Smokeless powder in muzzleloader?

Andy said:
The same kinds of opinions are regularly expressed with regards to the use of smokeless in antique cartridge firearms. Fact is that smokeless can be used safely in antiques (and many including myself do), but can be quite easily misused as well. Same applies to muzzleloaders, but the process is more complicated and the risk is higher, so it suffices to advise against it.
Click to expand...

Years ago, I had the opportunity to inspect a modern 24ga smoothbore (1137 barrel) that had been fired repeatedly using components from disassembled 20 ga shotshells. The only sign was a slight gas cut in the pan. The barrel and breech were just fine.
Nevertheless, using propellants other than blackpowder or intended substitutes is travelling in uncharted waters.
 
Aries- said:
The main problem savage had with their smokeless ML were idiots not reading the instructions on what powder to use, and using a powdr measure instead of weighing the powder out.

On that note. If the ML does not specificaly say it can be used with smokeless... DONT. You arent going to get any better performance, only thing you may get is less cleaning after shooting.

Remington is coming out with their new 700 muzzle loader soon. With its new ignition system and how much 777 it can hold they are punching a 250 projectile 2400 fps.
If you want beyter performance. Look at a new muzzle loader.
Click to expand...

You can get that velocity out of a Black Powder 54 caliber sidelock with a 250 grain Patched round ball. The distance limitation on traditional muzzle loaders comes from the rapid deceleration of a patched round ball, not its lack of original velocity. To get better range you have to go to an elongated bullet with better BC. Powder type is irrelevant to the discussion. That is why the 45-70, 50-100 etc. became so popular. Same amount of powder, far better range and long distance killing power. The 45-125 Winchester is capable of launching a 250 grain bullet 2200 fps with black powder.

The Remington's claim to fame will be launching a conical 250 grain at 2400 fps and thus replicate the performance of smokeless 45-70 loads, which are a max 250 yard proposition, were as a round ball is good to a max of 125 yards.. The issue with that is it causes places to eliminate the primitive weapons, or muzzle loader seasons because few places have staff knowledgeable enough to set the regulations so that only truly primitive weapons can be used.

As I posted earlier, you CAN use smokeless, but if you ever make a mistake you won't like the outcome. It is VERY hard to blow a barrel using Black, even an accidental double load won't. Same is NOT true of smokeless.
 
War Song said:
25 grains is way too much powder... so I'm not surprised there. What I meant with my question was IF proper loading data was provided, essentially converting loads to smokeless. Shotgun shells were originally black powder (hence the dram equivalence system) and most shotguns can run fine on both black and smokeless. Shotgun shell loads are restricted to max pressures pf 10,000 psi - 12,000 psi, so that means smokeless doesn't necessarily mean high pressure. As I understand it, smokeless powder develops pressure based on grain size and how compact they are. So is that it, smokeless just isn't reliable in a muzzleloader because they can't compact it uniformly with the ramrod, even if it was using the slowest-burning largest grain powder out there? But if that was true, stuff like Blackhorn 209 would blow up guns.

Your post opens up another question, why DON'T manufacturers utilize better barrel metal for their muzzleloaders? I wouldn't mind paying extra for a safer gun, but I guess Savage already provided us that with their 110... Still every other manufacturer seems content to use the same low-carbon steel or free-machining stainless for all the blackpowder guns they sell. Why not provide the option of heat treated 4140, or even just 4130? I would want that extra margin of safety, even if I was just loading straight black powder, there would still be the risk of double loads and short stops.


Seanmp: I agree with you, if I ever get into muzzleloading, I would stay with powder and not even touch the pelletized stuff out of principle. But I'm just more interested in the technical aspect of why we can't use smokeless!
Click to expand...

I don't know if I'm out on a limb here, but then again, I do live 4000 miles away from you, so if I get banned for speaking my mind, it's a meh. You've read all the posts here, and you just don't seem to be getting it.

The 25gr load of NITRO powder in the Remington BLACK POWDER revolver totally destroyed the gun. It was not intentional, it was plumb ignorance. The shooter was immensely lucky to have escaped needing only fresh shorts, and not an autopsy.

The metallurgy of a firearm intended to shoot BLACK POWDER loads only is quite different from that of a gun that is intended to shoot NITRO powder.

Why?

Because BLACK POWDER goes off slowly [in physics terms that is], rising slowly to a pressure peak, and then subsiding. The material of which the gun is made is metallurgically suited to this slow pressure spiking, typically at around 13000 CUP for a 44-40 Winchester centre fire cartridge, as an example.

THAT, friend is a load of 40gr of FFg BLACK POWDER.

Let's move over to a .44Magnum cartridge, loaded with 'only' 22gr of a nitro powder like say, 2400.

That 22 gr of pistol powder develops almost THREE times the pressure of the black powder load, and in a far shorter time - which is why the 200gr bullet of the 44-40 is doing about 1100 fps, but the 44Magnum around 1450-1500 fps.

The peak pressure of a nitro load happens FAR quicker than the black powder load, and is over quicker. The physical shock to the material is immensely more intense than with the black powder as well as the pressure causing it being three times higher.

Now if you can't get you head around the fact that mechanically, the material has to be of a much higher grade to withstand the immense nigh-on-instantaneous pressures developed by nitro propellant, by comparison with the radically different pressure wave profile of black powder, then I suggest that you do a lot more reading. These days, higher-grade materials = lots more money - THAT is the principle difference in cost between a black powder revolver and a nitro-cartridge revolver.

All I'm saying here is what numerous other posters have also said, in a slightly different way, so I'm at a loss to figure out why you are continuing this train of questions, unless, of course, you are looking for a spell of some kind.

tac
 
Last edited:
There has to be a distinction made between shooting smokeless in the two types of firearms - muzzle-loader and cartridge - that were originally designed for black powder. If you understand how smokeless powder burns and generates pressure, there are safe ways to load cartridges with smokeless powder and lead projectiles, and shoot them in black powder cartridge guns. The critical issue is having a combination of powder burn-rate, air-space and projectile resistance (mass and engraving/frictional pressure) that produce peak pressures that are within the firearm's safe breech and barrel pressure limits. This can be pre-calculated with some accuracy if you have the know-how. I have done lots of experiments using 45-70 and 50-70 with cast boolets and various smokeless powders, and in the end, the ballistics are actually often better, i.e. more consistent muzzle velocity and subsequent trajectory, with black powder or Pyrodex! The real challenge becomes the lubrication (bullet lube, grease cookie, etc.)

There's much greater risk with muzzle-loaders, even if you weigh out a "safe" amount of smokeless powder. This is because in the majority of cases, smokeless powder needs an air-space behind the projectile, and IMO this is too difficult to precisely control with a muzzle-loader. This air-space is a complete no-no with black powder, of course, but a must with the kind of smokeless loads we're talking about (peak pressures under, say 30 Kpsi). The amount of space will greatly influence the peak pressure.

So for the brand X .50-cal smoke-pole, under a 185-grain ball, you'd need N grains of "WYZ-BANG" smokeless powder, for example, and you'd need to seat the ball, say, exactly .321" above the smokeless powder. You would have to somehow set up your ramrod to do this accurately every single time. To me the whole thing just sounds like an accident begging to happen. Too much air-space, and the smokeless powder will not burn efficiently: you haven't blown anything up but bullet is stuck somewhere in the barrel. Too little airspace.... well, hopefully you have set your affairs in order. Is there an address to send a card or flowers? :(
 
Andy said:
The same kinds of opinions are regularly expressed with regards to the use of smokeless in antique cartridge firearms. Fact is that smokeless can be used safely in antiques (and many including myself do), but can be quite easily misused as well. Same applies to muzzleloaders, but the process is more complicated and the risk is higher, so it suffices to advise against it.
Click to expand...

X2. I use smokeless powder in my BP cartridge firearms almost exclusively. But not in BP muzzle loaders.
 
War Song said:
proper loading data was provided, essentially converting loads to smokeless. Shotgun shells were originally black powder (hence the dram equivalence system) and most shotguns can run fine on both black and smokeless.
As I understand it, smokeless powder develops pressure based on grain size and how compact they are. So is that it, smokeless just isn't reliable in a muzzleloader because they can't compact it uniformly with the ramrod,

Your post opens up another question, why DON'T manufacturers utilize better barrel metal for their muzzleloaders
!
Click to expand...

Smokeless powder relies on more than just grain size; it is also coated with retardents to slow it down to workable burn rates relative to what it is being used for. As applies to using it in places with no loading data (such as muzzle loaders) the burn rate of smokeless also varies according to pressure and the increase in pressure in relation to increased loads can be exponential ie as the load and pressure increase, a small increase in powder can result in a far larger pressure. I don't agree with the poster who wrote that you require a small air space over smokeless.

One thing that is a problem with using smokeless in a test gun clamped to a bench is that unless you have a piezzo electric cell and equipment, you don't know how high your pressure is. In a rifle cartridge, the condition of the primer tells you if your pressures are getting too high; completely flattened primers and fins of metal around the firing pin hole indicate that. Those conditions do not exist for muzzle loaders

The bottom line is --- can you shoot small amounts of smokeless in a muzzle loader; yes although you might need some black to ignite it. Can you work up a safe load and working velocities in the same gun; probably not unless you have specialized equipment and special training relative to metal strength and to smokeless burn rates. Fumbling in the dark is an accident waiting to happen

cheers mooncoon
 
I've never seen a modern reproduction of an old-style muzzle-loader that has been proofed for nitro loads of any kind.

Since most repros that we see these days are made in Italy, and Italy is one of the CIP signaturees, you can be certain that if the firearm is stamped PN [pulvero nero] then it is for black powder only. It may, in addition, actually have the words 'BLACK POWDER ONLY' stamped clearly on the barrel. In similar fashion, many of the reproduction firearms made in Italy that are designed to shoot cartridges are also made from the start to shoot nitro equivalent loads. These firearms are stamped PSF - smokless powder. Firearms of the type that DO shoot modern cartridges include Remington Rolling Block of all kinds, Winchester high and low wall models, Model 1873 Springfield [as sold by Harrington and Richardson, with reservations on the load for earlier versions due to a weak in design in the breech], all most of the Sharps replicas.

This does not mean that they will duplicate the performance of the 30-06 or .308Win, but that they duplicate the performance of the original black powder loads - especially useful for places where black powder is hard to come by, but regular nitro propellants are not.

Just to reiterate what MetMan has said -

1. Airspace in a nitro load = not a problem. Gun goes bang.

2. Airspace in a black powder load = BIG problem. Gun goes BOOM. The very least will be a ringed barrel, the worst could be fatal to the shooter or anybody nearby.

A BP gun with an airspace has another name.

Its name is 'pipebomb'.

tac
 
There use to be a powder made at the turn of the century called Kings Semi Smokeles.It was a bulk powder made of mostly black powder but with a small percentage of smokeless.It could be loaded bulk for bulk like black powder but shot a lot cleaner something the duplex loads used in the Black powder cartridge rifles of the day.I remember reading on Grants Single Shot Rifles of his using Kings powder in a percussion Sharps rifle.
 
Smokeless powder doesn't explode. It burns and creates far more pressure than BP ever will.
There are safe smokeless loads for BP cartridge rifles but not for ML's.
 
Is it just me or is anyone else sick and tired of stupid people doing stupid things with firearms? Tell the clown to screw with his guns on crown land...far from medical assistance and the problem will sort itself out eventually and no one else will get hurt. Win, win I say!?
 
Dean2 said:
You can get that velocity out of a Black Powder 54 caliber sidelock with a 250 grain Patched round ball. The distance limitation on traditional muzzle loaders comes from the rapid deceleration of a patched round ball, not its lack of original velocity. To get better range you have to go to an elongated bullet with better BC. Powder type is irrelevant to the discussion. That is why the 45-70, 50-100 etc. became so popular. Same amount of powder, far better range and long distance killing power. The 45-125 Winchester is capable of launching a 250 grain bullet 2200 fps with black powder.

The Remington's claim to fame will be launching a conical 250 grain at 2400 fps and thus replicate the performance of smokeless 45-70 loads, which are a max 250 yard proposition, were as a round ball is good to a max of 125 yards.. The issue with that is it causes places to eliminate the primitive weapons, or muzzle loader seasons because few places have staff knowledgeable enough to set the regulations so that only truly primitive weapons can be used.

As I posted earlier, you CAN use smokeless, but if you ever make a mistake you won't like the outcome. It is VERY hard to blow a barrel using Black, even an accidental double load won't. Same is NOT true of smokeless.
Click to expand...

you could make a triple load of blackpowder and it wouldn't blow up a barrel. what blows up blackpowder charges is space between charge and projectile.

where i hunt it is shotgun/muzzle loading only. most sabot slugs these days have better accuracy than most muzzle loaders, and can get shots off faster. hell my muzzle loader tosses a 535gr slug at about 1600-1800 fps using 120gr of FFFG thats got more kinetic energy than most guns out there, and is designed to shoot 1000 yards. not really what they intended for muzzle loader season.
 
Aries- said:
you could make a triple load of blackpowder and it wouldn't blow up a barrel. what blows up blackpowder charges is space between charge and projectile.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. While I agree its not a good thing in a muzzleloader, but any one that breech seats in BPCR has a space between the charge and the bullet. And often its not a small space. And it's being done in 130 year old soft steel single shots.
 
seanmp said:
That's not entirely true. While I agree its not a good thing in a muzzleloader, but any one that breech seats in BPCR has a space between the charge and the bullet. And often its not a small space. And it's being done in 130 year old soft steel single shots.
Click to expand...

most guys i have seen shooting 45-70 to 110 if they dont fill the case to the base of the bullet, use a filler. as stated, space between the bullet and charge is a BP's downfall. i have done it once on my rifle, but it is a 1" barrel with a .451" bore. i wasn't terribly worried about bulging the barrel. but a lighter barrel would probably do it.
 
plinker 777 said:
Is it just me or is anyone else sick and tired of stupid people doing stupid things with firearms? Tell the clown to screw with his guns on crown land...far from medical assistance and the problem will sort itself out eventually and no one else will get hurt. Win, win I say!?
Click to expand...

A bit harsh but when so many give the same advice and the OP insists on arguing with the advice I get to the point where like you I think, fine, do whatever you want!!!. Don't come crying and whining when the inevitable happens. I don't think there is actually more stupidity now, it is just that the Internet has let us know just how much of it there really is. Natural selection doesn't seem to be working as well as it did in previous generations.
 
Well there are thousands of us that shoot every day with a real space between the bullet and the charge.

Start with a search on breech seating. Then google breech seating tools
Follow up with a brief history lesson on Schuetzen from the period of Pope and Dr Mann up to now. 130 yrs give or take.
Then check out these guys www.issa-schuetzen.org/
and these guys http://www.assra.com/
Then read back issues of Black Powder Cartridge News for the last 15 odd yrs

Then you'll have a reasonable understanding of what is being done routinely and safely with black powder.
 
Aggressive Burn rates and resulting pressure curves are major differences between modern smokeless and BP (and BP subs). Touch a match to comparable size piles of each, and you will see that smokeless is closer to firecracker, whereas the muzzleloader stuff is a fizzling birthday cake sparkler. Duplex charges change the known properties of each. Like Moncoon said, the guys who do this stuff have the Resources and expertise, and fumbling in the dark is a recipe for disaster.


Enjoy your muzzleloader as it was designed to be used.

Peace out, Hakx.
 
hakx said:
Aggressive Burn rates and resulting pressure curves are major differences between modern smokeless and BP (and BP subs). Touch a match to comparable size piles of each, and you will see that smokeless is closer to firecracker, whereas the muzzleloader stuff is a fizzling birthday cake sparkler. Duplex charges change the known properties of each. Like Moncoon said, the guys who do this stuff have the Resources and expertise, and fumbling in the dark is a recipe for disaster.


Enjoy your muzzleloader as it was designed to be used.

Peace out, Hakx.
Click to expand...

HUH? Where did you learn that?

A loose pile of smokeless powder does not burn "like a fire cracker". It burns rapidly and gives off large volumes of smoke/gas but there is no bang or loud noise.
 
Well aware that all powders burn at known rates and produce gas rather than endure chemical change of states which result in detonation. Ironically....fireworks are black powder based.

It was figuratively speaking to to provide lay mans visual the difference in burn rates between modern smokeless and BP . Perhaps "firecracker" twert the best example, but hey, I was getting ready for a range day and couldn't be bothered.

Peace, Hakx
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom