Smokeless Powder Muzzleloading
An
Opinion by Randy Wakeman
In
the vast majority of states in this country, nitrocellulose based
smokeless powder is a legal propellant in muzzleloaders designed
for its use. Any state that investigates the matter honestly and
forthrightly will quickly come to the realization that if they allow
Pyrodex, American Pioneer, Triple Se7en, or flammable pellets or
sticks they are already allowing smokeless propellants as classified
by the United States Department of Transportation (Class 1.3 hazardous
materials).
Only marketing tactics
can suggest that Pyrodex, Triple Se7en, American Pioneer, and other
synthetic replacements are something OTHER than smokeless powder.
Pyrodex was long ago marketed as a "smokeless propellant
for muzzleloaders" right on every bottle. It was then,
and it is now. Additionally, the toxicity of Pyrodex is also documented.
Part of the raw materials that goes into its manufacture are the
bags of "dicyanamide". The large bright red warning labels
on all sides of the bags say "avoid heat or flame, when
heated to decomposition emits highly toxic fumes of cyanide".
The latest trend in muzzleloading marketing is "sulfurless
blackpowder replacements." Those include BlackMag3, American
Pioneer, and Hodgdon's Triple Se7en. They have absolutely nothing
chemically in common with blackpowder, they are not at all similar
in performance, and they are also not equivalent in weight. They
are provably, clearly, not blackpowder equivalents chemically,
by velocity, weight, residue, or by any rational basis. All are
used as reloading powders for modern cartridges and shotshells in
addition to muzzleloading use. Their "fuel base" can be
ascorbic acid, gluconic acid salts, and a variety of additives to
burn hotter, cleaner, and more efficiently than blackpowder.
It is bizarre to suggest
that these, the most recent propellants used in muzzleloading are
in any way "primitive" compared to nitrocellulose based
Accurate Arms 5744 that has been around for a lot longer-- and is
cleaner, safer to handle use, and store than any of these "OTHER"
far newer sulfurless propellants. Obviously, you need to load your
muzzleloader in accordance with the respective gun manufacturer's
rules-- with any of these propellants. To think that for
one Mexican minute that gluconic acid salts could possibly be ethically
given legislative preference over a recommended nitrocellulose based
propellant seems like a sick joke of some sort. Maybe some one had
a bad experience with Ping-Pong balls (nitrocellulose) or
film (nitrocellulose) as a child? Muzzleloading is more popular
than ever, and there is only one reason these silly attitudes while
dwindling, still persist.
If anyone has any doubt
about the purpose of Triple Seven, here's a direct quote from the
Hodgdon website that makes it quite clear:
"Q.
If I use equal volumes of blackpowder and Triple Seven, will there
be a difference in performance?
A.
Triple Seven is a high energy propellant designed to provide the
highest velocity possible out of modern muzzleloading rifles. Triple
Seven will provide the shooter with higher velocity, flatter trajectory
and more down range energy when compared to all other muzzleloading
propellants. See Loading Notes for more information."
That should end the
"blackpowder equivalent theory," in the words of Hodgdon
Powder Company: "HIGHEST VELOCITY POSSIBLE."
When compared to "ALL OTHER MUZZLELOADING PROPELLANTS".
It is right on the Hodgdon Triple Se7en "FAQ" page. Folks
might get a little confused at the reports that "Triple Se7en
is hopped up with a little Nitro." Well, that is the case
according to the United State's most respected forensic lab dealing
with bomb residue identification. The lab analyzed Triple Se7en,
and found what other chemists already had suspected: sodium dinitrobenzoate
sulfonate. To ship sodium dinitrobenzoate sulfonate as a dry powder
you must ship it as an explosive. It is sensitive to impact and
friction. Made into a paste with water, 20% water, it can then ship
as a flammable solid-- see the D.O.T. for details. It is well-documented
that the "dinitros" are used in low explosives while "trinitros"
are employed in high explosives. Likely you have already guessed
the most well-known of these, "TNT"-- or, trinitrotoluene.
It is all money and
marketing, for a substance in a bottle labeled as a "muzzleloading
propellant" can bring $25 or $30 a pound. Well more than double
what Accurate Arms 5744 can be had for (and similar propellants),
and you get double the amount of shots from a common propellant
like 5744. Here's an eye-opener: Triple Se7en pellets can cost upwards
of $25 a box of 100 pellets. For the popular "3 pellet loads,"
that is seventy-five cents (or more) per shot. You can find
Accurate Arms 5744 for $17 a pound. That is good for over 160 shots--
less than eleven cents a shot. This is one sweet deal for pellet
sellers-- they can get 700% more cash out of your pocket with every
shot in a special "muzzleloading propellant" labeled box
with every shot. If you guessing that pellets are cheap to make,
you are guessing correctly. And, if you are guessing that most of
that extra seventy cents a shot or more that it costs you is spelled
"profit"-- I believe you are on the right track again.
That prints a lot of "blackpowder replacement" or "the
muzzleloading propellant" labels. It is good marketing, it
is smart business, it is the American way. But, if you like to shoot,
if you enjoy practice, and you shoot a lot-- well, pellet burning
can empty your wallet faster than a Park Avenue hooker.
Poachers don't buy tags,
they don't use "recommended" equipment, and they
aren't all that concerned about seasons or safety. Buicks take more
deer than muzzleloading hunters in my area. The slaughter of complete
deer herds from chronic wasting disease problems, the piles of deer
taken for crop damage reasons across this country, and the insurance
companies that beg for more deer to be killed because of all the
deer / car collisions are just daily reality in many places.
It doesn't
take savvy Game Departments long to understand that there are better
things to do than worry about whether a tax-paying hunter is burning
a pile of synthetic pellets to fill his tag, or shoots cleaner,
safer, more economical nitrocellulose based propellants to accomplish
the same goal, at the same ranges. I'm proud that my home state
of Illinois has clearly, concisely changed their regulations this
year, effective 6/24/2005 to read:
3)
Only black powder or a "black powder substitute" such
as Pyrodex may be used. Modern smokeless powders (nitrocellulose-based)
are an approved blackpowder substitute only in muzzleloading firearms
that are specifically designed for their use.
It was only a year and
a half or so ago that neighboring state Indiana had a public discussion
of moving to outlaw smokeless powder, the results being recorded
at http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/about/deercomment.pdf
. The peculiar motivation for that little stunt would read a bit
like a novel, but it was figuratively and literally shot down in
a hurry. The link is placed here so those who wish to can read the
document in its entirety, and in context. I find Indiana particularly
significant, as that is where the modern muzzleloading era in the
United States was born, in 1939. One of the more reasoned comments
from this little discussion is quoted here:
I am writing regarding
the proposed ban on the use of smokeless powder muzzleloaders for
deer hunting here in Indiana. I am a graduate of Purdue, an honors
graduate of the Indiana Law Enforcement Academy, a Lieutenant on
the Madison County Sheriff's Dept., a certified firearms instructor,
and a SWAT member/trainer. I am telling you this because I want
you to know that I am educated and very familiar with firearms.
I have also been hunting since I was 13 years old, about 22 years.
I feel that I am qualified to speak about this issue because I have
hunted deer with a muzzleloader for years, and a smokeless muzzleloader
since 2000. I also am in a profession where I have had the opportunity
to investigate hunting "accidents."
My smokeless muzzleloader,
with the load I hunt with is 40 grains of 5744 with a 250 grain
bullet that kills deer very swiftly, and humanely. My best friend
shoots 150 grains of triple 7 and the same bullet. Both of our muzzleloaders
are sighted in up to 150 yards. Could mine shoot 200, probably.
Could his shoot 200, probably. I hunt strictly with my muzzleloader
because I value the accuracy and the ability to harvest a deer humanely
and limit the number of wounded animals, but what if I hunted with
a legal handgun. Lets say I'm shooting a 7mm Magi. in a bull barrel
pistol on November 15, 2003, when thousands and thousands of hunters
are in the Indiana woods. It is perfectly legal to shoot this pistol
utilizing a center-fire rifle cartridge and there is no talk of
banning it, that I can see, and no reason to either. I am sure the
IDNR would not allow the weapon to be used, especially during the
most heavily hunted portion of the Indiana deer season if it was
dangerous or had excessive range.
But if the proposed
ban becomes the rule, I will be unable to hunt with my smokeless
rifle, the safest production muzzleloader made. Many of the smokeless
powder weapons are only used by hunters during the muzzleloader
season, when relatively few hunters are in the woods, because they
use an auto-loading shotgun or handgun during firearms season. Which
brings me to my next point, excess projectile range contributes
to nearly no hunting accidents. I have never investigated a hunting
"accident" that occurred because of excess range. Yes,
hunting "accidents" occur but they are usually from negligent
handling of a firearm. The victim is usually the hunter himself
dropping a weapon or pulling a weapon into a tree when it fires
due to negligence. Another frequent type of hunting "accident"
is when a hunter mistakenly shoots another hunter moving through
the woods. These accidents could be long range, but usually aren't.
As you
probably know, an archer shot another archer in the leg here in
Indiana about three weeks ago.
One thing causes
"accidents", and it's not range of projectile, it is NEGLIGENCE.
I enjoy muzzleloading, modern muzzleloading. I have nothing against
primitive type muzzleloaders, I love to go to Friendship and watch
the competitors, but I don't have knowledge to shoot those rifles,
and quite frankly, don't want to clean up black powder rifles, that
is the main reason I went to smokeless. The sport of muzzleloading
is evolving rapidly. To single out smokeless powder when "black
powder substitutes" as they are loosely referred to are competing
directly with smokeless and can perform as well, or nearly as well.
Five years ago there was pyrodex, now there are many "black
powder substitutes" legal in Indiana. Who decides which of
these substitutes are legal? If the industry calls them a "black
powder substitute" is that good enough? There will be more
of these substitutes to come, will they all be legal as long as
they smoke, even when they outperform smokeless?
All of these
forms of gunpowder burn, producing a subsonic deflagration wave
rather than the supersonic detonation wave that high explosives
can produce. This reduces peak pressures in a gun, but makes it
less mining or blasting applications. However, black powder was,
for a few centuries, the only blasting agent available.
Historically
gunpowder has meant black powder, but modern references mean smokeless
powder when referring to small arms propellants, as it is so common.
Sulfurless blackpowder substitutes, a bit sadly, are typically defined
only by those who sell the stuff. The huge advantage of propellant
such as Accurate Arms has is that it is non-hygroscopic and non-corrosive.
Blackpowder fouling exhibits both of these poor properties
There
really isn't much mysterious about nitrocellulose lower smoke muzzleloading
in a rifle designed for it, whether you are shooting a Savage 10ML-II,
an SMI model, or a New Ultra Light Arms frontloader. The reason
most people choose the smokeless is that is doesn't stink, it isn't
messy, it is economical, it does not corrode your equipment, you
can see what you are shooting at, and you don't have to clean your
gun every time you shoot it. It is just plain more fun.
Postscript:
For
the by now hoary so-called modern vs. traditional debate, Tony Knight
summed things up well, in a recent interview published in the American
Rifleman:
"
I respect someone's choice to stay traditional, but the average
hunter wants to use the most modern equipment that's easy to use.
He does not have a lot of time to practice, so I think we are just
following the path that the compound bow set some 30 years ago.
I think we all ought to get together: I respect the man who wants
to be traditional, but he should also respect me for wanting to
be modern. What sets us [all muzzleloaders] apart, is the fact that
we have one shot and we are handloaders in the field. We are handicapped
with one shot when it comes to comparing us with general firearms.
Even an archer can shoot several arrows before we can get a second
shot ready to go. It's for that reason we have a separate season.
Bless the hearts of those traditionalists because they started the
[special muzzleloading] seasons, but now it's expanded, and to do
this you have to welcome everyone. We are following the same course
that compound bows did.You would be hard-pressed to find a hunting
household in this nation that does not have a compound bow in it.
I think the same thing for muzzleloading-- if we want it to grow,
we have to accept everything."
©
July, 2005 by Randy Wakeman
