Pyrodex loads

[NavyDoc76-80]

Ah ha, that was a da huh moment, thanks Archer

[Ohio3Wheels]

Yep, and I used a variety of material for them. Forty caliber wads used to be hard to find so I bought a punch and make my own. Used cereal boxes in the past along with 12 pack pop cartons. I've recently switched to plastic mostly the high density polyethylene that margarine tub lids are made from . I also like the lids from the gallon water bottles from Wally world. If you're careful with the 40 caliber punch it's possible to get 4 wads from one lid and they're colorful .

Later, ganf,

[NavyDoc76-80]

I think I have stated that I'm not a muzzle loader. I do have a .50 cal Hawkens, but that adventure is down the road. What I wanted to share for those interested in it though, is a book which I will call the encyclopedia of blackpowder. In my search for Pyrodex loading in cartridges, this latest book has little to due with it.BUT, if your into or want to know more about blackpowder shooting "The Complete Blackpowder Handbook" is worth getting. I found this used, it's the 4th edition, copyright 2001, but good stuff, easy and well read. It's just over 400 pages and only about 35 of them discuss lever action /CASS shooting. I did find an explanation as to why the tube feed of black/Pyrodex works. In short, the slow feed allows the irregular shaped grains to lock into themselves creating the compaction.

[Zippidydoodah]

Black powder vs. smokeless
Video by Hickok45, well done presentation of the two and demonstration of burn rate near the end.

i'm still confused by the burn rate illustration in open air the black powder burns faster, but when confined in a cartridge or chamber, I think smokeless will burn faster as sometimes with a large BP charge the powder is still burning as the bullet leaves the barrel, thus old muskets, eta had 32-38" barrels to utilize all the burn time. Am I correct in my thinking?

[rman]

I believe it was rman whom said he made his own dippers, volume measurements if I may, once a load was determined. In regards to this, I could see for speed and accuracy, individual made "dippers" be made and labeled for your different hand loads. That's what I see myself doing. It will be a little work at first but I'm sure it will pay off in the long run. I have read some serious discord over the subject of volume vs weight charges. It seems like a wasted argument. Whether it's volume or weight, it's still a measurement. Getting it right is the goal.outcome, tailored to my needs and at no cost, just time is a win win. To quickly recount the home made dippers, empty shell cases cut to length as needed, copper wire soldered on for handles. Consider them your customized home made Lee dippers.

Yes it was me Doc. Mine were used for smokeless powder in handgun loads. Once you develop a consistent routine for dipping, they can be quite accurate, and much handier than Lee dippers because they are tailored to an exact load. I gave up a long time ago on the volume vs. weighed argument. I've tested my favorite handgun and rifle loads in batches of weighed and measured and have found no difference between them. Maybe if you were a championship benchrest shooter, there might be a slight difference. Actually, I think it is more a matter of preference than it is scientific. I used to load a lot of Unique in .38 Special loads. Most powder measures are not very consistent using Unique because of its large flakes. My accuracy results though were just as good with measured loads as with weighed. I don't use the dippers much anymore, because my powder measures work equally well, but I can see how they could be very handy for your project.

[Archer]

Unique meters through some of the measures pretty well, others not so much.

I haven't tried to use it in the Dillon slide measures but I'm anticipating less than great results there.

[jdb]

Black powder vs. smokeless
Video by Hickok45, well done presentation of the two and demonstration of burn rate near the end.

i'm still confused by the burn rate illustration in open air the black powder burns faster, but when confined in a cartridge or chamber, I think smokeless will burn faster as sometimes with a large BP charge the powder is still burning as the bullet leaves the barrel, thus old muskets, eta had 32-38" barrels to utilize all the burn time. Am I correct in my thinking?

LOL, yep. It IS kind of confusing Zip. It all boils down to physics Zip. The "burn rate" does not necessarily translate into energy. Smokeless powders release a lot more energy as they burn. Which accounts for the higher pressures with less powder. It burns much more efficiently.

If you think about it, it's just like an oxygen/acetylene torch. To light it, you turn on the acetylene and light it. Now it's burning by using the oxygen in the atmosphere around it and no matter how high you turn up the gas, it makes a yellow flame and you'll likely notice it makes a LOT of black smoke as it burns. Only when you turn on the oxygen to the exact right amount does it turn into that focused blue flame that is hot enough to cut steel like butter.

Now the yellow flame will get the steel hot enough to melt...EVENTUALLY, but that really efficient, blue flame will do in seconds, what the yellow flame might take hours to do.

It's the same thing with black and smokeless powder. Smokeless powders are smokeless because they have just exactly the right amount of oxidizers to burn the fuels that make up the powder. Whatever the particular manufacture uses as the fuel and oxidizer, the proportions are balanced. Black powder doesn't and can't. It's because it's just not possible to oxidize carbon efficiently enough to make it burn cleanly. Too much of the energy is used up in the process and you get a low intensity flame with a LOT of byproducts...black smoke. ;~)

I'm amazed the EPA ain't trying to get us to put scrubbers or reburners on our front stuffers. LOL

Anyway, that's the way I look at it. It's all about the energy each of the powders are able to extract from the ingredients as they burn. In other words, the potential energy in the ingredients of the powders and how efficiently they can be extracted.

Pyrodex tries to and does to some degree, overcome that restriction of fuels and maintain the same burn characteristics as black powder and still reduce byproducts (SMOKE) by using more efficient oxidizers and fuels, But the basic laws of physics for the fuels is the biggest restriction on how efficiently they can do it and not cause someone to have a VERY bad day. ;~)

[Ohio3Wheels]

Just one nit to pick black powder smoke is usually if not always white when burned in the confined space of a gun barrel. And lots of it. And you're right between the smoke and the lead it's a wonder the EPA isn't all over us.

I wonder what the muzzle loaders in Kalifornia are doing.

Later,

[jdb]

Just one nit to pick black powder smoke is usually if not always white when burned in the confined space of a gun barrel. And lots of it. And you're right between the smoke and the lead it's a wonder the EPA isn't all over us.

I wonder what the muzzle loaders in Kalifornia are doing.

Later,

LOL, maybe I should have written black powder smoke instead of just black smoke. Just to avoid the nits needing to be picked. ;~)

And I don't know man. Is black powder and lead projectiles still even legal in Commifornia? ;~)

[aragornelessar86]

I wonder what the muzzle loaders in Kalifornia are doing.

And I don't know man. Is black powder and lead projectiles still even legal in Commifornia? ;~)

Our glorious and benevolent rulers (see what I did there?) don't seem to be interested in BP just yet, so we're doing just fine, thank you very much.