powder.
The Pyrodex shooter doesn't have to resort to wiping between shots or blow tubing, because the fouling does not continue to build in the bore the way it does with black powder. Pyrodex P works well for me in small rounds like the .32 Long because it has enough upsetting power to slug up the hollow base boolit but doesn't leave the accuracy destroying mess in the barrel that the equivalent load of Black would leave. I've also used it in my .32 muzzleloader when I want to do more shooting and less wiping. I have a Garrett Sharps Carbine that seemed to thrive on Pyrodex CTG when that grade was available. I was sorry to see it go. It never needed compression that I could see. And no, it doesn't shoot better with "real" black powder. It may in future, with a lot of finagling, but that Pyrodex load was quick and easy. I'm not always in the mood for a "science project."
Pyrodex has perchlorate in it to raise the ignition temperature. (This allowed it to be sold as a "flammable solid" back when Black Powder was classified as an "explosive.") The chloride salts left after firing are more liable to induce corrosion than the sulfides and oxides left by black powder, but the same timely cleanup regime that works for either will work for both with no corrosion troubles later. For people who take normal care in cleaning their guns, this is a prime nonissue. People who neglect their firearms will have the same problems down the road with either.
Most shooting is for fun or sport, for hitting reasonable size targets at reasonable ranges. For this shooting, black powder substitutes can hold their own with anything else.
I have absolutely no faith that this post, which has provided answers to the original poster's questions, will do anything to prevent the next "Why? WHY?? WhyOWhyOWhy????" repetition of the same stuff that has been said over and over already. The real question is "Why?" (do people who don't use blackpowder substitutes, and often have never even given them a reasonable trial, expend so much effort and bandwidth in their jihad against them) and "Why?" (are they so red-hot to come up with some magic rationalization that will induce total strangers to also avoid trying them.) I've never heard a cheese lover say Velveeta should be taken off the market or an aspirin user say nobody should use Tylenol because it's only a substitute. Only certain religionists and black powder shooters will have no other before them. "Why, Lisa?? Why, Why??" (Hand to brow.)