Reloading the 45-120

mbogo3 said:
90gr FFG [BULK NOT WEIGHT]
Click to expand...
I understand you are likely quoting the book and this isn't a jab directed at you but your comment reminded me of something so I figured I'd throw it out there.

Every BPCR shooter I've talked to in person and many I've talked to online measures black powder by weight. Unless it's a liquid, volume is not an accurate form of measure. I always measure black powder cartridge loads by weight but use a volumetric measure for my muzzle loader at the range/in the field since it's easier and "close enough" for non-precision work. It's when you get into substitutes that you get into problems because they are generally measured as a comparative volume to a specific weight of real black powder; this has no precise meaning.

There was a very informative article I read a little while back (I think it was on Chuck Hawks website but wasn't written by him) about how inaccurate volumetric measurements of black powder can be. The author measured different brands and granulation's of black powder and substitutes with a half dozen different measures made by different companies. There was quite a difference between the actual weight thrown by each measures since there is no standard on what the density of black powder is.
 
How do you measure by Bulk and not weight ??
Using my scale I load 6.0 gr. SR4759 against the standard primer, then 110.0 gr. FG ( Not FFG ) followed by a card wad, then a grease cookie and finally the bullet of choice.
This makes for a very clean burning load even after several firings.
 
There are various powder measures you can get. Adjustable ones are often brass with a slider and a lock screw to lock it in position. There are also scoop types where the bottom of the scoop is actually a separate piece and can be adjusted up and down to change the volume. This is how many black powder substitutes are meant to be measured as they are often of very different densities than black powder. A "90gr equivalent" charge will be when you set an adjustable powder measure to "90" and use that as a volumetric measure. That could be anywhere from ~60-110gr of substitute in actual mass but is the "volumetric equivalent of 90gr of black powder".

https://www.google.com/search?q=bla...ChMIpIjL0qSdxwIVR36SCh0Fgw8b&biw=1920&bih=941

It's a very crude method but works well enough for normal muzzle loader hunting distances. Some people insist it's the only proper way to measure black powder and it's actual mass as measured on a scale is meaningless. I'm not saying anyone in this thread said that, just that I have run into people who do.
 
All muzzle loader powder measures are volume adjustable as BP is very forgiving.A brass scoop if you will. I shoot 100gr charges of FFG from my .54 Renegade and it will take 110gr but the recoil is stiff enough and no real increase in velocity or accuracy with the .530 round ball.It relaxes deer just fine.We weren't speaking of 777 or Pyrodex were we? The old time loaders/frontiersmen didn't sit if the grass with their triple beam balances..they used a predetermined volume scoop.
 
mbogo3 said:
All muzzle loader powder measures are volume adjustable as BP is very forgiving.A brass scoop if you will. I shoot 100gr charges of FFG from my .54 Renegade and it will take 110gr but the recoil is stiff enough and no real increase in velocity or accuracy with the .530 round ball.It relaxes deer just fine.We weren't speaking of 777 or Pyrodex were we? The old time loaders/frontiersmen didn't sit if the grass with their triple beam balances..they used a predetermined volume scoop.
Click to expand...

I found that my smokepoles all liked moderate loads. My 2 Kentucky's in 45 liked 70 gr. as a maximum load with 250 gr. maxi's. I used 22 gr. with round ball, always measured by volume (I used a 30 M1 case filled to the top, with a 9mm case slipped over it for the minimum load, and an '06 case for the upper load, which actually gave me about 72 gr. by volume) - this was accurate enough to consistently hit grouse in the head out to 20 yds, or so, and the max load gave me about 3" groups at 100, which I considered the maximum range for a humane kill on big game. MY 50's and 58's also like moderate loads. If I were shooting target, I guess I would weigh the charge thrown by my volumetric measure and then used that exact weight in all my charges, but a volume measurement has always worked great for me. I also used volumetric BP and Pyrodex loads for my Trapdoor when I had it. Again, I guess you could weigh those charges if you want to squeeze that extra bit of consistency out of the charge, but don't use the same weight measure for different substitute BP propellants, or even for different granulations.
 
So I ordered the odds and end to get this calibre rolling at home. Talked to someone else who loads for it , for now I'm gonna load accurate 5744 smokeless with a 390 gr gas check bullet barn round and try out the 525 non gas check bullet barn bullet , but gotta keep the velocity down I suppose cause of the leading factor. No filler , no wads , simple.

Thanks guys. I might go down the black magic route casually / later on , might be cool to have all the smoke , idk. Will keep you posted on the results down the road.
 
I have BP(and Pyrodex) data from the Lyman BP Handbook and Reloading Guide(worth every cent of the $30ish) if you want it. Sam Fadala(25 books and thousands of articles. Tech editor of Rifle Magazine, Hand Loader Magazine, Field Editor of BP Hunting Magazine. Been there this guy) who wrote the thing says ALL BP is loaded by volume not weight.
 
Sunray that is wrong. I know very few guys who compete with cartridge guns that only use powder measures. Almost everyone weighs charges. This is not a new practice. Even in the 1800's noted Creedmoor competitor Edwin Perry recommended weighing powder charges for long range shooting.

Chris.
 
gunlaker said:
Sunray that is wrong. I know very few guys who compete with cartridge guns that only use powder measures. Almost everyone weighs charges. This is not a new practice. Even in the 1800's noted Creedmoor competitor Edwin Perry recommended weighing powder charges for long range shooting.

Chris.
Click to expand...

GL, you're obviously new to this site...........no one ever actually responds to sunray..........he's just one of those irritations we endure because he hasn't ever actually said anything to get himself banned. His best advice is questionable and his worst is downright dangerous..........and he never returns to respond, ever.
 
Naw I've been here for a few years. :) I just wanted to ensure that no one is misled by Sunray's incorrect posts. He's very good at sounding like he knows what he's talking about.

Chris.
 
Not to steal the thread but here is some lore on the old sharps. A mountain man, cowboy by the name of Jim Bridger shot a Apache war chief off his horse at slightly over 1200 meters at adobe walls with a borrowed 45/70 sharps. The party that Bridger was with had been pinned down for several days and the situation was getting desperate. That was when Jim borrowed the rifle and took a hale mary at his intended target. The hostiles thought that, the white man had big medicine and abandoned their attack and allowed the party to leave.

Cheers & Tighter Groups: Eaglesnester

Did the Indians put U here? Twernt Mormons.
 
LUTNIT said:
I understand you are likely quoting the book and this isn't a jab directed at you but your comment reminded me of something so I figured I'd throw it out there.

Every BPCR shooter I've talked to in person and many I've talked to online measures black powder by weight. Unless it's a liquid, volume is not an accurate form of measure. I always measure black powder cartridge loads by weight but use a volumetric measure for my muzzle loader at the range/in the field since it's easier and "close enough" for non-precision work. It's when you get into substitutes that you get into problems because they are generally measured as a comparative volume to a specific weight of real black powder; this has no precise meaning.

There was a very informative article I read a little while back (I think it was on Chuck Hawks website but wasn't written by him) about how inaccurate volumetric measurements of black powder can be. The author measured different brands and granulation's of black powder and substitutes with a half dozen different measures made by different companies. There was quite a difference between the actual weight thrown by each measures since there is no standard on what the density of black powder is.
Click to expand...
Have been shooting Brown Bess flintlocks, Hawken cap locks, and 54 cal rock locks. Have been to many mountain man gatherings and everybody measures black powder by volume. Never ever heard about measuring black powder charges by volume, unless it is a re=en actor using a hollowed out deer horn that measures out exactly 70 grains of holy black into his front stuffer. ?????
 
The reality is that there are cartridge rifle shooters that weigh charges and a few that use quality powder measures. The majority use a scale these days. There are some notable exceptions like Frank Monikowski ( hope I've spelled his name correctly ), who do not weigh. He has set a number of NRA BPTR records. I believe that some of them still stand, so it can be done successfully. I'm one of the ones who weighs the charges. I've done experiments with a couple of brands of powder measures and I can still do better with a scale.

Chris.
 
I measure black powder by volume for muzzleloaders, as I have found there was no appreciable benefit to weighing, for the typical shorter range of my rifles.
My cartridge rifles are more consistent if I weigh the charges, but not much. So I use a powder measure mostly.
I don't shoot long distance in competition, so I don't weigh my cast bullets either. If they look good, I shoot them.
 
We've measured BP by "grains" of volume for so long that a lot of folks don't realize where it all started.

First off there is no such thing as a volumetric measurement of "grains". Grains is a WEIGHT measure. Always has been and always will.

So where do all the black powder measures come from? They come from the fact that black powder today is very close to the same density as black powder from the last couple of hundred years when you're looking at the granule sizes used commonly for handgun and rifle sizes. And it's hard to take a scale out with us into the woods. So along the way measures that are graduated to hold a certain weight of black powder have been produced and labeled in "grains". But really it's "equivalent grains". And if you fill a BP volume measure up with fffg or ffg to something like 100gns and then dump it onto a scale it will read within a couple of grains of 100gns of weight. Always has and always will. And that's why black powder shooters using proper black powder can get away with using volumetric measures. And this has been so common for so long that entire generations of black powder shooters just never stopped to think about where it all started.

The serious BPCR shooters know better though. They weigh every charge if they are serious about the game. If they use a volume measure at all it's to drop a slightly short charge onto the weigh pan and then trickle up to the intended weight. They can't afford even the couple or 3% change in density from brand to brand. So each charge is weighed.

Hodgdon understood this when they made Pyrodex and 777 where they formulate the mix to produce the same gas volume from the same volume amount. Or they bulk it up with fillers so that the same volume of Pyrodex produces the same gas volume and pressure rise as the same volume of BP. They did this because they know that BP shooters "understand" volumes and already have the measures with them. So this makes the transition easier.
The variation is where
 
eaglesnester said:
A mountain man, cowboy by the name of Jim Bridger shot a Apache war chief off his horse at slightly over 1200 meters at adobe walls with a borrowed 45/70 sharps. The party that Bridger was with had been pinned down for several days and the situation was getting desperate. That was when Jim borrowed the rifle and took a hale mary at his intended target. The hostiles thought that, the white man had big medicine and abandoned their attack and allowed the party to leave.
Click to expand...
I've heard of Jim Bridger but I've never heard of a long range kill like this performed by him. Google comes up with nothing on him about long range kills.
It sounds almost exactly like the kill Billy Dixon made at the second battle for Adobe Wall though but that was with a .50-90 Sharps and was at 1500+ yards. Was also the guy beside the chief, not the chief that was hit (and on the 3rd shot).
 
Lutnic has the most widely accepted version of the story altho some say it was a R B and I have read that Billy Dixon's own memoirs only state it was a "shot with a borrowed "big 50" that I couldn't do again in a hundred years".

A little more to the story: a group of Physics professor types from some college stateside disputed that a BP cartridge of that size wouldn't do that shot or could even carry that far. A group of BPCR shooters and some military techs used a sophisticated military radar to prove the Professors wrong, duplicating the shot several times with a 50-90 BP cartridge. Using the radar,they proved the cartridge would carry some 2400 (been a while since I read this so could be a little give or take on this distance) yrds.
 
Got the goods from the bullet barn. Just waiting for the shellholder and case trimmer. That bullet and case are fricken sweet looking.

Bullet barn sent me some reloading data, just some various lyman mainly I think photocopied pages. Thanks BB.

So I got accurate 5744 to go with this huge case, (say 39-44 gr for a 500 grainer ) but there's a bunch of various smokeless I guess suitable to for this calibre. Doesn't mention filling or wads in the pages. Normal medium burning 308 win type powders. Psi is all under 27000 at least in these notes. Like 50-55 gr I think.

Man. Getting excited though to shoot this puppy. Be cool to ring steel at a grand if I get it accurate enough. Gotta watch quigly down under soon again too. Lol
 
Last edited:
with the absence of SR 4759 on the market now, AA5744 would be my second choice in that big case.

I've used slower rifle powders in my 45-70 and, while they work "passable", in my experience they seem to work better at the higher velocities hence recoil ,for me, becomes an issue with the "before the turn of the century" gunstock designs most of these guns have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom