2F and 3F differences

[thecapgunkid]

Sunday, on a trail walk, my friends got into a 2F/3F discussion, and I missed part of it because I made the mistake of bringing a new, short Jaeger to the match without having it fully sighted in.

This guy is a .62 cal, and I know about 70 grains of 2F will group ( just not yet 100% as to where...)



My guns are all ,50, .54, and .58 and I generally load about five grains of 2F over the caliber.

If I switch over to 3F, what can I generally look for or expect?

If you coyotes supply good answers sarcasm will be warmly accepted...

[Daryl]

Good looking stubby rifle. HANDY HANDLER.
I don't have any rifles that shoot well with such a light-per-calibre powder charge.

[Maven]

Greg, I've often read that 3F is ~10 - 15% faster than 2F and loaded accordingly.  Btw, was the shoot you attended at High Woods?  Sorry to say, but since Covid appeared I "disappeared" from group activities, even when outdoors.

[Daryl]

I also found in the .69, that 2F GOEX produced higher vel. than 3F GOEX when using identical loads and load combinations. I assume this is "calibre "related". I do not know where the "switchover" occurs.
Of course a chronograph & some time testing is necessary.

[rich pierce]

Granulation is an interesting topic. I think if we measured charges by weight we’d see a little less variation in velocity. Finer powder weighs more per same volume. Less airspace.

[recurve]

If I use 2f I start 10 grains less with 3f (I like swiss) some rifles show a differance liking one over the other .3f seams to faul less for me



Here is the same rifle and load one is 3f the other 2f swiss 70grns

[MuskratMike]

Not really an answer to the question you asked. I shoot Goex 3F in everything I own from .32 up to and including .54 caliber. It does shoot with more velocity than 2F in my experience. 75 grains of 3F in my .54 shoots with the same velocity as 92 grains of Goex 2F. I don't experience any additional fouling than with 2F. Now this is just 1 persons opinion I would suggest finding a 2F load you like chronograph it then shoot the next load with the same charge of 3F. Good luck and have fun with it.

[Standing Bear]

I’m just the opposite.  FFg in everything pistols, .32 rifle to 20 ga smooth then FFFF in the pan. I couldn’t care less about 100 or even 300 fps between granulations. What shoots the best?  Shoot for group and adjust sights as needed. More or less fouling is also a non issue, a damp patch every shot or 5 depending on the day.

[thecapgunkid]

Thanks for the replies.

Here's how this guy groups at 25 yards on the smaller target on the sheet. first two low and the other four after adjustiing sight picture.

2F 70 grains of Goex  on a .60ball with an 020 patch.



If there's a problem at all with this rifle it is that it is getting awful dirty.  and it gave me a lot of trouble at the Highwoods match with constant swabbing.   D'ya think 3F or Scheutzen will make a difference with that?

[Daryl]

No wonder it gets dirty, if your measurements are correct.
A .600" ball is already .020" smaller than the bore. If the rifle
has rounded rifling, you are likely, with a .020" patch:
Bore----------- .620"
groove---------.016"
groove---------.016"
grv. to grv.-----.652"
-
ball--------------.600"
patch-----------.020"
patch-----------.020"
ball/patch------.640"

.652" - .640" = .012" divided by 2 = .006" per side, short of hitting the bottoms of the grooves.
Result is "dirty" shooting and accumulation of fouling in the bottom of the grooves.

If you went to at least a .610" ball, your problems will might disappear and with a .615" ball, they would be gone,
after you learned to load that combination, using a starter. You wouldn't have a really hard fit (compression) in the bottom of the grooves, but a weak fit is better than no fit.

IMHO- if a different powder produces more velocity, it is producing more energy, ie: pressure.
My findings, back in the 1970's and 80's was if a load produces more pressure, it certainly has the potential to produce more fouling as the higher the pressure, the
tighter the load has to be to prevent blow-by of the expanding super-hot gasses & flame.

[thecapgunkid]

 
Sorry, Daryl.  Forgot to mention that the buckeye was sold as .62 but is really closer to .61.  [

[oldtravler61]

  Not sure cap if this helps. But I shot clean through a buck with 65 grains of 3 f out of my 54. Buck was standing about 65 yards away. Hit him right behind the shoulder. When down with in 20 yards.   Oldtravler

[hanshi]

I use 3F in calibers from .32 to .62.  But if I come upon some 2F I'm still happy.  In the distant past I had to get whatever the LGS had in stock and often it was 2F.  Whatever load I shot with 3F I used the same charge of 2F.  In those halcyon days I didn't care which one I poured down the bore as long as it went "BANG".  But then I've always been picky like that. 

[mgbruch]

I shoot fffg in my .50, my .58, and my 24 gauge trade gun; and they all shoot good with it.

Honestly, with that short of barrel, I don't think it's going to matter much.  Shoot what groups the best.

[Daryl]

Honestly, with that short of barrel, I don't think it's going to matter much.  Shoot what groups the best.

Exactly. You can work up accuracy loads for that rifle with ANY granulation of powder, 1F, 2F or 3F and it doesn't matter if LESS powder than that will shoot through a buck. What matters
is having the accuracy & ability to hit him exactly where you want to hit him at whatever range he happens to be, as long as you have the power that is necessary for an ethical kill.
If you hunt in an area that presents longer shots than 50yards, like 100 or 150, you will likely have to increase your powder charge somewhat to get the requisite accuracy at the longest expected range you are ethically capable of killing the game.  Accuracy at the longer round ball ranges also requires larger powder charges and as well as tighter fitting loads than some
are comfortable at loading. If you can keep your shots in a pie plate at the range you need, from the hunting/shooting positions you will be using, you have the accuracy requisite. IMHO

[smylee grouch]

Pass through penetration on game with a lead round ball is sometimes easier with lower bullet speeds as the ball does not deform or mushroom as much as with higher speed loads. Bullet placement and type of tissue encountered will be a big factor in all this.  Lower bullet speed can be from a lighter load or increased range to target.

[alacran]

That is a good-looking Jaeger Capgun. How long is the barrel?
I'm sure it is loud. I would suggest 2f powder. Felt recoil is not as sharp as with 3f.
I am currently experimenting with a 25 inch barreled Jaeger in .61 caliber square rifling. No way I can get a .600 ball with anything bigger than .014 patching. I switched to .595 balls and can handle .018 bull denim patching.
I have been experimenting with 70 grains 2f to save shoulder and powder. I have shot 95 grains of 2f through it, and it is not unpleasant. I will work up a hunting load in the 100 to 120 grain range with it, once I work out some sighting bugs.
I have some 1f Dupont that I will also try just for grins.
Have more patch materials to try.

[thecapgunkid]

Thanks Alacran.

The barrel is 20" long.  There are three reasons for this;

1.  My main interest is the Lake George Front, 1740-58.  We know that Rangers were often assigned to protect hunters armed with..."rifle guns" ( from scant contemporary sources)

2. We know that Aldus Albrect got here to Pennsylvania around 1750, as a musical instrument maker, and it is thought that the first guns he made range in that 50-55 period. Conjecture had it that he would likely have made shorter, European style guns before unfolding his wings(?)

3. Daryl once wrote in a post that he had seen too many $800 kits turned into $500 dollar guns, and that pre formed and pre cut stocks were risky and undesirable to work with.   When my new Marshall stock turned in the jig by ( I think) about 5 degrees, the bit skipped over the tenion and into the bore at about 21", the narrowest part of the swamp.  Didn't even feel it after  measuring and re-measuring  three (3)times.  You can't imagine how bent out of shape I was over a rookie mistake like that.

I'll be dipped in vinegar if I am gonna let that go, so out comes all the USMC brainwashing I hated as an 18 year old but have profited from ever since about turning defeat into victory, initiative, ooh-rah and everything else. 

I thumbed through everything I could find ( including launching a post over in gun-building ) about the short rifles and realized that this bad boy fits in the car better than my beagle.



It shoots true enough that I can lock it in with a little work ( hence the powder question here), I hit four targets in a row toward the end of the frustrating trail walk, had enough guys admire it and re-inforced that I could at least get back my $800 + when I showed it to Greg over at Dixons.

It comes in at 7 pounds because there seems to be a whole tree in the stock architecture.  I am giving serious thought to installing a .58 cal barrel in the stock and maybe adding two inches because I don't really get along with the .61/.62 it features and 20" is a little clumsy to load on the trail and seems to get dirty fast with the Goex as opposed to Swiss...I think...

Mike Brooks has an excellent video on YouTube where he patches a stock at the NMLRA class, and putting a little wood between the current stock end and the bone nose cap will likely go well because I watched the vid.

 




It points and aims fast, has a good ignition and I am sure I would have done better in the match had I spent more time at home sighting it in.

If I have to, maybe I'll kidnap Daryl to help me get the load mucho perfecto, seen-yor Monsoor

(Didn't know I spoke Spanish, huh?)

[Daryl]

That is a neat gun indeed. If re-barreling it, I would opt for a black horn or ebony nose cap, with perhaps an engraved horn (si9milar to the rosette on an Elk or Moose horn-schnable allowing 21" or 22" bl. Would this 'work".

[thecapgunkid]

Poopies, Daryl, I never thought of ebony...maybe...just maybe...

It'll depend on how fast Barbie can get another Buckeye barrel in .58 that will drop in the stock.  Right now she is as strapped as everybody else when it comes to supply chain.

[Darkhorse]

Years ago when I did a lot of matches I used a .54 and only 2fg. I did well and shot some good groups. Later on I added a .40 to my stable and shot both 2f and 3f looking for a good load. I ended up shooting 3fg in both rifles. Hunting loads in the .54 are 70 to 80 grains 3fg. Both loads will shoot completely through a deer.
In both my rifles 3fg is the most accurate. To reach this conclusion I fired well over a thousand shots in both rifles, tested patches and patche thickness, and different lubes.
So if you want to know the difference you must shoot a lot of shots.
I can't argue with groups like this.

[Mike Brooks]

I noticed right off there are more f's on one can than the other.

[Frozen Run]

https://archive.org/details/mad_monk_bp_files/mad%20monk%20files%20complete/CTG/mode/2up

[Jeff Murray]

Several items can affect accuracy as noted above.  Larger caliber round balls require more energy to get them moving and continue accelerating the full length of the barrel.  3F has a slightly faster burn curve than 2F which might be an advantage for your short barrel.  As suggested above, chronograph work will tell you which granulation of powder, and what volume produce the most consistent velocity at the muzzle.  If your muzzle velocity varies much from shot to shot you will not get optimum accuracy.  I have found that 2F gave me the smallest deviation in velocity in my 58 caliber rifle.  Best bet is to find the load and powder that gives you the tightest group (produced by consistent velocity) at your average hunting range and go with that.  When you consider wind, lighting, and terrain, many of the variations produced by different options don't really affect the average offhand shooter at hunting ranges.  Not knowing the rifle definitely will.