Muzzleloader Max Loads.....maybe not what you think!

BUTCHER45

BUTCHER45

Member
I made the following post on a local/regional hunting forum I belong to, that was motivated by another thread on there about a muzzleloader that was said to have blown-up. I am continually amazed at the lack of understanding I see from all sorts of muzzleloader shooters (from "old-school", to "newbie") as to just what "maximum load of 150 grains" REALLY means.

I wanted to share this with you all, and hear some feedback on this issue. The first response I got was "Thank you.....would have never put that together!"




"I see a whole lot of confusion in the muzzleloading industry as to what constitutes a "maximum load of 150grains".

All powder measurements referred to in this post are measured by VOLUME, not weight. If you measure grains by weight, you must realize that it doesn't measure the same as measuring by volume at all with MOST substitutes. From my understanding, most substitutes weigh much LESS than BP given the same volume.

From my understanding, the term "150grain maximum load" is not being communicated well at all by the muzzleloading industry. It is to the point I see long-time muzzleloader regulars on online forums misinterpreting it ALL THE TIME when making recommendations to newbies. It makes for a lot of confusion to the new guy like me that just bought his first, and is looking online to see what others are doing with theirs, and/or recommending.

When in doubt, CALL THE COMPANY.

To my understanding, the muzzleloader industry as a whole is not making it clear enough that when they say the max load in their magnum-rated guns is 150 grains, that means a charge that is equivalent to 150 grains of Black Powder.

TO MY UNDERSTANDING (which is not a strong one in this scene), that means (in terms of max loads/pressure).

1) 110grains of FFF 777 is the equivalent of 150grains of Black Powder. (Note: for some reason, CVA says no FFF in their guns......?).

2) From Hodgdon's 777 load notes page "To duplicate a blackpowder load velocity using Triple Seven, you must decrease the powder charge by 15%. ". They say "velocity", but does this correlate to pressure the same way? My understanding is that this would make the max load of 777 2f used in a CVA muzzleloader to be ?120grains?

3. Haven't seen an official conversion chart as to the equivalency of BH209, to Black Powder, so I would have to operate under the assumption that Western Powders recommended max of 120 grains is most likely equivalent to 150grains of Black Powder. Would CVA intentionally recommend a maximum load for their magnum rated muzzleloaders, that exceeds the powder manufacturers recommendation by 30 grains?

DISCLAIMER: The following is to the best of my recollection.........don't take my word for this. I do not know what I am doing. Call CVA if you want to know for yourself.

I called CVA to clarify their "no sabot loads over 300grains no conicals over 400grains" rule, as I insist on using at least 440grains for conicals used on our Roosevelt Elk we have out here. After some back and forth, I was told that 440grainers would be OK in a CVA OptimaV2 or AccuraV2, so long as the charge did not exceed 100 grains EQUIVALENT to Black Powder. So I should be able to make a plenty reasonable elk load out of that.

So that would make the maximum charge by volume in a CVA muzzleloader with a 400+grain conical about 70(?)grains of FFF 777 (CVA says NO fff in their guns), 85grains of BH209/FF 777, or 100grains of Pyrodex (I didn't do all the math, so all those numbers could be wrong).

Just wanted people to look further into what "Magnum rated for 150grains" muzzleloaders actually means, and bring awareness to the confusion before someone messes up royally hurting themselves by loading 150grains of 777 or BH209 behind a heavy conical because they thought they knew it was OK from their research online, or are basing what they are doing on their past experience using lower-powered propellents/powders.

Again.........I could be wrong about everything in this post. You won't ever catch me sharing load data on a muzzleloader online, that is for sure.

So using that data (if it is correct), unless the shooter is shooting real black powder, or Pyrodex (which we don't know at this point), a 110grain charge is pretty close to maximum no matter what sub you use (other than Pyrodex) assuming a bullet weight of UNDER 400grains in a CVA (otherwise it is over max by at least %10!).

Almost every muzzleloader enthusiast I have ever seen online developing loads for bore-sized conicals in a .50cal, settled on between 70 and 90 grains of 777 (lower end for FFF, upper end for FF) due to heavy conicals not benefiting nearly as much from additional powder charges as the lighter bullets do, and the pressures/recoil going way, way up with the heavier conicals with little-to-any additional benefits.

Just some stuff to think about."
 
Last edited:
I use Hodgdon Pyrodex pistol power for all most of my guns. 80 in vol min will do the same as 100 in the rifle powder. I use a shot gun primer Winchester 209 that is a hot one. The other muzzleloader is a Savage ML10 I use IMR 4227 and XMP 5744 I liked the XMP 5744 the best This gun is good up to 150 yards easy.
 
Last edited:
Using real black powder the only way to blow up a modern fluid steel muzzle loader is to short start the load meaning the ball or bullet is not seated on the powder charge and has thus has an air space. I don't know about 777 because I only use real black powder but 80 grains of FFF (3F) is roughly equivalent to 100 grains of FF (2F) of black powder. It looks like 777 is similar to 3F powder. 3F powder does create slightly higher pressures than 2F but it will not go above 12,000 CUP unless the load is short started no matter how much powder you load into the gun. In The Gun Digest Black Powder Loading Manual they tried to blow up various black powder barrels with double and triple loads of 3F but could not even get a barrel to bulge unless the load was short started. They even used copper water pipe with the same results. They could not get copper pipe to blow up or bulge with 300 grains of 3F powder but when they short started the load it blew up. They did get barrels with normal loads to bulge and split just by short starting the load.

This is why many mark their ram rods so they will know when the bullet is fully seated on the charge.
 
There is a point of diminishing returns on velocity with black powder. On 50 caliber loads velocity is not much different with 100 grains of FF vs 140. Velocity does increase but not by much.

I have no experience with 777 but I do with Pyrodex. In my experience Black Powder is better than Pyrodex in every way. Pyrodex is no cleaner is less consistent with velocity and is more likely to misfire. It seems to attract moisture as well. The only disadvantage is there are so many regulations on black powder that you have to buy it in a rural area because by law they have to store it off premise.
 
The whole BP/BP-sub industry needs to get with it on safe,
maximum loads. I was a reloader prior to getting a BP rifle.
To my dismay, there was little to no information about which
bullet weights were safe with any powder charge. Years later,
after moving to Iowa where there is only a choice of shotgun
or ML, I seriously got back into ML's. Still, there was little
to no information. Also got frustrated with smoke obscuring
game....never lost any deer, but it was often just a guess which
way they went after the shot. Went to SML and never looked
back. There are charts, load info, pressures on Doug's msg
boards for anything smokeless and some on BH209. It wouldn't
take rocket science for the BP industry to do the same.
 
Shooters who move to black powder from a cartridge reloading experience seem to have a problem leaving those inapplicable "rules" behind. The real differences between BP and the subs is not all that significant.

The difference between one brand of ff BP and another brand of ff BP can easily be greater than the difference between one of those brands and one of the subs. On top of that, the difference between lots of the same brand can be significantly different. Not so with all brands, but Goex for one has has a history of inconsistency.

The variations don't lend to the creation of precise load data manuals as does modern smokeless. It really does fall to the firearms manufacturers to advise what is safe in their guns.

If Maker X says their guns are safe up to 150 grains of powder, you can reasonably expect that it is. So, if you want to shoot a 450 grain bullet on top of 150 grains of 777, go ahead as long as the Maker rates It for it. You will begin to question your decision after snapping a few caps on that load, but as long as you keep your bullets seated on the powder, extreme recoil will be the only real problem.

It never ceases to amaze me what some hunters think is needed to kill a deer or an elk.
 
Originally Posted By: Longcruise

If Maker X says their guns are safe up to 150 grains of powder, you can reasonably expect that it is.




I don't think so. The whole point is that the term "150 grains" is clear as mud.

150 grains of what? Goex? Or Triple 7?

I think this chart was originally made by a poster on other forums that goes by "Sabotloader".

No pellets in my gun.........nope.

 
Last edited:
You are correct in that the whole volume vs grains thing is misleading at best. Being a meticlious hand loader when I first got into muzzleloaders I really had to research, because like you said people will just say "100 grains" and they mean by volume and not actual weight.

I think CVA & other companies dont get too into detail because if you look on the box/manuel it'l say 150 max and show a picture of three 50gr pellets behind a sabot. I'm literally the only guy I know that shoots blackhorn loose powder, so I think they just assume 90% of guys are using pellets therefore they list 150gr max charge being 3 pellets.

That being said, 110gr of blackhorn is a screamer and is as hot as i'd likely want it. I've noticed 110 grains also provides the best accuracy with 230-250gr bullets, and when I tried to reduce the powder charge it had an effect on accuracy.

I have the accura v2 with the bergara barrel. If you end up finding a good load for that heavy 400gr bullet please report back.
 

I shoot 110grs of BH209 with a 350gr Hornady FP .458" bullet in a black Harvester Crush Rib sabot. BH lists 120grs as max. 110grs by volume, 77grs by weight is more than plenty for me.
 
Bearcat, I am with you. I have rarely found best accuracy at max and the extra pounding is not worth the extra velocity. My loads with BH 209 are either 100 or 110 grains by volume depending on the rifle. My black powder load was 90 grains of FFF in a Renegade with conicals.
 
Quote:I don't think so. The whole point is that the term "150 grains" is clear as mud.

150 grains of what? Goex? Or Triple 7?


I don't see any confusion there at all. I reviewed a bunch of manufacturers load instructions and did not find any ambiguity at all. At the worst, some of them advised to follow the recommendations of the powder manufacturer. That is no less than is advised with a newly purchased Remington or Winchester). Does that mean that they are as "clear as mud"? Others advised, often in bold print, that all loose powder is measured by volume.

Reviewing Load data from the manufacturer for T7, Pyrodex, BH209 and clear shot (or was it clean shot?), virtually all of them made it clear that loads are measured by volume.

So, where is the confusion? I'd guess that the only shooters who are confused are the ones who don't bother to read the instructions with their gun or the powder of choice.

Quote:No pellets in my gun.........nope.


Nor in mine, but it's just a practical choice. If you are loading for your 300 win mag or .223 do you want to have only three possible load choices? And, at that, with the top one of three pellets delivering recoil comparable to some of the old nitro express elephant guns
scared.gif


As far as the chart goes, well, my response is, "so what?". The people who made your rifle and put three pellets within the range of an acceptable load would seem to be as well informed of the strength and capacity of their guns as any maker of a modern smokeless gun. If there is a message in the graph, it is that there are a bunch of rifles out there built to handle pressures just under 40,000 psi!

And, the thing that is missing from the graph is what bullets were loaded and into what guns. Certainly if the creator of the graph was shooting 400 plus grain bullets over three pellets out of a gun for which the max recommended load is two pellets it should [(have been or be)] a matter of concern.

BTW, I am not a supporter of any gun maker, powder maker or of the concept of extreme loads in any ML. In fact, I'm more of a traditionally oriented guy who prefers sidelocks, real BP and round balls. If 40 years of hunting with muzzle loaders has taught me anything, it is that huge bullets and monstrous powder charges are not necessary.

I hunt deer, elk and antelope. My usual preference is for a .54 with ball over 70 to 90 grains of Scheutzen 3f. It has proved perfectly adequate in my guns as well as those of various people I have hunted with.

Last year I hunted only deer with ML and went with a little .50 with 24" barrel loaded with a .495 ball on top of 60 grains of 3f. I can't give you the ballistics for the load since I did not chrono it. I did however previously chrono it with 80 grains of 3f and it produced 1475 fps. So, I'd take a SWAG of 1325 to 1350 fps for the 60 grain load.

The deer in the pic below was taken with that load at 80 yards. The side you see here shows the exit wound. Deer hopped 20 yards and dropped. The lungs were quite an adequate mess!
IMG_20150914_183645815_zpsjgcua18t.jpg
 
Those pellets and other T7 loads are way above black powder pressures based on the graph posted. I would only use them in modern firearms designed for it. Most black powder rifle loads use 2F or 3F. 3F will make more pressure usually no more then 12,000 psi with a ball and 15,000 psi with a large conical.

My Lyman Great Plains Rifle .54 has black powder only printed on it. I would feel safe using Pyrodex but everyone I shoot with has found black powder to be superior. 80 grains of GOEX FFF with a .530 round ball is a stout load with significant kick. It is the max load for my gun based on the manual.
 
That's my whole point, the pressures on the graph are not related to any specific firearm or load combination. The manufacturers who are showing
three pellet loads are manufacturing modern rifles of modern materials.

What exactly are "black powder pressures"? What is recommended as max in your GPR has no relationship to what is max in a modern inline rifle.
 
BTW, You should recheck your manual. My Lyman manual recommends a max charge for a rounball of 120 grains of 2f and 100 grains of 3f.

If you ever do any parallel testing of various black powder brands and granulations you will be surprised at the results.
 
I still have my manual from 23+ years ago. It states 80 3F and 100 2F for a round ball. I'm sure it is wildly over conservative for such a strong gun. They may have revised the recommendations. I tried .530 Roundball, Hopps #9 black powder lube, .018 pillow ticking and 70, 80, 90 grains of GOEX FFF the first day I got the gun. Settled on 80 grains and have stuck with it. A dozen deer, some squirrels, one Turkey and a few competitions later it still shoots well.

I've watched many people at the range clean modern inlines. Seems to take them twice as long to clean the gun after shooting. I guess out west they have an advantage due to more range. I keep my shots 125 yards and closer.
 
Here is a link to the Lyman users guide.

Lyman bp user guide

It's in pdf, so you should be able to save it.

I don't disagree with you at all on your choice of loads. They are very similar to mine.

I have a jug of T7 that I acquired at the range a few years ago. A guy was there shooting his inline getting ready for hunting season. Based on the way he reared back with each shot he must have been shooting some pretty heavy loads. His 50 yard target had a 9 or 10 inch group on it. He packed up his gear and walked over to my table and put the T7 down and said "here, you can have this crap, it's useless".

I see a lot of that at my club in the month before ml season. some guys manage to get their modern ml guns to shoot, but most give up in disgust. I used to try to help them out, but too many of them did not want any help from an idiot that was shooting a sidelock and round balls.

The manufacturers build their guns up as being super long range sudden death rifles, but most shooters don't seem able to achieve those results.

One factor is that CO does not allow during the specific ML season the use of pellets, smokeless powder, sabots or optics. That puts those guns pretty much in the same class as a TC shooting maxiballs.

I enjoy competition too but mostly shoot a .45 for that purpose.
 
Interesting, Looks like they changed that part of the manual. Here is a scan from mine.

http://www.wildersmobile.com/web/patterns/lymanScan.jpg

My brothers step daughter has an inline. I could get it to shoot but like you say I have seen lots of in-lines at the range that do not shoot well. Her gun was very hard to clean. Usually my gun shoots 2" groups sometimes smaller when using a rest and sand bags on a calm day. At 50 yards they are typically touching.
 
Originally Posted By: LongcruiseQuote:I don't think so. The whole point is that the term "150 grains" is clear as mud.

150 grains of what? Goex? Or Triple 7?


I don't see any confusion there at all. I reviewed a bunch of manufacturers load instructions and did not find any ambiguity at all. At the worst, some of them advised to follow the recommendations of the powder manufacturer. That is no less than is advised with a newly purchased Remington or Winchester). Does that mean that they are as "clear as mud"? Others advised, often in bold print, that all loose powder is measured by volume.

Reviewing Load data from the manufacturer for T7, Pyrodex, BH209 and clear shot (or was it clean shot?), virtually all of them made it clear that loads are measured by volume.

So, where is the confusion? I'd guess that the only shooters who are confused are the ones who don't bother to read the instructions with their gun or the powder of choice.

Quote:No pellets in my gun.........nope.


Nor in mine, but it's just a practical choice. If you are loading for your 300 win mag or .223 do you want to have only three possible load choices? And, at that, with the top one of three pellets delivering recoil comparable to some of the old nitro express elephant guns
scared.gif


As far as the chart goes, well, my response is, "so what?". The people who made your rifle and put three pellets within the range of an acceptable load would seem to be as well informed of the strength and capacity of their guns as any maker of a modern smokeless gun. If there is a message in the graph, it is that there are a bunch of rifles out there built to handle pressures just under 40,000 psi!

And, the thing that is missing from the graph is what bullets were loaded and into what guns. Certainly if the creator of the graph was shooting 400 plus grain bullets over three pellets out of a gun for which the max recommended load is two pellets it should [(have been or be)] a matter of concern.

BTW, I am not a supporter of any gun maker, powder maker or of the concept of extreme loads in any ML. In fact, I'm more of a traditionally oriented guy who prefers sidelocks, real BP and round balls. If 40 years of hunting with muzzle loaders has taught me anything, it is that huge bullets and monstrous powder charges are not necessary.

I hunt deer, elk and antelope. My usual preference is for a .54 with ball over 70 to 90 grains of Scheutzen 3f. It has proved perfectly adequate in my guns as well as those of various people I have hunted with.

Last year I hunted only deer with ML and went with a little .50 with 24" barrel loaded with a .495 ball on top of 60 grains of 3f. I can't give you the ballistics for the load since I did not chrono it. I did however previously chrono it with 80 grains of 3f and it produced 1475 fps. So, I'd take a SWAG of 1325 to 1350 fps for the 60 grain load.

The deer in the pic below was taken with that load at 80 yards. The side you see here shows the exit wound. Deer hopped 20 yards and dropped. The lungs were quite an adequate mess!
IMG_20150914_183645815_zpsjgcua18t.jpg


Well the screenshot of Knights' instruction manual for 2014 said it was good for 150 grains and that was about it.

The current Knight catalog has expanded on this, and shows approved loads for approved bullet weights, along with the different powders, and combinations of the two.

The person that posted the old manual screenshot, did so in an effort to show that 150grains of BH209 was safe in that gun. I am almost positive he was well aware of Western Rivers max load warning, and has read it......he has been a regular at sharing info on muzzleloading forums for many years, and is even a moderator. Yet he thought 150 grains of BH209 in a Knight was OK until the new manual screenshot was posted in a reply.

So yea, not clear enough=clear as mud to me.

The point isn't what is needed to hunt/shoot. The point is what the manufacturers are saying their guns can handle in vague terms like "150 grains". I get the impression they haven't all spelled it out in black and white yet to the extent Knight has now done (changed for a reason, I imagine?).

Also, when it is said "If there is a message in the graph, it is that there are a bunch of rifles out there built to handle pressures just under 40,000 psi!"......that high reading came from pellets loaded against the manufacturers instructions (firm tamp cracking pellets). Aside from the other reasons I don't want to use pellets, I don't want to take the risk of raising pressures due to cracking pellets upon loading in the heat of the moment.

I will try to find out what loads were used for the graph.......seems relative, regardless.

 
Last edited:
Yes, the graph brings up more questions than answers.

I would interpret any manufacturers statement that their guns are rated to handle 150 grains that it would handle 150 of any of the powders available. Anything else would be irresponsible.
 
Originally Posted By: LongcruiseYes, the graph brings up more questions than answers.

I would interpret any manufacturers statement that their guns are rated to handle 150 grains that it would handle 150 of any of the powders available. Anything else would be irresponsible.



The newer manuals seem to be catching up to this now.....props to Traditions especially for their explanations of the different black powder subs, and how to do the math. This info is still absent from the advertising of most companies.

When CVA told me that I could use 100grains of black powder, or "black powder equivelant", I had to do my own research and math to determine what that means in terms of 2f 777, then contact them again to confirm what I had learned (which took some back-and-forth). In the case of 2f 777, the equivalent of 100grains of Black Powder amounts to 80-something grains I believe.
 
Back
Top