I seek help,Pedersoli has the new .72 safari model dubbel kodiak,when I first saw it,it was love at first sight!!I mean I can put my hole thumb into the barrel.I did some research however I am still not sure if I must buy it,not knowing how accurate it will be,what fps ill get out of it ext.So please help me to get to know it better and what I will need if it comes to the basics of shooting this monster.

I just got one a few months ago, the big .72! My impressions... Accuracy is very good, but I have to use both sights, one for each barrel. It's in no way regulated. Some people claim that their particular gun is regulated well and I have no reason to doubt them. My take is, expect to need both sights, and rejoice if you're one of the lucky ones that don't have to. By using both sights, I'm able to keep the balls touching at 50yds, both barrels.

I attempted to get a velocity reading using roundballs, but as luck would have it, I finally shot my 15yo chronograph. At least it wasn't with a 22LR. My guess is that I'm running around 1500fps, but I'll have to take out the new chrono and check it. I'm running 150gr of Swiss FFFg... It's stout!!

Overall, it is what it is, a $1000 double muzzleloader and to me, I got what I paid for. It's neat as hell, and sounds wicked when it goes off. Never had a misfire, but I check the nipples for "hissing" as I swab the barrels between each shot. I recently took all the furniture off of the stock and put several coats of boiled linseed oil on all the internal relief pockets. They're left unsealed coming from the factory.

I'd buy one again, and I definitely recommend one. Just don't expect to get a $15k double out of it.

ManCannon,
sounds excellent,I want to add that we get to buy Sannadex powder here in South Africa,from what I hear the other stuff are to expensive so the retailers mostly keep Sannadex in their stores.

I've got one that regulates perfectly at 30 yards with 120 gr. Goex FFG with patched .715 round balls and is going around 1200 fps. I replaced the rear sights on mine with a Marbles #30.....1 because the original two sight set up is ugly as a turd and 2 because adjusted all the way to the bottom the rifle still printed too high to suit me. Having said all that, I'd like to sell mine and will send it to you, original sights and all for 750.00. Not displeased at all with it, just hankering for something else right now and need the money.

I can talk about my .58" only.
It shot better than me, 3" ant 55 yds 3 from each barrel only one sight. It takes some time to find a good load.
JMHO: those are very good guns considering an old 12bore double cost 5 times a Kodiak.
Martin

Degoin's load would be all that's really necessary for most hunting in North America & actually more than needed for all buy perhaps big bears (ie: grizzlies). His estimated velocity of around 1,200fps is prety much on-track as well.
I would not shoot more than about 160gr. GOEX 2F and certainly not a heavy load of 3F from this gun. The pressure rise (shock loading) is much too quick using 3F in this big bore, in my opinion. If you want to shoot a lot of powder, by all means, use a more appropriate grade of powder, ie: 2f GOEX or 1 1/2F Swiss- but, I'd not go over 150gr. of 1 1/2F Swiss.

Also, I'd not shoot any Pyrodex nor T-7 due to the almsot 20% chlorate in their compostion. Chlorate/percolates are very corrosive.

I suggest you ask Pedersoli themselves what they think about 150gr. of 3f Swiss (or any make BP) as a charge, considering that's probably 50% higher than their proof load of 2F.

Granted the bigger the bore, the lower the pressure - but - the stock might not take the heavy recoil - and they do recoil pretty good.

I have shot up to 7 drams of 2f GOEX in a 1900 era 12 bore double shotgun, without any damage nor pressure signs except for a broken stock. From this sealed ignition gun, that much powder gave only 1,450fps.

To get 1,500fps from a 12 bore is difficult- this is why in the ctg. era, they made special very heavy 9 dram (245gr.) guns.

A buddy of mine has a .75 Sporting rifle, in which he started at 200gr. 2f, then steadily dropped his charge 20gr. per year. At 120gr. 2F GOEX,(the 5th season of use) he managed to stop a ball inside a moose. Prior to that, he got exits, every time.

Pedersoli's recommended maximum load was 90 grains. I checked with them one time when I thought about buying one. There is undoubtedly the "lawyer" factor in that load. Your looking at the equivalent of a Brown Bess load only rifled.

Still, I wouldn't go over 120 grains max of GOEX 2ffg. 3fffg is asking asking for trouble, maybe not tomorrow or even a year from now, but some day,something's going to come apart. A stripped out nipple going by your eyeball at Mach 2 will get your attention. 1200 fps from a 710 RB is plenty of killin!!!

My 14 bore and 8 bore have some serious barrel thickness, particularly on the back end where all the shit blows up.

I collected my .72 dubble last week and only fired it today for the first time after lots of rain,I took 8 shots with it and what a pleasure,well my arm is sore and a bit blue.I was shooting at 50m and the right barrel shoots 6 inc to the left and the left barrel 2 inc low of the bull with the sight nearest to me,guess I'll have to use both sigts,one for each barrel.

If someone have had the same problem please give some tips.
Im shooting 770 grain conicals with a load of 130 grains Sannadex.

Maxload- you are making a mistake shooting slugs from a muzzleloading double rifle.

Firing the first barrel can move the unfired slug foreward off the powder - it now becomes an obstruction. Some say there's don't move.
Reminds me of the guy who always runs stop signs - never hits anything - except the last time he did it. Now, he can't run any more.

If the barrels are crossing with round balls, more recoil will cause them to uncross with each addition of powder. Work only until they shoot into one group, or parallel, which would be perfect.

If you want to shoot slugs - get a single barreled gun.

Slugs will not increase the killing power of a .72 cal gun. They actually decrease it. They are slow, they are difficult to hit with, and since the must be pure lead and engrave, actually become more difficult to load.
Since they are pure lead, they will not penetrate as deeply as a much faster moving round ball that can be any alloy. The faster moving round ball is easier to hit with, as it is much flatter in trajectory.
We have smashed both shoulders of a bull moose and had the WW alloy ball exit. A slug from a muzzleloading rifle can not do that. It's pure lead content flattens out into a blob that stops in heavy bone, instead of smashing through it & continuing on.

quote:

Originally posted by yellowstone:
Pedersoli's recommended maximum load was 90 grains. I checked with them one time when I thought about buying one. There is undoubtedly the "lawyer" factor in that load.

For those owners who want to reproof, I have access to British proof regulations of 1855 and 1868.

My Safari will be delivered April 12. I intend to reproof.
***
I seek a round ball mold .715-.720 inch. I prefer single cavity, but double-cavity mold is acceptable. While my easiest way to go is to buy, if you have a mold and have things for which you want to trade, I'll see what I can do.

Daryl S.
I have heard of this problem and after I fired my first shot I tested it and the unfired slug didn't move at all.What grain of round balls would you recommend for large and dangerous game,and what fps would one get with it if I use 120gr of Sannadex +- ? At what distance is the round ball still accurate?
Went shooting yesterday,the 770gr conicals with 130 gr Sannadex goes 1187fps through my crony.I sighted the right barrel at 100m and the left one at 50m and I must say its deadly accurate,though not a pleasure shooting from the bench. Thanks a lot for the help!!!

Hi,
I’m reading "The Sporting Rifle and its projectiles." by Lieut. James Forsyth.(1867)
I enjoy the reading a lot.
On reading I read a paragraph very interesting as it is what I found when range testing my Kodiak:

“The only effect of increasing the charge was to lessen the elevation, and make the rifle hit harder; the recoil, of course, increased in proportion. It is of great importance that the sporting rifle should admit of varying charges without affecting its accuracy to any serious extent. This is the case with the spherical ball rifle as properly constructed, but with no other that I am acquainted with. The only effect increase of charge has on this rifle is to make the point-blank range somewhat longer, and to make the rifle hit harder; the accuracy remains unimpaired. If it be a double barrel, and it shoot true with the ordinary charge, an increase will have a slight effect on the shooting of the barrels, making each diverge slightly to Its own side. As such animals are always shot at short distances, this will hardly be perceptible; but some error of this description is unavoidable with double rifles used with varying charges.


This is exactly what I found.
I think that black powder increase recoil more than speed.
All double rifle manuals recommend to lower the charge in order to “uncross the barrels” but this must work only in smokeless loads or black powder very low loads.

NOTE: I have posted it in another forum.

Thanks
Martin

quote:

Originally posted by Maxload:
Daryl S.
I have heard of this problem and after I fired my first shot I tested it and the unfired slug didn't move at all.What grain of round balls would you recommend for large and dangerous game,and what fps would one get with it if I use 120gr of Sannadex +- ? At what distance is the round ball still accurate?
Went shooting yesterday,the 770gr conicals with 130 gr Sannadex goes 1187fps through my crony.I sighted the right barrel at 100m and the left one at 50m and I must say its deadly accurate,though not a pleasure shooting from the bench. Thanks a lot for the help!!!

BE VERY CAUTIOUS! Just because it doesn't move once, it will under recoil!

You may be very sorry if it does.

I have a double 50 and shoot heavy loads with slugs, but just one at a time. The 1-48 twist shoots round balls better at 95FF.

Use one slug, fired first and have the second shot a patched round ball.

Best results in accuracy should be from a near bore size ball and a tight patch.

Most big animals can't stop a 550 grain ball at 1200 fps. from passing out the far side.

Bruce

I'd like to try to summarize what I've learned here about the Kodiak, because I was considering getting one of the new guns to deer hunt the early season with -

You have to use patched round balls because of the danger of the second load lifting off the powder (Maxi-Balls used to slip down the barrel of my T/C Hawken with hardly any pressure at all). And I suppose you would want to check periodically to make sure the second load's properly seated. And I imagine you would not want to shoot, reload, shoot and reload repeatedly one barrel only without firing the other, for the same reason. I also presume use of both sets of iron sights is necessary and that a scope is impractical because of regulation issues.

One other thing, in a .50 you would probably limit it to about 90 grains.

Is that basically correct?

Shack,

I have a scope on my 50, just have to aim 5"s to the left at 100yds on the second shot. I shoot the rear trigger first. [left barrel]

My bores never do cross, sighted in for the left, the right barrel shoots to the right! About 5"s at 100 with patched round balls.

Bruce

quote:

Originally posted by Maxload:
Daryl S.
I have heard of this problem and after I fired my first shot I tested it and the unfired slug didn't move at all.What grain of round balls would you recommend for large and dangerous game,and what fps would one get with it if I use 120gr of Sannadex +- ? At what distance is the round ball still accurate?
Went shooting yesterday,the 770gr conicals with 130 gr Sannadex goes 1187fps through my crony.I sighted the right barrel at 100m and the left one at 50m and I must say its deadly accurate,though not a pleasure shooting from the bench. Thanks a lot for the help!!!

maxload- sorry I didnt' get back to you on your question.

My .69 single, will put 5 consecutive round balls into 1" to 1.5" at 100 yards, and last summer, made a pattern of 1 1/4" wide X 3 1/2" tall with 6 consecutive shots, while sighting in for a 200 yard postal match. The gun has English-style Express sights on it, no scope.

The best cases scenario for the double, is to have 2 sights, each zero'd at different ranges, not one for each barrel as pedersoli intends.

If you can get the gun shooting close, then zero one sight for the 'best' barrel and learn to hold for the poor one, as Bruce does.

Forsyth tells us that some makers used to split the difference between the barrels, holding 'off' for each. I think this is a mistake - you should have one barrel that is true, and learn to hold the other.
In developing loads for my .58 double, I shot this group using one sight - range 50 yards, off the bags. I then fired 1 shot from each barrel offhand, holding centre for the left barrel (fired first, then holding low and a tich left for the seocnd shot, the right barrel.


Further to that day, I've been testing different loads, different patch materials and each time I made a change, the point of impact changed. I am not shooting both barrels into am egg shaped 1-hole group at 50 yards - with one sight. This will allow me to put another sight in the rear sight base, zero'd for, say, 125 yards, allowing me an easy 150 yard range for hunting deer and black bear - or moose, if I'm not packing my .69. I am happy with the rifle.

I see you are still using those conicals. Conicals destroyed the killing power of Baker's big bore muzzleloading rifles rifles, they'll ruin yours as well.

"destroyed the efficiency of my rifles" "led me into such scrapes that I eventually gave up the conical as useless". That's just about exact quotes of Samuel Baker, concerning conical balls.

Perhaps your results will be different?

Conical balls only proved themselves better than round balls with the advent of breechloading rifles, since the breech loader allowed the use of hardened bullets. Conicals for a muzzleloader must be every soft to allow obturation to occur which allows them to grip and hold in the rifling. Due to having to be soft, the conicals will not increase penetration.

Again, according to Baker, hardened round balls, from a slightly smaller 14 bore rifle (15 bore(.675") bore ball) will exit an elephant's head from the side - with only 4 1/2 to 5 drams of powder(125 to 136gr.) - is that enough penetration for you?

I have smashed a concrete block measuring 4" thick X 10" X 14" into pieces less than 3" in diameter with a straight WW ball, and recovered the flattened ball. I was shocked by the explosion of concrete. Conicals are not needed.

In the .72, you can shoot WW balls or balls of any hardness, if .700" to .710" in diameter & be able to load and shoot this load all day without having to wipe the bore.

Jeff Tanner of England will make you a mould of any size you want. I own 5 of his moulds now - they work very well indeed.

This is the result of my latest testing. Maintaining the powder charge of 100gr., but switching to a .022" denim patch (12 oz.) brought the barrels together to a satisfactory regulation. Next tests will be to increase the charge to 110, 115 and 120gr. to see what effect that has. As well, I'll try .570" and .575" balls & repeat all combinations to date - as well as testing with neetsfoot oil and mink oil for hunting lubes. Isn't this fun! The point is, picking a load and expecting or demanding that ONE to work, doesn't work very often. When I started, this gun crossed by 1 3/4" and shot 2" different elevation, using the same sight. Antoher point, I shoot only real black powder. Leave the corrosive phoney powders to the inlines- perhaps the stainless barrels aren't effected as badly as normal muzzleloading barrels.

Hi Daryl S.

Thanx for your replies,it's exactly what I've been looking for.I am definitely getting me some of those round balls.Have you ever shot round balls through a crony?
This upcoming weekend if everything goes well I'm going hunting!

Daryl-


It's good to see the 58 shooting so nicely.
Way to go!



Cheers
Tinker

TKS guys. I'm happy with it now. At first, I was a bit frustrated- but it only took 4 trips to the range and about 3 pounds of powder.

I have not chronographed it yet - am a bit surprised I didn't take the chronograph with me last time - nice day too - just above freezing.

I expect the 100gr. load to run 1,450fps. Fine for deer or black bear, but not what I want for moose or griz. which is why there is more testing to do. There is always more testing needed - it's what I do and enjoy. Need to try .570" and .575" balls along with other patch material. The powder remains constant - 2F GOEX.

As it is, the zero will be 80 yards with that load, and 2 1/2" low at 100, but 7 3/4" low at 125, so the second sight will be zero'd at 125.

A velocity of 1,750fps, with the same 1 1/2" height at 50 yards, will be zero'd at 90 yards, 1" low at 100 and 4 3/4" low at 125, so the second sight will be zero'd at 130yards with a max easy deer range of 160 yards at 6 1/2" low.

A 12 bore, shooting a 1 1/4oz. ball(.715") at 1,300fps has enough of a higher ballistic coefficient that it will have a zero of 85 yards, if 1 1/2" high at 50, and is only 1 1/2" low at 100 and 4 1/4" low at 125". That's a pretty good point blank for a fairly light 4 1/2 dram (125gr.) load. The second sight zero'd at, say 130 yards, would be 5" down at 160 yards - easy range for deer while moose or elk could easily be taken with a spine hold to 200 yards, where the ball is 15" low- right in the middle of the ribs on bull moose.

We use laser range finders, BTW so we know exactly what the range is & therefore the drop. Lyman's black powder handbook will give the ballistic coefficients of the balls and bullets, while a computer program such as point blank, which used to be free, will give the drops. We've found point blank to be as accurate as Sierr's comp. program, but less comprehensive, of course.

on the 58s ..
you will be shocked by the LOW speed of these loads ...
(btw, i dislike round balls being used on game, if concials are available)
100 of 2f will be under 1000 fps,
120 of 2f will be under 1150

modern BP equilivants are NOT corrosive .. that's an amazing misnomer .. they aren't .. at least 777 and pyrodex are

my final load on my pair of 58 caliber kodiaks, with 600gr conicals, was about 1350 but could ONLY be acheived with 777 ... far, repeat FAR superior to using BP in terms of velocities ... and far less carcenogens.

the low SD of RB means lower penetration compared to a concial at the same speed, in game.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
on the 58s ..
you will be shocked by the LOW speed of these loads ...
(btw, i dislike round balls being used on game, if concials are available)
100 of 2f will be under 1000 fps,
120 of 2f will be under 1150

modern BP equilivants are NOT corrosive .. that's an amazing misnomer .. they aren't .. at least 777 and pyrodex are

my final load on my pair of 58 caliber kodiaks, with 600gr conicals, was about 1350 but could ONLY be acheived with 777 ... far, repeat FAR superior to using BP in terms of velocities ... and far less carcenogens.

the low SD of RB means lower penetration compared to a concial at the same speed, in game.

Jeff? - you need to get your chronograph fixed - as well as to do a study on the effects of perchlorate on steel AND the steel particles inside stainless steel.

I haven't chronographed my Kodiak yet - maybe today is a good day for that - but did chrnogrpah my .58 Hawken back in the 70's, as well as a Zouave and my current Musketoon. You are in error in your estimates. Heavy hunting loads with Bear grease lubed .022" denim patch.
(75gr. 2f GOEX - .562"RB 24" bl. 1,308fps- spit patch - .018" denim patch - Enfield Musketoon)
95gr. 2F GOEX - 1,424fps(spit patch).575" RB - Hawken 32"
140gr. 2F GOEX - 1,736fps .575" RB Hawken
160gr. 2F GOEX - 1,867fps .575" RB Hakwen
185gr. 2F GOEX - 1,951fps .575" RB Hawken

Same rifle -
675gr. Conical
150gr. 2f GOEX - 1,250fps - Hawken
160gr. 2F GOEX - 1,325fps - Hawken

As far as the .72 goes - 80gr. 2f GOEX produced 1,080fps in my brother's Bess with a 545gr. round ball - any alloy can be used. 150gr.2F GOEX(5 drams) produced 1,350fps, and 190gr. (7 drams) produced 1,490fps.
These velocities were very similar to my double 12 bore ctg. gun - which ran another 50fps on average.

Samual Baker had a vast amount of experience on dangerous game using muzzleloading rifles - "I at length gave up the conical as useless" - his quote, not mine.



My 24" Musketoon, with it's undersized .574" barrel, shooting the .562" round ball, attains 1,308fps with a mere 75gr. 2F. I have no idea where you got your information from. I've been chronographing round balls and YES - conicals for 37 years, when I bought my first Oehler M12 - I am not new to this and also have enough chemistry to know the effects of Pyrodex and T-7's chlorates/percholates on barrels - witnessed it on several as well.

Conicals in the small bores ( 24 gauge, ie: .58cal.) only exceeded the penetration of hardened round balls, when they themselves could be harded. In a muzzleloader, bullets must be cast very soft to obturate into the rifling & therefore, at velocities that will give penetration superior to round balls, expand excessively and fail to penetrate as well as hardened round balls. They must be seen to be believed - quite incredible, really.

Carcenogens? - never heard that story before - sounds like something the advertisers of Hodgdon might have dreamt up.

BP is a mixture of natural elements, not chemicals as-are Pyrdoex and T7.

The way to get more power per gain weight, is to increase the oxygen producer, making it burn hotter, producing more gas - that is where perchlorate comes in and does. Potassium chlorate is what made WW1 corrosive primers corrosive - how much ina primer? Certainly not the 17% of the entrie charge that makes up T7 and Pyrodex.

So - look at it this way - corrosive primer weight of the corrosive element - maybe 1 or 2 gr. per shot. T-7 and Pyrodex weight of a 100gr. charge in corrosive element - 17gr. per shot.

Daryl

Excellent,I like the facts!!

Daryl
We disagree ..
Just called Hodgdon on the "potassium chlorate" comment .. NO -- its not there .. ZERO ZIP NADA .. 913 962 9455, ext 1 ... feel free to call and ask for yourself

the rest, well, sounds like conflict of opinions ..

I did understimate the lightness of the RB .. conicals at 500-600gr are MUCH slower!

72 caliber...does Safarikid have one of these???

For those that are interested, I just got back from doing some chrono work with the .72 double. Data is as follows:

0.715" RB - 0.015" patch - Swiss FFFg
80gr - 1169 fps
100gr - 1319 fps
120gr - 1390 fps

0.715" RB - 0.015" patch - Swiss FFg
80gr - 1142 fps
100gr - 1273 fps
120gr - 1356 fps

0.715" RB - 0.015" patch - Triple 7 FFg
80gr - 1160 fps
100gr - 1285 fps
120gr - 1329 fps


The velocities are graphed below.
Blue line = Swiss FFFg
Pink line = Swiss FFg
Yellow line = Triple 7 FFg

Mancannon - note the higher speeds over what I posted. This is the difference between the GOEX I used and Swiss powder, which delivers higher speeds and if the pressure is well up, slightly less fouling than GOEX as well. It's good stuff. I know many guys who swear by it in ctg. as well as muzzleloaders. I was interested to see the T-7 velocities starting to plateau at about 108gr., then perhaps starting to climb again around 120gr.

The Swiss black powders appear to very closely match the better English powders of the late 1800's in velocity production, and this is why many ctg. gun shooters with double rifles, prefer it for matching the regulation loads stamped on their guns.

I will not use any of the phony powders again, in my own guns. One wrecked is enough along with the other's I've observed with rotted bores, which had NEVER shot anything by Pyrodex or T-7.

One similar rifle with interchangable barrels, a .32 and .40, a custom English 'Rook" rifle mere 2 years old, is sitting in my brother's shop right now, never shot anything but T-7 according to the owner. 2 years later, the bores are both like iron sewer pipes - pitted badly from breech to muzzle, yet they are small bores and shoot small powder charges. The bores appear identcial to his TC barrels, which are also sitting in the rafters for anyone to see- both rottenf from shoot Pyrodex. He said that he was told by the company who sells it, that those powders weren't corrosive & but that BP was. There is some technicality that must allow that statement - perhaps it is the necessity of moisture being present.

A gunsmith friend of mine said he can look through dozens of BP Ctg. guns barrels and pick out the ones which have fired at least 100 rounds of Pyrodex powder.

Jeff - note that they might be calling the corrosive ingredient, percholates - or percolates, not chlorate. Same deal as far as your barrel is concerned.

As I said, I love Hodgdon's smokeless powders & use little else now. I will not use their Pyrodex, etc, due to it's corrosive nature.
All of the companies who sell phony powders claim BP fouling to be corrosive - & their's not to be.

Without any moisture, dry BP fouling is almost completely neutral and needs moisture over about 35% before it can cause oxidation of the surface metal. With humidity lower than 30%, you can leave a BP gun fouled for a week or more and it will not harm the bore - at all. There might be some staining, but no rust, no pits. I've done it. I've also done the same with Pyrodex in the .70's and pitted the bore in the same length of time, same dry winter. That test cured me on those powders.

A chemical engineer told me they both contained 17% per volume of percolates or chlorates, same stuff that made primer corrosive in the early years. That was good enough for me. I am merely repeating his warning and that of others I know who have mopre experience than I in this 'stuff'. This is then my opinion.

Daryl
Perhaps you can call them and get the straight answer .. In houston, and most of eastern texas, humidity is NEVER under 50%, and so is not realistic for us. in fact, more than 1/2 of the US is generally over 50% humidity ...

I asked a bunch of questions, and, well, basically, 777 doesn't contain any of that .. I used pyrodex for about 2 bottles, and moved to 777 due to velocity gains on big conicals.

Getting a straight answer is virtually impossible - I tried that with the American Powder company andonly got straight answers when I contacted my chemist friend about it. He has personal relationship reasons for not wanting to test it for himself, but does know the chemical properties of it.

Hodgdon doesn't make the powder, any powder, they merely sell it. Much today is made in Australia (ADI powders), the Hodgdon ball powders from Scotland I believe, and the IMR comes from Canada(Quebec), I understand. I don't know where the WW powder comes from - it may be made in the States for all I know, maybe Scotland as well for Denmark for that matter.

It is also virtually impossible to get a chemical breakdown on any powder - hidden under 'trade secrets', which is a good way to hide what's in it. The only way to find out, comes from someone with knowledge of chemistry who gets into the testing stages of the powder or later testing, which is where I was told about the percolates and chlorates.

Some time ago, I asked if T-7 was easier on barrels than Pyrodex and was told it-too contained the bad stuff, 17% per volume.

I've been shooting black powder rifles since 1972, tried and abandoned pyrodex in the 70's when I found accuracy sucked compared to real black powder. Too, standard deviations were all over the map, which, of course, shows up on the targets. That is also when I destroyed a barrel with it.

I've lost expensive (at the time) .45 x 3-1/4" brass cases to T-7 as have others. Short while ago - maybe a year, we had a similar discussion on T-7, etc, over at nitroexpress.com.
One of the lads posted pictures of his .577/450 brass that was cleaned and tumbled after shooting nothing but T-7, then stored for 2 years with his other stuff. Most of them had split necks with corrosion showing, along with rotted bodies, yet they looked 'perfect' when stored. That cured my T-7 curiosity.

Apparently, the company which makes Shockey's Gold,american Powder, or something like that, is using a sugar based propellent, which works both good and bad(accuracy wise) in inlines, apparently and should not be corrosive as the others appear to be, however I don't know if they make it in anything but stange shaped plugs - which are probably expensive.

Guys in the States have it easy - they can get powder shipped all over the States by UPS - and cheap, like $12.00 per pound including HAZMAT fees. We are paying $23.00 to $45.00 per pound depending on where we get it. Real black powder is cheaper than the phonys and will not hurt your bores. They must be cleaned, yes, preferably the same day as shooting. I usually get around to cleaning mine the next day. My bores shine like mirrors - no pits, no rust - ever. Don't do that with Pyro or other phony powders. Cold water does a perfect job on real BP fouling, and is recommened by Holland and Holland for antiques. Boiling hot water tends to flash rust, due to the heat and perhaps ambient moisture when dry. This flash rusting is accumulative - this-too we've seen in barrels we've had to lap for the people. I use nothing buy cool tap water for cleaning and it takes less time to properly clean my muzzleloaders than it does to properly clean my varmint or big game modern rifles.

50% is our ambient humidity here in central B.C. It will run from the teens to 90% throughout the year, but usually winter and summer are dryest. At our 10 day Hefley Creek Rendezvous end of August, first week of Sept, the humidity will run below 10% to as high as 50% or 60%. It rains there (and here) with humidity as low as 50% to 80%, yet here it could be 90% and no rain & rain at 80%. Weather is odd, seemingly no absolutes.

Best wishes.

Further to that last post, I read an article about the - "New White Hot's" made by IMR and sold by Hodgdon.

They give the chemical Potassium Perchlorate as being a major component in all three, Pyrodex, T-7 and the White Hots.

The article was, as noted, about the White Hots, and was in the 2009 Hodgdon's Annual Mannual.

Now we know for sure.

This does not stop me from using Hodgdon's smokeless powders in all my modern rifles - so far, for my use it's been the best of all.

I'm not sure of the actual chemical difference between Pyrodex and T-7, but I have shot both of them quite a bit. I won't touch Pyrodex again as it made a .54 caliber of mine rust like hell, even after repeated cleanings. I use T-7 now in a Knight .54 in-line and I really like it. It cleans up super easy, and I just don't see the corrosive effects like Pyrodex produces.

This tells me one of two things... Either perchlorates aren't the main corrosive agent or T-7 has far less perchlorates than Pyrodex, otherwise they should have equally corrosive fouling residue, and they simple don't.

The perchlorates are the corrosive chemical, and both those powders run 17%/volume in it. Chlorate and perchlorate fumes will actually disolve the steel/iron particles inside stainless steel railings. This happened to a cat-walk above the vats in a percholate producing plant. The catwalk collapsed and they found under microscopes that it was honeycombed inside due to the disolved steel particals.

Why your observed difference between the two, I don't know. I have heard that before, but still do not trust it.

Once the 'process' has started, every firing impulse deepens the pits in an every-increasing fashion.

A person must take a lot of old and current advertizing with a grain of salt. In other words, "Don't eat that Elmer, it's bullshit".

There was a time when it was reported that with Pyrodex, no cleaning was necessary at all and that it could be treated as any smokeless powder - go figure.

The picture of the shooter's T-7 fired .477/450 brass, cleaned then tumbled after shooting, that rotted while being stored remains 'fresh' in my mind. I had the same thing happen to Black Mag 3 fired .450 Alaskan and Pyrodex fired .45 3-1/4" as well as .50 3-1/4" brass. Yeah - I was a slow learner. No subs for me now.

hmm - I seem to have misspelled perchlorate a number of times.
here's the chem # CLO-4
Here's a diatribe on the stuff.


http://yosemite.epa.gov/r10/CL...-The-Environment.pdf

Daryl,
I am trying to be nice, and provided you the phone number. please don't tell me how "hard" it is to get a straight answer, as I am learning that in other avenues. I believe you are mistaken, and you'll need to prove the 17%, sir .. please do stop, till you prove it. In fact, i've heard the rumor that 777 is a smokeless powder, with "smoke" agents added. And I believe that more than 17% triple-eythel-death content

Suit yourself. The 17% content came straight from the guy who did the chem. annalysis on the stuff. Hodgdon themselves say it is made with perchlorates, as printed in their annual manual.
This is a headsup only - use it if you want - good luck.

Daryl,
I've only shoot 10 to 12# of it .. in kodiaks and 777, as I tried nearly everything else.. Hodgdon DOES NOT say it, as I asked them dead point blank.

Claiming it, as a i heard it from a guy that says he did ... well, that's an extraordinary claim .. and requires extra ordinary proof.

I myself have NOT seen this, even with bertram brass on my 550 flanged (577/500 improved to 550 and atf approved)

3 chlorine mol + oxygen to the 4?- hell, I'm not the chemist. Like IMR WhiteHots, Pyrodex and T-7 are based on Potassium Percholorate. they need this to develope their presssure and velocity with projectiles.
I found that out myself when I made my own priming compound for home made percussion caps, that the increase in perchlorates (chlorate) is necessary to produce a rapid burn. In those, the amount is a 5chlorate:1sulpher:1charcoal ratio in order to get the conflagration-type burn needed for a priming mixture. Reduce the perchlorates to slow the burn further and you have a propellent - although that would take a lot of testing with proper equipment and the result is hard on barrel steel. I know they don't use sulpher or charcoal - doesn't matter. What does, is the perchlorates.
Black Mag 3 is another of the perchlorate powders.

They are NOT smokeless powders. This 'rumour' also went around when Pyrodex first came out in the 70's.
Believe what you want.

"A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still".

The only other successful phony black powder that is successful is based upon Ascorbic Acid- ie: Vitamin C. Shockey's Gold is of this type. Nothing Hodgdon sells at this time has the same compostion as American powders (Shockey's Gold).

Is this one good? I don' tknow, never tried it and probably probably never will. I've tried T-7 and Pyrodex and had or observed problems with both due to their compostion. I always quickly and correctly cleaned my barrels using the flush method in a bucket of water. Others who believed them to be smokeless and were tardy with cleaning, or cleaned their barrels on the guns using some well advertised solvent designed solely to make money for some company, had trouble with rotted bores.

perhaps with proper and promt cleaning, the bore won't rot. However - any of the perchlorate powders is death on antiques that are already lightly pitted from 100 to 200 years of use. Many of those were pitted from using perchlorate (the old corrosive) primers alone.

Real black powder works too well to seek a change in propellent. For long range competition, it is also more accurate. The White Hots have shown to develope very low SD's, same as black powder and therefore, might be useable, however being a perchlorate based propellent, I'll not use nor try them.

I'm about finished with this thread.

TTFN

tell you what .. i just asked for the most trivial of backup on this, and provided the makers number and i got was "you can't get a straight answer" .. and i agree, its hard to get a straight answer .. but i just happen to have 45/120 /3.25" and various blackpowders and substs. i may bother trying a test on them.

777 is not prodex, not even close, and, as you repeatedly state, there are various other ways to make BPs .. is what it is, but i do call BS on anything being made of 17% of the same thing as primers .. primers are explosives, powders aren't

Merely repeating what the chemical engineer said - 17% for both of them. Black Mag 3 probably has even more as it developes higher speeds yet. It wouldn't to matter if it was only 5% - it's still a very nasty corrosive. In order to get more power, you have to include that which gives the power - in this powder, it's perchlorate, which is a chlorate - either potassium (from potash) chlorate, or potassium perchlorate or sodium chlorate or sodium perchlorate. None of them are good for steel. That is why the transportation system for the stuff used to be glass lined. I don't know what they use today.



"A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."

its now not 17%? its 5%
Daryl,
You have presented some sidealong statements as proof, and i STRONGLY disagree with you. Unless you can PROVE you statement, by actual chemical analysis or statements by the maker, sir, I believe you data is false.

a primer, back then, was nearly 100% nasty salting, therefore coorosive, primers ,... that made a messy instantly.

YOU, repeat, YOU don't use the stuff, I have, and I don't see the same results you are stating,.

perhaps the formula has changed, and lets stick to 777, shall we?

You seem to have all the answers, but I don't feel your "proof"

I feel your data is wrong, but you really believe it.

Daryle, 5 shots with just a primer would salt a barrel and start pitting IN A DAY .. and its less than 2% of the over all charge .. you are telling me its a HUGE percentage of the same ..

i'll be blunt -- I don't believe you, and you have done NOTHING to prove it...

you keep stating the "concinced against his will" but you keep saying the same things.

I believe your data is incorrect, and you should probably research it ..

its kinda like the guy that says "its flat to 400 yards .. same hole at 100 as at 400 .. and he's full of prunes

quote:

Originally posted by Daryl S.:
That is why the transportation system for the stuff used to be glass lined. I don't know what they use today.

Dude, you are full of it .. BP for small arms has Not been required to ship in glass for at least 30 years ... and the pyrodex/777/other stuff has NEVER been shipped in glass..

nor has smokeless powder, primers, or ANY of the other propellents .. this is non-factual in the last 3 decades .. it COULD have been true, older than that, but i have NEVER seen a glass lined bottle of powder .. never, not once, and have, at one time, had a massive collection of powder cans.

this comment is rubbish, AND, Daryl, primers weren't corrosive UNTIL fired .. that's why you can stil shoot those cases, 80+ years later!