triple f in a .50 cal rifle

[moooose102]

so what happens if triple f is used in a .50 cal rifle? does it burn to fast increasing pressures? explode a barrel? i once did this in my bk-92 ( i was given a can of triple f ), i reduced the loads by 40% hopeing to be safe. i used up the whole can shooting at targets, with no ill effects to the gun. but i never did load it to full load. i stuck with 60 grains. i am just curious to what would happen if i would have loaded it all the way up.

 

[Macmac]

I commonly shot Goex in my TC Hawken's with FFFg to 120 grains and with maxies for hunting. Then I got older and didn't need the blast and recoil, and found charges in about 80 grains was as good if not better for hunting...

My personal opinion is you can shoot 120 grains of Goex FFFg with no problem. Also I think with that load you are wasting powder you could use for more shots per can.

More or less for targts 60 is my MAX, and closer to 50 is my norm.

The reason more being I forget stuff, and so if I load twice, and shoot once I am still in the safe neighborhood.

Probably a TC Hawken can stand 240 grains of FFFg, but I am not so sure I can.

 

[sundance44s]

I`ve used 50 gr and 60 gr charges of 3f for round ball shooting in my 50 cal rifles always ...heavyer bullets uasually shoot better with 2f ...just my experience .

 

[mykeal]

I assume you are wondering about the difference between FFFg and FFg - if 100 gr of FFg is ok, is 100 gr of FFFg also ok, or will it damage the gun.

FFFg burns faster and reaches a slightly higher peak pressure sooner than FFg. The difference is very small, and in a rifle barrel they produce the virtually identical amounts of energy. With larger calibers this difference can actually result in lower muzzle velocities for the FFFg as the pressure wave peaks too early to efficiently move the more massive ball. Again, the difference is not great - a few percentage points.

You will not damage a rifle using FFFg instead of FFg. Accuracy may suffer a bit; certainly the most accurate load is different with FFFg than FFg.

 

[moooose102]

i was just curious if i would have been in any danger. i am pretty much sold on triple seven now, and i will not purchase incorrect powder, at least on purpose. i would rather shoot what i am supposed to if given the choice. if somebody develops a better powder, i will try it, i always try to keep an open mind. i haven't seen anythng that man has made that was perfect. i may have bought the savage (smokeless powder) rifle, but here in michigan, you have to use bp, or bp subs to hunt with. no sense in developing a great smokeless round only to be limited to target practicing with it.

 

[Wildfire]

3 f

Hey there:
I use Pyrodex "P" all the time in my Encore with 80 grains and a 300 grain bullet. It is safe. 120 would be a max load in most guns. Much over that and things could get a little warm. I would not go that far unless using a modern so called Magnum Muzzleloader.

 

[Mark whiz]

moooose
I've done a good bit of testing with 2f & 3f 777 powder in my .50cal and I've deduced the following:
1. There is not a whole lot of difference between 2f & 3f 777 - 2fg 777 is cut into such fine granules that it pretty much acts like a 3fg powder right off the bat............which I figure is why it is more powerful than any other 2fg powder.
2. I've loaded identical loads with 2fg & 3fg 777 and found at most a 100fps difference in muzzle velocity.
3. I've found that, at least in my rifle, 3fg gives better accuracy when using saboted bullets of 350gr and greater, while 2fg is better for anything less than 350gr.
4. Powerbelt bullets do not like 3fg powder at all - apparently its pressure is too much for the little plastic cups to fall off of the bullet like they are supposed to. Patched ball and lead conicals also seem to like 2fg as well.

 

[arcticap]

If using fffg, I reduce the load by about 10% from ffg.

If using 777, I reduce the load by 15% to obtain the equivalent of the similar granulation of other powders.

If going from an ffg powder to 777 fffg, I might reduce the load by up to 20%, although 15% should be sufficiently safe as long as it's not at the maximum loading volume.

 

[Misfire99]

The Lyman manual addresses this. They have loading of 110 grains for FF and a load of 90 grains for FFF. So that comes out to about an 82 percent charge for FFF over FF. Or you could say an 18 percent reduction for using FFF over FF.

 

[bigbadgun]

LEt me ask a powder question.
If using 777 fffg does one compress the powder like you would if using goex fffg? Either in Revolver or rifle?
I know that with Pyrodex you just seat the ball but you dont compress.

 

[Zeke/PA]

For accurate round ball shooting in my built-from-kit T.C. Hawkin I use 45 grains of FFFG, a home cast .490 ball and .010" patch.
For hunting with a 370 gr. Maxi-Ball my rifle is very accurate with 90 grs. of FFG.
Zeke

 

[arcticap]

LEt me ask a powder question.
If using 777 fffg does one compress the powder like you would if using goex fffg? Either in Revolver or rifle?
I know that with Pyrodex you just seat the ball but you dont compress.

Pyrodex produces more velocity when it's compressed. The more compression, the more velocity, as with Pyrodex pellets. However, if consistent compression isn't applied, there will be more velocity variation between shots. That's supposedly one reason for using less compression with Pyrodex. There will be less velocity and variation but more consistency. But the same can said for the highly compressed Pyrodex pellets too, more velocity and less variation = more consistency.
777 has opposite characteristics. The more compression, the less velocity. 777 pellets produce slightly less velocity than the same amount of loose powder. The more that loose 777 powder is packed, the greater the tendency for it to shoot erratically.
Maybe this is more noticiable in rifles than short barrel pistols though.

 

[bigbadgun]

Thanks arcticap that answers my question.

 

[bigbadgun]

Thanks arcticap that answers my question.