NB we do not guarantee our revolvers when used with smokeless or nitro powders

[glowe]

Why is it then that flintlock rifles need to be cleaned immediately or they begin to erode?

James - muzzleloaders shot with black powder sure do need to be cleaned soon after shooting, especially in humid conditions. The major issues with BP is the sulfur residue and the fluffy ash that both attract moisture like magnets. The good news is that BP is easily flushed with soap and water. The old priming residue can be really tough to clean out. My thought on the most corrosive primer material, however, was fulminate of Mercury??

I can remember my father shooting old military 30-06 ammo in his M1903-A3 and cleaning the bore over and over again with both Hoppe's and soap and water until he was sure the corrosive residue was gone. I now have that rifle and I am glad he took the time, since it still looks and shoots as well as when I was a kid many years ago.

 

[DWalt]

"My thought on the most corrosive primer material, however, was fulminate of Mercury??"

Mercury fulminate's use as a priming composition was pretty well extinct by the late 19th century. It had a very short shelf life (especially at higher temperatures), and was completely unsuited for military use. Contrary to what some may think they know, black powder residue is not particularly corrosive to steel, certainly nothing like chlorate primers. On the other hand, residue from BP substitutes like Pyrodex is quite corrosive and anything using Pyrodex should be cleaned immediately.

 

[jw mathews]

To add a bit to Mr. Jinks' letter to Mr. McCrory posted above, the point about reduced smokeless powder loads I think is well-taken. When the 44 Special was designed for the Triple Lock ca 1907, it was originally intended to be more powerful than the 44 Russian, so the case was made longer to hold more (black ?) powder. Yet the later published factory ballistics (up till the 1960s -'70s or so) for the 44 Special show the same weight bullet and the same velocity as the 44 Russian. Thus there was no practical advantage of the 44S over the 44R using factory loads, up till some 20-30 years ago, when different bullets & faster loads from the factories finally became available for the 44 Special. Of course, the 44 Special gained favor as handloaders (notably Elmer Keith) experimented with heavier loads. This situation was not true when the 44 Magnum came along. It's longer case was purposely made so it could not chamber in 44 Special guns, and with very good reason, because it was loaded much "hotter" than the 44 Special at the beginning.

One cannot change history, but I think the 44 Special would have become much more popular much earlier had it been loaded to beat the 44 Russian by 100-200 fps with the same weight bullet instead of having just the same velocity as the 44R.

 

[DWalt]

As Elmer Keith showed, the .44 Special can be loaded to awesome levels, and it's entirely feasable to develop a very stout load in a .44 Special case that can balistically perform about as well as a .44 Magnum. The major problem in doing that is the abundance of older revolvers in .44 Special that would have blown up had it been used in them. The main reason for the longer case of the .44 Magnum was not better performance vs. the .44 Special, but prevention of its use in old .44 Special revolvers. Much the same can be said about the .357 Magnum vs. the .38 Special. It's not difficult to reach .357 MVs using heavy loads in a .38 Special case. One of our Mexican friends here relates that such a practice is common in Mexico, where revolvers chambered in .38 Special are legally OK (at least for some), but those in .357 Mag are banned under Mexican law. So they simply stuff more powder into .38 Special cases to get the same results (mainly in N-frames). As long as the barrel is stamped ".38 Special," all is OK with the Mexican law.

 

[Stevie]

In the early days there were two types of smokeless powder, "bulk" and "dense". Bulk powder was meant to be loaded with the same measures as black powder, but dense powder needed to be loaded by weight. Many shooters didn't know or understand the difference and loaded dense powder with their old black powder scoop measure, leading to blowups. Also lot to lot consistency wasn't as good as it is today, leading to other problems.
DuPont manufactured bulk shotgun powder into at least the 1950's and maybe later.

So they had 'black powder' subs even back in the day?.....Them darn French!....Really jacked the tracks sideways with that new powder!

 

[Skeetr57]

I don;t know if I have ever read anything about the relative corrosiveness of mercuric versus chlorate primers, but the real problem with mercuric primers was their destructive effect on brass cases when fired. A brass case after firing with a mercuric primer is seriously weakened, often to the point where it can be crushed in the fingers. The Army, up until WWI at least, reloaded ammunition for training, so the loss of cases was important.
I believe that black powder is just as corrosive as the chlorate primers as both are compounds with an excess of oxidizer, potassium chlorate in the primer and potassium nitrate in the BP. The corrosive effect of the chlorate primer wasn't recognized until the advent of smokeless powder, when the old custom of cleaning bores with water was was no longer thought to be required. In addition, a large part of the chlorates was absorbed by the great amount of fouling left behind when using black powder, and was brushed out of the barrel when cleaning. Black powder is so corrosive that when I fire it in brass cases, even with non-corrosive primers. I take a container of soapy water to the range to drop the cases in as they are fired to prevent them from corroding before I get home.
The military continued to use chlorate primers through WWII because they had better storage life and consistency than the newer non-corrosive types. Some of the last .30-06 ammunition loaded with corrosive primers was some match am loaded in the early 1960's.

 

[DWalt]

Chlorates produce chloride salts which are hygroscopic, i.e., attract water from the atmosphere, causing steel corrosion. Sulfate/sulfite/sulfide salts from black powder are not nearly so hygroscopic. In any event, it's always good to clean anything firing black powder or Pyrodex ASAP after shooting using water. BP residue is not so good on fired brass cases, as copper and zinc sulfates will form fairly quickly. So they should also be given a bath immediately after firing.

 

[rhmc24]

Considering the .44 Russian & .44 Special factory loaded ballistics being the same, I reamed
the chambers on my DIY S&W DA Topbreak & shot it a lot. Thankful due difficulty getting
.44 R ammo.

 

[DWalt]

So they had 'black powder' subs even back in the day?.....Them darn French!....Really jacked the tracks sideways with that new powder!

Bulk smokeless powders had a very low bulk density and were used principally for shotshells, as the intent was to load them, volume-for-volume, like black powder (using a powder scoop), just like Pyrodex today. I guess you could say bulk powders were, more or less, a BP substitute. There were others. For many years, there were strange hybrid powders available, most notably King's "Semi-Smokeless" and Winchester's "Lesmok." Semi-Smokeless was highly regarded and very popular among members of the muzzle-loading fraternity until the 1950s, and even later. I saw it being used in ML matches during the 1960s by those who had laid in a supply of it. It was sort of a combination of black powder and nitrocellulose. Lesmok was used mainly in .22 cartridges, and apparently gave an accuracy advantage for match use. I don't believe Lesmok was ever made available to the shooting public.

 

[brokenprism]

That gun brings to mind the word 'peashooter'. It's funny to look back at what discriminating gentlemen carried in their vest pockets for protection.