Cost of Powder - Amounts by VOLUME

[Dutch]

Re: Cost of Powder

The problem with this conversation is you're comparing BH 209 to regular Goex BP. You need to compare to Goex Olde Ensyford. The last time I bought it, it was $16lb. About half the cost of BH, and it's a full lb, and not 10oz like BH.

In the fps tests i've seen posted the Olde Enysford was equal, and sometimes faster than T7. You'll see T7 is very close to the power of BH. So, measured by volume you'll find BH and Olde Enysford are very close. BH may have 100fps more.

The best bang for the buck is Olde Enysford, and no other powder is even close. least of all BH 209. It has the worse bang for the buck.

Goex tried to match the power of Swiss when it was developed, but couldn't quite do it. They came very close, but considering it cost $10 less a lb than Swiss. It blows it away in the bang for the buck category.

BH 209 has many assets. Cost will never be one of them.

Pete,
Thanks for the info about OE vs T7. I have four plunger style rifles so BH is not an option (though I did try it once but that is another topic for another day). I have been using T7 for unite a few years. I don't seen to get the bad crud ring that some folks experience. I am sure the no. 11 caps I use are a factor. All that said I have really gotten interested I shooting black again. I have not been able to find it but a forum member advised where I can get it in my area. While I don't know from personal experience, many competitive shoot on this forum say that it is more consistent. Given that OE is close in velocity to T7, I will probably start at the same volumetric loads; 70 gr for conicals and 100 gr for sabots.

 

[GM54-120]

Re: Cost of Powder

So, measured by volume you'll find BH and Olde Enysford are very close.

Neither are sold by volume. I would love to see a test done comparing 300gr+ sabot loads and 400gr+ conical loads by weight.

Example, i can get around 2400fps with two different powders. One powder i only need 43grs and the other requires 56gr.

As far as Olde Eynsford, the reviews on Castboolits and The Highroad show anywhere from slightly slower than Swiss to slightly faster. One post showed 98gr of Swiss gave the nearly same fps as 88gr of OE in a BP cartridge. They claim the fouling is even lighter and softer than Swiss also.

Locally OE is around $17lb which would make it a excellent value especially in grains needed to achieve the desired fps.

 

[Muley Hunter]

Re: Cost of Powder

Dutch........The #11 cap is why you're not getting a bad crud ring with T7. It will be perfect with OE. You will have to swab more though. Even though OE is cleaner than regular Goex. It's still BP, and dirty.

 

[Muley Hunter]

Re: Cost of Powder

So, measured by volume you'll find BH and Olde Enysford are very close.

Neither are sold by volume. I would love to see a test done comparing 300gr+ sabot loads and 400gr+ conical loads by weight.

Example, i can get around 2400fps with two different powders. One powder i only need 43grs and the other requires 56gr.

As far as Olde Eynsford, the reviews on Castboolits and The Highroad show anywhere from slightly slower than Swiss to slightly faster. One post showed 98gr of Swiss gave the nearly same fps as 88gr of OE in a BP cartridge. They claim the fouling is even lighter and softer than Swiss also.

Now you're talking about smokeless?

 

[GM54-120]

Re: Cost of Powder

Im sorry the analogy escapes you but powder is powder and a dollar is a dollar. I used that example because i know exactly how much i used (by weight) and i know what fps MY rifle produced. Both were tested using my chrono on the same day with the same rifle.

The topic IS "Cost of Powder" is it not?

 

[Muley Hunter]

Re: Cost of Powder

It didn't escape me, but it's easier to get big swings in fps with smokeless.

We were talking about Swiss, T7, OE, and BH. No big swings with those powders.

 

[Squeeze]

Re: Cost of Powder

Ive experienced crud ring with real black in inlines with 209 ignition. I have discussed this on a few forums and others have had the same experience, albeit to a lesser degree than a typical se7en crud ring, but it can/will occur. The powder argument can go on forever, as there are many more contributing factors, such as different guns, ignitions, typical ranges and accuracy obtainable by each individual shooter/gun combo. its hard to compare any unlike circumstances across the board. Each individual must take the information available and make their own decision, pertaining to their own circumstances. I use several different powders in different guns for different reasons. and even those choices are subject to change under a new set of parameters.

 

[GM54-120]

Re: Cost of Powder

What do you consider "big"?

Ive personally seen over 50fps spreads from T7 and Pyrodex. My BH209 load fps spreads are often in the teens if shot the same day. My preferred NULA loads easily rival those spreads under the same conditions.

 

[Muley Hunter]

Re: Cost of Powder

What do you consider "big"?

Ive personally seen over 50fps spreads from T7 and Pyrodex. My BH209 load fps spreads are often in the teens if shot the same day. My preferred NULA loads easily rival those spreads under the same conditions.

I'm talking about big swings between the different powders to each other. Not the spread with the powder itself.

We're talking about cost. We can't talk about cost if the powders aren't close in power. You can, but that has to be figured in. The 4 powders I mentioned are close enough in power, that you can just look at the difference in cost.

OE is the hands down winner. T7 and Swiss are close. BH is in 4th place by quite a bit.

 

[Dutch]

Re: Cost of Powder

Dutch........The #11 cap is why you're not getting a bad crud ring with T7. It will be perfect with OE. You will have to swab more though. Even though OE is cleaner than regular Goex. It's still BP, and dirty.

Absolutely right! I don't mind the swabbing. I've been a 100% ML hunter for quite some time. Swabbing and cleaning are part of the fun! :lol:

 

[GM54-120]

Re: Cost of Powder

When range time is costing me $13/hr, i would rather be shooting than swabbing.

Sure i can shoot for free if i want to drive 90 miles each way. I wont have the nice 200 yard range or the nice covered benches though...at least not until this spring/summer.

 

[Muley Hunter]

Re: Cost of Powder

Yeah, we spend a lot on patches.

 

[52Bore]

Re: Cost of Powder

Well, I see this post has gone in a little different direction since I last checked in. I'll still stand by the charts for the cost of powder based on weight and how much you pay and the shooting cost associated with it - whether it's Swiss, Goex, Old Endsford, Dupont, etc.. Weight is weight. even with BH209.

As for those who speak Volume, I don't know why you even bother, since Volume is a measurement that cannot be accurately defined. i.e. There is not standard in which to base Volume measurement from - it's approximate. If there is, please tell me where it is located - like the 'master of time' for the world is only located in one place..

I have to agree, I stopped reading the guy who posted 'energetic' with respect to shooting, I've never heard such an adjective.. I thought to myself, here is another chair jockey who probably doesn't even shoot. The adjective was on my mind at church this morning when I thought my Methodist minster was 'energetic' about his sermon. Made me think of the guy who made the post and things like:
"You are ENERGETIC about BH209"
"You are ENERGETIC to talk about BH290 Volume characteristics, that I find meaningless."
"I was 100% more ENERGETIC about actually gathering a little volume data with different powders to see what the difference really was, so I ENERGETICALLY took the same manual adjustable measure that was set on 90 and weighed some of the different powders I have."
All kidding aside, I did learn a little after doing this:

 

[Muley Hunter]

Re: Cost of Powder

You're saying volume isn't a measurement?

 

[sabotloader]

Re: Cost of Powder

Gmail 54, I don't doubt what your saying, but still why are all you 209 guys so wrapped up in velocity?

I must admit I have not read all the posts in this thread, but I would like to provide and answer to the statement posted above. I really do prefer the best velocity with accuracy I can get with the bullet I am using - but I am a hunter not a paper shooter. Were I shooting targets for accuracy and competition I would make several changes versus my hunting load.

No one has yet to tell me an advantage of Shooting over 1600fps?

I am shooting a 40x230 grain brass bullet @ 2200 fps from a fast twist 45 - again for hunting and again I prefer the velocity-accuracy, trajectory, and the FPE that bullet offers across 200+ yards, but again this is in a hunting application.

Bestill, that 45-120 info is about right. I wondering what that velocity of your 209 loads is down range? How fast is it losing energy? Do you think you could shoot 15 shots in 45 minutes at 500 yards without anything other than a damp patch between shots? and hit anything........

With practice, I would bet that Bestill could and/or maybe he already does. While I do not shoot anywhere near the 500 yard mark with a ML - were I to do that - I too would seek out a freight train type bullet for that application.

The other thing I have not seen mentioned in this thread, jwhill, do you know that BH is a 'progressive burning' powder although that might not make any difference to you in your application.

I also should say while I have shot a lot of BH, it is not my powder of choice - it is to expensive for my shooting style especially when I still get a pound of T7 for $20.

What it comes down to is not everyone shoots the same thing the same style of for the same purpose. We all tend to do what works best for us the individual. Heck! we do not even use the same terms and descriptions but the terms I use make sense to me as an individual and if you would like an explanation ask me and I bet we can come to a mutual understanding.

 

[jwhill]

Re: Cost of Powder

Sabot, thank you for the response,

The other thing I have not seen mentioned in this thread, jwhill, do you know that BH is a 'progressive burning' powder although that might not make any difference to you in your application.

Blackhorn is a propellant, Black powder is an explosive, but then again someone said powder is powder....lol. I am trying to figure out why a lot of people think the higher velocity is worth the cost or ware and tear on your shoulder.

 

[Busta]

Re: Cost of Powder

The BP Substitute industry uses Volume for their standard measure. If you want to weigh your loads that is fine, but you better know the conversion first.

I don't have a problem weighing charges, I've weighed thousands of them. I make sure I know the conversion rate and maximum volumetric and weighed charges. 120 grains by volume, 84 grains by weight happen to be the maximum recommended ny the manufacturer for Blackhorn 209.

I've shot several cases of Blackhorn 209 since April 2008 in over 15 different rifles and a pistol with around 50 different breech plugs. This would include OEM, modified OEM, semi-custom, and custom rifles and breech plugs. In March of 2009 I spent 3 days with the guys in the ballistic lab at Western Powders. I just might know a little bit about it?

I never intended to discredit your chart or black powder. What I was trying to point out is that you cannot compare Blackhorn 209 to Black Powder based on just weight alone. It is not a direct substitute either by weight or volume.

There are new guys that come here for information. If they were to load their rifle with a 120 grain charge by weight of Black Powder, they might get a good kick out of it. If they were to think they could directly substitute Blackhorn 209 by weight to standard Black Powder it could likely be catastrophic.

The industry absolutely uses the volumetric measure as their standard safe measurement. Check Hodgdon Pyrodex, Triple Se7en, American Pioneer Powder, Shockey's Gold, Alliant Black MZ, Blackhorn 209. Blackhorn gives you the conversion multiplier to go from volume to weight, but for loose powders volume measurement is the industry standard for all BP Subs. As you have discovered, these powders do not all weigh the same as black powder.

 

[sabotloader]

Re: Cost of Powder

Sabot, thank you for the response,

The other thing I have not seen mentioned in this thread, jwhill, do you know that BH is a 'progressive burning' powder although that might not make any difference to you in your application.

Blackhorn is a propellant, Black powder is an explosive, but then again someone said powder is powder....lol. I am trying to figure out why a lot of people think the higher velocity is worth the cost or ware and tear on your shoulder.

Well actually I would indicate to you that BH has less felt recoil than the other subs shot with equal amount if powder. As I am sure you know the weight of the rifle, the weight of the projectile, and even the design of the stock probably have more to do with recoil than does the propellant.

I use T7 powder and lighter bullets than you do for sure and for myself recoil especially hunting is a non-factor. Now I would say if I were bench shooting and shooting 120 grains (volume) of T7 with a Bull Shop .504x460 grain bullet - I guarantee I would probably feel that on a bench. But then again it is nothing compared to a Turkey load and a light Remington 870 shotgun.

Shooting 120 grains with a 300 to 350 weight bullet does not seem to be a factor - more of a factor for me is the velocity, trajectory and the FPE along a 200+ yard shot. Again for hunting purposes.

I will also say that either way a 90 grain load of T7 a 460 grain Bull Shop and 120 grain load of T7 with a 300 grain Bloodline will harvest an Elk at 200 yards equally well - but the 300 will get there faster and flatter. The + factor would be the even longer yardage shot where the external factors will effect the flight of the 300 grain bullet far more as it looses fps...

I think Busta may have approached something we really need to be careful of... when we/I mention grains of powder in the ML world I am always talking by volume and I think that is the standard meaning by most ML shooters. But often a novice might assume we are talking about a weighed charges which could really cause a problem!

 

[Busta]

Re: Cost of Powder

Sabot, thank you for the response,

The other thing I have not seen mentioned in this thread, jwhill, do you know that BH is a 'progressive burning' powder although that might not make any difference to you in your application.

Blackhorn is a propellant, Black powder is an explosive, but then again someone said powder is powder....lol. I am trying to figure out why a lot of people think the higher velocity is worth the cost or ware and tear on your shoulder.

It's obvious you didn't get what I was trying to point out. Is not the higher velocity I was trying to convey, it was that you could use much less Blackhorn 209 by weight to achieve the same velocity you get with Black Powder. 40% less by weight, and that will give you several more loads than the original charts show. Black Powder and Blackhorn 209 are not direct conversion by weight or volume. I don't know how much simpler I can try to make that point? Cost per shot will also be 40% less than 52bores chart indicates, because you are using 40% less powder by weight to match the standard.

 

[jwhill]

Re: Cost of Powder

It's obvious you didn't get what I was trying to point out

I'll type slower,.....WE UNDERSTAND THAT.....you cant read, it cost more still, slice it how you want......