The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

My reply was directed at Dark Skies not you, I should have quoted him.

There has been much discussion about tripple 7 before you joined.

Start you own threads and will be happy to contribute, it is this one I am done with.

dromia wrote:You don't have to believe me, it is your hands and face, worse still it might be someone elses.

Twist the "logic" any way you want but that is not what it says.

I don't know how many times on here I have warned about Tripple 7's propensity to dangerously pressure spike when loaded outwith the data, but as I obviously cannot be believed I will leave it to you to do as you will. Last time I bother offering you advice.

As I said in an earlier post, despite seeing a drop in volume with a flick of the measuring tube, down to 25 grains, I did go to the lower limit / level / recommended / specified lower load with no perceptible change.

So which is the accurate way to measure? Fill up the tube to 20 or 25 grains and leave it at that? Accept as gospel the readings and ignore that the slightest knock on the tube causes the powder to settle significantly?

I note with powder flasks the tube seems to be thicker which would allow better settling when upending to fill. Are they more accurate?

The loads given by Hodgdon are the only two loads that are recommended by Hodgdon, one of 20gn with a lubed wad and one of 25gn, by volume.

777 can do strange things and give pressure spikes outside of these loads. 777 was designed as a high energy BP substitute for use with modern, in-line muzzle loaders which were in turn designed to advantage of the extended hunting seasons in the US for "primative weapons". Further uses gave since been researched by Hodgdon and as Adam has stated, anything outside of these parameters is not sanctioned by Hodgdon and you do so at your own risk.

It is not very good at all in revolvers. It is suspected that it has become popular in the U.K. Because it is a doddle to clean up and nothing more. You will not get the best from your revolvers using it.

There are other BP substitutes manufactured, by the likes of Alliant, but Edgar's won't bring them in as they will be a direct competitor for their other imports, Pyrodex and Triple 7. And if you have to use a substitute, Pyrodex is far better in latitude of loading and will produce better accuracy, as my findings go...

Powder measures are so that they are calibrated to take the space of the measure as the measure is filled. Tapping, scraping, flicking all moves grains around and fills the air space in between the grains. In effect you are compressing the load. Fill the measure and that's it.

It would seem from the reply quoted in the other thread that Hodgdon are now stating that you can use loads in between the two stated ones. I guess this trumps what others, including me, have said.
As I stated in an earlier post, Hodgdon used to have warnings about deviating from any of their stated Triple-7 loads, but these warnings have been removed.
I hope you find a load that works reliably

Donald

Sim G wrote:Powder measures are so that they are calibrated to take the space of the measure as the measure is filled. Tapping, scraping, flicking all moves grains around and fills the air space in between the grains. In effect you are compressing the load. Fill the measure and that's it.

Ta for clarifying this.

MrD wrote:It would seem from the reply quoted in the other thread that Hodgdon are now stating that you can use loads in between the two stated ones. I guess this trumps what others, including me, have said.
As I stated in an earlier post, Hodgdon used to have warnings about deviating from any of their stated Triple-7 loads, but these warnings have been removed.
I hope you find a load that works reliably

Donald

It makes sense. There was no logic in the lower figure being safe but a few grains over made it unsafe until you reached the higher figure when it became safe again - unless you were a few granules under the load. I suspect they built in a few grains on top of that as a safety measure too - to allow for disparity of accuracy between measures AND 'experiments'. :)

In any event I'm going to the 20 grains X volume because it's a nice round number, the results were unchanged from the 25 grains - so I'm saving 5 grains per shot in powder.

I'm waiting on some .457 balls to try (as per my findings a few posts back).
I will shoot these without changing any other aspects of the load to see how matters improve.

I'm also making my own lubed wads. Slightly thicker than the store bought ones. I'm planning on popping a couple in to act as a filler to raise the ball closer to the mouth of the cylinder. If this improves things then hoorah. If not then at least I'll know for sure.

I'm also going to give Pyrodex pellets a go - sometime when I have the range to myself. and won't hack anyone off.

Dark Skies wrote:

Sim G wrote:Powder measures are so that they are calibrated to take the space of the measure as the measure is filled. Tapping, scraping, flicking all moves grains around and fills the air space in between the grains. In effect you are compressing the load. Fill the measure and that's it.

Ta for clarifying this.

MrD wrote:It would seem from the reply quoted in the other thread that Hodgdon are now stating that you can use loads in between the two stated ones. I guess this trumps what others, including me, have said.
As I stated in an earlier post, Hodgdon used to have warnings about deviating from any of their stated Triple-7 loads, but these warnings have been removed.
I hope you find a load that works reliably

Donald

It makes sense. There was no logic in the lower figure being safe but a few grains over made it unsafe until you reached the higher figure when it became safe again - unless you were a few granules under the load. I suspect they built in a few grains on top of that as a safety measure too - to allow for disparity of accuracy between measures AND 'experiments'. :)

In any event I'm going to the 20 grains X volume because it's a nice round number, the results were unchanged from the 25 grains - so I'm saving 5 grains per shot in powder.

I'm waiting on some .457 balls to try (as per my findings a few posts back).
I will shoot these without changing any other aspects of the load to see how matters improve.

I'm also making my own lubed wads. Slightly thicker than the store bought ones. I'm planning on popping a couple in to act as a filler to raise the ball closer to the mouth of the cylinder. If this improves things then hoorah. If not then at least I'll know for sure.

I'm also going to give Pyrodex pellets a go - sometime when I have the range to myself. and won't hack anyone off.

I'm willing to bet £20 that it's not a load issue..........

tackb wrote:

Dark Skies wrote:
I'm willing to bet £20 that it's not a load issue..........

If it is I am willing to retrospectively claim my £20 and say we had a bet all along. :)

Low blow...

Dark Skies wrote:

tackb wrote:

Dark Skies wrote:
I'm willing to bet £20 that it's not a load issue..........

If it is I am willing to retrospectively claim my £20 and say we had a bet all along. :)

Are you willing to pay up if it isn't though ?