well guys i worked up a load using 4f goex in my 1851 navy 36 caliber

[dickydalton]

Well boys, go ahead and get mad at me. I have about 25 BP handguns and 3 rifles and a double barrel shotgun that is BP. personally, I get tired of people that are trying to make "Magnums" out of BP replicas and originals i have up to 460 S&W in revolver and magnum rifles.All this 4F loading is just that, Baloney. If you think you are going bear hunting with your 36 because you use 4F then you are in need of counseling.

 

[midland man]

Well boys, go ahead and get mad at me. I have about 25 BP handguns and 3 rifles and a double barrel shotgun that is BP. personally, I get tired of people that are trying to make "Magnums" out of BP replicas and originals i have up to 460 S&W in revolver and magnum rifles.All this 4F loading is just that, Baloney. If you think you are going bear hunting with your 36 because you use 4F then you are in need of counseling.

really not trying to magunize mine just wanted to see what my pistols top performance is plus I mainly shoot 25grs most of the time but if needed I like to know what my gun is capable of, and no I don't have bears in my part of this area so mainly hogs/deer etc.

 

[Steel Hayes]

Well boys, go ahead and get mad at me.

dickydalton, since I’ve been here, I’ve always enjoyed your wit and wisdom. I never get mad at anyone.
This thread went opposite of what it should, a discussion on 4f vs 3f and max amount of powder charge in a .36.
I have no idea where it went after that?

 

[midland man]

dickydalton, since I’ve been here, I’ve always enjoyed your wit and wisdom. I never get mad at anyone.
This thread went opposite of what it should, a discussion on 4f vs 3f and max amount of powder charge in a .36.
I have no idea where it went after that?

lol i'm not mad at anyone I challenge anyone who says it won't work well test it for yourself and see...

 

[Mizar]

Some people like to experiment, it's that simple. Some of you don't see the need for 4FG in a revolver, but some of us do. And that is not "magnumising" of any sort - as Rodwha already pointed out, there are several sources confirming that 4FG powder was used in the 19 century paper cartridges (both .36 & .44) due to limited space. I also remember a post by a match shooter in EU who said that many people in his club use extensively Nr. 1 Swiss (4FG) powder in their revolvers, because it left less fouling and due to reduced charges one gets more shots from a pound. I don't know about you, but that sounds like a winner combination for me. And who exactly said that 4FG should not be used in a Cap & Ball revolver? Because Sam Colt did not specify which powder to be used in his revolvers, neither the other manufacturers. Everyone has a head on their shoulders - simply reduce the charge, check crony results and adjust accordingly.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

On the subject of finely ground powders, 777 is pretty well ground with very small granules. I have had problems with it building up under the cut off gate in my powder flask to the point of jamming it open. Sounds strange maybe, but is a royal pain when out in the field and you have take the flask apart to dig out powder so the damn thing will work. I guess 4f is a tad smaller but not by much. I would think that both powders would give close to the same performance with 777 being a little more energetic. That's just a guess on my behalf since I don't have a chronograph to prove it one way or another. Might be interesting for someone to compare the the 2 and see.

 

[rodwha]

All this 4F loading is just that, B̶a̶l̶o̶n̶e̶y̶ historical.

Also if you speak with European shooters you’ll see how over there they’ve often used 4F in all sorts of handguns as that’s just how it’s been done. Reference the previous Swiss powder bottles and you’ll see for yourself.



Say what you will be that’s just how it’s been and this 4F is only for the pan is 20th century BS.

Now, as I’ve said, since we have energetic powders that also work in my rifle I see no need for 4F (unless it were any of the other weak powders on the market).

 

[Eyrie G. Dogg]

Adverting to a mid Nineteenth Century statement of the Colt Company -

“N.B. (nota bene - note well) - It will be safe to use all the powder the chambers will hold, when loading with the flask, leaving room for the ball, whether the Powder is strong or weak. Fine grain powder is the best.” (Emphasis added).

That inferentially supports the use of 4Fg in revolvers. I have never used 4Fg in pistols and just followed conventional “wisdom” and used 3Fg - but that’s about to change. Product liability lawyer advice to their client companies may have been misleading for purposes of actual real world use.

 

[Steel Hayes]

It does say that fine grain powder is the best.
Time for some experimenting this weekend.

 

[Mizar]

Bellow is a screenshot of various gunpowder grades from 19 century from W. W. Greener's book "The gun and its development". For the shotgunners - Yes, THAT Greener. On the lower right one can spot a powder granulation called "Revolver". I believe that the image size is about 1:1 to the real book. That revolver powder is said to be produced and used exclusively for percussion revolvers and it's size looks to me pretty much like 4FG. By the way, get that book if you can - it's a lengthy, but rather interesting read.

P.S. Thanks to Rodwha for posting the articles from that Yahoo group - that is where I found the information about it.

 

[grter]

First off Sam Colt was a bonafide snake oil salesman prior to his contribution to the firearms world and liability laws were either very anemic or non existent in the 1800s. The science of metal was not as fully developed, understood, or as advanced in the United States as in places like Japan or the Nordic regions.

Testing results back then produced little more than a good guess, and quite good guesses which went a long way at that but still not nearly as conclusive and rigid as todays standards so it would be hard to tell if a company was selling a powder that was indeed safe for the products it would be used in (guns) or if they were simply claiming it was safe for marketing purposes because it did not blow up "most" guns.

Can you be sure ?

I am not convinced that fully loading the chambers with 4f is safe and I think at the very least it may prematurely wear out the cap and ball revolver. I never said 4f was totally out the question and as you pointed out it was used in smaller amounts to make up for lost space in certain loads and the European shooters someone said use reduced amounts of 4f not full chamber loads.

I do belive 4f would make a .31 cal or lower caliber revolver more potent and that 3f full loads in them do not yield very impressive performance but I am still unsure how much of a risk there is in doing so.

As far as lawyer loads go I am not sure I would blame the Americans for it this time since at one time Lyman did publish loads for 4f, which by way falls way short of pouring in a cylinder full of it and cramming a ball on top, but Lyman stopped publishing those loads. Why ?

I can only guess, but I have heard my fair share of stories of some of these older revolvers having serious reliability and durability problems. I figure that while Lyman may have been able to tell what loads these guns can handle most of the time could not count on the Italians, who refuse to proof their cap and ball replicas to adequate loads that were originally used in them, to consistently make replicas that can safely handle the more hotter loads with 4f.

This may not be the case now with CNC technology improving fit and better metal, maybe better metal because the Italians are still mum on the exact type of metal they use/used and when. I think it depends on what they have at hand and despite OBVIOUS IMPROVEMENTS the Italians still refuse to proof them to higher loads/standards.

I think companies like Lyman would do their part if the Italians did their part but for now I can see why they don't publish those type of loads anymore and someone like me could only wonder.

I have to say the Italian replicas are still among the best out there excluding much more expensive products generally out of the price range of most people however they are certainly "lawyering up" at the very least to this day.

It seems some on this forum are doing the real proof testing but I would still advise caution if you choose to do so.

IS ALL THIS CAUTION NEDDED HONESTLY I DON'T KNOW AND THATS THE PROBLEM FOR ME ANYWAY.

That being said I absolutely love the current Italian replicas being produced today.

 

[rodwha]

“...European shooters someone said use reduced amounts of 4f not full chamber loads.”

I don’t know that European shooters only use reduced loads. I’d suspect the match shooters do as most accurate loads tend to be around 1/2 of what the chamber can handle.

“...at one time Lyman did publish loads for 4f, which by way falls way short of pouring in a cylinder full of it and cramming a ball on top...”

Actually the used 37 grns of 4F and crammed a ball on top. Not sure if that was a full chamber or not but it certainly would be close.

“...but Lyman stopped publishing those loads. Why ?”

That’s a good question. I highly doubt standard 4F Goex produces and more pressure than 3F Swiss or Olde E, and would venture to guess it produces less.

“I can only guess, but I have heard my fair share of stories of some of these older revolvers having serious reliability and durability problems.”

The only ones I’ve read of that were known for quality issues like that were with ASM.

“...could not count on the Italians, who refuse to proof their cap and ball replicas to adequate loads that were originally used in them...”

Is there an article or something on this? It’s the first time I’ve heard the Italians use deficient proofing standards.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

My only addition to Rodwa s post is some of the Spanish arms both black powder and modern were questionable in the late 60s and early 70s. The only Italian ones I have heard about were ASM.

 

[Steel Hayes]

Something I was not expecting.
1st in the Pietta ‘51 cylinder full, is the 3f Goex. Measured roughly 36-37grains.

2nd is the 4f Goex.

Measured roughly 31-32 grains.
I did this three times because I thought I measured wrong, but the same each time.
I would have thought the smaller grain would have measured more?

 

[midland man]

View attachment 801106 View attachment 801107 Something I was not expecting.
1st in the Pietta ‘51 cylinder full, is the 3f Goex. Measured roughly 36-37grains.

2nd is the 4f Goex.
View attachment 801108 View attachment 801109
Measured roughly 31-32 grains.
I did this three times because I thought I measured wrong, but the same each time.
I would have thought the smaller grain would have measured more?

like I said if using 4f in the newer guns with the better metals which are stronger I feel will be fine but I wouldn't want to use it in the much older guns as the metals aren't as strong as what we have today!

 

[rodwha]

View attachment 801106 View attachment 801107 Something I was not expecting.
1st in the Pietta ‘51 cylinder full, is the 3f Goex. Measured roughly 36-37grains.

2nd is the 4f Goex.
View attachment 801108 View attachment 801109
Measured roughly 31-32 grains.
I did this three times because I thought I measured wrong, but the same each time.
I would have thought the smaller grain would have measured more?

I must admit I’m not familiar with your measure. The way I read it is 3F measures roughly 26-27 grns and 4F measured around 23. I assume with the plunger bottomed it’s 0 grns. Is that the cabela’s pistol measure? Mine throws way less according to the number on the slide.

The .36 cal Colt ‘51/‘61 held roughly 30 grns with a ball so I don’t see how it could go over that by much.

 

[Steel Hayes]

Your correct rodwha, I was thinking of 10 grain increments and didn't think about the cutoff line.

 

[grter]

I looks like things have changed at Pietta I remember old manuals that said not to exceed .26 grains for a .44 as well as other very low powder charges for other calibers. These new loads are the type of loads that were generally used for these although I think the .31 loads may not be very potent.

Proof by Italian law so I read would be a minimum of 30% over intended service loads.


MAXIMUM GRAINS OF BLACK POWDER
CALIBER BALL DIAMETER BALL DIAMTER BALL TYPE FFG GRAINS FFG GRAMS FFFG GRAINS FFFG GRAMS
.31 Revolver .322" 8,20mm Round - - 12 grains
.36 Revolver .375" 9,55mm Round - - 22 grains
.44 Revolver .454" 11,55mm Round - - 35 grains


And yes a lot of the older guns had bad quality control.

 

[drobs]

I looks like things have changed at Pietta I remember old manuals that said not to exceed .26 grains for a .44 as well as other very low powder charges for other calibers. These new loads are the type of loads that were generally used for these although I think the .31 loads may not be very potent.

Proof by Italian law so I read would be a minimum of 30% over intended service loads.


MAXIMUM GRAINS OF BLACK POWDER
CALIBER BALL DIAMETER BALL DIAMTER BALL TYPE FFG GRAINS FFG GRAMS FFFG GRAINS FFFG GRAMS
.31 Revolver .322" 8,20mm Round - - 12 grains
.36 Revolver .375" 9,55mm Round - - 22 grains
.44 Revolver .454" 11,55mm Round - - 35 grains


And yes a lot of the older guns had bad quality control.

Pietta's recommended load is worse than that. Page 18:

http://www.pietta.us/pdf/Manuale_Avancarica_ENG.pdf

 

[Stormson]

As rodwha pointed out 777 is pretty finely grained... Finer then 3f at any rate.. And I use it almost exclusively.

I DO want to "magnumize" my guns in fact... well sort of... and frankly I dont see a damn thing wrong with that!

Where I live we have a LOT of issues with black bear, including a LOT of "run ins". These are BLACK bears, and having lived out west I am well aware that thats a lot different then grizz... But we ARE also having some serious problems, like one guy last year that was literally picked up and thrown off his own porch when he walked up on one eating out of his cats bowl. My best friend in this area went out one morning, half asleep with coffee before work, and walked dead up on one on his back porch. He QUICKLY learned to keep his trash ELSEWHERE before he could make a trash run LoL. We also have hybrid hog here. REAL hybrids. If ya check, the largest records are always from eastern Tennessee. We had them as far north as Abington. Abington is a 45min tide from here, but that includes "out of my way" drive time, it would probably be 20mins as the crow flies. The reason for the records is that some are true Russian boar and most are bread with em... Nasty ass critters to say the least, and VERY dangerous.

I have loaded up to 38grs of 777 in my remmis and the only problems I have faced so far is some gas cutting on the arbor from practicing that load too much. I reduced how much I practice with it by using multiple cylinders. Yes, I have center fires if I KNOW Im going into the bears living room, but these days I usually dont and I almost ALWAYS have one of my BP on me.

Look, thats what DREW me into the whole BP revolver thing in the first place. If i WANT to shoot mousefarts, then I can LOAD for that.. But if I want to make sure Im loaded for bear, or hogs, or meth heads, then I can load for THAT too... Im basically handloading each and every round without ever having to invest a thousand bucks, and room I dont have, in hand loading equipment.

That being said, I also want to know just HOW much my guns ARE capable of, and want the wiggle room to use that much if the situation calls for it. Unlike others here, as a former bear hunter, I am damn sure NOT about to go up against a bear or monster hog with ANY BP sidearm if I can get OUT of it... But since its what I will most likely HAVE, if that day ever comes, Id also like to have the best chance that I can.

 

[LonesomePigeon]

Something I've wondered about these recommended loads, I see no mention of filler or wads, would 9 to 12 grains in a .36 caliber or 12 to 15 grains in a .44 caliber even allow the rammer to seat the ball all the way down on the powder?

If I recall correctly I use about 28 grains of Goex 3F to get light compression in my Uberti 1860 Army with the rammer fully pressed to it's mechanical limit and about 32 grains for the same in my Pietta 1858 "Shooter's". I don't see how one could load just 15 grains in a .44 and not have an air gap, unless loading off the gun with a press of some sort.

 

[Stormson]

Something I've wondered about these recommended loads, I see no mention of filler or wads, would 9 to 12 grains in a .36 caliber or 12 to 15 grains in a .44 caliber even allow the rammer to seat the ball all the way down on the powder?

If I recall correctly I use about 28 grains of Goex 3F to get light compression in my Uberti 1860 Army with the rammer fully pressed to it's mechanical limit and about 32 grains for the same in my Pietta 1858 "Shooter's". I don't see how one could load just 15 grains in a .44 and not have an air gap, unless loading off the gun with a press of some sort.

I agree.. There is no WAY that any of my Pietta .44 Colts or Remingtons could load 15grs without leaving a dangerous airspace if I didnt use a filler. Frankly, I would worry about a ball getting stuck in the barrel with 12.

I agree fully that the rammer could never seat the ball properly... And have always wondered the same thing.. I think the lawyers are either insane or or on drugs... JMO

 

[tbob38]

This discussion has got me wondering as to the best powder to use in my Pieta .44 cal snubby revolver. I use Swiss 3f in my other bp revolvers. Any ideas?

 

[rodwha]

I agree.. There is no WAY that any of my Pietta .44 Colts or Remingtons could load 15grs without leaving a dangerous airspace if I didnt use a filler. Frankly, I would worry about a ball getting stuck in the barrel with 12.

I agree fully that the rammer could never seat the ball properly... And have always wondered the same thing.. I think the lawyers are either insane or or on drugs... JMO

I’ve seen it said it just takes about 5 grns to expel the ball. Not sure about all of the circumstances but some people, who have issues with ignition (forgot to load powder?), will remove the nipple and dribble a little powder in there to fire it. Doesn’t seem it could even be 5 grns and this is generally with a rifle where the barrel can be over 30” long.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

I have dry balled a rifle and pistol both and did the remove the nipple thing, dribble as much powder as you can stuff in the hole, replace the nipple and shoot the ball out. It's more of a poof than a bang. I don't believe it was anywhere near 5 grains.