Black Powder versus Substitutes

N

Newton24b

Moderator
Heres a good question, and with good reason.

the packageing for pyrodex that ive seen in the last 10 years has all said "use same loading data as blackpowder" and "grain for grain equivalent for volumetric powder measures."

meaning that a measure throwing 10 graisn of black powder will throw the identical volume of pyrodex and create the same pressure and not blow our guns up.
The problem is that in the little cabelas manual it says you need to "reduce loading data 10% for using pyrodex" meaning if you use 30 grains of bp you need to use 10 percent less of pyrodex.

That makes no sense if the whole world of pyrodex is a straight forward substitute.
 
I dunno where Cabela's is getting their info from. Pyrodex is a straight across substitute for real black. 777 on the other hand has to be reduced.
 
Hawg Haggen + 1

Hawg Haggen + 1
Sure would like to see where this is written !! .... :confused:


Be Safe !!!
 
Sure would like to see where this is written
Click to expand...
I've seen it written in manuals for some muzzleloaders, magazines, heck it's even written in the Dixie Gun Works catalog. I don't believe it, but it is written.
 
That's why I said "I don't believe it" in my other post. I measure it the same way I do real BP. Same as I have since 1996.
 
Volume to Volume is the same. !!!

the packageing for pyrodex that ive seen in the last 10 years has all said "use same loading data as blackpowder" and "grain for grain equivalent for volumetric powder measures."
Click to expand...
Okay !!
Once more we are getting measument by Grains, (Weight), confused with Volumetric measures. If you load by volume, there is essentially the same. if you load by grain, there is a difference. Will not go into great detail, but instead I would refer you to the Lyman Black Powder Handbook and Loading, 2nd. edition, page 65, of Charpter-8. Wish you guys could have done a little more homework and documentation. By the way, the Dixie catalog listing that you might have been refering to, is the difference in grains and not volume.


Be Safe !!!
 
Last edited:
when the bp handgun arrives in the little tan box with a little tan colored manual from cabelas, the manual says that pyrodex needs to be reduced by 10 percent from the black powder load for that caliber/weapon.

the little manual states 28 grains of pyrodex max for a 1860 colt, but 35 graisn max with "G-O black powder". but even with addled brains, that isnt technically a 10% reduction.

when one talks "grains" of black powder, they mean volumetric. when they talk grains of pyrodex or 777 or APP they mean volume. that traditions revolver measure is only designed for volumetric loading.

now when you talk GRAMS then you mean actual weight.
 
Pietta's from Cabela's come with two pamphlets. One from Pietta and one from Cabela's. Without digging one out to check I believe the Pietta pamphlet says 15 grains of bp for a .44 and Cabela's says 30 grains for a .44:confused: it's all for the lawyers. Fact is you cannot overload a steel frame bp revolver with bp or Pyrodex.
 
pietta changed the manual in 2008 i believe. they now have maximum loads for their guns, 35 grains of bp, 28 grains pyrodex for armies. the 12-18 grain loads are for "target/low recoil" .


a real fun irony is that the manual says to make sure NOT to put lube or oil on top of bullets when loaded as that may cause oil or lube to get into the powder charge and kill the powder, and probably cause a barrel blockage as "cap can still generate enough force to pushball or bullet into barrel causing a blockage that can cause gun to explode if fired again before blockage is removed". also any lubricant or preservative left in barrel before firing can cause the same issue.
 
I have a Cabelas manual in front of me. My Manual states a max load for a 44 35 grains G-O FFFG and 28 grains of Pyrodex P. They have to be talking about weight not volume. The funny thing is that those loads are listed for 451 round balls and conical bullets. The Lyman manual lists 35grains by volume the max load for FFFG black powder and Pyrodex P when shooting round balls 30 grains by volume when shooting conicals. I don't think you can get 35 grains of powder and a bullet in a 60 Colt chamber.
51
 
You can get 40 grains of Pyrodex in a 60 Colt but Pyro compresses more. I doubt you'd get 40 of real black in one.
 
I meant 35 grains of powder and a conical in a 60 Colts clamber. Do you think you can get a conical and 35 grains of powder to fit?
51
 
Grains are avoirdupois units of weight and nothing but.
You can do ok loading black powder by volume but calling the number on the volumetric measure "grains" does not make it so.

Pyrodex is meant to be comparable to black on a volume basis but is about 70% the density so the actual charge weight is less. If anybody is talking about reducing the Pyrodex load 10% from the normal volume of black, he is very timid.
 
Pyrodex P produces faster velocity from pistols than most all black powder except for Swiss.
If wanting to match equivalent velocity then Pyrodex P can be reduced. But it doesn't need to be reduced if the shooter doesn't want to. It's just like when using Swiss and it weighs 11% more because it's denser and more potent. It should be reduced to make an equivalent load.
I reduce Pyrodex P by 10% in rifles compared to using Pyrodex RS. The P granulation is finer with less air in between the granules, so 90 grains of P equals about 100 grains of RS.
That helps to make the velocity between loads of each to be more equal and matching.
Cabela's probably assumes that Pyrodex P is being used in a revolver.
If Pyrodex RS is being used in a revolver then add 10% more to equal Pyrodex P.
That would make sense too, but it doesn't amount to many grains of powder by volume.
It's all just academic advice for the purpose of exactness. :rolleyes:
 
if the powder measure is not measuring a powder charge in "grains", then what the crap system of units is it measuring in then? the package of the powder measure says GRAINS, so does the manufacturers website.
 
if the powder measure isnt measuring out a powder charge in grains by volume, then what damnable measuring system is it calibrated in?

and why is it that if you go to the muzzleloadingforum.net and look in the information articles you can get a listing of charges for bp and equivalents based upon hole diamter and hole depth?
 
For the amount of difference in velocity between 3F and 2F, it has never been a controversial issue before.
In rifles it makes more of a difference to the target shooter than it would make to a combat revolver shooter.
It's basic elementary muzzle loading that not all powders have equal velocity even though they can generally be assumed to be equal for the purpose of loading by volume safely.
Many rifle manuals will state the recommended or maximum loads in 2F BP. That means that the shooter needs to make the load adjustments in the field if they want to be really precise using 3F.
Not everyone has a chronograph and new shooters may not be aware that Pyrodex P shoots faster than most black powders.
I think that's why the Cabela's manual wants folks to know.
We discuss the weaknesses with brass frame revolvers enough to pass on the information to keep the loads down or risk longevity problems with them.
So why shouldn't Cabela's let folks know that Pyrodex P isn't the same as black powder 2F?
It might make a difference to some but not most.
We're always mentioning the 15% reduction when using 777 as if the new shooter weren't aware.
A greater reduction can even be justified for 777 3F, but it's such a small number of grains when fired from a revolver that it shouldn't be anyone's burden to need to explain each and every time that 777 is mentioned.
That's because it's common sense, 3f has more power than 2F in most every case using most every powder in most every gun.
Small adjustments are suppose to made in the field/range when folks work up their own loads.
IMO it's not really a revolver safety issue, but more of a velocity adjustment issue. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top