Welcome to Boone Man - For Those Who Love To Hunt

The average whitetail hunter in Michigan may not be aware of the often heated debate that muzzle loaders engage in. However, one only needs to frequent a few of the local message boards to find that arguments abound.

As far as I can tell - its simply a muzzle loading season. Nothing published by the DNR states that the season is or ever was a primitive season. To be fair, I have spoken with a number of conservation officers who seem to have the perception that today's muzzle loaders violate the "spirit" of the season. I think if we scratch the surface a little, we may find these perceptions unfounded.

The most recent phenomenon that has shaken up the muzzle loading world is the usage of smokeless powder in lieu of black powder or black powder substitutes. Before proceeding too much further, however, it may be necessary to establish the difference between the types of powders commonly used for muzzle loading today. Current law allows the use of black powder, or a black powder substitute. The original black powder is composed of 3 organic substances - potassium nitrate (saltpeter), charcoal, and sulfur. Commonly used black powder substitutes such as Pyrodex and Triple 777 (both sold by Hodgdon Powder Company), as well as Black Mag 3 (made by MagKor), and American Pioneer and Goex Pinnacle, bear no chemical resemblance to black powder. In fact, the black powder substitutes really bear no resemblance to each other - each differs in chemical composition, sometimes drastically (though they all lack sulfur, giving higher velocities by weight, and proving somewhat less corrosive). Try as I might, I can find no definition on the books, chemical composition or otherwise, that defines what a black powder substitute is. The only common similarities between them all is that they all produce varying degrees of smoke, and all can be volumetrically measured with old black powder powder measures. That does not mean to infer that they are equivalent to black powder - in fact, when measured volumetrically, black powder substitutes are generally 15-20% more efficient than black powder.

What's commonly referred to as "smokeless" powder today is nitrocellulose based powder (Single Base), or nitrocellulose combined with up to 50 percent nitroglycerin (Double Base). What's the difference between smokeless powder and black powder (or black powder substitutes)? Black powder burns inefficiently, leaving up to 55% of its combustion product in a solid state, whereas the combustion product from smokeless powder is almost entirely gaseous. It is this solid byproduct of the combustion of black powder that is so corrosive, rendering the firearm useless in short order if not cleaned promptly. The efficiency of smokeless powder makes it far less corrosive. Black powder is exceptionally easy to ignite, and is classified by the DOT as an explosive, because it doesn't need to be confined to destructive (it can't even be stored on a retailer shelf - retailers must store it in an approved, locked container). Black powder substitutes and smokeless powders are all classified by the DOT as propellants, and require far greater ignition temperatures. Unlike explosives, propellants need to be tightly sealed and confined to produce pressure that would destroy its surroundings.

What's more surprising is that black powder substitutes are held in higher regard than smokeless powder by traditional hunters. Why, is beyond me. I suppose because they produce smoke and can be measured in a black powder measure? When discussing the "primitive" nature of black powder substitutes, it's worth noting that the granddaddy of BP subs, Pyrodex, was introduced in 1976. Black Mag 3 was introduced in 1995-1996, while Triple Seven was introduced in 2002. Of course, there are others, none older than a decade or two. Hardly primitive when one considers that the original black powder substitute, smokeless powder, was introduced mainstream to the shooting public around 1880, nearly 100 years earlier.

- Safety. Some would argue that smokeless powder is unsafe to use in muzzle loaders, creating too much pressure. This is a misunderstanding. Smokeless powder is much more efficient than black powder and black powder substitutes, which means much less powder is necessary. During muzzle loading season, I shoot a 250 grain bullet, using 100 grains of Triple 7 powder (BPS). During general firearms season, I use the same 250 grain bullet, with 42 grains of Accurate Arms 5744 powder (Nitrocellulose). These loads have both been shot over the chronograph, and ballistically, perform equally. Nevertheless, hunters should only use powder and components recommended in the manual provided by their firearms' manufacturer. Hunters encounter this restriction in every facet of firearms and reloading - muzzle loading is no different. Its not plausible to suggest that because smokeless powder becomes legal, that hunters would begin using it in firearms not rated for its use. I've never filled my tank with diesel, though the pump resides right next to the gasoline, and it would be completely legal for me to do.

I'd argue that, when using firearms rated for smokeless powder, its safer. Smokeless powder doesn't produce a cloud of poisonous gas. As mentioned previously, its not hygroscopic, and mis-fires and hang-fires are virtually non-existent. (Hang fires are really misfires - in which the powder is partially ignited but doesn't burn fast, and eventually fires after some delay. I have a friend who was bear hunting with black powder. While attempting to shoot at a bear, he pulled the trigger, and nothing happened. He waited a few moments with the gun aimed and at his shoulder. Still nothing. He then dis-mounted the gun, and began to examine the hammer, to see if the primer went off. At this point, the gun fired. Fortunately, no one was hurt.) Because of its high flash point, smokeless powder is far safer to transport and store.

- The other most common misconception is that somehow, by using smokeless powder, hunters will be able to greatly extend their range making it comparable to other center fire hunting rifles. This is wrong on two accounts. First - a 50 caliber bullet can only be made to go so far - no matter what type of powder is pushing it. The laws of physics dictate this. A muzzle loader will always have roughly half the range of say, a 30-06. Secondly - smokeless powder does not push the bullet any faster than black powder or black powder subs can. It simply does it with less powder. I have a Savage 10MLII, and a Thompson Center Omega muzzle loader. Savage's published loads do not exceed 2300 fps from the muzzle, using smokeless powder. TC and Knight muzzleloaders both publish loads meeting or exceeding these velocities in their manuals, using black powder substitutes such as Pyrodex and Triple 7. Knight just released their new "long range" hunter model, that guarantees accuracy at 200 yards using Triple 7. Michigan's own "Ultimate Firearms", maker of the BP Express muzzle loader, is rated to use 200 grains of Triple 7, and touts 2400 fps. "Put 'em in a pile at a quarter mile" is the slogan on their web page, and have confirmed kills in excess of 500 yards.

What we all need to consider is that the introduction of optics, sabots, and conical bullets are the primary factors that have extended the range of the modern muzzle loader. These are all legal to use in Michigan's muzzle loader season. And why not? Optical sights have been commonly used by hunters for a century or more. Conical bullets replaced round balls as early as 1865, when civil war soldiers were firing their "Minnie Balls" with an effective range of 300 yards. Sabots were first introduced to mainstream muzzle loaders in 1985, though the concept had been employed in military applications decades before. Even the "modern" sealed, inline design can trace its roots to the 18th century!

It only helps the cause that smokeless powder is far cheaper to shoot - since you shoot so much less powder per shot. I can buy a pound of Triple 7 for $25 and get 70, 100 grain shots, or a pound of AA5744 for $22, and get 140, 42 grain shots. Since recoil is a product of charge weight and bullet weight, smokeless powder recoils much less than black powder or black powder subs. The cleanliness of smokeless powder cannot be over-stated - especially in today's world.

Modern Muzzleloading Misconceptions