Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Muzzleloader Hunting
Black Powder question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Timeout" data-source="post: 1041883" data-attributes="member: 50852"><p>Not trying to start a controversy, but I dislike Pyrodex. Back in the day I did alot of primitive black powder shooting, as in almost daily. There were not so many choices of black powder propellants back then as there are now. My very first purchase was a Ruger Old Army revolver. I did not have any powder purchased for the revolver and consequently borrowed some Pyrodex. I was told that it was a direct one to one substitute for black powder. The cap and ball revolvers are limited by chamber design as to how much powder can be stuffed in behind the ball. I filled the chamber to the fullest extent and seated the ball. I proceeded to shoot at a steel target. The shot produced very little recoil and just dented the steel. I purchased my triple F black powder a short time later. Filling the revolver chamber with the same amount of triple F produced dramatically different results from the Pyrodex. There was a great deal more recoil, a gorgeous cloud of white smoke, and the lead ball sailed completely through the steel. Admittedly, this was not a very scientific test, but it was convincing. I recently purchased a more modern muzzleloader and will be doing load testing with various powders using a chronograph when the weather permits. This may, or may not, change my opinion of pyrodex,</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Timeout, post: 1041883, member: 50852"] Not trying to start a controversy, but I dislike Pyrodex. Back in the day I did alot of primitive black powder shooting, as in almost daily. There were not so many choices of black powder propellants back then as there are now. My very first purchase was a Ruger Old Army revolver. I did not have any powder purchased for the revolver and consequently borrowed some Pyrodex. I was told that it was a direct one to one substitute for black powder. The cap and ball revolvers are limited by chamber design as to how much powder can be stuffed in behind the ball. I filled the chamber to the fullest extent and seated the ball. I proceeded to shoot at a steel target. The shot produced very little recoil and just dented the steel. I purchased my triple F black powder a short time later. Filling the revolver chamber with the same amount of triple F produced dramatically different results from the Pyrodex. There was a great deal more recoil, a gorgeous cloud of white smoke, and the lead ball sailed completely through the steel. Admittedly, this was not a very scientific test, but it was convincing. I recently purchased a more modern muzzleloader and will be doing load testing with various powders using a chronograph when the weather permits. This may, or may not, change my opinion of pyrodex, [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Muzzleloader Hunting
Black Powder question
Top