When I wrote that, I paused at noting that there are no smokeless powders today safe to use in black powder arms.
I knew someone would raise the Finger of Technicality.
But my reasoning was sound: I didn't want to confuse the issue, and give a false impression to a newcomer who might be tempted to dump some smokeless pistol powder in his cap and ball revolver.
As for the term, "smokeless."
All black powder substitutes create more smoke than the nitrocellulose-based gunpowders we lump together as "smokeless" powder. Again, I didn't want to confuse the issue.
I know that if it's NOT black powder than it's likely labeled as "smokeless" in the loosest terms, but with so many new shooters out there, I felt it best to avoid the issue altogether.
King's Semi-Smokeless was a bulk powder made as a black powder substitute, to be measured in equal measure to black powder. I'm unsure of its composition, but it was a transitional powder that appeared to have both black powder and nitrocellulose in its mixture. I may be wrong about that; I can't find the answer on the internet or in my books.
Are Hodgdon 777, Pyrodex and other black powder subsitutes "smokeless powder?" Yes, by definition and composition. Do they create very little smoke? No, they create quite a bit.
Pick your definition. The argument could go on as long as the classic, 9mm vs. .45 and .30-06 vs. .270 contentions.
Perhaps you've introduced a new argument.
