Surprise at the range

Me, i have ultimate confidence Blackhorn will ignite in all conditions. Why wouldn't it? It always has......

BH will not ignite with no.11 percussion caps. T7 will. BH will not ignite consistently with lower power "muzzleloader 209" primers. T7 will.

T7 is hygroscopic mean it will absorb humidity out of the air. I don't know about BH but I assume it is not as hydroscopic. With a sealed breech like most BH ready ML's have today, this is not a problem for either powder. If I were going to Alaska to hunt for days on end in rainy conditions, I would convert my UL to the red plastic primer carriers. I would put the rubber bore sleeve over the end of the barrel and not worry a bit about ignition. I don't know if BH will ignite consistently with the red primer carriers.

Dutch said:

BH will not ignite with no.11 percussion caps. T7 will. BH will not ignite consistently with lower power "muzzleloader 209" primers. T7 will.

T7 is hygroscopic mean it will absorb humidity out of the air. I don't know about BH but I assume it is not as hydroscopic. With a sealed breech like most BH ready ML's have today, this is not a problem for either powder. If I were going to Alaska to hunt for days on end in rainy conditions, I would convert my UL to the red plastic primer carriers. I would put the rubber bore sleeve over the end of the barrel and not worry a bit about ignition. I don't know if BH will ignite consistently with the red primer carriers.

Click to expand...

Not sure we're you mentioned percussion caps in your post. I would use Goex black powder in my Flintlock instead of 777 for better ignition as well.
My reply was to you with the understanding your gun was being used with 209 primers. Your UL will ignite BH209 with all primers on the market. And using the red plastic jackets in Alaska would be a poor choice cause they don't seal. A slight crushing 209 primer is perfect. Your original post you seemed to be right on track with everything, i hope you stay on track. :wink:

WV Hunter said:

I was in a store yesterday locally and to my surprise T7 is up to $28.99. :shock: Any idea why so much? :huh?:

Pyrodex RS was $19.99, and BH209 was $36.99. Historically, T7 has usually been about $2-3/ lb more than Pyrodex in my area.

Click to expand...

Speculation on my part... but I do not believe that BH has cut that far into T7's market share and because if that they are able to sell the powder at a higher price and still compete with BH.

Black Powder and the Pyrodex powders including pellets outsell both T7 and BH.

Grouse said:

Dutch said:

BH will not ignite with no.11 percussion caps. T7 will. BH will not ignite consistently with lower power "muzzleloader 209" primers. T7 will.

T7 is hygroscopic mean it will absorb humidity out of the air. I don't know about BH but I assume it is not as hydroscopic. With a sealed breech like most BH ready ML's have today, this is not a problem for either powder. If I were going to Alaska to hunt for days on end in rainy conditions, I would convert my UL to the red plastic primer carriers. I would put the rubber bore sleeve over the end of the barrel and not worry a bit about ignition. I don't know if BH will ignite consistently with the red primer carriers.

Click to expand...

Not sure we're you mentioned percussion caps in your post. I would use Goex black powder in my Flintlock instead of 777 for better ignition as well.
My reply was to you with the understanding your gun was being used with 209 primers. Your UL will ignite BH209 with all primers on the market. And using the red plastic jackets in Alaska would be a poor choice cause they don't seal. A slight crushing 209 primer is perfect. Your original post you seemed to be right on track with everything, i hope you stay on track. :wink:

Click to expand...

Grouse you are incorrect about the Red FPJ's not sealing the breech they do and do it very well. Knight has utube videos out with the rifle submerged in water for days - pick the rifle out of the water it will shoot without a problem. The sealing portion is on of Knights prime reasons for pushing FPJ's.

Sabotloader,
If you read the OP posts you will see he's on track to doing everything right. Once he shims his plug with a slight crush fit with his primer of choice he will have no leakage at all. If he does it right and I'm sure he will. It's a Guarantee the red plastic jackets will leak after firing for sure. His shimmed plug will not. I like my chances of no leaking versus leaking especially out in the wilderness when reloading and everything becomes a factor.

You take a Knight Ultralite out of the box with no crush fit, I would say a red plastic jacket would be better. But I would have someone fix my plug before using red plastic jackets. I know you can tell how much I like them. Lol

Gents,

I did not plan on switching no to FPJ's. I will shim my plug per Sabotloader's posts. I am sure it will be perfect.

Dutch said:

Gents,

I did not plan on switching no to FPJ's. I will shim my plug per Sabotloader's posts. I am sure it will be perfect.

Click to expand...

It wasn't about you Dutch. Sabotloader is questioning my opinion on crush fit plugs against red plastic jackets. I think the crush fit plugs win every time in all conditions. But he is also correct on saying you need consistent primers to have the right crush all the time. That's why I'm going to switch to CCI eventually on all my ML'S cause most people I talk to agree they are the most consistent in size.

Many years ago I converted one of my MK85's to 209. I had trouble with consistent ignition. A call to Knight in Iowa and they told me the plugs were designed for Winchester primers. I have been using those every since. But, I really like CCI better. Let me know how the conversion goes. I might like to change. Since I will be shimming anyway, it shouldn't be a problem.

Dutch said:

Many years ago I converted one of my MK85's to 209. I had trouble with consistent ignition. A call to Knight in Iowa and they told me the plugs were designed for Winchester primers. I have been using those every since. But, I really like CCI better. Let me know how the conversion goes. I might like to change. Since I will be shimming anyway, it shouldn't be a problem.

Click to expand...

The other day Grouse and I were having a conversation about plugs and primers, he mentioned that his NULA plug and bolt are flawless and that the NULA uses CCI's for the primer. I know from reloading trap that CCI primers are far more consistent in length than are the W209's. Which loading a shotgun shell is no big deal. But, today I was isle shopping in Sportsman's and for some reason I ended up with four boxes of regular CCI primers, not the mags they are way to hot and not needed for a Lehigh plug and Vent Liner. Think I am going to re-shim one of my current plugs to accept them and do some shooting with them.

Some where I have a heat and pressure chart for primers and I think the reg. CCI's are a little hotter than W209's but not that bad if I recall correctly.

Sabotloader please let me know which shims work for you. I plan on getting the replaceable ones first and once I confirm the fit I will go with the permanent shims.

Dutch said:

Sabotloader please let me know which shims work for you. I plan on getting the replaceable ones first and once I confirm the fit I will go with the permanent shims.

Click to expand...

For the job and rifle you are doing I would think all you need are the .241 x .005 and the .248 x .005. I would think with either a Mountaineer or Mountaineer ULite you probably will only need 1 or 2 .005's using W209's and if you go with the CCI maybe you might need a 3rd size shim a .248 x .015 shim - but do not put the .015 in until you confirm with .241 x .005 shims

Thanks Sabotloader.

Dutch... When I was talking about the FPJ system - I was talking about their ability to keep water/water vapor from getting through the breech to the powder. Grouse was indicating he was talking about them leaking blow back when shot, which they do. So I was indicating a response to your note about Alaskan rain or anywhere else it might be raining.

If I were going to Alaska to hunt for days on end in rainy conditions,

Click to expand...

And as Grouse has said the NFPJ or bare primer system can do the same if there is a primer crush... but you will not know until you remove your hammer assembly and close the bolt on a test primer...

Sabotloader you and I were thinking to same way. But Grouse is also correct in his comments.

And I like the bare primer much better.

Dutch said:

Sabotloader you and I were thinking to same way. But Grouse is also correct in his comments.

And I like the bare primer much better.

Click to expand...

I think red plastic jackets belong on all plunger style guns. I seen some videos on plunger guns shooting number 11 caps and 209primers. I didn't believe what I saw so I did my own. Well I can tell you there's no more plunger guns in this house and hopefully never will be. But with a red plastic jacket I think they are a much safer type of an ignition.

Please direct me to the links showing all this shrapnel being hurled at the shooter from shooting approved loads with #11 cap ignition in a plunger style rifle. Or better yet lets see the videos you claim to have made showing this.
I have been shooting APPROVED loads in my plunger style muzzleloaders and have not experienced this. The cap remains contained in the cup of the striker. Of course safety glasses should be worn with these rifles as they should be with ALL.

Fwiw...I have a number of plunger rifles (mostly MK-85's). In almost 25yrs shooting them, I've never had an issue with caps coming apart or flying out at all. In fact, most times after firing they end up stuck in the face of the hammer. I just re-cock the hammer, roll the rifle over and tap on the stock...and the spent #11 cap falls out.

I could see where its possible to potentially have an issue if you used real heavy loads... or BH209 (which is not recommended). The heavy loads can force the plunger back and can even re-cock the rifle is what some have reported. I've never had that happen, but the most I've ever used was 110gr, and my goto loads are often less than that. I have shot some heavy conicals a few times with about 80gr powder, no issue there either.

Just my personal observations. (off topic I know, sorry Dutch)

Dutch

Here's something else to consider.......

If you are in-need of maximum powder charges to tighten shot groups and then notice that recoil with the heavier powder charges are not there, you are losing energy/gas around that bullet.

Consider two things. A tighter sabot and either a wad behind that plastic sabot cup, or 25 grains of yellow cornmeal down the bore, right after you load the powder.

I guarantee you that you will no longer need 130 grains and you will notice a recoil increase difference..... just like you're supposed to.

I used 777 powder for about 10 years. I know all about that stuff..... well, FF and FFF anyways. Never used pellets.

Ditto on what Mike an Art said above! I have shot T/C and White plunger rifles for years with no problems of flying debris from caps and have never had a gun recock itself! I do wear glasses so the eyes are protected always! I'd like to see those video's myself....