Last edited by Chill Wills; 07-01-2019 at 12:08 PM.
Chill Wills
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
interesting video.
https://www.forgottenweapons.com/elm...ka-boom-video/
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...
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
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).
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/
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!
Ted, If I may ask; what did Winchester do in 1897?
Chill Wills
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.
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.
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!
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 |