Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Muzzleloaders Smokeless powder question

Using a primed case (instead of a breach plug) and pouring the powder/projectile down the muzzle has proven to be dangerous in a break action. H&R used to make one with a non thread plug. If you open the action after a misfire the plug can become a projectile. There are some customs that use a primed case but they also have locking lugs on the bolt and a breach plug.

Powder is powder, just like a stock is a stock. I dont see anyone promoting a ban on a 1lb Kevlar composite stock even though it offers a big advantage while hunting.

I don't see anyone banning the customs like Ultimate that let you achieve near smokeless performance safely with 180grs or more of Blackhorn or other subs. They may ban the ignition type but they are not banning the performance of the load.

The major bans/regs ive seen are on the ignition type, scopes and projectile. If you have those regs in your state, smokeless is either worthless or offers very little advantage. A muzzleloader by our state's definition can only be loaded from the muzzle and that is good enough for me.

still dodging the question Over kill . when will it not be good enough ?
Ill step up and submit that its only good enough now when those shooting it are a minority . When they become a majority that�s when it wont be good enough . The end result will still be to try and get center fire performance from a muzzleloader

as to break opens being dangerous .
How exactly do we come to that conclusion
Drillings are break open and one of the highest quality guns ever made .
SxS, Over and under as well as many single shot , shot guns and rifles are break open . Is there a danger in those ?
opening any gun after a miss fire can cause harm .
as a very young man i held down a soldier who mistakenly open the feed tray on an M60 after it had chain fired then stop suddenly . took his complete arm off right at the shoulder.
do you look down the bore when your rifle missfires ?


Im not suggesting we Bann anything . What I suggesting is that we all support each other by recognizing the laws as they are written instead of liberalizing everything we touch

H&R MADE a break action with a plug without threads..Its no different than a brass case. It becomes a projectile under certain conditions.

Thats why NO ONE offers that design anymore. Its why all H&R muzzleloader breach plugs NOW have threads. I never said all break actions were dangerous.

If it loads from the muzzle ONLY its a muzzleloader PERIOD. It may not be traditional but its a muzzleloader as defined by law. Its not a form 4473 firearm.

The difference is one is a firearm and the other is not since it can not be loaded from the breach with a current production cartridge.

I can achieve over 2500fps with BH209 and a 200gr ST, are you suggesting BH209 should be banned also? Are you suggesting a ML can be banned based solely on how much fps or fpe it can generate?

I can break over 2300fps with T7 and a 200gr SST. Should it be banned also? That can even be done without a 209 primer.

Load data for Pyro pellets claims over 2400fps with a 155gr bullet in a 45cal sabot. Should it be banned also? Thats similar to a 7mm-08 at the muzzle.

I know,,,, lets ban all powders except real BP and require you to use heavy conicals so its impossible to break 1500 fps. Oh... but wait those are effective killers too. Oops those loads can beat a 45/70 405gr trap door load.

Darn it, i thought i had the solution.

Well i guess i will just keep launching a 275gr BE at a mild 2400fps until i can see a good reason not to shoot them. The deer haven't seemed to know the difference in any bullet or powder ive used. They all died quickly. They all died at under 200 yards.

Good load for rifle seasons where it belongs.

Thats when i normally use them.

I just dont see the difference between using a 45/70 or a muzzleloader with identical ballistics. Its VERY easy to duplicate or beat a 45/70 even with real BP in a 45cal. 405gr at 1300fps-1400fps...no problem.

Its a bit more challenging to duplicate the accuracy and reload time though with a ML. I draw MY line at what is legal and encourage those that make the laws to offer more options for those who want to self impose more of a challenge.

First let me apologize for this post being so long .
As well as high jacking this thread .
I really didn�t mean to do that . But I think it�s a subject that we all need to consider and talk about .
Its not about modern vs. traditional . Its about both . Its about us all .
Hell its not even about banning smokeless powder for muzzle loading . As I have said before . . There is no reason why smokeless cannot be used when done properly .
All im saying is lets take a minute and look back over the development in the last 20 years . Then look ahead and ask ourselves if we are ready for the consequences.
All I ask is that we think about as truly i believe it will effect us all .



Actually the big reason is that the Federal laws state that in order to qualify as a non FFL weapon , the design cannot be readily converted to center fire .
Savage ran into that with the early ML10 design which is an . Bad bull also had this issue . But they chose to go a different route and just make a FFL required rifle .
Ill get to more of that in a second .



Being capable of loading from the breech with a "current" production cartridge has nothing to do with it . its any avalable fixed ammunition which includes BP loads . . Nor does loading from the muzzle . It has to do with the frame or receiver .
Please re -read 18 U.S.C. � 921(a)(16)
Take note of the following in section C

C: Any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term �antique firearm� shall not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon, which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof.

Im not going to get into a traditional vs. modern argument with you. It has nothing to do with that . What im trying to tell you is that if we as a shooting discipline , read as ALL muzzle loading people , don�t start policing ourselves and stop interpreting things out of context , we are going to end up sucking pond water and IMO will have no right to complain when the fed does the same thing . Which by the way they are already doing .
When the ATF say


Now I ask you . Who in the hell is the ATF to determine anything. They are enforcement not courts .
Now maybe you missed it so ill bring it up again .
I have a bone stock Pieta reproduction of a colt 1860 . it�s considered a muzzleloader and no form 4473 is required .
How long do you think its going to be with the current gun ban push , before the ATF realizes that and a whole hand full of other black powder revolvers , fall under what I just posted above ?
Do you realize that there are people who are suggesting that ALL muzzleloaders , traditional and modern should be required to be sold through an FFL with full back ground and registration. that�s not just production guns either. There is talk of even requiring SN# and registration , on muzzleloaders made by those who make traditional long rifles like myself .. �NOTE : im not one of them � frankly I think its stupid and just another attempt by the Anti�s to track us all down .
But frankly I see a day when there is a very real chance that�s going to happen �IF� its not already being implemented with obamas new gun laws .
Why exactly do you think they are doing that Overkill ?



Why do you think you had a solution , what you just did was prove my point .
Why would you stop at allowing real Black powder when it also will produce the same load for the 45.70.
In fact we can get very near those same muzzle velocities from in a 36 or 45 cal shooting a round ball . Do you think a 71 gr, RB want kill you at just over 2200ftps ????
What do you think I would get if I used that same charge an stuck a 139 grain , 6mm boattail with a sabot down that bore ???
The more and more we push the point where more and more shooters pushing center fire performance, realizing just what these guns are capable of ,the easier its going to be to simply disregard keeping muzzle loading guns separate from all these regulations.
Even more so once the use of smokeless powder becomes popular .
Why , because more an more people are going to start looking at the actual numbers . Thus making that comparison.

So folks don�t think im harping just on modern guns, please bear with me just a few minutes longer .
Currently we are seeing folks wanting to ban high capacity magazines .Were not talking 20 and 30 round clips . We are now down to talking 10 .

Just a few days back I posted a link to modern air rifles . Most of you probably past right over that .
But do you realize that the Girandoni air rifle as used by Lewis and Clark in their famous expedition, by that time the design it was some 20 - 30 years old and in fact had been designed and used in combat . It also carries a large 21 round magazine which loads a new ball with the simple push of a slide lever . The magazine also loads the balls at the breech . So no need to ram a ball home
The rifle is also said to be able to fire up to 40 rounds without and noticeable loss in performance .
Which even at 100 yards is more then adequate enough to putting a 44 cal round through a 1 inch pine board .
Its rate of fire is said to be as great as 22 rounds in 30 seconds . that info can be checked through the NRA web site
how many of you realized that . I would bet not many . Most likely because you never thought about it or looked
Granted , right now we are talking low base smokeless powders that produce in the ball part of BP. But its not going to stay that way as its realized that so much more is capable .
Once again im not talking about banning anything . Im also not talking modern vs. Traditional . What im saying is we better start thinking about where exactly it is we are heading and why . For if we don�t we better not cry when the anti gun groups start crawling up our back side with a microscope and thus realize that they have us all by the Nuts

I'll take a stab at it. The 45/70 shoots a cartridge. And loads from the breech. The muzzleloader doesn't.

How'd I do?

CRS, you've been given some very good advise on a very complex subject. Accept it, reject it as you deem fit. There are options available for a designed smokeless ML. The other option available for loading smokeless in a ML not intended for such is illustrated in the photos of the hand above.

Nitro for black loads have been around for a great long while and there are people still fiddling with such things today. They are doing so with CARTRIDGE guns, not MLs. Their work is irrelevant to your inquiry.

The weak point in conventional ML design is mostly found in the breech plug and/or bolster/nipple. If one is inclined to futz around with the pioneer theory re: pressure with all attendant analytical metrics, keep in mind the health, safety and welfare hinges on machined threads. Such things are commonly viewed as stress multipliers from an engineering perspective. That is a circumstance unique in the world of firearms with only rare exceptions.

I do agree with Capchee that developing a nitro for black load for MLs is possible, but at the same time suggest that absent education on the topic of internal ballistics and testing equipment to evaluate the process leaves one woefully ill prepared to do so safely. Measured velocity in this case is NOT a valid tool insofar as evaluating pressure.

With that said, if you're laboring that much to clean a ML after using BP, my guess is you're doing something wrong. I am not personally inclined to masochistic behavior myself and prefer cleaning BP residue from a number of arms to smokeless/copper fouling cleaning in others. I do both, but prefer the former.

This has been a very informative thread.

As far as the cleaning, it isn't that hard. But I like to clear my load every night. So I clean every night I go hunting. I hunt hard and long, meaning all day. And cleaning is just one less thing I would like not to do when I get home.

I still cannot understand how some of the BH209 and T7 loads from above are less dangerous than say AA5744 pushing a 250gr bullet to 1950 fps, or the manuals that state 150gr BP/pyrodex loads pushing a 250gr bullet to 2200-2400 fps. Especially since AA5744 is considered a very good substitute for BP cartridge loads.

I just do not think anyone has does the testing and the manufacturers have no monetary incentive to do the testing when they can sell their BP substitutes for a much better margin.

I have though about buying some pressure testing equipment, but there is no monetary incentive for me to pursue it when I can buy BH209 and go from there. I can only draw a tag every third or fourth year, so that is the most common sense route. I used up most of my Black Magic this past season practicing and discharging loads at the end of the day.

I have another 3-4 years to work up another load for when I draw the next tag.

I personally think that the best thing for special muzzleloader seasons would be to get rid of inlines/sabots and allow flint/caps with patches and roundballs being pushed by black powder only. Buckhorn sights and call it good, but that will never happen.

If you are hunting with a clean bore and can safely secure the gun overnight, remove the prime, or primer as the case may be and hunt with it the next day. If the bore is oil free and dry the powder will not rust the bore.



Well, try this: BP is relatively stable insofar as quickness is concerned. "Quickness" is the property wherein burn rate varies as a function of pressure. Smokeless powder burn rates correlate significantly with pressure, ie, they are not stable in that context. This is one reason smokeless propellants generate higher peak pressures. It could well be the comparison you give is predicated on that particular metric. Peak pressure is the beast that can dismantle a breech plug or nipple in half a blink. One can double charge a gun with BP and not necessarily cause harm to anything other than ego. That cannot be done with smokeless. Murphy's Second Law om paraphrase as I recall it, "If it can be done, it will be done."
http://www.murphys-laws.com/murphy/murphy-laws.html



I think they promote subs because they are easier to distribute from a regulatory perspective which makes them more available and popular than BP. Ignition favors conventional primers due to brisance characteristics and specifically the #209 style because they are easily handled. FWIW, many shooters of BP cartridge guns favor magnum rifle primers for BP due to enhanced accuracy.



I am of the same sentiment, but that is another can of worms and best left unopened for the moment.

Yes

I understand that double base powders can get unpredictable with varying pressures, but single based powders are much more predictable and mild mannered. For example AA5744.

The double charge can happen, but I am anal enough that I actually weigh my BP substitutes, I do not measure by volume.
Volume measurements and actual weight do not correlate.

I found some pressure dataon AA5744.
44gr with 250gr bullet is 38k psi out of a Savage, velocity was reported 2200 fps.
That exceeds the 28-30k psi that muzzleloaders are suggested to stay within.

But, what if you dropped the charge by 6gr? I am pretty sure one would well under the pressure limit.

Just for thought anyhow.

I found some pressure dataon AA5744.
44gr with 250gr bullet is 38k psi out of a Savage, velocity was reported 2291 fps.
That exceeds the 28-30k psi that muzzleloaders are suggested to stay within.

But, what if you dropped the charge by 6gr? I am pretty sure one would be well under the pressure limit. I am pretty sure the firearm cannot tell the difference in what kind of powder is generating the pressure. As long as the pressure is within the safe operating range of the firearm.

Just for thought anyhow.

Sure, you could drop the charge to keep peak pressure within safe limits with nitrocellulose powder for a black powder barrel. But compared to black powder you would end up with lower average pressure. It's that burn rate pressure exponent thing. So you would get lower velocity from smokeless than black. How much I don't know, but I'd bet a lot slower.

But how would you know how much powder is safe without instrumenting the barrel? Would be guessing whether or not you just made a pipe bomb.

Of course you would have lower velocity with lower pressure. The whole point of this thread is what is the actual pressure?

And is the pressure low enough to be safely used in non smokeless produced muzzleloaders. ie < 30k psi

The gun barrel cannot tell the difference where the pressure comes from. As long as it does not exceed the capabilities to safely contain it. Most inlines are limited to 30k psi I believe.

The western powders website list 45-70 loads with AA5744 from 16k - 38k psi. A saboted bullet and bigger bore diameter should actually reduce pressure even more.

You notice that all of BP and substitute load data does not list pressures just velocities? How do they know it is safe in muzzleloaders? They have to have pressure data, just not presenting it to the general public?

I think it is a bunch of smoke and mirrors, with the muzzleloading industries bottom line benefitting.

So if you load nitro based powder to the same peak pressure as black and end up with significantly lower velocity, what's the point? You don't have an excess of velocity to start with.

Not being expert in internal ballistics I would not try to transpose cartridge data to muzzle loading. Obviously a lot of things are different. Of course BP substitutes are pressure tested, they don't publish burn rate data either as far as I can tell. I suspect there's enough difference to heed maximum load warnings.

There is no way that you can accurately extrapolate peak pressures or pressure curves without equipment. Trying to do so....that would be smoke and mirrors.

That lower pressure. = lower velocity is not always the case. Other factors come into play.
Example: two .416s with 400 grain bullets at 2370fps. The Rigby version is at or lower than 40K CUP. Remington's runs at 52K psi.
Pete

I am not chasing velocity, I am chasing economics and ease of cleaning. I do not want to push envelopes, just stay within the pressure parameters of the firearms.

That information is not readily available from the manufacturers. The question is why not? We are to blindly accept their word without scientific data?

No . but lets remember that what your looking at is companies that will be held liable when someone does something stupid . Which they will swear didn�t happen or wasn�t their fault .
There are just to many variables where seemingly minor changes can result in drastically different out comes .
But as you say . Why take their word for it . So if they build a rifle and clearly state 10 grains by weight of brand X powder . It isn�t long before someone doesn�t take their word for it and uses 6 grains of brand Y .
Next thing you know billy bob say ; I use brand Z and have no issues .
Maybe he doesn�t or as the case most often is , he doesn�t have the knowledge to know if he has or is causing damage to the gun which may end up coming apart down the road .
In which case the cry will go out about how poorly made the gun is

There is a lot more to it then saying Hay , why wouldn�t this be safe if I have near the same X .
What you maynot be thinking about is just what some of the others have posted time and time again .
IE what are the pressures
What are the pressure curves
How do those pressures curves effect things
How do those pressures react for the given application .
Can the total design withstand the pressures .

Even if you got all that information , your still not going to be able to take the human variable out .
There in lays IMO the real reason as to why .
No one wants to put their neck on the line to see if billy bob will not be stupid .Maybe it wouldnt even be his fault . things happen. even when you think everything is right . just take a look at what can happen when you get your reloads wrong .

Hell you cant even get so call well known authorities to understand they need to maintain the gun and replace parts when needed . Then when the gun blows up , they blame the maker .
Its hard enough getting folks to not try and load smokeless in muzzle loading guns not designed for it .
Did they know better ? Most times they found out they didn�t know as much as they thought they did