MORE SMOKE?

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

Actually, I had "read only" access to the Wire while incarcerated (once I got a portable brought in & they untied me from the bedrails).

 

Thought it best at the time to NOT REPLY while on meds...now y'all know what can happen.

 

You mean like the new 125 smokeless power factor?

[Capt. George Baylor SASS#24287L]

Gee, if I knew it would cause this moh commotion on the SASS Wire...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would have done it sooner.

 

BTW, I can't blame it on pain meds. I've done most of this recovery a cappella. I may be crazy, but it ain't drugs. Hope you all enjoyed it. I did put in enough clues in the original post that a true SASS rules nut would catch on that it was a hoax. Some did.

[Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life]

Gues some of us don't do the social media thing, so it'd be hard to "see" the clues!!!

[Pulp, SASS#28319]

Gee, if I knew it would cause this moh commotion on the SASS Wire...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would have done it sooner.

Good one Captain. We all need a little stirrin up from time to time. One thing about them new smoke standards though. I can always meet them with my Walkers. Might have to violate the 1000fps rule, but I can guarantee enough smoke.

[Nellie Blue #54399]

Gues some of us don't do the social media thing, so it'd be hard to "see" the clues!!!

 

Big Sage, there weren't any clues...he got even more replies than this thread did! ROFL

[Rafe Conager SASS #56958]

oh yes there were! I tried tellin em Capt.

1. Can't get 40 grns. of powder in a .45 colt case toped with a 200grn. bullet

2. Tex don't shoot .45s he shoots 44-40s

Rafe

[Hogleg Hunter]

Is there enough case capacity in any of the 32's to make minimum? If I remember correctly there was barely room in the .38 special case to get 15gr by volume with the bottom of a 158gr SWC touching the powder. I had wanted to use .38 long or short colt brass to make up my BP rounds but couldn't get enough powder in them to make minimum.

[Pulp, SASS#28319]

According to this link: http://www.realguns.com/Commentary/comar173.htm the .32H&R will hold 16 grains of water, the .327 Federal Mag will hold 19 grains of water. Since BP and water have close to the same specific gravity I'd guess, and it's just a guess, that the .327 Federal Mag would likely hold about 15-17 grains of BP and still have room to seat a bullet. The .32H&R would really be pushing it.

 

The .32-20 gives you a bit more room to play with, according to this link: http://kwk.us/cases.html

 

Obviously, none of these are going to create huge volumes of smoke compared to a fully loaded .44-40 or .45Colt. But they would still probably make the minimum standard. Just be prepared for a challenge if you choose to use them. Doesn't matter to me, I wouldn't challenge someone if they used a .22 short loaded with BP 'cause it just isn't that important to me what other folks are shooting.

 

BTW, I've never seen a challenge, but since I shoot Frontiersman instead of FC, I probably wouldn't ever see it if it did happen.

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

Powder weight varies by brand and batch so the standard isn't a flat 15 grains of BP, it is 1cc. 1cc of different brands of real BP won't necessarily weight 15 grains and none of the subs will "weigh" that amount. 1cc will fit into a .32 H&R case. Even more precisely the standard is the amount of smoke generated by 1cc of real BP. If a sub can produce the equivalent amount of smoke with less than 1cc, then it will pass the test.

 

"It is expected the blackpowder competitor shall contend with smoke obscured targets. To ensure this, all shotgun, revolver, and rifle powder charges must produce smoke at least equivalent to a baseline load of 15 grains by volume (1 cc) of ffg blackpowder."

[diablo slim]

Spreading false rumors on social media for ones own amusement is not the "COWBOY WAY " IMHO

[Edward R S Canby, SASS#59971]

Is there enough case capacity in any of the 32's to make minimum? If I remember correctly there was barely room in the .38 special case to get 15gr by volume with the bottom of a 158gr SWC touching the powder. I had wanted to use .38 long or short colt brass to make up my BP rounds but couldn't get enough powder in them to make minimum.

Try loading those small cases with APP. It's quite smokey - more so than genuine BP. My wife shoots APP in .32 H&R mag cases. She never gets complaints about the amount of smoke produced.

[Straight Arrow Hombre]

Spreading false rumors on social media for ones own amusement is not the "COWBOY WAY " IMHO

Tellin a tall tale to ones own friends doesn't fit the cowboy way? Realllllly.......?

[diablo slim]

When it has to do with rules and regulations of the game....Not so much....

[Snakebite]

The smoke standard works just fine. I've not heard of any suggested changes. We have enough problems without trying to fix something else that doesn't need fixing.

 

Snakebite

[diablo slim]

It was a joke Snakebite.....

Started by a board one arm Frontiersman.

[Capt. George Baylor SASS#24287L]

The following is not part of any hoax:

 

Edward R. S. Canby--I know your wife's 32s exceed the smoke standard. I've seen her shoot. I don't have any .32s, so I never did any smoke standard testing on .32s. And I still am not allowed to shoot. BUT I have a motor-drive Nikon and a tripod, and I'm still in ABQ. So, with your help, we could do a comparison test. I have plenty of .38 Special "Smoke Standard" rounds. If you could make some .32 H & R Mag loads with, say, APP 3f, 777 3f and 2f, Goex 2f & 3f, Pyrodex P, and Swiss 3f (I have any of those powders you don't have--I have omitted out of production powders and low production powders in order to make this workable), we could get together after the local match of your choice, hopefully with some black powder shooting witnesses and just see what does work.

 

I do know the smoke standard was made around .32 H & R Mags, so I know it's possible to make the smoke standard with them. Larsen never had any trouble. I haven't seen any below standard rounds fired in a match in a long time. I think everybody is trying to shoot legal. But this would give comfort to .32 H & R Mag shooters, some of whom have been subject to excessive scrutiny because they shoot .32s.

 

BTW Tex currently shoots 7.5" Ruger New Vaqueros in .45 Colt. He shoots .44-40 rifle loads in his '73. Those of us who shoot with him often know that he has occasionally loaded a .45 Colt into his rifle. He's very good at clearing that.

 

The above is not part of any hoax. You are free to go back to believing 10% of what you read in the SASS Wire.

[Edward R S Canby, SASS#59971]

The following is not part of any hoax:

 

Edward R. S. Canby--I know your wife's 32s exceed the smoke standard. I've seen her shoot. I don't have any .32s, so I never did any smoke standard testing on .32s. And I still am not allowed to shoot. BUT I have a motor-drive Nikon and a tripod, and I'm still in ABQ. So, with your help, we could do a comparison test. I have plenty of .38 Special "Smoke Standard" rounds. If you could make some .32 H & R Mag loads with, say, APP 3f, 777 3f and 2f, Goex 2f & 3f, Pyrodex P, and Swiss 3f (I have any of those powders you don't have--I have omitted out of production powders and low production powders in order to make this workable), we could get together after the local match of your choice, hopefully with some black powder shooting witnesses and just see what does work.

 

I do know the smoke standard was made around .32 H & R Mags, so I know it's possible to make the smoke standard with them. Larsen never had any trouble. I haven't seen any below standard rounds fired in a match in a long time. I think everybody is trying to shoot legal. But this would give comfort to .32 H & R Mag shooters, some of whom have been subject to excessive scrutiny because they shoot .32s.

 

BTW Tex currently shoots 7.5" Ruger New Vaqueros in .45 Colt. He shoots .44-40 rifle loads in his '73. Those of us who shoot with him often know that he has occasionally loaded a .45 Colt into his rifle. He's very good at clearing that.

 

The above is not part of any hoax. You are free to go back to believing 10% of what you read in the SASS Wire.

You are on for the .32 H&R mag smoke test. It will make a good Cowboy Chronicle Article. I will need a little Swiss 3F from you. I will load 777 2f out of respect for Hodgdon's loading instructions. Before a match is better than after a match since we need low wind conditions. (You know how hard the wind can blow in New Mexico.) A final request: I'd like Shirley Shooter (current regional LFC Champion) as one of the judges if she is available.

[Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L]

The following is not part of any hoax:

 

Edward R. S. Canby--I know your wife's 32s exceed the smoke standard. I've seen her shoot. I don't have any .32s, so I never did any smoke standard testing on .32s. And I still am not allowed to shoot. BUT I have a motor-drive Nikon and a tripod, and I'm still in ABQ. So, with your help, we could do a comparison test. I have plenty of .38 Special "Smoke Standard" rounds. If you could make some .32 H & R Mag loads with, say, APP 3f, 777 3f and 2f, Goex 2f & 3f, Pyrodex P, and Swiss 3f (I have any of those powders you don't have--I have omitted out of production powders and low production powders in order to make this workable), we could get together after the local match of your choice, hopefully with some black powder shooting witnesses and just see what does work.

 

I do know the smoke standard was made around .32 H & R Mags, so I know it's possible to make the smoke standard with them. Larsen never had any trouble. I haven't seen any below standard rounds fired in a match in a long time. I think everybody is trying to shoot legal. But this would give comfort to .32 H & R Mag shooters, some of whom have been subject to excessive scrutiny because they shoot .32s.

 

BTW Tex currently shoots 7.5" Ruger New Vaqueros in .45 Colt. He shoots .44-40 rifle loads in his '73. Those of us who shoot with him often know that he has occasionally loaded a .45 Colt into his rifle. He's very good at clearing that.

 

The above is not part of any hoax. You are free to go back to believing 10% of what you read in the SASS Wire.

 

That be a funn-y-un right thar!!

 

GG ~

[Billy Boots, # 20282 LTG-Regulator]

The following is not part of any hoax:

 

Edward R. S. Canby--I know your wife's 32s exceed the smoke standard. I've seen her shoot. I don't have any .32s, so I never did any smoke standard testing on .32s. And I still am not allowed to shoot. BUT I have a motor-drive Nikon and a tripod, and I'm still in ABQ. So, with your help, we could do a comparison test. I have plenty of .38 Special "Smoke Standard" rounds. If you could make some .32 H & R Mag loads with, say, APP 3f, 777 3f and 2f, Goex 2f & 3f, Pyrodex P, and Swiss 3f (I have any of those powders you don't have--I have omitted out of production powders and low production powders in order to make this workable), we could get together after the local match of your choice, hopefully with some black powder shooting witnesses and just see what does work.

 

I do know the smoke standard was made around .32 H & R Mags, so I know it's possible to make the smoke standard with them. Larsen never had any trouble. I haven't seen any below standard rounds fired in a match in a long time. I think everybody is trying to shoot legal. But this would give comfort to .32 H & R Mag shooters, some of whom have been subject to excessive scrutiny because they shoot .32s.

 

BTW Tex currently shoots 7.5" Ruger New Vaqueros in .45 Colt. He shoots .44-40 rifle loads in his '73. Those of us who shoot with him often know that he has occasionally loaded a .45 Colt into his rifle. He's very good at clearing that.

 

The above is not part of any hoax. You are free to go back to believing 10% of what you read in the SASS Wire.

Careful with the final report..........the threat from that TO at Plum Creek still exists.......and he does not want to change loads. ha.

[Hogleg Hunter]

The test would be even more valuable if there was a chart of the amount of each powder needed to make minimum. This would let those of us who shoot oddball calibers extrapolate to see if we are in compliance.

 

I use APP which is supposed to be smokier than real black. Knowing the ratio of APP to real black would be very helpful.

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

The test would be even more valuable if there was a chart of the amount of each powder needed to make minimum. This would let those of us who shoot oddball calibers extrapolate to see if we are in compliance.

 

I use APP which is supposed to be smokier than real black. Knowing the ratio of APP to real black would be very helpful.

There is absolutely no way anyone could come up with a chart of "minimum" charges to make the standard. Powder varies, the guns vary and peoples' subjective evaluation varies. If you have an oddball caliber, toss 1cc of whatever you are using into the case and fill the rest up with grits or some other filler and test it. (Read the manufacturers recommendations. Hodgdon, for example, does not recommend fillers with 777.) I would never load to the "minium" and go to a big match. Might not be so "minimum" when you get there.

[Capt. George Baylor SASS#24287L]

You are on for the .32 H&R mag smoke test. It will make a good Cowboy Chronicle Article. I will need a little Swiss 3F from you. I will load 777 2f out of respect for Hodgdon's loading instructions. Before a match is better than after a match since we need low wind conditions. (You know how hard the wind can blow in New Mexico.) A final request: I'd like Shirley Shooter (current regional LFC Champion) as one of the judges if she is available.

No problem with the Swiss. Let me know when/where to make the drop. I would still like 777 3f in there simply because I know too many people using it in .32 H & R Mag. I will add appropriate disclaimers to make Birdshot happy. If we can get Shirley, we will. No problem with "before," but we'll probably have to use Founders Ranch. RGR is setting up before, and FR has 17 bays.

 

As for figuring minimums with each powder, I agree fully with Larsen. Let's test with 1.0 CC powder from a Lee Dipper. I tried making test loads using gr. Very frustrating loading session. A Lee dipper makes a repeatable volume consistent load that anyone can duplicate and then turn into gr. weight for his volume loading. If you don't have a set, I do.

 

Billy Boots--There has to be a statute of limitations. The Vietnamese government has officially told me they've dropped all charges, and I'm welcome to visit, and that was 1970. Anyway, Billy, I watched you shoot 12 stages at EOT. You make plenty of smoke. I thought you shot .38s anyway.

[Edward R S Canby, SASS#59971]

OK Captain, we'll load some 777 3f. I also have some Ten-X 32 S&W rounds loaded with 777 we can test. Maybe next weekend I can get the dippers and Swiss from you. Let's test before the RGR match at Founders Ranch on October 6th. That's Balloon Fiesta weather. A still, cool morning should be good for the test.

[Billy Boots, # 20282 LTG-Regulator]

No problem with the Swiss. Let me know when/where to make the drop. I would still like 777 3f in there simply because I know too many people using it in .32 H & R Mag. I will add appropriate disclaimers to make Birdshot happy. If we can get Shirley, we will. No problem with "before," but we'll probably have to use Founders Ranch. RGR is setting up before, and FR has 17 bays.

 

As for figuring minimums with each powder, I agree fully with Larsen. Let's test with 1.0 CC powder from a Lee Dipper. I tried making test loads using gr. Very frustrating loading session. A Lee dipper makes a repeatable volume consistent load that anyone can duplicate and then turn into gr. weight for his volume loading. If you don't have a set, I do.

 

Billy Boots--There has to be a statute of limitations. The Vietnamese government has officially told me they've dropped all charges, and I'm welcome to visit, and that was 1970. Anyway, Billy, I watched you shoot 12 stages at EOT. You make plenty of smoke. I thought you shot .38s anyway.

I'll have to give thought to that statute of limitations from Plum Creek......ha.

 

 

Yep, 38s for pretty much everything, except elk.......and no bp for the FA 454, lots of H110.

 

Although I shoot some 777 FFg in revolvers, like you, I know a number of shooters who use the FFFg. Heck, two or three on our eot posse.

 

Hope to see ya soon.

[Cowboy Rick, SASS #49739L]

While I don't know the good Captain, I applaud him for a good jab. I used to work on the railroad in a switch yard. We started and stopped the engine in the same spot every day. All the tracks ran east/west. One day I thought I'd get a laugh and asked if the rest of the crew knew whether we traveled farther east or farther west in a day's work. The argument ensued, and I was told to stay out of it when I tried to explain.

Not sure if they ever figured it out

 

The only way this con could have been less convincing was to claim that 50gr of FFFg would be required.

CR

[Madd Mike #8595]

Oh boy...another RUMOR!

but, many have ben tolt, if its on the internet, it is true

 

I herd that:::: what ever the cartridge used, it must be all powder (compressed load)

not count-in cap and ball guns

[Capt. George Baylor SASS#24287L]

OK Captain, we'll load some 777 3f. I also have some Ten-X 32 S&W rounds loaded with 777 we can test. Maybe next weekend I can get the dippers and Swiss from you. Let's test before the RGR match at Founders Ranch on October 6th. That's Balloon Fiesta weather. A still, cool morning should be good for the test.

Sounds good. Give me a call for this weekend.

[ORNERY OAF]

Maybe they are making Pale Rider an official category?

Bout time

 

 

OO

[Hogleg Hunter]

There is absolutely no way anyone could come up with a chart of "minimum" charges to make the standard. Powder varies, the guns vary and peoples' subjective evaluation varies. If you have an oddball caliber, toss 1cc of whatever you are using into the case and fill the rest up with grits or some other filler and test it. (Read the manufacturers recommendations. Hodgdon, for example, does not recommend fillers with 777.) I would never load to the "minium" and go to a big match. Might not be so "minimum" when you get there.

Never had a problem with my loads as far as smoke. What I was trying to do was go to a shorter .38 case than the special and still have enough smoke. I load APP up to the bottom of the bullet. No fillers.

[Madd Mike #8595]

Never had a problem with my loads as far as smoke. What I was trying to do was go to a shorter .38 case than the special and still have enough smoke. I load APP up to the bottom of the bullet. No fillers.

the search for the shotest case: that was going on, in the race for fast, and minimum loads long time ago,

be it smokeless or smokie the bear stuff

there is a 38 short, but it probaly wont make the smoke standard these days???

black powder shooters should have to contend with, for gosh sakes, smoke

[Branchwater Jack SASS #88854]

Much like we get the call for 'stock guns' every now and then, how long is it until we get a call for everyone needing to run 'factory loaded' black powder ammunition to make sure it is fair for everyone?

 

But I can tell you, some of the best times I have ever had in SASS have been shooting with a bunch of guys shooting black powder. The last thing that I am ever thinking about is does everyone's loads meet the standard.

 

Personally, I am not a fan of the subjectivity of the black powder smoke standard test, but I really couldn't tell you a better way, so I'll keep my mouth shut.

 

Even as a bp shooter since day 1 of shooting SASS, I don't think I could tell you what a standard load look like to even know if I, as an RO, should say something or not. I started off with full house 45 loads and then worked down from there. But there is so much that can affect how smoke looks from one day to the next. Wind. Humidity. Time of day. Shadows. Angle of the sun. Whatever. Again, that is why I do not like the subjectivity.

 

I am also surprised someone has not yet recommended pulling and testing ammo for bp shooters the same way WB ammo it tested.

[Hogleg Hunter]

the search for the shotest case: that was going on, in the race for fast, and minimum loads long time ago,

be it smokeless or smokie the bear stuff

there is a 38 short, but it probaly wont make the smoke standard these days???

black powder shooters should have to contend with, for gosh sakes, smoke

Now that you put it like that I don't even have a good reason why I was trying to do this. I love the smoke. The recoil is mild enough. Must have been from the discussions we had a while back when we were having a hard time finding APP locally. We were trying to find ways to stretch what we had. Had to go to 777 in the shotshells so I could save the other for the .38 rounds.

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

Much like we get the call for 'stock guns' every now and then, how long is it until we get a call for everyone needing to run 'factory loaded' black powder ammunition to make sure it is fair for everyone?

 

But I can tell you, some of the best times I have ever had in SASS have been shooting with a bunch of guys shooting black powder. The last thing that I am ever thinking about is does everyone's loads meet the standard.

 

Personally, I am not a fan of the subjectivity of the black powder smoke standard test, but I really couldn't tell you a better way, so I'll keep my mouth shut.

 

Even as a bp shooter since day 1 of shooting SASS, I don't think I could tell you what a standard load look like to even know if I, as an RO, should say something or not. I started off with full house 45 loads and then worked down from there. But there is so much that can affect how smoke looks from one day to the next. Wind. Humidity. Time of day. Shadows. Angle of the sun. Whatever. Again, that is why I do not like the subjectivity.

 

I am also surprised someone has not yet recommended pulling and testing ammo for bp shooters the same way WB ammo it tested.

 

The BP smoke test is not as "subjective" as many seem to believe.

The initiation process IS, ... it is also very disruptive (having been personally involved in one);

...same as the process for a power factor challenge (which is done mid-match, rather than pre-match as in WBAS).

 

REF: RO1 p. 14

 

The idea of having a minimum standard is to encourage shooters to load ABOVE that standard, rather than try to bump their loads DOWN to meet it (for whatever reason).

[Cowboy Rick, SASS #49739L]

The idea of having a minimum standard is to encourage shooters to load ABOVE that standard, rather than try to bump their loads DOWN to meet it (for whatever reason).

I believe this has been achieved. While there are those who load to the minimum, I have not had any doubt that the smoke generated on any given day is not sufficient to unequivocally determine that the shooter is in the BP category. Prior to the standard, there were times when it was difficult to tell. Those days are gone, at least around here.

 

CR

[Branchwater Jack SASS #88854]

You're right, PWB. Subjective may not be the right word choice for the BP Standard test. But there are two parts of this that I still like to learn more about so I can improve.

 

First, as an RO, how do I recognize when there may be an issue? It is pretty easy to see when someone is shooting a BP round that is making less smoke that some other folks smokeless rounds, but what if it is not that obvious? As you said, first, to make the call that there may be an issue that may need to be looked at is a true subjective one in that the call for the test is based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions of the Range Officers or Range Master. Again, even as a BP shooter - who has never loaded down to the minimum - I don't think I could tell you if a given round shot was a minimum standard round or not. So, with the greater population not shooting in BP Categories, one could reason that the greater proportion of Range Officers would not be BP Shooters. How are they going to know what a standard round looks like to even know if a call should be made? Then, as the Range Officer, do I want to put you through what has been described as a very disruptive process if I am not sure?

 

The other point that I was trying to make is that the BP Standard testing is not based on empirical and measurable evidence with results that can always be scrutinized by peer review and repeated when accounting for all tested conditions.

 

With testing Smokeless loads, we shoot the rounds through a Chronograph and compute the power factor. With the assumption that your tested rounds being made consistently, same gun is used, etc., your results are measurable and are as repeatable as your Chronograph and math skills are reliable.

 

With testing BP loads for smoke factor, while the test may be based on observation and experimentation, results may not be repeatable based the unknown control - the perceptions and observations of the human judges and other uncontrollable factors like atmospheric conditions. While we used to call it OET testing (Old Eyeball Technique), the judges observation is an unknown that cannot be scientifically quantified.

 

The guts of the BP smoke test is defined as:

If a competitor’s blackpowder ammunition is checked, they will be asked for five rounds from each suspect firearm, preferably already loaded at the loading table. These loads will be compared to the amount of smoke produced by this published standard regardless of the specific loading techniques or components used.

So, you shoot off some standard rounds. Then you shoot off the competitor's rounds. You get some judges to observe the whole thing and go, "Ya, looks to me like it is making the same or more smoke," or , "It doesn't look to me like it is making enough smoke." You may not even get all three judges to agree all the time. But, then you throw in three different judges, on three different days with the same round tested, the results still may or may not be repeatable. Is a 10% reduction in the volume of smoke perceivable by the human eye? What about a 5%? Does the amount of light reflected off one powder make it look more dense than another at different times of the day?

 

Again, I don't know a better solution, and maybe the engineer in me is getting in the way, but then again I really have yet to see it as a problem where I am at. I also wonder if all this non-name calling on the wahr after the fact is better served by doing something at the match. But, like you said, that is the part that is really subjective.