BP Loads

Welcome to the forum!
I’ve used both grades of powder over the past 45 years. Both work well however the fff gives a bit more kick. For blackpowder cartridges I fill them as much as I can leaving enough room to seat the bullet with a bit of compression. Some use a filler to reduce powder charge but I don’t. Just one opinion. Many more expert shooters will be along soon.

Swiss will generally give the most fps per powder type, I would load carbine loads in the trapdoor of 55 grains, you will need some filler to get the compression I like about 1/8"

I use FFg in both .45 Colt and .45-70 TD BP loads.

If loading both 45 Colt pistol and larger 45-70 Rifle. . . . 2Fg.

Unless you have a seprate compression die, fill the case -- powder shaken down as low as it will go -- until even roughly with bullet base.
Insert 2 milk carton wad/cards -- that will provide both a little compression/base protection when seateded/crimped firmly

3f is fine although many like 2f. Use Swiss if at all possible. Most BPCR like some compression of the powder by the bullet. Exactly how much is a variable you have to control as it changes from rifle to rifle.

Here's my original 1869 rolling block in 50/70

If your aim is to only have one grade of BP then I would recommend FFg. In my experience it would be a better choice for the 45-70 Gov and you can get decent performance in 45 Colt from a revolver. My preference is FFg in the 45-70 and FFFg in the 45 Colt, but I am duplicating the ballistic performance of the original BP factory loads and in solid head cases the two cartridges seem to work better with different grades of BP. YMMV

Dave

I tried both 2F and 3F Goex in 45-70 and 45 Colt rounds. Got slightly more consistent results with the 3F in these specific guns. I've read enough to know many prefer 2F. I suspect the difference in performance is minor so use what you can get. Real BP benefits from compression so take that into account. I load the powder under a lubed felt wad (homemade) that I push into place with the eraser end of a pencil. I don't recall the actual charge but experimented until seating the bullet gave that compression then made a charger for that amount. It was trial and error.

If you didn't know, remember you have to wash the spent brass just as you do the firearm. I just decap the cases with a Lee universal decapping die, dump them in water and scrub them with a 45 caliber brush inside and out. It only takes a few seconds per case. Then let them air dry.

I hope you pursue this. BP cartridge shooting is a LOT of fun. It can be very accurate and you get that wonderful black powder aroma.

Welcome to the Forum.

Jeff

For the 45-70 I would use 65 grains of FFG with a 405 grain bullet. For the .45 Colt I would use 35 grains of FFG with a 250 grain bullet. I am not a fan of reduced loads.

I only keep 3f so its what I use . 37 - 40 grains of 3F with 250 grain RNFP in 45 colt.

Either/or will work. I use 2F in my .45-70 and 3F in my .45 Colt.

As mentioned, both will work. As I understand it, the powder originally used in the .45 Colt was actually closer to 2F than 3F so that seems like the natural recommendation is you want just one type. If I had to pick just one, I would stock up on 3F because it can be used effectively for just about any cartridge as well as a priming charge in a flintlock but for your stated purposes I would just buy whichever you can find.

Personally in my Trapdoor I use either 60 or 65 grains of 2F under a card wad and 405 grain bullet and it works well. I prefer the 65 grain load but mine has issues with case extraction and the 60s tend to be easier in that regard. I have not personally tried 2F in .45 Colt but have no doubt it would work very well. On the same token I have not tried 3F in 45-70 but many people prefer it to 2F in that cartridge. At the end of the day, I don't worry all that much about the difference between the two granulations. One may be better than the other in any given circumstance but I am not a good enough shooter to tell, frankly.

I've always used 3fg Swiss in both my Model 1873 Springfields, one rifle and one carbine. A full 70 grains is not a problem under a replica of the 405 grain bullet, and I have found no reason to load a lighter load for the carbine.

Black powder does like to be compressed in a cartridge, it will burn cleaner. Just my opinion, but I think it likes to be compressed a bit more than what you can do with the bullet, without deforming the bullet.

Here's a pic of my Marlin shooting under one inch at 100 yards, with 80 grains under a Speer 400 grain jacketed bullet.

The carbine does quite well with a full power, 70 grain load, and the 405 grain cast bullet.

Ugly Sauce said:

View attachment 1046329
The carbine does quite well with a full power, 70 grain load, and the 405 grain cast bullet.

Click to expand...

Guess you're way stronger and tougher than the Indian Wars cavalry troops. They shot the 405g bullet over 55g of black powder...something like our FFg. That was the issue carbine load.

Dave

Dave T said:

Guess you're way stronger and tougher than the Indian Wars cavalry troops. They shot the 405g bullet over 55g of black powder...something like our FFg. That was the issue carbine load.

Dave

Click to expand...

I must be. I am!! Thank you!

But I've never been "recoil sensitive". I would imagine that among the troops there were many who would not be bothered shooting the rifle load in the carbine, who were perhaps "gun guys" to begin with and then there were many "city boys", new recruits, not experienced with firearms, or more recoil sensitive types who were bothered by it. The solution of course would be the lighter load to improve marksmanship with the recruits and those who were more recoil sensitive. ? That's my theory, and I'm sticking to it! I really don't think the rifle load kicks that badly in the carbine. And I don't think every trooper would have found it "objectionable".

The 55 grain carbine load did have it's disadvantages, the rifle load, from the rifle out-ranged it quite a bit. At the battle of the Rosebud, when the Cavalry troops were getting hard pressed, or in a pinch, they would then have the infantry come up and put more effective rifle fire on the enemy, and drive them back.

Ugly Sauce said:

I must be. I am!! Thank you!

But I've never been "recoil sensitive". I would imagine that among the troops there were many who would not be bothered shooting the rifle load in the carbine, who were perhaps "gun guys" to begin with and then there were many "city boys", new recruits, not experienced with firearms, or more recoil sensitive types who were bothered by it. The solution of course would be the lighter load to improve marksmanship with the recruits and those who were more recoil sensitive. ? That's my theory, and I'm sticking to it! I really don't think the rifle load kicks that badly in the carbine. And I don't think every trooper would have found it "objectionable".

The 55 grain carbine load did have it's disadvantages, the rifle load, from the rifle out-ranged it quite a bit. At the battle of the Rosebud, when the Cavalry troops were getting hard pressed, or in a pinch, they would then have the infantry come up and put more effective rifle fire on the enemy, and drive them back.

Click to expand...

I've always wondered about this too. Admittedly mine are shot out of a rifle, not a carbine, which I'm sure helps a little bit. But I remember when I got my Trapdoor, working myself up to fire the full-strength (okay, a couple grains short of 70 because I didn't have a drop tube at the time) cartridge, because I'd heard so much about how much of a butt-kicker it was. I mean, if it was too much for the Army, who knows what it's going to do to me...

A couple shots later and I started to realize that there were probably a lot of folks in the Army who were not necessarily firearms enthusiasts and just had to shoot one as part of their job. Not that there's nothing to it, but I can stand there and go through a whole box of ammo in a short time without a great deal of discomfort. Maybe it would be a little trickier from horseback, I don't know. I'd like to try it out of a carbine sometime just to see if the removal of ten inches really does make such a massive difference, but at least out of my rifle I thought it was surprisingly mild...

I'm not recoil sensitive either. 405 grain bullets with 65 grains of powder is pretty puny out of a carbine. That's what I used when I had mine. I doubt 5 grains more would make much difference. I used a 497 grain bullet with 80 grains of powder in my 63 Sharps and it was an easy shooter but it had a 32 inch heavy octagonal barrel.

To those of you who want to fire the hottest BP loads you can, more power to you.

My intention in shooting BPC has always been one of pursuing the historical experience as it was in the 19th Century. Years ago, when I owned a Trapdoor "carbine" (in reality a cut down rifle that made it affordable), I shot the 55g/405 load because I wanted to know what it was like for the cavalry troopers in the late 1870s and 1880s.

I have a Remington RB Sporting rifle now and I load 69.2g of FFg behind a 415g RNFP. My fixed rotor measure won't throw exactly 70g but 69.2 is getting close. I can't cast bullets anymore (too busted up these days) so I buy them from Montana Bullet Works and his version, lubed with SPG, comes out at 415g instead of the original 405. Sharps actually sold 45-70 ammo (they called it the 45 2-1/10") loaded with 70g of powder behind a 420g bullet. My handload is close to that original loading for my civilian rifle.

YMMV,
Dave

Dave T said:

To those of you who want to fire the hottest BP loads you can, more power to you.

My intention in shooting BPC has always been one of pursuing the historical experience as it was in the 19th Century. Years ago, when I owned a Trapdoor "carbine" (in reality a cut down rifle that made it affordable), I shot the 55g/405 load because I wanted to know what it was like for the cavalry troopers in the late 1870s and 1880s.

I have a Remington RB Sporting rifle now and I load 69.2g of FFg behind a 415g RNFP. My fixed rotor measure won't throw exactly 70g but 69.2 is getting close. I can't cast bullets anymore (too busted up these days) so I buy them from Montana Bullet Works and his version, lubed with SPG, comes out at 415g instead of the original 405. Sharps actually sold 45-70 ammo (they called it the 45 2-1/10") loaded with 70g of powder behind a 420g bullet. My handload is close to that original loading for my civilian rifle.

YMMV,
Dave

Click to expand...

Nothing but respect for that! I don't think anyone's getting into BPC that isn't interested in recreating history. I'm all for shooting the historically correct load even if the hotter ones are just fine too. Actually, even though I enjoy the hotter loads a little more, the load I typically shoot out of my Trapdoor rifle is closer to 60 grains just because I've found that to be the most accurate and these days, saving a little bit of powder can sure add up.

With the 500 grain bullet, recoil might be getting stout in a carbine. I wonder if switching to the 55 grain carbine load coincided with switching to the 500 grain bullet in the rifle. ? Perhaps that was the problem, and nothing to do with the 405 grain bullet. I have never fired a 500 grain bullet over 70 grains in either rifle or carbine.

Dave T said:

To those of you who want to fire the hottest BP loads you can, more power to you.

Click to expand...

Pun intended??

Well, some quick research says the 500 grain bullet didn't come along until 1888 (?) and the 55 grain carbine load seems to be as old as the carbine. So maybe them old cavalry troopers weren't as tough as we thought they were, when it came to recoil.

I dunno...I'm shooting the 535gr Postell out of my Pedersoli Sharps with 60gr 2F behind it...and that's literally as much powder as I can stuff in there (Starline brass) using a Walters wad and a compression die. And the recoil of that compared to my smokeless .45-70 .405gr JFP rounds out of my HiWall are a walk in the park. Still, I'm good for about 20 of those off the bench. Last outing with the Sharps I ran through 35 rounds and felt fine afterwards. The smokeless rounds leave me black and blue for a week after.
I shouldn't think 70gr behind a 405gr bullet should be that excessive, even on a carbine, but let's remember, they were shooting from horseback at times. That could get squirrely in a hurry.

Captain*kirk said:

.I'm shooting the 535gr Postell out of my Pedersoli Sharps with 60gr 2F behind it..

Click to expand...

Wow...I think my Marlin would like that. That is often my berry-picking-gun. That load would pack a punch!