PDA

View Full Version : Smokeless in a BP ???


Joey V.
November 16, 2010, 02:51 PM
I have a savage ML that I am considering buying used from a friend. In reading a bunch of stuff online about the powders that are safe to us and the SAMM pressures involved I got to thinking about something. I understand that you are never to use smokeless powder in a black powder only rifle but why not? If you knew how to make all things equal between the two powders then why couldn't you do it? If a BP only rifle could handle 100G of FF why then could it not handle say (whatever 20 grains) of smokeless powder? I am only saying 20g smokeless as an example, I never tested anything and NEVER will. :barf: I am just sayin it is absolutely incorrect to think that any BP pistol / rifle could not safely shoot smokeless powder you just need to know how little to use right? I reload everything from 222 to 375 weatherby. and it all simply takes less powder the smaller you go in caliber. I guess what I am asking if has anyone ever tested say different smokeless powders in muzzle loaders that it was not designed for? I was thinking maybe no one put out info on do this little cowboy trick because someone would surely blow themselves up. With tha said I could do the same thing by simple massively exceeding a recommended BP charge right? Again I WILL NEVER be the tester on this but do you know anyone who has?

Roaddog
November 16, 2010, 03:01 PM
Why not shoot what your gun is made to shoot. I'm not trying to be a wise guy but I sure don't whant to see you get hert. Get a 45-70 sharps.

Doc Hoy
November 16, 2010, 03:25 PM
Between black powder and smokeless powder I am not sure it is possible to make "all things equal."

I think it has to do with the difference in the way the pressure rises over time.

I would be happy for an expert to endorse or correct this thought.

It is an interesting question from a scientific standpoint, but like you, I would not be the one to test it. when I was a kid, one of my friends had an old 45-70. The ammunition was so scarce and expensive that he used to shoot .410 shotshells in it. Sometimes the fact that we made it past the teen years is amazing to me.

Tnx,

Jim Watson
November 16, 2010, 03:40 PM
The Savage 10ML is the only muzzleloader I know of that the manufacturer recommends smokeless powder for.

There are some British conversion cylinders for LIGHT loads of smokeless in cap and ball revolvers because modern handguns are no longer legal there and the pistol shooters had to come up with something to stay active.

Joey V.
November 16, 2010, 03:45 PM
Just to clarify I am not an idiot and I WILL not try this at home folks!!! I just would like to have a powder knowledgeable person comment on pressure spikes, burn rate differences, and what not. I LOVE the rotten egg smell of BP I don’t even shoot Trp777 because it doesn’t smell good to me:D I just believe that ANYTHING in moderation can be substituted for anything under the right constraints. They used an explosive called gun cotton in cannon instead of BP a looooong time ago but switch to BP because gun cotton had a very nasty habit of bursting the cannon because of LOADER ERROR. Again it was able to be used. I would bet that Dynamite could be used in a 30-06 if you only had a dot of it in the case but again I AINT TRYING IT. Keep the opinions coming guys...

Joey V.
November 16, 2010, 04:16 PM
Do you have any load data for say a 44 conversion cylinders for LIGHT loads of smokeless in cap and ball revolvers? I see guys shoot light smokeless loads in these revolvers with conversion cylinders at my gun club. I bet the powder they use and the grain weight they load up is very equal. Never thought of the whole conversion cylinder thing.... Oh wait are they still using BP but in a cartridge instead of just loading the cylinders????

Doc Hoy
November 16, 2010, 04:27 PM
I am talking out of school here.

Someone who has messed with conversions needs to wade in. I am not familiar enough with the pressure chart comparisons between BP and SP.

Certainly you could load it light enough to keep from blowing up the firearm but I don't know what kind of overall performance you would get.

I think everyone understands that you do not intend to try to make this a functional load, but merely to approach it from the "what if" perspective as a sort of academic discussion. I would posit that it is not the first time it has come up.

darkgael
November 16, 2010, 04:38 PM
It is not just a matter of finding the right smaller amount of smokeless propellant.
The two systems are quite different.
Smokeless powders are ignited in and burn in a sealed system...first the cartridge itself and then, once pressure has sealed the cartridge to the chamber, in the barrel.

BP is burned in open systems - so to speak; you have a vent hole of some sort, whether it be the flash hole on a flint gun or the nipple under a cap.
Using smokeless powder in a system that can flash back is not a good idea.
Plus, the characteristics of smokeless powders are much influenced by chamber pressure - something which would be compromised in the open systems of MLers.
Pete

Joey V.
November 16, 2010, 04:56 PM
Dark A I think I am getting it now. Basically yes I could ignite it and yes it could be done but it simply would not work correctly.... Kind of like using lighter fluid for gasoline. I bet you might get the engine to turn over once but it sure couldn't run at all... Good point!!! The powders characteristics are just two different animals and they “go off” differently under different confinements... Oh wait now I am right back at the Savage ML again. I load it from the front and us a 209 primer in the bolt action to ignite it. Again it is indeed a much more "closed" system (no Nipple or touch hole) but a front stuffer non the less. I think I am going to call a powder manufacturer and see what they say just for fun. I might even tell the guy I am planning on using like 100 grains of IMR 4350 in and old flintlock just to see how excited I can get him lol. :D

Pahoo
November 16, 2010, 06:00 PM
Just to clarify I am not an idiot
Perhaps but know that it's a fool's game and please don't do it anymore ... :eek:



Be Safe !!!

Rifleman1776
November 16, 2010, 06:19 PM
The concept is so dangerous it shouldn't have been mentioned.
If I could, I would lock and delete the thread.

bedbugbilly
November 16, 2010, 06:59 PM
I think Forrest Gump had a famous saying . . . but I won't repeat it. I agree with Rifleman - it shouldn't even be mentioned. Whether the OP would or would not ever use it - doesn't matter - there are those out there who don't have enough sense to pound sand into a rat hole that might read it and think . . "well, why not?". In over 45 years of shooting, I have seen weapons in which the improper powder was used - with disasterous results - lost fingers, a lost hand and in one case, death. Sorry to those who think my reaction is overboard and that I'm a p _ _ _ k - but it irritates the heckk out of me when a subjectlike this is even brought up. :mad:

Brian Pfleuger
November 16, 2010, 07:00 PM
There's actually no reason why modern smokeless powder could not be used in ANY black powder weapon.

The "concept" is not dangerous.

The problem comes in load development. Unless you have a way of directly measuring pressure then there is no really, truly safe way of doing it.

Now, if you'd like to have a safe way, you could buy RSI's Pressure Trace equipment.

A typical modern black powder long gun is limited to the upper 20k, very low 30k, psi range.

With Pressure Trace, it would be easy. Start low, watch the pressure, and stop when appropriate.

It would be pricey and somewhat pointless, but the "concept" is perfectly safe.


Anyway, the real answer, as you already know, is to buy a Savage ML-10 and never look back.

darkgael
November 16, 2010, 07:30 PM
Kind of like using lighter fluid for gasoline.

More like using gasoline in a kerosene stove or heater.

That the concept is perfectly safe is arguable. Savage may have marketed the 10ML but there are problems associated with its use - mostly very narrow ranges of powders and charge weights. The Savage system is also sealed in a much more definite way than most other MLers. BP and smokeless powders have very, very much different burn characteristics, especially in confinement. Remember - one is an incorporated mixture of sulfur, saltpeter and charcoal....the other is plasticized nitroglycerin.
Pete

noelf2
November 16, 2010, 07:38 PM
The concept is so dangerous it shouldn't have been mentioned.
If I could, I would lock and delete the thread.
and
there are those out there who don't have enough sense to pound sand into a rat hole that might read it and think . . "well, why not?".

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw

Looking at this from firearms perspective, the unreasonable man has been responsible for all firearms advancements throughout time. There were a lot of stupid people around when smokeless powder hit the scene too. I'm sure there were lots of know it alls back then that were sure people of a stupid nature would stuff that powder down a muzzleloader and blow themselves up. Maybe some did despite warnings not to! I'm convinced though, that if it weren't for the unreasonable man, we'd still be throwing rocks and sticks. I'm not saying let's all go out and do stupid things with the wrong powders, and neither is the op, so wanting to censor a valid thread (that is educational) for the safety of stupid people is egotistical, condescending, and ridiculous.

Model-P
November 16, 2010, 08:25 PM
Best post I've found explaining the differences in pressure characteristics. The maximum pressure is not the issue, and making an equivalent pressure smokeless load (which in itself is very difficult to do) will NOT make it "safe":

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1660912&postcount=17

Brian Pfleuger
November 16, 2010, 08:50 PM
The maximum pressure is not the issue, and making an equivalent pressure smokeless load (which in itself is very difficult to do) will NOT make it "safe":

That is correct. It will be nearly impossible to replicate BP performance in a BP gun when using smokeless powder and keep the pressures safe.

That doesn't make using smokeless powder "unsafe", it makes it impractical.

Still, smokeless could be used but performance would suffer.

Model-P
November 16, 2010, 09:09 PM
I can't find the "whistling in the wind" smilie:rolleyes:.

Joey V.
November 16, 2010, 09:48 PM
I never thought this would have such a great debate! After reading everyones responses I am NOT going to buy the savage ML. I just don't feel it to be as safe as I want it to be and besides I love the smell on BP. Thanks again everyone for the debate and thanks to the forum police for not locking this thread. I belive it is extreamly important to hAve free speech no matter how potentially stupid the subject! Next someone will ask to take away your right to own guns.... Oh wait the do that EVERY day! Be kind to each other and to what people would like to talk about. As long as it is not illegal leave it be. Again thanks to all who replied and changing my mind on the savage. I just don't feel comfortable with it anymore....

Joey v.

James K
November 16, 2010, 10:00 PM
OK, a few comments.

Yes, of course it is possible to load smokeless powder at a level that will be OK in a black powder gun, and the ammunition companies have turned out millions of rounds of .32 S&W, .38 S&W, .45-70, .45 Colt, etc., all loaded with smokeless powder since around WWI. Many millions have been fired in guns made before smokeless powder existed. Since the smokeless powder loadings were kept to the same pressure levels as the black powder loads, the only guns damaged were ones that should not have been fired at all, with any ammunition.

Smokeless powder is capable of generating greater pressure than black powder, but the peak pressure itself is not always the problem. One major problem is with old shotguns, especially those with Damascus barrels. A characteristic of black powder is that it burns very rapidly, and creates an immediate pressure spike. That means the pressure is mostly generated, and contained, in the thick part of the barrel around the chamber. But progressive burning smokeless powder keeps the pressure on longer. If you look at an old time shotgun barrel, you will see that it thins down in front of the chamber, right about where the shooter of a double or single barrel holds the gun with his off hand. And that is where the old guns let go with smokeless powder loads, often taking a few fingers along for the ride.

All of this has nothing to do with whether the gun is muzzle loading or breech loading, or whether it has a "vent" or not, but a couple of points do need to be considered. Firing a modern, well made muzzle loader with the appropriate smokeless powder would not be dangerous, but standard percussion caps are not hot enough to fire smokeless powder, so experimenting can leave you with a loaded gun you can't fire. Another point is that most muzzle loader barrels are made from soft steel and not hardened for use with the hot burning smokeless powder, so the barrel will burn out quickly if you can get the smokeless to light off.

Jim

Jim Watson
November 16, 2010, 10:33 PM
I am NOT going to buy the savage ML.

Why not? It is the only muzzleloader factory approved for smokeless powder. True, there are only three suitable powders in the manual, but that is not too limiting.

I think it is wrongheaded but it is a safe enough product for those who want to just barely squeak in under the rules for muzzleloading hunts.

Model-P
November 16, 2010, 10:52 PM
A characteristic of black powder is that it burns very rapidly, and creates an immediate pressure spike. That means the pressure is mostly generated, and contained, in the thick part of the barrel around the chamber. But progressive burning smokeless powder keeps the pressure on longer.

I was going to say that I have heard the exact opposite, but I did a bit of research first and found we would both be correct since it entirely depends on which smokeless powder is being compared.

I'm learning......

http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=27410

B.L.E.
November 17, 2010, 07:06 AM
Most muzzleloaders have an ignition system that is totally unsuitable for smokeless powder. Black powder only wants to be set on fire and that's what percussion caps and nipples with their tiny vent holes were designed to do.
The modern cartridge and primers of modern guns don't just set the powder charge on fire, the primer establishes the initial high pressure in the case that the smokeless powder needs to burn efficiently. That's one reason that a good crimp is so important in modern guns.
The primer alone in a .22Hornet will propell a .22 caliber air rifle pellet set in the case neck with enough velocity to shoot it through a beer can.

I have successfully made smokeless work in a Ruger Old Army but only after using a small charge of FFFFg to act as a kicker to get the smokeless to burn like it's supposed to. Without the black powder kicker charge, I only got failure to fires and squibs.
To really make this revolver smokeless powder friendly, you would need a special cylinder that uses sealed shotgun primers instead of percussion caps.

darkgael
November 17, 2010, 07:50 AM
All of this has nothing to do with whether the gun is muzzle loading or breech loading, or whether it has a "vent" or not,
Jim: I am open to different ideas and to changing my point of view if new and better info happens along.
The quoted comment above....could you, would you, explain that more? How could the presence of a vent not have something to do with the safety of what we are discussing? I understand the problem related to ignition with percussion caps but, as noted, duplexing can solve that.
I am not arguing.....open to new ideas.
Pete

Doc Hoy
November 17, 2010, 08:30 AM
Do BP Cartridges have vents or a way to vent?

noelf2
November 17, 2010, 08:47 AM
Do BP Cartridges have vents or a way to vent?

Nope. I load 45lc with BP all the time, and I load cowboy action velocities with TrailBoss in BP (only) cartridge guns as well. I use a standard 45lc case and standard LP primers. I guess the old pinfires could vent a bit through the pin hole, but BP doesn't need a vent for good ignition. It just needs to be compressed a bit, unlike SP.

Doc Hoy
November 17, 2010, 09:07 AM
Thanks,

I thunk it was that a way.

Rangefinder
November 17, 2010, 10:50 AM
Again I WILL NEVER be the tester on this but do you know anyone who has?
Yup---this guy has...Smokeless powder used in an BP rifle... Weak stomachs need not click the link.

http://www.castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=77487

Although there is a lot of argument within the thread as to what actually caused the barrel failure, the professional opinion (a machinist and pro muzzle-loader maker) who showed me the details of this before the thread ever hit internet said it was because the guy used a volume measure meant for BP to load for smokeless and ended up with a slight overcharge.

While some BP's have been made for a smokeless cross-over, WHY DO IT? Want a muzzle loader? Great. BP is a fun sport. Don't want BP? Great--get a cartridge. Pouring smokeless (IMHO) down the barrel of a muzzle loader is kinda like tossing ammo in the campfire--never know when something is gonna go the wrong way, but it's just begging for it.

Brian Pfleuger
November 17, 2010, 11:14 AM
I never thought this would have such a great debate! After reading everyones responses I am NOT going to buy the savage ML. I just don't feel it to be as safe as I want it to be and besides I love the smell on BP.

I have to say that I could not disagree with that decision any more than I do.

Even if I were going to shoot BP, it would be from a Savage.

But, I would NOT shoot BP.

The Savage is a fantastic gun. It is NOT NOT *NOT* a black powder gun that shoots smokeless.

It is DESIGNED to shoot smokeless powder. It is the ONLY muzzleloader on the market with a GUN QUALITY steel barrel.

Let that sink in.... other muzzle loaders do not use GUN quality steel in their GUN barrels.

My uncle has a Savage ML10. It is fantastic. 58gr N120 produces 2200+ fps from a 300gr Barnes Original 45cal bullet. The effect on deer has to be seen to be believed.

You will NOT regret buying an ML10.

Oh, and while we're at it, pay no attention to the rantings of the disgruntled former Savage employee who is the only person in the world who has ever managed to blow up an ML10, and he did it twice.

It has been PROVEN, more than once, that a Savage can handle a LITERAL double charge of smokeless power. The barrels are proof tested to 110,00 psi.

B.L.E.
November 17, 2010, 07:38 PM
Do BP Cartridges have vents or a way to vent?
__________________


Well, I would suppose that every revolver is a "vented" system once the bullet gets past the forcing cone.

B.L.E.
November 17, 2010, 09:36 PM
It is the ONLY muzzleloader on the market with a GUN QUALITY steel barrel.

Let that sink in.... other muzzle loaders do not use GUN quality steel in their GUN barrels.



Oh I don't know but I'm pretty sure the Stainless Steel Ruger Old Army pretty much uses the same barrel and barrel materials used in the .45 Long Colt version of their revolvers, in fact, I would even bet that that barrel could withstand "Ruger only" handloads in revolvers chambered for .45 LC. In fact, I don't see how, in this lawsuit happy society, a manufacturer would dare use anything less strong than "gun quality" steel in their barrels, just to cover their rears.

Also, modern cartridge breechloaders have been blown up by injudicious handloads.

Brian Pfleuger
November 18, 2010, 10:56 AM
Oh I don't know but I'm pretty sure the Stainless Steel Ruger Old Army pretty much uses the same barrel and barrel materials used in the .45 Long Colt version of their revolvers, in fact, I would even bet that that barrel could withstand "Ruger only" handloads in revolvers chambered for .45 LC. In fact, I don't see how, in this lawsuit happy society, a manufacturer would dare use anything less strong than "gun quality" steel in their barrels, just to cover their rears.

Also, modern cartridge breechloaders have been blown up by injudicious handloads.


I'm talking about rifles. There might be other BP guns with similar barrels, I know nothing about handguns of this variety but the Savage is certainly one of a VERY few, if there are ANY others, with certified Gun Quality 416 stainless steel.

Of course, ANY firearm can be blown up. That's not the point. The point is that the Savage ML10 is proof tested to over 100,000psi, 129,000 I think. That's higher, by a lot, that most any center-fire rifle of which I am aware. Center-fire rifles are, I believe, tested to 20% over max, which is typically around 78,000psi max proof test. The Savage has been shown, more than once, to be capable of withstanding a LITERAL double charge of smokeless powder.

Also, the Savage is the only muzzleloader factory pillar bedded action and free floating barrel, not to mention the only muzzleloader with an Accu-Trigger.

What would happen to a... I don't know... CVA muzzleloader with a double charge of BP?

Rangefinder
November 18, 2010, 11:20 AM
What would happen to a... I don't know... CVA muzzleloader with a double charge of BP?

Probably nothing. Years ago when I was more interested in traditional forging (as in hammer and anvil with a billow on hot hickory charcoal) I did some research on traditional muzzle loader barrel forging techniques. One of the early methods of testing the forge-weld seam after finishing a barrel abd before mounting in a stock and lock was to mount it in a firing block and fire from a distance with a double charge, then inspect it. Part of the inspection was to check the bore diameter with a feeler rod. Any "loose" spots indicated bulging. Tight feel through the length of the bore was a 'good-to-go' approval. NOTE, this was an early method by individual smiths, not mass-production. BUT, the point is that the standard for barrel construction from the beginning was to be capable of handling a double charge with no ill effect.

Would I try it? NOPE. But they'd likely handle it just fine.

mrappe
November 18, 2010, 11:38 AM
In cowboy action shooting some people load bp in a .45 Colt and some people load smokeless in the same cartridge but the pressure curve is different for each. Smokeless, from my understanding needs to be pressurized in a some controled way to realized its power. If you burn smokeless in the open air it burns very differently than it does under pressure. With a ML it would be hard to control the pressure and you may get something that under performs in one case and with a slightly different amount of powder and or compression space you might get blow the gun up. The chance of getting it right would be very low and not worth the risk.

Just my opinion

darkgael
November 18, 2010, 11:42 AM
Sam Fadala did manage to blow up a MLer some years ago in a test of overcharges.
It's in one of his books - forget which one. I also don't recall how much of an overload he used.
There is a good discussion of this topic in the Gun Digest Black Powder Reloading Manual.
Pete

Doc Hoy
November 18, 2010, 01:31 PM
I think I remember that article. I also remember he had to do a lot of different things to get the barrel to let go. As I remember superimposed charges and gaps in charges and tremendous overloads.

darkgael
November 18, 2010, 07:02 PM
Doc: Yeah, that's the article in Gun Digest. There was a much earlier article in one of his "Sam Fadala's BP.....etc.". The pix had him wearing sidewhiskers from the 1970's so it was a few years ago.
Pete

Nite Ryder
December 8, 2010, 08:45 PM
Joey,
You are wanting to speak to someone familar with using smokeless powder in a muzzleloader, Savage Arms probably has several engineers who could answer your questions. Their first sentence will have the words "don't try it" somewhere before the period at the end. Even their model 10 ML muzzleloader is unsuitable to use many brands of common smokeless powder, they use powder made by only one or two companies and anything else is dangerous. There are a series of photographs floating around the internet of what used to be a stainless steel Savage model 10 ML, the barrel is split. Also in the series are photos of what used to be the shooters hand, minus fingers and thumb. It could be you if you continue out with this nightmare.

Joey V.
December 10, 2010, 11:48 AM
Just to clarify if you read my post I said I never will do this.

I only seek the knowledge of why it "can't" be done in a safe way. I did kind of find my answer by calling a few powder companies. Seem as if Smokeless powder when it is "detonated" (their wording not mine) produces a massive pressure spike before it levels out and lower grade BP intended steal barrel can't take it. It will first blow out nipples and breech plugs and then if you’re stupid enough to keep strengthening the weak points as you proceed it will burst the barrels and probably kill ya. They did however tell me if you build a muzzleloader (in-line so no nipple to blow out) out of gun barrel steel and a strong enough CLOSED action you can do it with no problem just like savage did. I am not setup to do such a thing so again I would never do it nor would I want to. Well maybe I would LOVE to be able to because I could cash in on the $$$ millions Savage is pulling down but….. Besides I love the smell and simplicity of BP and that is why I won’t even buy the savage.

lashlaroe
December 11, 2010, 09:25 PM
I have found this thread to be quite interesting. I know that some of you were only tolerant in your discussion of this and maybe a few who...well...were...not, heh, heh, but in the end there was good information discussed and ideas brought forth.

While I know that we cannot assume that anyone reading these discussions will read all of a particular thread (or even a whole post sometimes it seems) and therefore jump to conclusions that may lead to a poor decision, we also should not stifle intelligent discussion on the off chance a fool will be as a fool is. My opinion of course.

I guess I'm saying that maybe some people remove themselves from the gene pool for a reason. Natural selection at it's best, if you will. :)

Oh, and I'll also say that I love BP shooting for what it is and prefer flintlock even, since that's where I get my thrill. Each to his own, eh?

simonkenton
December 12, 2010, 07:04 PM
You are a man of imagination.
You are a thinker and an adventurer.

You want to go where no other man has gone before.

You remind me of Otto Lilienthal, whose last words were "Sacrifices must be made."

Hawg Haggen
December 12, 2010, 07:14 PM
Last words. Theres the rub.:D

Smokin_Gun
December 13, 2010, 03:51 AM
I'm sorry folks all I can do is shake my head no again on this question...
:confused:

darkgael
December 15, 2010, 02:46 PM
Do BP Cartridges have vents or a way to vent?

I was revisiting this thread and this question caught my eye and my attention. The answer is, of course, no. Within the context of this thread, though, the question of "venting" in cartridges as opposed to front stuffers is at least a bit off the track. One can load a cartridge with either and the cartridge will probably be safe if the gun is safe. Neither BP nor smokeless powder require a vent.
The difference is that a muzzleloader, by default, is not sealed - the nipple or flash hole provide a way for gas to escape and it does; while the lower pressures of BP are normally not an issue when the gun is fired, the pressures of smokeless powders are.

Also -
If there is any doubt about whether or not smokeless propellants can be ignited by percussion caps, follow this link.....http://forums.handloads.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=27675&PN=1

Pete

B.L.E.
December 15, 2010, 08:17 PM
the nipple or flash hole provide a way for gas to escape and it does; while the lower pressures of BP are normally not an issue when the gun is fired, the pressures of smokeless powders are.



Modern revolvers vent high pressure gasses between the cylinder and barrel and even with some of the extreme magnums where pressures approach or exceed 50,000 psi, that cylinder gap seems to hold up quite well.

You can also blow up modern cartridge guns with injudicious use of powder. That bozo who was the subject of that link would likely have blown up a modern magnum revolver if he had gotten ahold of some reloading equipment and a can of Red Dot or Bullseye.

darkgael
December 15, 2010, 10:00 PM
that cylinder gap seems to hold up quite well

Absolutely. That gap --- you wouldn't want any part of your body near it when it was venting. Think about where a nipple on a BP pistol or a BP rifle is pointing when it vents gases.
Pete

DrLaw
December 15, 2010, 11:30 PM
I was going to be snide and say that this thread should be locked down for excessive stupidity, but I will be nice and won't.

No reason my being ticked right now should lead me to say what I am thinking and hurt anybody's feelings. :rolleyes:

The Doc is out now. :cool:

Joey V.
December 16, 2010, 02:17 PM
Drlaw,

I applaud you for not wanting to shut this down because this thread might just save someone’s life some day! I mean this sincerely...

Also, I learned more from this thread than I ever could have imagined... I also learned that just because you read something on the net doesn't make it so hahaha!!!

I recently have been reading many OOOOOLLLLLD reloading books my grand pap gave to me about black powder and loads and a lot of good stuff. I am going to be a much safer guy at the range now for it all. Best part about all of the stuff I learned is how to VERY INTELEGENTLY tell others why they should NEVER use Smokeless in a BP gun instead of just saying "well just don't do it" because that does nothing to deter. Remeber back when you would say "awh mom why can't I"? Her reply usually was "BECAUSE I SAID SO"? That doesn't cut it for adaults...Because we are stupid!:D

THX again EVERYONE!

B.L.E.
December 16, 2010, 10:42 PM
Absolutely. That gap --- you wouldn't want any part of your body near it when it was venting. Think about where a nipple on a BP pistol or a BP rifle is pointing when it vents gases.
Pete


You really don't want any part of your body in line with the cylinder gap of a revolver loaded with black powder either.
Anyway, what I have mostly been trying to say is that it's not just about the strength of the guns. The cap and nipple system is just not suitable for smokeless powder. Smokeless wants to be kicked off hard with a powerful primer in a sealed system.
Black powder is fine with just having a glowing ember dropped on it.

darkgael
December 17, 2010, 05:30 AM
BLE: +1 about that.