Goex vs Schuezten

[HardBall]

I'm down to my last can of Goex 3F with only a partial can of Goex 2F, but have more ordered, however, I still have plenty of Schuezten 2F that I'd like to use as a backup for when I run out of Goex.  I've always found Goex 2F to work just as well as Goex 3F as long as you upped the charge a bit to get equal accuracy and velocity of a particular 3F load.  Schuetzen, as least the batch lot dated 2003, seems to foul much more than Goex.... I had heard that Schuetzen fouled less?

Comparing Schuetzen 2F to Goex 2F, at 75grs, with a .440" ball and 'ticking patch lubed with moose milk, I can load and shoot Goex over and over- no problem.  With Schuetzen I get one shot before loading gets tough.  Has anyone found that Schuetzen likes a different lube compared to Goex?  I'm in Louisiana and maybe Schuetzen fouls more in a hot humid area?

I guess I thought BP was BP but my first foray into powders other than Goex hasn't been very successful.

[Bull Shannon]

I found no difference in the amount of fouling between using 2f & 3f Goex, but did notice that the POI changed.  I just lowered the charge from 85 grains of 2f to 80 grains of 3f.  Now, both granulations were made by Goex, however the 3f came from Jacks's powder keg which gets their powder from Goex but the can is labeled by Jack's.  The difference is that Goex does not use a graphite coating on the powder they produce for Jack's.  I do notice an slight increase in the amount of powder fouling I get when the humidity goes up here in South Texas but I normally swab the bore between shots when at the range or shooting a match.  You might try Jack's powder; http://www.jackspowderkeg.com/ but there's a 5 pound minimum, perhaps a friend could let you try some.  We ordered a 25 pound case through or club but customer service was not good so we're going back to ordering through Powder Inc.

[mjm46@bellsouth.net]

The way I understand it fffg for example the g indicates graphite in the powder as a coating. Keeps it from sticking together. Jacks powder keg also has a reenactor grade powder that may be what you're using, don't know. But my goex from Jacks powder keg is in a Goex can with fffg on all the cans. I didn't buy the reenactor grade.

[Daryl]

I've never used Sheutzen powder, but have used GOEX, GOX, Curtis and Harveys - we useed to call it Hartless and Scurvey's, Meteor, ICI, Dupont and several others and Have never had fouling build up - I find this subject quite interesting.

I do use a fairly tight ball and patch combination that cleans as you load the next round, then when fired, leaves that shot's fouling soft for the next loading. There is never more than one shot's fouling in the bore and it is soft. If the fouling is hard and crusty, there are a couple main causes, not enough lube/solvent or too thin a patch for the ball being used.

I did not think any black powder is graphited these days. Tumbling in the drums is what gives the powder a glazed, shiny finish.

[heinz]

Daryl, It has been a long time since I heard "Heartless and Scurvey"  I traded for a lot of neat little items in that time period because I had 5 pounds of DuPont 4f :-)

[Roger Fisher]

I found that using same charge of Schuetzen as Goex 3 f my old rifle shot 2 inches low at 55 yds I'm sticking with goex (or Swiss).  I'm told that Schuetzen has less oomph and I believe it. 

[HardBall]

I find this subject quite interesting.

As do I...  I may have several variable working against me as this rifle has different bore dimensions than I am accustomed to.  My bore has .445" lands and .475" round bottom grooves.  While viewing the muzzle it looks almost hexagonal with six lands and grooves.  I've heard that TVM typically uses Long Hammock barrels but I'm not sure if this is, indeed, the maker of my barrel?

I simply cannot generate enough spit for continuous loading with .016" to .018" 'ticking in this barrel but when these same patches are generously soaked in Winchester Sutler's Moose Milk (which I'm almost out of), I can shoot and load easily with either 2F or 3F Goex and lighter charges of Schuetzen with a .440" ball.  60~75gr of Schuetzen 2F, however, starts to give me problems.  Occasionally I get weird chrono readings with Schuetzen or an occasional FTF, requiring a 2nd CCI std #11 cap (regular, non-magnum cap).  I have not had the FTF issue with the hotter Remington #11 caps but haven't shot enough of the Schuetzen/Rem #11 combo to see if that completely solves the issue.

I switched to some .020" cotton duct lubed with the same Moose Milk but Schuetzen 2F still fouled badly with 75gr and a .440" ball but loading was rather stiff, I suspect because of the tight land-to-land dimensions of my barrel when using a .440" ball.

I don't have any .445" balls to try with the 'ticking and since a .440" ball with any lot of 'ticking that I have, measuring from .016" to .019", loads so easily over and over again with Goex, and to a similar extant with lighter, plinking charges of Schuetzen, I'm hesitant to try the bore sized .445" balls.

My plan, is to try some different lubes with the 2F Shuetzen, .440" and 'ticking combo such as what little LHV lube I have left and some Hoppe's 9 Plus that I have on the way.

I've also got two lots of Schuetzen 2F, the batch i'm using now, lot dated 2003, and another, unopened batch lot dated 2009.  I'll be interesting to see if the newer batch of Schuetzen gives me the same problems.  I understand that the newer batch of Schuetzen is milled longer and gives a little better velocities as the older batch is a bit weak.

[HardBall]

I found that using same charge of Schuetzen as Goex 3 f my old rifle shot 2 inches low at 55 yds I'm sticking with goex (or Swiss).  I'm told that Schuetzen has less oomph and I believe it. 

Good to know, Roger.  I wondered if Schuetzen's 3F was more comparable to Goex's 3F.  Schuetzen's 2F certainly offers less velocity than Goex's 2F, at least the batch dated 2003.

Did you notice any difference in the fouling of Schuetzen's 3F compared to Goex?

[Daryl]

With your .445 bore and it's rounded .015" rifling, the .440" ball and .020" should work OK, within reason, but with heavier, over 2,000fps loads, the pressure generated might demand a thicker patch yet, like a 10ounce denim which I measure at .0225".

Due to the depth of the rifling, I'd go with the thicker patch rather than a larger ball. A larger ball, ie: .445"(bore size) will make for more lead movement than might be easily accomplished due to a .020" required patch needed to fill that deep rifling.

.440"+ .020" + .020" = .480".  That shows .0025 compression in the bottom of the grooves, which should shoot well with moderate loads - and shoot cleanly. Only testing will prove it.

A suggestion on target shooting lubes. Some of us here use a Winter Winshield Washer Fluid without anything special in it, ie: no teflon, etc + a bit of oil to slow evapouration.  I'm sure alcohol, water and oil would work as well.  We then preplube our patches and carry them in a tin in the possibles bag - ( sucrets tin with the paint burned off).  After a shoot, I simply leave the tin's lid open to evapourate the lube from the patches so they don't rot or mould in the tin. Re-wet for the next shoot and carry on, carrying on.
I use 100% Neetsfoot oil - not the Neetsfoot Compound" - and about 6 ounces in a gallon of WWF.

[HardBall]

Daryl,

While working with this rifle, I imagined you would suggest thicker patching, hence my trial with .020" duct.  This material seems a bit more coarse or grippy in it's unwashed form than ticking though.  I think I'll cut a sheet of duct and wash it.  I imagine it will fluff up to at least .022" but may make it softer and allow more smooth loading than in it's .020" unwashed and stiff form.

Regarding the overall load of, say a .440" ball and about .016" ticking (since most will compress to that) in a .445" bore;  I think I get a small amount of swaging of the ball due to the tight bore- Wouldn't that take up some of the "slack" in the deep grooves? 

During one of my Schuetzen 2F misfires, which wouldn't fire after several caps, I blew out the ball with a CO2 discharger, recovering the ball I noticed the pronunced shape of my barrels round grooves. I think I remember seeing patching marks throughout it's circumference but dropped the ball and couldn't find it again.  Think I'll dry ball one and blow it out again and measure it.

One more thing, I worked the crown on this muzzle as best I could, following your suggestions from a previous post.  With such deep grooves I think it could stand a bit more work but the leads are now smooth, slightly rounded and "polished".  I also had to wrap some 00 steel wool around a smaller brush and "lap" the barrel a bit until it stopped cutting cleaning patches, this too I think, needs a bit more work near the breech at the bolster area as patches usually snag there and I have to get pliers to pull the ramrod.  When a patch snags there, it's usually torn just a little.

[bgf]

I tried some recently made  3F Graf's (relabeled Schuetzen) a while back and it was good enough that I bought some more.  For me it is cleaner than Goex and I don't think the "oomph" is always much different, in fact one lot of Goex seemed to be slower/lower, but there are lot to lot variations in all powders. One thing that may be causing you problems is that the fouling of the Graf's is even more attractive to water/humidity than that of Goex.  There may be a level of temp./humidity that causes problems -- I certainly thought I was seeing some of that the other day when ignition was markedly slower than usual and the vent had to be picked every time, whereas a week or so before it had been a string of non-issues, just X's (I get poetic license on the internet, don't I?) . 

Try the "2009" lot to see -- supposedly they made some improvements.

I don't know whether the (what I think) dates on my Graf's cans corresponds with your Schuetzen, but the first one I had was either 2007 or 2009 (in another building so I can't check right now) while the current one is 2011.

[HardBall]

One thing that may be causing you problems is that the fouling of the Graf's is even more attractive to water/humidity than that of Goex.  There may be a level of temp./humidity that causes problems -- I certainly thought I was seeing some of that the other day when ignition was markedly slower than usual and the vent had to be picked every time, whereas a week or so before it had been a string of non-issues, just X's (I get poetic license on the internet, don't I?) . 

Very interesting.  That may explain the slimier residue I was seeing with Schuetzen when I had to patch it out.  Perhaps a less watery lube would be in order?  I think I've got some precut-prelubed OxYoke ticking patches somewhere, I wonder how they would do?  The pre-lubed ones are certainly not "wet" feeling.

[Daryl]

Hardball, the sticking in the breech area is caused by 1 of perhaps 3 problems.
1/.,  is pits due to poor cleaning or the use of pyrodex - or both. That is normal with this powder, BTW.
2/.,  breech plug does not come to the end of the threads, leaving threads to catch and hold the patch
3/.,  The cavity in a patent breech having a larger hole than the groove diameter, which is usually or highly unlikely.

Problem #'s 1/. and 2/. are the usual culprits.  The steel wool or better yet, a Scoth Brite 'pad' tightly fitting and lubed, on a jag will help solve a pitting problem.

When I measure cloth, the measurements are given as: cloth between the tines of my calipers, the jaws tightly gripped between forefinger and thumb, squeezed about as hard as I can- they are compression measurements, not loose. The reason being a loose measurement is usless  in my opinion as the lands compress the cloth, so must I to get accurate measurements of cloth + ball to match and show some compression in the grooves.

Taylor's own .50 Rice barrel, with .016" rifling, shoots a ball that is .005" smaller than the bore, with a .020" patch quite well, but - he's only shooting up to 85gr.2F so far. We'll have to see if the accuracy stays with greater charges - some day.

My own .45 barrel likes anywhere from 65gr. to 75gr. 2F with a water-based lube, but if I use a slippery oil, like LHV, Shenedoah or Hoppe's, I have to use  85gr. 2F.  With 3f, it's 65gr. or 75gr., water or oil.

The 10gr. greater charge with oil for lube, duplicates the water lube's velocity.

In my .40 cal, it's 65gr. 2F with water, or 75gr. 2F with oil, or 55gr. 3F water or 65gr.  3F with oil.

In both these barrels, 2F gives closer shot to shot velocities, thus has the 'potential' for greater accuracy.

In neither barrel is there any difference in noticable fouling, 2F to 3F - the loading methods and force is identical - no difference is felt.  Contrary to what we've seen in print, both Taylor and I have found that 2f does not appear nor seem to  foul more than 3F when using our normal ball and patch combinations.

If switching powders does cause different fouling, something is wrong with the load and your accuracy is less than the gun is capable of as the powder is then building shot to shot and changing the internal and external ballistics shot to shot.  In all shooting, consistancy is of prime importance.

The only differences I've been able to ascertain, is that if the pressure gets high enough, 3f will foul more than 2f, due to gas cutting from the higher pressure. Going to an even tighter ball and patch combinaton has solved that problem.

Thus, you can actually get away with a looser combination with a 'weaker' powder, than with a stronger propellent.  Meaning, 2F might allow heavier charges than 3f due to the different pressure levels generated.

[HardBall]

Hardball, the sticking in the breech area is caused by 1 of perhaps 3 problems.
1/.,  is pits due to poor cleaning or the use of pyrodex - or both. That is normal with this powder, BTW.
2/.,  breech plug does not come to the end of the threads, leaving threads to catch and hold the patch
3/.,  The cavity in a patent breech having a larger hole than the groove diameter, which is usually or highly unlikely.

Problem #'s 1/. and 2/. are the usual culprits.  The steel wool or better yet, a Scoth Brite 'pad' tightly fitting and lubed, on a jag will help solve a pitting problem.

This rifle has not had Pyrodex or other substitute powder used by me, only Goex or Schuetzen BP.  I don't know if TVM test fired the rifle with a substitute powder, however.

My rifle has a drum and no patent breech, although, I suspect the drum does form a sort of anti-chamber?  My guess was that the drum does not extend all the way to flush with the bore, or to the grove depth rather, and my jag snags on this area?  ...Or, that the drum extends past the groove depth to flush with the lands? I can feel the ramrod supposedly bottom out, then with a bit more pressure it seems to seat another 1/4" or 3/8".

I started off smoothing this area with a scotch brite pad then switched to 00 steel wool as I was afraid the scotch brite pad was too abrasive.  The sctoch brite pad would seem to offer a better, lasting fit as it's more springy than steel wool.

When I measure cloth, the measurements are given as: cloth between the tines of my calipers, the jaws tightly gripped between forefinger and thumb, squeezed about as hard as I can- they are compression measurements, not loose.

I measure a spot, with the ruffled edges trimmed away, and use the flat part of the jaws on my caliper, not the sharp part of the jaws.  Is this what you do?  ...Or are you measuring with the sharp, beveled part of the jaws?

The only differences I've been able to ascertain, is that if the pressure gets high enough, 3f will foul more than 2f, due to gas cutting from the higher pressure. Going to an even tighter ball and patch combinaton has solved that problem.

The only difference in fouling that I've noticed, in the colder, dryer winter months, is with extended shooting with 3F Goex I've occasionally noticed a crud ring just forward of the ball.  This is only in the colder months and then only when I was using bore butter type lubes.  2F never seemed to do this, I supposed fouling was more evenly distributed and not so clumped up near the breech.

Thus, you can actually get away with a looser combination with a 'weaker' powder, than with a stronger propellent.  Meaning, 2F might allow heavier charges than 3f due to the different pressure levels generated.

 I've certainly noticed this with regards to patch integrity- heavy charges of 3F being tougher on patching than even heavier charges of 2F.

[Daryl]

You're definitely on the right path, Robert.  Tks for the call, btw.  The drum causing sticking of a patch is the 4th cause- HA! missed that one- a vent with a flinter also happens at times.

Measurement with the wide part of the tines is the way I do it as well.  Note that different makes and models of calipers give differing measurements in the same material. I always measure cloth dry.

Bore butter is not a good lube as it can build up in the grooves and hurt accuracy, I suspect, especially in square rifling.

I also suspect that like a ctg. gun, if the lube is too hard, the gun fouls in the breech, if not enough lube, it fouls at the muzzle and if fouling one end to the other, poor lube in a ctg. gun or too loose a combination in a ML.
Insufficient lube will also foul at the breech if when loading, the lube is used up and there is none to soften the fouling at the breech when the shot is fired.

With a ML, we know that most anything will act as a lubricant, but that the water based ones are usually best for accuracy shooting with the lightest powder charges - the slippery lubes demanding more powder to produce consistant pressures and velocities.

[HardBall]

Okay, I've got some things to do tonight.  I'll hit the breech with a scotch brite pad again and try to smooth the drum area a bit more, follow it up with 00 then 000 steel wool then maybe work a bit more on the crown to make it easier to load with the cotton duct that I'm going to wash, dry and re-measure with my calipers.

This weekend i'm going to try lubing with straight WW fluid and the thicker patching and see if Schuetzen 2F will behave.  I'm now thinking that the WSO that's in my moose milk mixtures is slowing evaporation and if Schuetzen likes to absorb moisture (moist burning) then maybe the oil is keeping things too wet- which might explain the slimy fouling.

[Daryl]

If you can produce enough of it to really wet the patch ie; dripping wet, you will find that for target shooting where the gun is not loaded for long periods of time, that spit is one of the, if not the best lube.

[HardBall]

Here's a couple of pictures of the muzzle of my rifle.  You can't really see the lands, or the crown for that matter, but it shows the almost hexagonal rifling.  The lands are more pronounced than the pictures would indicate but I could get them to show up well in a picture.

[Herb]

Your powder drum is too long and is sticking into the bore.  You won't be able to polish the end off.  It can be unscrewed and filed shorter so the cleaning jag won't hit it.

[Daryl]

Probably, or too short and the patch is grabbing in the threads on the side of the hole - but Herb is most likely correct.

[HardBall]

Last night I hit it again with a sctoch brite pad wrapped around a .22cal brush, then followed by wrapping 00 steel wool around a bit less scotch brite which was wrapped around the same brush- this worked well for keeping the 00 steel wool compressed into the barrel/grooves.  I ran out of time before I could finish up with some strokes with 000 or 0000 steel wool.  Still, after running cleaning patches wet with WD40 to clean out any crude from the smoothing effort, I could still feel the patched jag catching near the drum area, but they did not come out nicked or torn at all- even after several strokes.  I think I've got whatever burrs were there smoothed out.

I thought about removing the drum and measuring it to see if it's equal to the lands or groove depth but didn't have time.

One other thing I noticed was that the nipple screws, what seems like, too for down into the drum.  With the nipple fully seated into the drum there's only about 1/16" (just guessing) from the bottom of the nipple to the bottom of the drum when viewed through the cleanout screw.  I had one of those brass flash cups laying around so I installed it which shimmed up the nipple some.  Tonight I'll measure the diameter of the drum and wall thickness to get more precise measurements.

[Roger Fisher]

Last night I hit it again with a sctoch brite pad wrapped around a .22cal brush, then followed by wrapping 00 steel wool around a bit less scotch brite which was wrapped around the same brush- this worked well for keeping the 00 steel wool compressed into the barrel/grooves.  I ran out of time before I could finish up with some strokes with 000 or 0000 steel wool.  Still, after running cleaning patches wet with WD40 to clean out any crude from the smoothing effort, I could still feel the patched jag catching near the drum area, but they did not come out nicked or torn at all- even after several strokes.  I think I've got whatever burrs were there smoothed out.

I thought about removing the drum and measuring it to see if it's equal to the lands or groove depth but didn't have time.

One other thing I noticed was that the nipple screws, what seems like, too for down into the drum.  With the nipple fully seated into the drum there's only about 1/16" (just guessing) from the bottom of the nipple to the bottom of the drum when viewed through the cleanout screw.  I had one of those brass flash cups laying around so I installed it which shimmed up the nipple some.  Tonight I'll measure the diameter of the drum and wall thickness to get more precise measurements.

I suggest that if you are satisfied with the 'smoothness' of your jagged patch passing the drum threads go with it; but if not take the bull by the horns debreech her go in  with a rattail file (made safe on the end) and shape that drum end properly assuming it sticks in to the bore....   I personally do not like flash cups since in my experience the cup 'cupped' cap flash up into and against my forehead.(with glasses on of course)  but I do see them used by other shooters...