"What do you use the powder for? A great many shooters are happy if the gun goes 'bang' consistently."
Dan, I use it for target shooting in 2 .50cal. caplocks and a .62cal. flintlock trade gun for target shooting, if it can be called that, as well. Why don't you try some DB before you condemn it as being "old wine (Elephant, for ex.) in new bottles?" Btw, your 2nd sentence is insulting and I won't stand for such a characterization.
I have been though the powder thing frontwards backwards and sideways for DECADES about 4 of them now. I KNOW its just not possible to make a really GOOD powder CHEAP. It never was. Good powder ALWAYS costs more. Not liking cheap powder is not something I decided just for this discussion.
But then "good" is relevant. Compared to the C&H being imported at the time Lyman was doing their first BP Manual ANY TRUE propellant powder would have been miles ahead since the stuff was basically blasting powder and required HUGE charges to equal normal loads of Dupont/GOI/GOEX. Low quality ingredients, short mill times cause s-l-o-w burn rate and poor velocity performance. This was the C&H Lyman used.
But if we compare propellant powders to propellant powders then cheaper is still always a trade off. The best that can be hoped for in lower end powders is a "rifle grind" which is OK. Its cheaper to mill the powder for a shorter period of time. Musket grind I would not care for much. But a GOOD musket grind is probably going to be better than a sloppily made rifle grind powder. But they also are unlikely to use carefully burned charcoal from a really suitable wood. Its to much trouble. So they now have 2 second (or worse) best factors. Are they using PURE saltpeter? Even tiny amounts of residual sodium can cause real problems. This afflicted American made powder for probably decades in the late 20th century and only relatively recently was this fixed. Is it uniformly compressed to the uniform density? Is a significant percentage of the powder UNDER compressed because of the technology used? Good in the middle loose at the edges? Is it carefully polished or do they add graphite? Graphite has been the hallmark of powder making shortcuts for about 200+ years.
Short milling times slow burn rates and reduce velocity.
Carelessly burned charcoal can cause velocity and fouling problems. The creosote level is critical.
Impure saltpeter, sodium contamination, sucks up water from the air.
Inconsistent compression makes for some of the powder having soft easily damages grains that may fall apart when loaded or carried in a flask or horn.
Graphite increases fouling and can make cleaning more difficult since, while carbon, it will not burn with the rest of the carbon in the powder.
Having used pretty crappy powder for YEARS while shooting competition, sometimes throwing away 25% or more from every can as totally useless dust, having to do ALL the load development over again every time I bought powder. Not being able to get close to original ballistics etc etc etc. Its not fun...
My second choice after Swiss would be another of the European powders. Schuetzen or maybe KIK. I would certainly try GOEX, now.
For example I have a Nock breech (1787 patent IIRC) English style sporting rifle. I had some older Schuetzen that I tried in it. While I can shoot it literally all day with Swiss, the old lot of Schuetzen (newer stuff is supposed to be much better friends tell me) would block the passage to the antechamber within THREE SHOTS, causing misfires. BECAUSE IT PRODUCED LARGE FLAKES OF FOULING IN THE BORE that would then break loose from the bore wall and fall into the breech and block the powder passage.
So why would I risk low end powder? Even if it were as good as GOEX I have no interest in it if I can get Swiss
A round ball gun can be made to shoot pretty well with almost any BP they are very forgiving. But consistent accuracy requires consistent powder. The old time shooters, the serious ones, always used the best powder they could get. Many would screen it themselves to get uniform granule size. In reading old cartridge boxes from the 1870s (they sometimes gave reloading instructions) Dupont was not mentioned at all in many cases. There were a number of American makers that made better powder. But Dupont was making military powder, where the money REALLY was and did not much care. This carried over until the importing of superior powders changed the market somewhat. But they still have the military contracts. But the Military has not use for even propellant grade powders. I would point out that Goex is now under new management and the attitude of the past is not that of today SFAIK. In the 1970s it was "take it or leave it" and that was about how good the powder was for a long time.
The statement that "many shooters are happy if the gun goes bang" is simply a statement of fact and I am sure you know it to be true, it was not aimed at any particular person. The wide spread use of "re-enactor" type powders (Schuetzen "Re-enactor" powder, for example, has a grain size from .009, the size of really fine Null B Swiss priming powder, to .063 which is max for Swiss and Schuetzen FG and costs about 10-11 a pound by the case) and even fireworks powders confirms this. I have no idea what DB really is. But I suspect from what I have read its a middle of the road propellant powder, rifle grind and likely good components. If it works for you fine. But my experience tells me that better powders are just better. The fact that its not in production anymore makes it pretty useless from my point of view. I am about to order 25 pounds of Swiss. Probably 21 pounds of FFF and 4 pounds of Null B.
It is too easy in banging out thoughts on the computer to write things that are perceived as insults when face to face in conversation body language and inflection change the tone. Writing is a stiff, hard way to communicate and I tend to be too blunt at times I know and I have been attempting to be more diplomatic. Writing conveys the facts but it does not convey the meaning as it might be "seen" as spoken language. It was not intended as a personal insult.
Dan
