BH209 vs Triple 7

[bronko220002]

First off I'm putting this out there right now. I'm not a big fan of either but after watching this little video I'm having second thoughts. To be honest I shoot mostly BP, Pyrodex and Alliant Black MZ (which gives me the best accuracy in almost all my inlines)
You will see if you watch this short video comparing BH209, T7 and a couple other powders that a couple things pop out.
BH209 is likely the most consistent with the smallest std dev.
What I found most interesting is the velocity differences. With a 100 gr charge BH209 has a velocity of 1796 fps where T7 produced 1883 fps (this is an average of 5 shots). However with a 120 gr charge the speed difference is reversed with BH209 having 2036 fps while T7 producing 1913 fps! (again average of 5 shots)
I'm just surmising that the faster speed at the heavier charge is caused by the chemical composition and burning characteristics differences of the two powders.
So my thoughts are if you're deciding on what powder to choose from these two and you are a hunter and shoot 100-150 yards then T7 would likely be your best option. Especially if cost is a factor. The higher SD will not hurt you at those ranges for hunting. However if you're a competitive shooter and need consistency at 600, 800 and 1000 yards then BH209 is your best bet.
Here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=blackhorn+209+vs+pyrodex
I'm going to do something similar soon with BH209, T7 and Black MZ using 100 gr of each for 5 shots.

 

[snapbang]

Good info. Thanks Bronko

 

[sabotloader]

Bronco, the heavier the bullet the more efficient BH is.

This old but iy might show you what I am talking about. these were shot at approximately 3000 ft. elevation.

 

[ElDiablo]

Yep - no surprises - all well-known stuff. Links to that video have been posted here a number of times I believe.

To add a couple more (well known) factors to the decision making process you mention: smokiness, consistency in grains, ease of ignition, availability, corrosiveness and fouling.

The weight one gives each of these factors is a personal decision.

 

[MrTom]

There are too many variables in this that haven't shown me enough to even remotely consider T7 for hunting. Different guns of the same make and caliber can have barrels that are not equally tight amongst them. Barrel lengths are all over the place. Packing pressure can differ between persons. Actual air temp can affect things. Relative humidity can throw things off. Elevation can mess the comparison up. The list can go on.

Honestly, there are a ton of people who have full faith in BH209 [I am one of those] and many of those perhaps cannot afford it but still make sure they have it to keep doing what they enjoy doing. These same people see the benefits of BH clearly and are happy to see those that simply cannot afford BH or are too cheap to use it. The bottom line is simple....don't like something about BH, don't use it. Savvy individuals find ways to use BH for hunting and some other sub to play around with.

 

[ElDiablo]

Every time the question comes up, I wonder if we would be debating anything if BH209 and 777 cost the same….

 

[deermanok]

Lately, I've been using Triple 7 in a couple of my sidelocks. I'll get hang fires if I run it straight but with a small 10 grain v charge of black powder ahead of my T7, my guns go off instantly.
My little 45 caliber Traditions Deerhunter rifle with a prb, 10 grains of black and 60 to 65 grains of T7, 2f or 3f, will put a ball in about the same hole shot after shot.
Both of my 54's seem to shoot accurately with T7 as well. So, I guess it just depends on the individual gun.

 

[bronko220002]

There are too many variables in this that haven't shown me enough to even remotely consider T7 for hunting. Different guns of the same make and caliber can have barrels that are not equally tight amongst them. Barrel lengths are all over the place. Packing pressure can differ between persons. Actual air temp can affect things. Relative humidity can throw things off. Elevation can mess the comparison up. The list can go on.

Honestly, there are a ton of people who have full faith in BH209 [I am one of those] and many of those perhaps cannot afford it but still make sure they have it to keep doing what they enjoy doing. These same people see the benefits of BH clearly and are happy to see those that simply cannot afford BH or are too cheap to use it. The bottom line is simple....don't like something about BH, don't use it. Savvy individuals find ways to use BH for hunting and some other sub to play around with.

Well Tom I would agree with you if the tester used different rifles with different barrel lengths so you can throw that variable right out the window because it wasn't there. The only thing different in this entire test was the type of powder used. Bullets, volume, primers were all identical.
Midway has T7 for $34 a pound and BH209 for $74 for half pound. IMO for the average Joe shooting on weekends or for hunting where shots are <150 yards there is absolutely zero reason to buy BH209 for over four times the cost. Even if the BH209 shoots 1/2" tighter groups at 100 yards in my mind it just isn't worth it unless you're a competitive shooter and the difference of 1/2 MOA at 1000 (5") yards could me winning or losing. And for the swabbing between shots "claim to fame" who cares? The guy hunting who gets one shot? But if a person wants to waste his money more power to him.
Honestly, I have 2 canisters (10 oz ones) of BH209 that shoot the best out of only one of my 6 or 7 inlines but when its gone I won't be buying any more.

 

[MrTom]

My point is that it's only a problem powder for those who want to make it a problem. People that swear by it don't see the cost as an issue.

 

[ronlaughlin]

I have 2 canisters (10 oz ones) of BH209 that shoot the best out of only one of my 6 or 7 inlines but when its gone I won't be buying any more.

You haven't done your comparison yet of the three powders, but you have already made a decision that goes against one of them. It appears it is impossible for you to make an unbiased impartial comparison for the forum.

 

[snapbang]

For me, Im cheap. Im not a competitor. But I have killed about 4 deer a year for the last 35 years. Im estimating at least half with a PRB from my Hawken. Frankly Ive dumped all kinds of cheap black powder or substitutes down the barrel. All kill deer when I do my part.

 

[bronko220002]

You haven't done your comparison yet of the three powders, but you have already made a decision that goes against one of them. It appears it is impossible for you to make an unbiased impartial comparison for the forum.

No Ron that's not it. I'm still going to do the side by side comparison without any bias. The reason I'm going to stop using BH209, and you should know this as well as me, is the cost. My finances do not allow me to go out every week and shoot it at over $80 with tax. An 8 oz canister is only 3500 gr. Divide that by 77 (100 gr volume) and that's only 45 shots - or almost $1.80 a shot. Add a bullet and primer or cap to the mix and depending on what bullet you shoot you're approaching or over $4 a shot. For the increase in velocity by only a small margin the cost doesn't justify the means at least for me. And when only 1 of 7 rifles shoot it a little better than a less expensive powder again not worth it.
My test will be valid because I want to confirm the test linked above.
Not arguing with anyone that wants to use it. I'm saying that unless the price drops I won't buy any more.

 

[MrTom]

But if a person wants to waste his money more power to him.

Why is it a waste when someone wants to use a specific powder in his guns, for his own reasons, and it doesn't affect your pocketbook at all?

For the increase in velocity by only a small margin the cost doesn't justify the means at least for me.

But what makes another powder better than BH for someone else that has no problem with the cost. Obviously, the cost is your issue, but certainly not everyone's issue.

In addition to the cost, you seem to be basing a lot on velocity. Yes, it's a factor for some but I'd wager that the bulk of BH users who are using it to hunt could give a **** about velocity at the ranges they are shooting when hunting. It's a small number who are using muzzies that chance shots much over 200 yards with the vast majority well under that and velocity is moot. You need to expand your argument a bit. And if you are going to do testing to eliminate bias you need to understand that you'll need to use several different bullet designs and weights along with the different sabots [regular and crush rib], several different primers, several different charge levels of each powder and all of this in several guns with different barrel lengths. And that's on one given day so weather concerns are as near to identical as possible.

I, for the most part, enjoy the heck out of your posting Bronco. But you're stuck on this BH thing. If it is going to cost more than you want to spend, don't buy and use something that fits your budget, but damn, don't dun people who chose to use BH because they find favor in it. They don't see it as wasted money and remember, they use BH for their own reasons, not to gratify your needs. If BH doesn't fit in with your guns, fine, don't use it.

There are two sides to every coin. In this case your pet powder argument are on one side and your argument against BH is on the other. People that favor Bh are not going to change because you think its too expensive or because you think it burns slower than something else.

The only person on this site that has/is doing anything even remotely in line with scientific comparisons on anything is Mountain Monkey and his barrel research where he uses lots of different bullets at various weights as both bore riders and with sabots, at lots of different charge levels with different powders. To be unbiased in your powder quest, you'd have to engage in testing at MM's level at the very least and somewhere here you posted that money is an issue that keeps you from shooting at times.

There are two sides to every coin. In this case your pet powder argument are on one side and your argument against BH is on the other. People that favor Bh are not going to change because you think its too expensive or because you think it burns slower than something else.
Why not take a ride in your Ram and somewhere along the route throw this coin out the friggin window? You don't need it anymore.

 

[Cedarmtnqlguy]

I personally could never go back to Triple 7 or Pyrodex after using BH209. It has little to do with velocity.

1. I like that I don't have to swab between shots with BH209.
2. I like that I can clean it with oil-based solvents -- not water/water-based solvents.
3. I like that it is far more forgiving in the corrosion category.
4. It has better shelf life (less prone to absorb moisture out of the air).

For these reasons alone it is worth the cost to me. If 777 were far more accurate/consistent, then I would have to rethink my position.

 

[bronko220002]

Tom it seems you only read what you wanted to read from my post. Did you read my last sentence?
(Not arguing with anyone that wants to use it. I'm saying that unless the price drops I won't buy any more.)
I'm still going to do the test if only for my own curiosity. If you or anyone else can afford it and feels the slight edge will help them in hunting and it makes them more confident then have at it. From what the test above showed is that BH209 is the most consistent burning powder. That is a major factor for a competitive shooter because consistency is the difference between winning and losing a match. For Joe Hunter it really doesn't mean squat. How many posts on here have people complained about BH209? Yeah a lot of them issues were caused by incorrect BPs or dirty BPs but there were others. Personally I believe this is the 4th time I've been trying to get it to work for me. I started when I got my Accura V2 and the BH209 BP when you could buy a full pound for a competitive price. I couldn't get the accuracy I was getting with Pyrodex RS. I tried it again in a Knight but same thing. Poorer accuracy and more recoil even when reducing the charge. At that time the canisters were 10 oz. I even tried it a couple months ago with 350 gr bullets. (See my thread "Took the 700 out"). Ron said earlier in this thread that BH209 is better with heavier bullets. Well if you look at that thread there was quite a bit of difference in accuracy between BH209 and Black MZ.
My one and only rifle that shoots BH209 better than any other powder is my .45 Knight Mountaineeer and the difference isn't by much. Now I'm going to be using this rifle to try my hand at muzzleloader long range shooting. Started shooting long range with CF and its so much fun I want to try it with the muzzy. That being the case, if I can figure it, out I'm likely to stick with BH209 solely because of its consistency and nothing else.
Stay tuned for my test results next month.

 

[bronko220002]

I personally could never go back to Triple 7 or Pyrodex after using BH209. It has little to do with velocity.

1. I like that I don't have to swab between shots with BH209.
2. I like that I can clean it with oil-based solvents -- not water/water-based solvents.
3. I like that it is far more forgiving in the corrosion category.
4. It has better shelf life (less prone to absorb moisture out of the air).

For these reasons alone it is worth the cost to me. If 777 were far more accurate/consistent, then I would have to rethink my position.

And I won't argue it with you. That's your choice. I agree it cleans easier. In regard to corrosion that's another non-issue for me because I clean my guns as soon as I get home after every shooting session. Same for swabbing. I like consistency so I swab between every shot no matter what I'm using. As for shelf life I never had an issue with it and I have real black powder that is super hydroscopic that is 15-17 years old and is still as good as the day I bought it. And with Pyrodex, Black MZ and T7, I don't have it long enough to see any difference in shelf life issues.

In your last statement about accuracy what is your definition of far more accurate? 1/2"group difference at 100 yards, 1", what is your criteria. Now I realize that we all strive for perfection when it come to shooting. But are you a competitive shooter or are you like most of us that just go out on weekends and hunt with their muzzleloaders? I'm asking because if you shoot a 1" group with BH209 (consistently not just once in a blue moon) and a 2" group with T7 is that going to mean you're going to miss an animal at 100 or even 200 yards? My bet is no.
I'm not trying to persuade you or anyone else to stop using BH209 if that's what you want.
But I bet if we all stopped using it for a year the prices would probably drop to a more reasonable cost for all.

 

[Cedarmtnqlguy]

In your last statement about accuracy what is your definition of far more accurate? 1/2"group difference at 100 yards, 1", what is your criteria. Now I realize that we all strive for perfection when it come to shooting. But are you a competitive shooter or are you like most of us that just go out on weekends and hunt with their muzzleloaders? I'm asking because if you shoot a 1" group with BH209 (consistently not just once in a blue moon) and a 2" group with T7 is that going to mean you're going to miss an animal at 100 or even 200 yards? My bet is no.

Honestly, I'm sure I shoot far less than most of you. My shooting primarily revolves around hunting preparation/practice, which is one reason cost is of little concern.

In order for me to switch from BH209 to 777, I would have to see significant increase in accuracy. Example: 2.5" group vs 1" group at 100 yards. If accuracy and consistency were identical between the two subs, I would still take BH209 over 777 even with the increased cost.

That's just my preference.

 

[MrTom]

Like I stated, I do enjoy your posting and yes, I read the last sentence. And I understand completely how some guns just won't perform well using BH. Totally understand. That's just the nature of the beast. The cost argument is what gets me and the answer is simple: don't use. Just about every negative post on this site is about the cost and it's something that nobody on this site is going to change. Cedarmtnqlguy offers his side of the BH discussion with "In order for me to switch from BH209 to 777, I would have to see significant increase in accuracy. Example: 2.5" group vs 1" group at 100 yards. If accuracy and consistency were identical between the two subs, I would still take BH209 over 777 even with the increased cost". There are those who could care less about the cost if they have a need and BH fills it.

I'll be looking for the test shoot you have offered. I'm always game to see where different things lead. We're all in the same boat, just at different ends or sides.

 

[bronko220002]

Honestly, I'm sure I shoot far less than most of you. My shooting primarily revolves around hunting preparation/practice, which is one reason cost is of little concern.

In order for me to switch from BH209 to 777, I would have to see significant increase in accuracy. Example: 2.5" group vs 1" group at 100 yards. If accuracy and consistency were identical between the two subs, I would still take BH209 over 777 even with the increased cost.

That's just my preference.

And if that's your criteria and you don't shoot that much then a can of BH209 may last you an entire year or longer. And if you're happy with that then that's fine. Confidence in your equipment is essential.
When I'm back up in my PA home I try to get out twice a week weather and other factors permitting. Definitely once a week.
Using various powders I may go thru a total of a pound of powder every 2 weeks because when I go out I take 2, 3 or even 4 rifles at a time with combos of inlines and sidelocks. I'm pretty sure there are a couple guys in here that go through more than that especially when practicing for a match. At the rate I go through powder(s) I couldn't afford to spend $150 a month on powder.

 

[bronko220002]

OK guys let me set the record straight and why BH209 doesn't really get me all hot and bothered.
I purchased my first inline back in 2010 - a .50 cal CVA Accura V2. I was and still am a member of another hunting site that has a ML section and I joined this site back in 2016. Prior to joining here I read many post praising BH209 so I decided to give it a shot - literally. So I went and bought a canister of it and a BH209 BP for my Accura. I was shooting 100 gr of Prodex RS and a 300 gr XTPs with a CR sabot and getting 1 - 1.5 MOA accuracy. Now shooting that rifle with 80 gr of Black MZ and a 290 gr Barnes TEZ I consistently get sub-MOA accuracy. With BH209 I couldn't come close to that. I tried charges from 80 - 120 by V and even started to weigh out charges but no improvement. Same thing with a Knight MK85 (?). Now it was obvious there was an increase in velocity with BH209 because the recoil was substantially more. (before you say it no, recoil doesn't bother me. I've shot 460 Weatherbys, 458 WMs, 3" 12 ga slugs etc.)
So here's my take on it (Keep in mind this is for me only):
1 Velocity: Yes, higher than other subs (Positive)
2. Accuracy: I get better with other subs (Negative)
3. Fouling residue: Just as dirty as any other sub* (Negative)
4. Cleaning: Easier to clean with std gun products (Positive)
5. Swabbing between shots (N/A ) (I swab after each shot)
6. Recoil; More recoil (Negative)
7. Less corrosive: Yes (N/A )(I clean immediately)
8. Consistency: Yes (Positive)

But with all that being said I'm not throwing it under the bus just yet. I have a lot left and I'm going to keep trying it. I just may find the key to solving my accuracy issues.

*although there is just as much fouling the fouling is softer allowing for reloading without swabbing.