RotoMetals2RepackboxMidSouth Shooters SupplyTitan Reloading
Inline FabricationReloading EverythingLee PrecisionWideners
Load Data

Thread: My homemade black powder

  1. #4901
    Boolit Master almar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    580
    Vette that the same stuff, i blend it before i put in the ball mill.
    “It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
    ― Winston S. Churchill

  2. #4902
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    665
    Almar;
    I shoot a .58 caliber Patched Round Ball and 60 grains of powder, for the most part. My comparative tests have all been that way. I have tested from 52-68 grains, but all my posted tests have been with 60 grains. The round balls weigh 278 grain. The barrel is 40".
    Your cure for the 'Potassium dots' is the same that I did. I was getting them from my green meal, but when I milled it longer they went away. From my small experience with it, I think that is a quick indicator, and an easy test on green meal, to confirm adequate milling time. If I switch to the type media you use, I'm probably going to have to make a mill switch, as well. I can do that, but not wanting to, until I have to.

  3. #4903
    Boolit Master almar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    580
    I switched over to high antimony .570 round balls last few batches.
    “It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
    ― Winston S. Churchill

  4. #4904
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    665
    I have a bunch of them I poured and didn't use, on my tests. I wanted to keep them as fair as possible. I have been planning to use them in my mill, as well. Actually, when I get done testing, I'm probably going to switch from Hornady swaged round balls I've been using, and go back to my own. I have a bunch of lead and a lot that is not pure. I don't think my rifle will care, using PRB in it. I have a couple of mini molds, that I will only use pure lead in, but the round balls just need to be grouped by weight and I think they'll be fine.

  5. #4905
    Boolit Master almar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    580
    I am cooking the driest sassafras in the box at the lowest temperature I ever used (520deg) and its still pitch black but not charcoal yet after 1.5 hours, its interesting how different woods react. That stuff smells tasty though haha, it does smell like root beer. Double buck, PM me an address, ill send you some of my best willow brown, let me know how much you need for a batch. I'm figuring that if we both test the same charcoal, we can narrow down some differences?



    On a side note I was target practicing today out back on my property today and some surveyors popped out behind the bush. They had a shaky voice when I asked them "hey, what ya'll doing back there?". That black powder sure gives a mean boom. They were southern boys so they didn't make a fuss but makes me wonder if I need to move now...I don't like close neighbors.
    Last edited by almar; 11-22-2021 at 03:43 PM.
    “It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
    ― Winston S. Churchill

  6. #4906
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    665
    Almar;
    One time several years ago, a buddy showed up with a new pistol, and right in my driveway, we shot probably 60-100 rounds across the dirt road, down in the holler at various things, by my old chicken house. I live pretty much in the boonies. We got done and were leaning on his truck and talking, and here comes a guy in a orange vest walking out from beside the chicken house. It was my neighbor, deer hunting. I said, "Joe, were you down there while we were shooting at you?" He laughed and said, "Yeah, I just sat down behind a tree, till you got done." haha
    I live in a RURAL area.

  7. #4907
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,124
    Quote: He laughed and said, "Yeah, I just sat down behind a tree, till you got done." haha
    I live in a RURAL area
    . Unquote

    And around very cool people! Getting harder and harder to find such a place...

    Vettepilot
    "Those who sacrifice freedom for security, have neither."
    Benjamin Franklin. (A very wise man!)

  8. #4908
    Boolit Master almar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    580
    Vettepilot, I just received that book and read the first few pages, I wish I got it before. He shares my views on this propellant particularly on page 5. I hope I can learn a few new useful things with this book. This book was written after Goex closed, pretty recent.

    Well I got to the potassium nitrate portion and I typically use prilled KNO3. Wow, I guess I have to purify it. That last batch I made I didn't bother mentioning it because I didn't think it was a factor, but I ran out of my blended prilled stuff so I made up the difference with my old powder form nitrate I got awhile ago from amazon just called (high purity). I didn't know they used a binder to make prilled KN03. Why do they say its 99.8% pure then? well I got another thing to try I guess.
    Last edited by almar; 11-23-2021 at 10:50 PM.
    “It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
    ― Winston S. Churchill

  9. #4909
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    665
    I just bought the book on Amazon 'Kindle'. It is pretty interesting. It says I'm 18% done with it.
    The book states the #1 powder used in 1876 was R.F.G., or Rifle Fine Grade and was approximately 1.55 density and screen sized to <12 mesh, to >20 mesh. Fast burning large grain size tempered powder.
    To quote the book, "In 1876, an officer of the Royal Gunpowder Factory of Waltham Abbey observed, "And, now, as far as we know, no powder excels R.F.G in shooting qualities in the Enfield Rifle"." That was arguably the best powder ever made by commercial manufacture, at the height of the most tested and most examined black powder in history.
    Just got done reading about the highly interesting art of purifying Potassium Nitrate. That is cool and something I may try at one point, being mine is labeled as 99.8% pure. I've grown crystals before, and it's pretty easy to do and easy to shape them, as well. It might be fun to try some actual 100% pure product. It is something I would have to see a viable difference in my powder, to do every time. For now, I think I can live with .2% contamination. That would only be .2 gram contaminations per 100 grams of nitrate. But, it may be worth doing.
    Last edited by DoubleBuck; 11-24-2021 at 01:54 AM.

  10. #4910
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,702
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleBuck View Post
    I just bought the book on Amazon 'Kindle'. It is pretty interesting. It says I'm 18% done with it.
    The book states the #1 powder used in 1876 was R.F.G., or Rifle Fine Grade and was approximately 1.55 density and screen sized to <12 mesh, to >20 mesh. Fast burning large grain size tempered powder.
    To quote the book, "In 1876, an officer of the Royal Gunpowder Factory of Waltham Abbey observed, "And, now, as far as we know, no powder excels R.F.G in shooting qualities in the Enfield Rifle"." That was arguably the best powder ever made by commercial manufacture, at the height of the most tested and most examined black powder in history.
    Just got done reading about the highly interesting art of purifying Potassium Nitrate. That is cool and something I may try at one point, being mine is labeled as 99.8% pure. I've grown crystals before, and it's pretty easy to do and easy to shape them, as well. It might be fun to try some actual 100% pure product. It is something I would have to see a viable difference in my powder, to do every time. For now, I think I can live with .2% contamination. That would only be .2 gram contaminations per 100 grams of nitrate. But, it may be worth doing.
    the caveat here is "shooting qualities in the Enfield Rifle" ....= ...58 calibre using a heavy minie.
    the grade by my reckoning is a Fg - FFg combo (Swiss one and a half maybe???)

    I have questions around the density numbers you boys are using - so is 1.55 density the density of the poured powder in a measure ? if so how much vibration ? drop tube ? or no? OR do these numbers refer to unbroken pucks???? I always assumed it was poured powder in the measure ?? All I ever did was comparison to a known commercial powder ie we got 93 % of commercial goex or whatever . We know from numerous posts by experienced loaders that Swiss is slightly more dense than most others.

  11. #4911
    Boolit Master almar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    580
    Quote Originally Posted by indian joe View Post
    the caveat here is "shooting qualities in the Enfield Rifle" ....= ...58 calibre using a heavy minie.
    the grade by my reckoning is a Fg - FFg combo (Swiss one and a half maybe???)

    I have questions around the density numbers you boys are using - so is 1.55 density the density of the poured powder in a measure ? if so how much vibration ? drop tube ? or no? OR do these numbers refer to unbroken pucks???? I always assumed it was poured powder in the measure ?? All I ever did was comparison to a known commercial powder ie we got 93 % of commercial goex or whatever . We know from numerous posts by experienced loaders that Swiss is slightly more dense than most others.
    Its the pressed powder in puck form, taken by the weight of the puck divided by its volume in cubic centimeters. The reason why its metric i believe is because the powders density back in the day was measured compared to water or specific gravity and one gram of water occupies one cubic centimeter. So basically a pressed powders density is for example, 1.55 times the weight of water for the same volume occupied.

    The granulated powder density is another matter but somewhat related. Its why i compare granulated powder using a black powder measure and say for example that at the 30 mark my powder weighs 27 grains. Swiss typically is on the mark at 30 for 30. Hope this helps.
    “It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
    ― Winston S. Churchill

  12. #4912
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,702
    Quote Originally Posted by almar View Post
    Its the pressed powder in puck form, taken by the weight of the puck divided by its volume in cubic centimeters. The reason why its metric i believe is because the powders density back in the day was measured compared to water or specific gravity and one gram of water occupies one cubic centimeter. So basically a pressed powders density is for example, 1.55 times the weight of water for the same volume occupied.

    The granulated powder density is another matter but somewhat related. Its why i compare granulated powder using a black powder measure and say for example that at the 30 mark my powder weighs 27 grains. Swiss typically is on the mark at 30 for 30. Hope this helps.
    thanks for the clarification - I believe I will continue on my present path - comparison to commercial is simple and easy - my puck process would be almost impossible to accurately measure and a PITA to boot. Main focus has always been consistent chronograph results and even there I am lazy, I want acceptable velocity but am majorly focused on Extreme Spread for a ten shot string - that requires very careful loading right through the process from case prep to trigger pull - if I take care the range of 6 to 9 FPS is achievable. I have a lab measure for 250 ml and a decent scale so will come back later with a measure for granulated.

  13. #4913
    Boolit Master almar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    580
    It not really complicated if you can reference how far your piston goes during the compression and weigh the powder before putting in the die., there are some benefits to measuring it. If you make each puck consistent with the same density, the grains will be more consistent. Also if you have been maxing out the pressure, maybe play around with that by lowering the pressure to see what that does.but this isn't a job or anything, we do what we want and go as far as we want really. You've been doing this long enough to have your method down for sure. I just keep making slight adjustments here and there and like to share it here in case somebody can use it or provide feedback in case I am missing something.

    I purified some of that prilled stuff from Duda diesel today. Its not difficult to do but it takes some time. If you try it, keep that water for the next run, don't throw it away. ill see if its worth it with the next batch. The water turned yellow for some reason.
    Last edited by almar; 11-24-2021 at 11:11 PM.
    “It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
    ― Winston S. Churchill

  14. #4914
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    665
    Indian Joe and AlMar;
    Joe, I hope you will measure that powder and post your result, to just see how my math figures to our results.
    I have thought for a long time, that my fastest powder was the screened Sassafras that I made as a test, that had 2% dextrin in it. By weight it was, and is.
    Thinking on our homemade powder usually weighing light on a standard volume measure, I pulled out three of my powders and did some weighing of them and made some volume calculations.
    I took a six Milliliter syringe, which would also be six Cubic Centimeters, or six Grams of water. I weighed two grams of each powder out and funneled it into the syringe, put a cap on the end and inserted the plunger. Then I turned it up and squeezed the air out, I made a small space, and then 'knocked' it on the table a few times, to settle it into the end evenly and squeezed the plunger tight and read how many CC's it held, and recorded the numbers.
    The first powder was my last 'Brown' Black Willow, that measured 1.72 grams per CC, at the dry puck.
    That powder was actual 2F and as poured into the barrel, the granulated powder measured 1.05 Grams Per CC.
    The next powder was the Paulownia I made a few months ago, which measured 1.6 Grams Per CC at the dry puck.
    The difference in it and the first (1.72 G/CC) was it was not actual 2F but what I call my HM 2.5F. So that can account for a small difference, but as poured in the barrel, that powder measured just about exactly 1.0 Grams Per CC.
    The third powder was my prized Sassafras, which has out performed everything I've tested.
    As I said, it was screened and not pucked so as poured in the barrel is the only density I have, but it recorded .714 Grams Per CC.
    I've done all my main tests with 60 grains of powder by weight.
    I knew that screened powder by volume was a lot larger charge, but never gave it much thought, until this evening.
    Converting those numbers to a 60 grain Volume measure, showed me how much difference it actually was.
    My Swiss powder is used up, and about the only real tests I got on it, was how much a 60 grain charge weighed. It was about exactly 60 grains.
    The 'Brown' Black Willow would weigh 63 grains, for a 60 grain Volume measure.
    The Paulownia would weigh about exactly 60 grains per 60 grain Volume measure.
    The Sassafras Screened powder would only weigh 42.84 grains, for a 60 grain Volume measure.
    So, I wrote all this to conclude that while the other powders have been pretty close in volume, and all weighed 60 grains, they were way unequal to the screened powder, which a 60 grain weight charge, had almost 1/3 more volume of powder.
    And, THAT, my boys, is why I believe my screened Sassafras was so much out performing all my other powders. If I had of been going by volume measure, I may have turned my nose up, when I used it. I never thought about it being so much more volume required, to get the same weight of powder. And, in this case, I'm convinced it made a big difference.
    What this test didn't tell me, was why my second fastest powder has been Sassafras Pucked to 1.6 Grams Per CC. haha
    And there you have it.
    AlMar, I hope I have not wasted a bunch of your time, with the Sassafras, even though it still remains my fastest tested powder, and the pucked my second fastest powder, my tests were skewed by testing the screened like the pucked. I still hope you get a home run, with the Sassafras. I'm not giving up on it, by any means.
    Last edited by DoubleBuck; 11-24-2021 at 11:43 PM.

  15. #4915
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,702
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleBuck View Post
    Indian Joe and AlMar;
    Joe, I hope you will measure that powder and post your result, to just see how my math figures to our results.
    I have thought for a long time, that my fastest powder was the screened Sassafras that I made as a test, that had 2% dextrin in it. By weight it was, and is.
    Thinking on our homemade powder usually weighing light on a standard volume measure, I pulled out three of my powders and did some weighing of them and made some volume calculations.
    I took a six Milliliter syringe, which would also be six Cubic Centimeters, or six Grams of water. I weighed two grams of each powder out and funneled it into the syringe, put a cap on the end and inserted the plunger. Then I turned it up and squeezed the air out, I made a small space, and then 'knocked' it on the table a few times, to settle it into the end evenly and squeezed the plunger tight and read how many CC's it held, and recorded the numbers.
    The first powder was my last 'Brown' Black Willow, that measured 1.72 grams per CC, at the dry puck.
    That powder was actual 2F and as poured into the barrel, the granulated powder measured 1.05 Grams Per CC.
    The next powder was the Paulownia I made a few months ago, which measured 1.6 Grams Per CC at the dry puck.
    The difference in it and the first (1.72 G/CC) was it was not actual 2F but what I call my HM 2.5F. So that can account for a small difference, but as poured in the barrel, that powder measured just about exactly 1.0 Grams Per CC.
    The third powder was my prized Sassafras, which has out performed everything I've tested.
    As I said, it was screened and not pucked so as poured in the barrel is the only density I have, but it recorded .714 Grams Per CC.
    I've done all my main tests with 60 grains of powder by weight.
    I knew that screened powder by volume was a lot larger charge, but never gave it much thought, until this evening.
    Converting those numbers to a 60 grain Volume measure, showed me how much difference it actually was.
    My Swiss powder is used up, and about the only real tests I got on it, was how much a 60 grain charge weighed. It was about exactly 60 grains.
    The 'Brown' Black Willow would weigh 63 grains, for a 60 grain Volume measure.
    The Paulownia would weigh about exactly 60 grains per 60 grain Volume measure.
    The Sassafras Screened powder would only weigh 42.84 grains, for a 60 grain Volume measure.
    So, I wrote all this to conclude that while the other powders have been pretty close in volume, and all weighed 60 grains, they were way unequal to the screened powder, which a 60 grain weight charge, had almost 1/3 more volume of powder.
    And, THAT, my boys, is why I believe my screened Sassafras was so much out performing all my other powders. If I had of been going by volume measure, I may have turned my nose up, when I used it. I never thought about it being so much more volume required, to get the same weight of powder. And, in this case, I'm convinced it made a big difference.
    What this test didn't tell me, was why my second fastest powder has been Sassafras Pucked to 1.6 Grams Per CC. haha
    And there you have it.
    AlMar, I hope I have not wasted a bunch of your time, with the Sassafras, even though it still remains my fastest tested powder, and the pucked my second fastest powder, my tests were skewed by testing the screened like the pucked. I still hope you get a home run, with the Sassafras. I'm not giving up on it, by any means.
    ok
    test measure
    my lab measuring cylinder holds 322 ml of water brimful (bigger the measure less margin for error I reckon) I had this thing and I know its quality equipment.
    so full up, vibrated down by hand until the column stopped moving = 316 grams of HM FFFg = 0.981 gram per cc
    (this is the last of 2018 batch)

    same fill of Goex 5FA vibrated down the same = 343 grams = 1.065 gram per cc

    screened? I didnt measure but previous tests say 65 to 70% of the Goex density

    an interesting test was screened vs pucked in 44/40 - ingredients from the same mix just processed different - 40 grain load of each gave almost identical chrony number - getting that much screened into the case is a bit of a trick but can be done - so energy per gram of either was the same.
    my wood is hybrid willow - its close, plentiful, works well, just too easy to be bothered looking for something better

  16. #4916
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    665
    Indian Joe;
    Thanks for taking the time to check that. It believe it backs up my numbers very well and if Goex is close to Swiss in density, it makes my thought of a loss of 30% just about right.
    I used to screen all of my powder until about three years ago. I still have that powder and when I bought my chronograph, I tested about every powder I had made, and even though I recorded the results, it never hit me why the Sassafras was so fast and it shot good, too. haha
    Now I'm pretty sure I know why.

  17. #4917
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,702
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleBuck View Post
    Indian Joe;
    Thanks for taking the time to check that. It believe it backs up my numbers very well and if Goex is close to Swiss in density, it makes my thought of a loss of 30% just about right.
    I used to screen all of my powder until about three years ago. I still have that powder and when I bought my chronograph, I tested about every powder I had made, and even though I recorded the results, it never hit me why the Sassafras was so fast and it shot good, too. haha
    Now I'm pretty sure I know why.
    That goex is old - early 1990's - a whisker less dense than wano and 2 whiskers less than swiss from what I been told (never shot swiss so just going on rumour)

  18. #4918
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,124
    Quote Originally Posted by indian joe View Post
    ok
    test measure
    my lab measuring cylinder holds 322 ml of water brimful (bigger the measure less margin for error I reckon) I had this thing and I know its quality equipment.
    so full up, vibrated down by hand until the column stopped moving = 316 grams of HM FFFg = 0.981 gram per cc
    (this is the last of 2018 batch)

    same fill of Goex 5FA vibrated down the same = 343 grams = 1.065 gram per cc

    screened? I didnt measure but previous tests say 65 to 70% of the Goex density

    an interesting test was screened vs pucked in 44/40 - ingredients from the same mix just processed different - 40 grain load of each gave almost identical chrony number - getting that much screened into the case is a bit of a trick but can be done - so energy per gram of either was the same.
    my wood is hybrid willow - its close, plentiful, works well, just too easy to be bothered looking for something better
    Hey Indian Joe,

    Thanks for the report on your weights. How does your powder compare to Goex in performance? (Weight Goex to weight "Indian Joe")

    Thanks,
    Vettepilot
    "Those who sacrifice freedom for security, have neither."
    Benjamin Franklin. (A very wise man!)

  19. #4919
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,124
    Quote Originally Posted by almar View Post
    It not really complicated if you can reference how far your piston goes during the compression and weigh the powder before putting in the die., there are some benefits to measuring it. If you make each puck consistent with the same density, the grains will be more consistent. Also if you have been maxing out the pressure, maybe play around with that by lowering the pressure to see what that does.but this isn't a job or anything, we do what we want and go as far as we want really. You've been doing this long enough to have your method down for sure. I just keep making slight adjustments here and there and like to share it here in case somebody can use it or provide feedback in case I am missing something.

    I purified some of that prilled stuff from Duda diesel today. Its not difficult to do but it takes some time. If you try it, keep that water for the next run, don't throw it away. ill see if its worth it with the next batch. The water turned yellow for some reason.
    Jeeez Almar! You don't "Let any grass grow under ya" do you!!?? Do you ever sleep??

    I barely mentioned that book to you, and I blinked twice, and you had already gotten the book, read the book, and already purified some potassium nitrate!! Wow!! You're amazing! And here I was waiting to see if you wanted me to send you a copy of the book!

    When I read that part in the book about KNO3, I knew right away it was info you would want to have. He has some comments about density you might have found interesting too.

    Add: He says something though, about most home made powder, that doesn't follow his methods, being terribly under-powered. I don't agree with that...

    Vettepilot
    Last edited by Vettepilot; 11-25-2021 at 02:35 PM.
    "Those who sacrifice freedom for security, have neither."
    Benjamin Franklin. (A very wise man!)

  20. #4920
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    665
    Vette Pilot, or AlMar;
    If you guys both have paper copies of the book, I'm wondering if you can read the density charts at the end of chapter 7? And, if you can read them, can you take a picture of them and post it? On line, the charts aren't clear and blowing them up only makes it worse. I would really like to be able to see them. I was going to buy a paper copy of the book, but wanted to read it while I had time, so just bought the online version.
    If you can do it, thanks, and if not, I'll live.

Page 246 of 403 FirstFirst ... 146196236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256296346 ... LastLast

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