Black powder & smokeless question

D

Dingoboyx

New member
All of my black powder pistols (ROA's & 1858 Rem clones) are stamped on the barrel/cylinders Black Powder Only.

Just wondering what this is all about? Is it a Lawyer/legal issue, a manufacturers legal issue, or is it a fact that if you were to use an apropriate modern charge in a Bp revolver, would it actually blow up?

My ROA for example, I load with about 30 gr of black.... quite a big boom.... shakes the ground..... bystanders are very impressed :D So, say someone was to put in something like 6 gr of say, winchester 231, would the gun explode in a ball of flames & remove the shooters head and hand?

From my understanding, black powder is more volatile than modern powder, when a black powder charge is ignited in the barrel, it explodes instantaneousley, finished with, and the resulting pressure travelling down tha barrel, pushes the ball down and out of the barrel. Whereas, modern powder burns in the cylinder and burns behind the projectile as it travels down the barrel?

I just find it hard to believe that using modern powder in a Bp revolver can be so dangerous, other than if someone was to use too much modern powder, I could see problems there. If someone thought they were using 30 gr of black, but were actually using 30 gr of modern powder (a massive load) I could see flames and destruction then.:eek:

See my point? How could an APPROPRIATE load of modern be so devistatingly dangerous?

Would caps have touble igniting modern powder?

Your imput would be appreciated :D
 
I've seen a new manufactured muzzleloading shotgun blown apart by somebody that took apart a modern shell and loaded the components into it.
I've seen an original .22 pistol broken into three pieces from a modern .22 short. I've seen pics of several other guns blown apart from smokeless. Try it at your own risk.
 
HH

I wouldn't risk trying it unless I thought it was safe do do so, Thats why I am asking opinions on here :D

If the general consensus on here was that the stamped warning is a 'lawyer' related thing as opposed to a 'will probably destroy the gun' thing, I might try loading 4gr in a cylinder and see what happens. If everyone says it will probably end in disaster, I will definately heed that warning and refrain.

And i wouldnt be trying it on one of my good ROA's, I have a Euroarms of America Remington 1858 NA copy, that has been bastardised by its previous owner, which has trigger issues as well, so it would be a good 'guinney pig' gun
 
The warning label is not a 'lawyer' thing. It's a serious warning. Using smokeless powder in a gun designed for black powder is very, very dangerous.

Smokeless powder generates very high pressures, several times greater than that generated by black powder. Yes, it really will blow up the gun, and serious injury to the shooter and/or bystanders is very possible. It's happened. It's not a myth or a rumor or a 'let's be super safe so we don't get sued' thing.
 
Another issue is the rear of a percussion cylinder, it's not sealed by the cartridge case like on a cartridge revolver, the only seal upon ignition is the pressure the hammer face has on the fired percussion cap. with the higher pressure that smokeless generates, the hammer would most likely not be enough to contain it.
 
Last edited:
Smokeless powder generates very high pressures, several times greater than that generated by black powder. Yes, it really will blow up the gun, and serious injury to the shooter and/or bystanders is very possible. It's happened. It's not a myth or a rumor or a 'let's be super safe so we don't get sued' thing.

Mykeal is right.
You did ask a legitimate question, but the answer is that the gun may explode if you shoot smokeless. Much much higher pressure with smokeless, maybe 3 times greater.

ps I have a smokeless capable muzzleloading rifle, and I wish someone would make a smokeless pistol, I am tired of cleaning the old cap and ball.
 
BP and Nitro

burns in the cylinder and burns behind the projectile as it travels down the barrel?
Click to expand...
That's not quite true - though the actual interior ballistics are are beyond me. BP is way less efficient in its burning than smokeless propellant, something on the order of 50% efficient - the remaining 50% is smoke and fouling. As I understand it, this inefficiency is partly what keeps the pressures relatively low. I have read that BP "explodes" when ignited; I have read that it deflagrates very rapidly but doesn't explode. Which?
In any case, smokeless powders are way more efficient as energy producers than BP - much, much higher burn % - as well as the fact that the base chemical is much more powerful. Many powders are essentially plasticized nitroglycerine and those that aren't are based on the cousin, nitrocellulose.
Burn a quantity of smokeless powder out in the open and you will get a violent, hot, yellow-white flame. BUT.....confine it in a small space and ignite it with a spark that travels through the entire charge, lighting virtually all of it in a nanosecond and you have a different beast entirely, pressures get very high, very fast.
Pete
 
All gunpowders deflagrate. BP is classified as an 'explosive' because it has a comparitively low ignition temperature, not because it's higher-pressure or faster-burning than smokeless.

BP is rather slow burning, and as was mentioned above, terribly inefficient as a propellant - less than 40% of the mass is converted to gases, the rest is soot.

More importantly, BP and its subs create a relatively slow pressure wave - this is why even a very small charge of smokeless can be dangerous; its pressure wave is closer to a step function (off, then instantly on).
 
ps I have a smokeless capable muzzleloading rifle, and I wish someone would make a smokeless pistol, I am tired of cleaning the old cap and ball.
Click to expand...

I'd like someone to come up with a subistute powder that had the same pressure rating as true black but was as non-corrosive and clean burning as smokeless, oh yeah, and sell for five bucks a pound too:D Hey, I can dream can't I.
That said, I'm happy with what's available, eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow who knows.
 
to the OP:

it all boils down to the metallurgy used- the BP C-B guns are made from soft castings, while a modern magnum handgun is made from forgings- the latter is much stronger, and can take the pressures of modern powder- if you're thinking of putting smokeless in a BP C-B gun, don't do it- the gun can explode and blind you, or worse. It will become a fragmentation grenade in your hand

castings are much cheaper to make than forgings- the BP C-B mfrs. use castings and save a pile of money in mfg. costs- because castings are strong enough for BP- if they used forgings, the guns would cost 2x-3x more than they do now.

some modern gun mfrs. use castings for frames, but the cylinders and barrels are forged or billet steel for strength. If you packed up a BP C-B cylinder with fast smokeless powder, it would blow the cylinder apart, like a pipe bomb. But a modern forged steel or billet cylinder would take it no problem- such as a 357 magnum or 44 magnum. Even those have limitations and cannot be overloaded, or too fast a powder used. Pressures with BP guns may be 10-15 CPU, while pressures with smokeless may be 30-50CPU (copper pressure units) Imagine a boom with 3x the pressure in a black powder Colt CB gun w/wedged barrel frame. These guns shoot loose with blackpowder, let alone smokeless.

see it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forging#Advantages_and_disadvantages

Advantages and disadvantages

Forging results in metal that is stronger than cast or machined metal parts. This stems from the grain flow caused through forging. As the metal is pounded the grains deform to follow the shape of the part, thus the grains are unbroken throughout the part. Some modern parts take advantage of this for a high strength-to-weight ratio.

Many metals are forged cold, but iron and its alloys are almost always forged hot. This is for two reasons: first, if work hardening were allowed to progress, hard materials such as iron and steel would become extremely difficult to work with; secondly, steel can be strengthened by other means than cold-working, thus it is more economical to hot forge and then heat treat. Alloys that are amenable to precipitation hardening, such as most alloys of aluminium and titanium, can also be hot forged then hardened. Other materials must be strengthened by the forging process itself.
 
Last edited:
Under the repressive laws in Great Britain, Westlake Engineering have devised nitro conversions for cap and ball revolvers. Note that this involves an entirely new cylinder with battery cup (shotshell) priming and light target loads, they are not just dumping some 231 in their Uberti.
http://westlakeengineering.com/4640/4694.html

So the real answer to your question is mostly "no."

Even the old bulk smokeless powders were fraught with risk, as a reading of W.W. Greener's book The Gun and its Development will show.
 
Look at that! My dream has come true.
A cap and ball pistol that shoots smokeless.
Uses 209 primers.
Seriously, I would love to have this conversion, I don't mind if you call me a wimp I am sick of cleaning up after black powder.

For that matter, you could get this conversion, and then use Blackhorn 209, it is supposed to be non corrosive.

Cost of smokeless cylinder, 300 Pounds.
That doesn't sound too good, how much is a pound?
 
it all boils down to the metallurgy used- the BP C-B guns are made from soft castings, while a modern magnum handgun is made from forgings
Click to expand...

That's not metallurgy, that's production method. Metallurgy is the makeup of the metals used, and that's where the differences lie. Castings can be hardened, too. Tank turrets and hulls, with the exception of some of the very latest designs, have been cast since the '40s.

The only castings on C&B revolvers are the frames on some models, and the unstressed bits. Barrels are forged, cylinders are machined from bar stock. I can't speak to Pietta, but (recent, at least) Ubertis have forged frames as well.

The difference is, they're forged/machined from fairly basic, lower-yield limit steels. Cheaper and easier to work with, and plenty strong for BP pressures.

Even if they used stronger materials...smokeless is a whole 'nother thing. Half a grain of smokeless can be the difference between normal operation and catastrophic failure, even in modern weapons. Not terribly suitable for volumetric loading at the range.
 
i
t all boils down to the metallurgy used- the BP C-B guns are made from soft castings, while a modern magnum handgun is made from forgings- the latter is much stronger, and can take the pressures of modern powder- if you're thinking of putting smokeless in a BP C-B gun, don't do it- the gun can explode and blind you, or worse. It will become a fragmentation grenade in your hand
Click to expand...

That depends. Some BP frames are cast, some are forged.
Some smokeless powder frames are cast, some are forged.
The type of steel used and the heat treatment are the major differences.
You can't use 'cast' or 'forged' as a litmus test for strength.

From my understanding, black powder is more volatile than modern powder, when a black powder charge is ignited in the barrel, it explodes instantaneousley,
Click to expand...

The BP charge burns, building pressure, forcing the projectile out the barrel.

The warning label is not a 'lawyer' thing. It's a serious warning. Using smokeless powder in a gun designed for black powder is very, very dangerous.
Click to expand...

That is not an understatement! ANY amount of ANY type of smokeless powder in a BP gun is a good way to lose life or limb.
 
It's really pretty simple! If you buy a Black Powder Gun and the Warning says use Black Powder Only, you use only Black Powder.
In my mind if I didn't want to shoot Black Powder I would not Purchase a BP Gun... there are plenty of Smokeless cart guns to choose from.
Labels like use premixed gas/oil in a 2stroke engine...do not place metal containers in microwaves...Deep End of a a Pool ifin ya can't swim don't jump in...ect, ect, ect...
I guess I'm wayyy old school and use common sense and street smarts...or is it I just love Black Powder...and that's why I shoot it.
 
Dingoboyx: My ROA for example, I load with about 30 gr of black.... quite a big boom.... shakes the ground..... bystanders are very impressed
Click to expand...

For the boom/smoke factor I put 40 grains of 777 in my ROA. 40 grains of 777 is the equivalent to 46 grains of BP. Some will put 45 grains of 777 in their ROA's. BTW, I don't recommend anyone going over the 35 grain max recommendation of Hodgdon. Just tellin' ya what I do for more bang in lieu of the lack of a Walker in my collection.
 
"I can't speak to Pietta, but (recent, at least) Ubertis have forged frames as well."

True. My Cimarron Remington has a forged frame, though the steel is far from stout. It could handle target/cowboy smokeless loads in a hardened conversion cylinder. I'd be nuts to load the cap & ball cylinder with smokeless.
 
Hallo folks, look at this sample:



This revolver is (or was) a Santa Barbara Remington .44 cal, it is buid in a very hard steel, so the owner thought it could support a small smokeless powder charge, this is the result, no more charges, no more revolver, no more experiments.

Regards
 
A reasonable analogy might be...BP revolvers are built to lift 500 pounds, 100 pounds at a time.

Smokeless powder asks that that 500 pounds be lifted all at once.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top