any difference between a black powder charge between muzzle loader & cartridge charg

[Magnum Wheel Man]

curious if ( for example ) all other things being equal, if a 50 caliber muzzle loader & a 50-70 government's energy & velocities would be similar???

does 70 grains of FFG in a muzzleloader equal the same performance as 70 grains in a cartridge case???

40 grains in a cap & ball revolver equal 40 grains in a revolver cartridge case???

I would assume so... but maybe I'm missing something... of course bullets would have to be the same or very similar...

 

[TimSr]

I think the bigger factor is empty case space.

In a muzzloading .50 cal, whether you use 70gr or 120gr charge, the bullet is always sitting tight on top of the powder.

I don't load black powder in cartridges, so somebody who does can correct me, but I think empty space in a case is a no-no and simulates a muzzleloader that doesn't have the bullet rammed all the way home.

 

[Magnum Wheel Man]

I've only done a few blackpowder cartridges... but I fill them to slightly compressed... cartridges like 45-70 for example, may not hold 70 grains of black powder anymore, as lots of those cases had balloon heads... but in this example 65 grains may work

 

[mehavey]

As long the same amount of BP that's req'd to fill the case in the cartridge is the same as used
in the muzzleloader (of the same caliber/bullet/barrel length), no significant difference.

 

[Bishop Creek]

I have no ballistics proof whatsoever, but I have seen no difference between shooting my Remington '58 loaded with 30 grains of black powder in a .45 Schofield cartridge case with a .454 round ball using a Kirst converter and loading a .454 round ball directly into the cap and ball cylinder with 30 grains of powder and shooting it that way.

 

[Bootsie]

I have done an experiment with two custom converted Army revolvers: Centaure 1960 NEW MODEL ARMY and Uberti Colt M 1860, both with 8" barrel. Centaure rifling groove dia .447", Uberti .452".
During part one of the test the pistols were fitted with their Thuer conversion cylinder, in part two with the C&B cylinder.
Both types of cylinders were loaded with the same quantity of hot Swiss #1 using Thuer cases filled to the rim as measures, same 195 gr. soft lead heel type bullets of identical dia.
In the Thuer mode the cartridge cases were again identical.
Difference was in the primers used: CCI for the Thuer cases, RWS #10 for the C&B cylinder.
Average velocity measured at 2 meters (fps):
Centaure 1960 NEW MODEL ARMY: Thuer 1017, C&B 975
Uberti Colt 1860: Thuer 853, C&B 817
The different velocities of the Thuer cartridges vs C&B loads in the same pistol can be explained by the different type of ignation used, i.e. "closed cartridge system" in the Thuers but gas back-firing through the nipples when the C&B cylinders were installed.
The comparatively lower velocities of the Uberti are likely due to the larger bore diameter und subsequent gas leakage.
Long Johns Wolf

 

[45 Dragoon]

Hmmm . . .
I would say the increase in fps would be from the more efficient cartridge than the loose powder & ball. A crimped projectile allows more gas build up / powder burned, thus, a more efficient system. I would think a primer to be more efficient than a cap as well, not just in that it seals the case or shell but the mixture in the primer. Maybe someone here has some knowledge of components?
Good post

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

Then again, differences in barrel /cylinder clearance isn't known (which is somewhat important for gas leak). Since in the above exercise, cylinders were swapped in each revolver. The clearances in one setup may cancel the setup in the other.

Wow, the plot thickens . . . . .

 

[Bootsie]

45 Dragoon and campfire: I agree that a cartridge is more efficient than the C&B system. However no crimp is possible with Thuer cases!
Long Johns Wolf

 

[mehavey]

the more efficient cartridge than the loose powder & ball.

The ball/projectile in a muzzleloading rifle is firmly (I say again firmly) rammed down against the powder -- dare I say it even compresses a bit.

Crimp on a BP cartridge has little effect on burn -- and in fact most cartridges I have dealt with use no crimp anyway except in revolvers.

 

[Magnum Wheel Man]

on the few muzzleloader rifles I shoot... my routine is to tamp the ball 4-5 times on top of the powder charge... don't know if I'm "normal" or not... but I'd say that I compress the powder charge in a muzzleloader at least as much as I compress the powder in a black powder cartridge???

at this point I admit I was thinking "traditional" but my new deer rifle does use 209 primers

 

[45 Dragoon]

Well I guess no crimp wouldn't have much effect but I use a factory crimp die on all my re-loads except the acp. I too made sure I "tamped " the load rather well (when loading rifle )but i don't think a patched ball is held as tightly as a crimped bullet. I have pulled both, and the patched ball is easier.
Just my experience.
. . . .the plot gets thickerer !!

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

 

[T. O'Heir]

Suggest you buy a copy of Lyman's BP Handbook and Reloading Guide. Tells you everything you ever wanted to know about BP cartridges, including some you never thought to ask. Still trying to get my head around BP being loaded in grains by volume and not by weight. It's a good read too.
And that ffg isn't used in BP rifle cartridges.

 

[stubbicatt]

TOHeir, I use FFg in 40-65 cartridges for a Sharps.

Also the velocity differences posted above do not seem terribly significant to me between a cap and ball revolver and one shooting cartridges, and may readily be accounted for by dimensional differences in those firearms, as pointed out by others here.

 

[B.L.E.]

I use 80 grains FFg and 1 1/8 ounce of shot in both my muzzleloading 12 gauge and for the cartridges in my breech loading 12 gauge. The clay birds that I smite can't tell the difference.