First time shooting with Black Horn 209

Finally broke the seal on the bottle of BH209 I’ve had sitting in the powder lock up for the past 3 yrs. Time to see what all the fuss was about and if it is worth the extra cost.

One of the big selling features was that it doesn’t create a crud ring in the lower barrel like T7 does…dat be true…the range rod had no problem even after x15 loads.

However, what I found was it forms a crud ring at the top of the barrel. Almost broke my ball starter trying to get it past the first 2-3” below the crown aftr about 6 shots. The last two rounds took a huge effort to get started. Never found this with T7 not sure what to think of it.

Guys also say it was cleaner….not to sure if I agree or not, the patches come out of the barrel were just as dirty as with T7. The barrel and breach plug still required cleaning, so it doesn’t matter ‘how’ dirty really, it still needs to be cleaned.

Over all didn’t notice a great deal of difference from T7 or Pyrodex. It cleans up the same. Not sure what all the fuss was about when it first hit the shelves, just another substitute for Goex :)

Anyway, I used my .50 cal in-line Traditions ML that was zeroed for a .360 gr bullet with 85 gr of T7. and loaded it up with the 300gr QT and 60grs of BH209.

The first shot was way high and right, hit off the paper.

It took 10 shots and 4 adjustments of the reticle to bring it into center. The next 5 shots grouped fairly well on center, I’ll try a 5 shot set with 50gr then jump to 5 shot set with 70gr load to see it that tightens up that group any, but I'm confidant with those results for a 50 yd shot.

https://i.imgur.com/8o41VFHl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/zRnzX0Yl.jpg

Mike,
Can you clarify "the range rod had no problem even after x15 loads." You were able to take 15 shots without cleaning? Did I understand that right?

Anyway, I basically stopped using Triple Seven after I found some White Hots. The fouling is much less compared to Triple Seven, but I could not dream of taking 15 shots without cleaning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rf2

Can you clarify "the range rod had no problem even after x15 loads.

---

Yup....once I got the sabot below that first 3-4" in the barrel, I switch to a range rod and it pushed down fairly easy after 15 shots. So there is a crud ring...but at the top instead of the bottom :)

I normally swab the barrel between shots when using T7 or Pyrodex to ensure consistency when I'm zeroing etc.
I guess I'll still have to do that with the BH209.

I may have stumbled onto the right combination for a load with this BH209.. purely by luck HaHa..

First shot of the Day thru a clean gun !! A hunter can't ask for better than this !!

https://i.imgur.com/G9kOEyXl.jpg

I had the same shot last week with the PH .58 Musketoon....first shot of the day after I got it set up !!

https://i.imgur.com/NX41XPul.jpg

Beautiful

It might not be perfect, but I have found Black Horn 209 to be the best alternative to black powder for me. Good shooting Mike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishhawk

It might not be perfect, but I have found Black Horn 209 to be the best alternative to black powder for me.

---

It does have a few positive points FH, I haven't crono'd it but they say it picks up the velocity some.

I'm glad guys like it enough to go back to using loose powder and develop their loads for the best accuracy. Pellets like the White Hots etc are more convenient, but you could be giving up accuracy for the sake of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

It does have a few positive points FH, I haven't crono'd it but they say it picks up the velocity some.

I'm glad guys like it enough to go back to using loose powder and develop their loads for the best accuracy. Pellets like the White Hots etc are more convenient, but you could be giving up accuracy for the sake of it.

---

It will be interesting to know the velocity difference compared to triple 7, pydorex and goex, real world numbers.

At the price though it seems a little crazy, $3 or so a shot, probably more with premium sabots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

It will be interesting to know the velocity difference compared to triple 7, pydorex and goex, real world numbers..

---

I've seen a few charts;

Goex 100 gr of FFG: 1495 ft/sec
777 powder 100 gr ; 1,883 ft/sec
BH 209 100 gr: 1,796 ft/sec

Goex 120 gr of FFG: 1,621 ft/sec
777 powder 120 gr ; 1,913 ft/sec
BH 209 120 gr: 2,036 ft/sec

So basically : " At the same time, the Blackhorn 209 and loose 777 loads were comparable in performance with a difference of approximately 100fps in average velocity.

Honestly, the differences in velocity between the various Blackhorn 209 and 777 loads were not big enough to make a gigantic difference afield. Yes, the 120gr load of Blackhorn 209 has a slightly flatter trajectory than the 120gr load of 777 powder, but it’s a small enough improvement that it should not outweigh other concerns you should keep in mind when choosing a propellant like accuracy, cost, availability, reliable ignition, etc."

Keeping in mind, that most ML shooting is less than 100 yds...100 ft/sec is relatively meaningless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

I've seen a few charts;

Goex 100 gr of FFG: 1495 ft/sec
777 powder 100 gr ; 1,883 ft/sec
BH 209 100 gr: 1,796 ft/sec

Goex 120 gr of FFG: 1,621 ft/sec
777 powder 120 gr ; 1,913 ft/sec
BH 209 120 gr: 2,036 ft/sec

So basically : " At the same time, the Blackhorn 209 and loose 777 loads were comparable in performance with a difference of approximately 100fps in average velocity.

Honestly, the differences in velocity between the various Blackhorn 209 and 777 loads were not big enough to make a gigantic difference afield. Yes, the 120gr load of Blackhorn 209 has a slightly flatter trajectory than the 120gr load of 777 powder, but it’s a small enough improvement that it should not outweigh other concerns you should keep in mind when choosing a propellant like accuracy, cost, availability, reliable ignition, etc."

Keeping in mind, that most ML shooting is less than 100 yds...100 ft/sec is relatively meaningless.

---

I think most guns recommend a max powder of less than 100gr of BH209 as well.

It will be nice to see what numbers you actually get out of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

It will be nice to see what numbers you actually get out of it.

---

Pretty much a moot point....

The muzzle energy for a 250gr PowerBelt with 777 (100 gr) is 1,968 fpe and BH209 (100 gr) is 1,790 fpe..plenty with either to drop a deer.

Mike - thanks for taking the time to post this.

I switched from Goex to loose Pyrodex RS last year. I would have gone with BH209 if my gun was 209 capable.

I shoot about 10 shots a year, so the cost difference is negligible. Last year I killed 3 deer with the muzzleloader and found the Pyrodex RS to be adequate but I had a misfire when unloading at the end of the last day. If I recall, it took 3 percussion caps before the round fired. There was a light drizzle but nothing I hadn't seen in my 20+ years hunting with Goex. To date Goex FFG has never let me down.

Thanks again for posting your results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by benjhind

To date Goex FFG has never let me down.

---

I too like Goex with my side locks, has never let me down either. I used to use Pyrodex RS with my .45 Kentucky but switched to Goex FFG when I found I was getting better results with my PolyCup and Ball. I recently picked up some Pyrodex P (FFFG) and want to give it a try with the .45

I'm also recently started using Goex Fg with my .58 Muskettoon, gives me the energy I need to get the Minnie Ball to grab the rifling.

I'm not sorry I bought the BH209, it was fun to have a reason to make smoke and to some shooting and draw my own conclusions. It didn't disappoint, really, just didn't live up to all the hype.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

I too like Goex with my side locks, has never let me down either. I used to use Pyrodex RS with my .45 Kentucky but switched to Goex FFG when I found I was getting better results with my PolyCup and Ball. I recently picked up some Pyrodex P (FFFG) and want to give it a try with the .45

---

The only problem with Goex is that true black powder is an explosive so many shops cannot get it or it becomes a pain to get, Pyrodex is considered a propellant so anyone with a magazine to store smokeless can store it.

I know, gun shows, ha ha, pyrodex has worked in my sidelock and 777 in the inline, Goex in the antique gun though still.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

The only problem with Goex is that true black powder is an explosive so many shops cannot get it

---

There are 3 local gun shops (GunMart, NorthGower and Cornwall) all can get Goex fairly easy, they order it in. And yes, Gun Shows were good to me, I filled my magazine with enough Goex to do me thru to next year :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

There are 3 local gun shops (GunMart, NorthGower and Cornwall) all can get Goex fairly easy, they order it in. And yes, Gun Shows were good to me, I filled my magazine with enough Goex to do me thru to next year :)

---

They can get it but they have to drive on their own to get it, the shippers do not handle it in many cases. Have never talked to Cornwall about it, North Gower can get it but ideally would like 2 lbs sold due to the pain to drive to go get it, Gun Mart I never asked about how much of a pain.

Any powder that will get me over 3 shots is an improvement. I am unable to fully seat a bullet after my 3rd shot with triple 7. Im leaning on the BH209.
Thanks for the info

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A crud ring towards the top of the barrel is a very interesting find. Never heard of this before.
Did you try to figure-out what may be causing it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

T...Gun Mart I never asked about how much of a pain.

---

Not a pain for me, easier actually, I'm not spending time/money on gas to go get it HaHa...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by G.S.

A crud ring towards the top of the barrel is a very interesting find. Never heard of this before.
Did you try to figure-out what may be causing it?

---

I'm going to do some more shooting in the next few days and see if I can figure it out. I've never seen this before either, at least not with this ML.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by G.S.

A crud ring towards the top of the barrel is a very interesting find. Never heard of this before.
Did you try to figure-out what may be causing it?

---

I hit the range today and shot 10 loads (60 grs of BH209).

The same problem cropped up. The crud ring at the top of the barrel was noticeable loading shot 7 and by shot 10, it took a huge effort to set the sabot with the ball starter. But once started, the Range rod had little difficulty seating the bullet.

I took some pics.

Pic 1 : I pushed the cleaning jag in about 4". The patch was completely full. Thick black carbon.

https://i.imgur.com/jj9302Zl.jpg

I then preceded to clean the rest of the barrel and you can see the carbon is pretty thick on the 1-3 patches. It took 6 patches to come out grey. That is not far off the cleaning I need with T7 or Pyrodex, but more than I was expecting for a powder like BH209, that claims it's cleaner.

Not sure why this is happening, I can't remember if this happening with T7, I guess the crud ring at the bottom of the barrel may have overshadowed the problem.

https://i.imgur.com/QtO38J6l.jpg

I guess I'll continue to swab the barrel between shots if I am shooting more than 5 loads.

Just wondering why 60grs when most are between 90grs - 110grs
Three of us in are group are extremely happy with blackhorn209. 15+shots and easy loading one guy with bone collector was 22shots using Barnes bullets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by js4fn

Just wondering why 60grs when most are between 90grs - 110grs

---

When I'm just plinking at 50 yds for the first time with a new powder to get the scope on paper etc, I use a light load, saves powder. I move up to a larger load when I move out to the 100.

I wouldn't have thought that less powder in a load would cause that much fouling, I read that BH209 was suppose to leave almost an 'ash' residue, but as you can see on the swabs, that is significant fouling for only 10 loads.

I'll bump it up to 80 the next time out and see what happens...maybe the extra heat will burn off the residue :)

I was looking for answers and found a few guys on other forums had the same issue with no answers yet.

Quote:

---

lastly, do you guys that use b/h209 have the tar like residue? its more of an oily soot not unlike the nasty residue coming out of an old diesel engine between exhaust connections or a leaking turbo.. sort of like a partially burned oil like crap... its not really noticeable at first but after about 10 rounds i notice it building up around the crown of the barrel and if i swab the patch comes out really nasty.

---

edit add; I saw a few guys comments on other forums that do indicate the problem/solution is you have to use larger loads to prevent the crud build up.

So I've per loaded up some 80gr loads to see if that solves the problem.

Quote:

---

One of the things I have noticed in three different muzzys that I have set up with BH209 is that low charges of the powder do leave more fouling in the barrel. On my 45 cal guns that seemed to disappear when I got to 70 grains volume of the powder. On the 50 cal that point was about 80 grains volume. This powder likes speed and shoots very good when up around 110 - 120 grains volume.

---

In my opinion, the benefits of BH209 do not outweigh those of T7. I found T7 is MUCH easier to use and most importantly MUCH more dependable to go "bang" when you pull the trigger.

I tried BH209 and did everything right, following their ignition instructions to a T, but still has spotty ignition performance at the range. I should have known better not to use it for hunting.

After losing a gorgeous buck because of delayed ignition, I wont touch the stuff anymore. Too fussy for me. Be careful of this if you use it!

Mike, it seems you are Powder starving your load. If you bump the powder charge to recommended amounts that ring should just disappear.

ML’s do funny things when you have to little powder. BH209 is the only powder I’d use if I was stuck only being able to use BP or substitutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Jack

Mike, it seems you are Powder starving your load. If you bump the powder charge to recommended amounts that ring should just disappear.

ML’s do funny things when you have to little powder. BH209 is the only powder I’d use if I was stuck only being able to use BP or substitutes.

---

I'm tending to agree Jack, it seems the recommended load is 90-100 grs for BH209, but who knew there was a minimum ? :)

My hunting load for T7 is 85 grs, but for years I've commonly used 60 grs for plinking, never saw this problem, but I also swabbed between each shot because T7 was naturally dirtier....I wasn't expecting it would be required for BH209.

I've per-measured 80 and 90 gr. of BH209 for next shoot...see it that clears up the crud some. I don't have an issue with using 90 for a hunting load, but at the extra cost of BH209 I would like to find a smaller load for shooting holes in paper :)

[QUOTE]In my opinion, the benefits of BH209 do not outweigh those of T7. I found T7 is MUCH easier to use and most importantly MUCH more dependable to go "bang" when you pull the trigger.

I tried BH209 and did everything right, following their ignition instructions to a T, but still has spotty ignition performance at the range. I should have known better not to use it for hunting.

After losing a gorgeous buck because of delayed ignition, I wont touch the stuff anymore. Too fussy for me. Be careful of this if you use it!/QUOTE]
Actually BH209 is well known for being super reliable,even when its a little wet. I bet you where using a primer that was designed for muzzle loaders? 7 series powders etc. These wont work with BH209, you need a super hot primer, CCI and Federal 209 shotgun primers are recommended. I personally have been using BH209 for the last 5 years with no residue or ignition issues. Unlike the 7 series powders I switched from.

[/QUOTE]Actually BH209 is well known for being super reliable,even when its a little wet. I bet you where using a primer that was designed for muzzle loaders? 7 series powders etc. These wont work with BH209, you need a super hot primer, CCI and Federal 209 shotgun primers are recommended. I personally have been using BH209 for the last 5 years with no residue or ignition issues. Unlike the 7 series powders I switched from.[/QUOTE]

Thanks Fishhawk - Tried everything including what you suggested. I told you I followed instructions to the letter! This was not my first rodeo at muzzle loading. Maybe had a bad batch is a more likely explanation or powder has a problem with colder temperatures (reported by others too).

Loaded it the night before - super dry, super clean bore and breech hole. Next morning using CCL hot primer - it was cold- pulled the trigger at a buck - the primer fired, but nothing happened for 2 seconds, then the shot fired, after I moved the scope reticles off the buck - Grrrr! f#@k! LOL. Did this at the range too. should have known better then.

PS used a Thompson ML, on the OK list for BH209 supposedly.

Well I'm going to wrap up this trail. I hit the range with 80gr and 90 gr of BH209 the other day and came away a little happier. The crud ring at the crown did diminish with 80 gr and by 90gr wasn't noticeable.

I however found my groups opened up at 90gr so I backed off to 80 gr and they are were hitting much better. Considering I was getting even better groups at 60gr, I'm sure I'm going to find a sweet spot somewhere between 60-80 grs. Which isn't unexpected because my Traditions ML/ PR bullet combo like 85 grs of T7 and BH209 is suppose to be better, so it should use less, probably in the range of 70 grs by the time I'm done.

But it will mean that swabbing will be required, which I do with T7 so not a biggy.

All in All ...I won't buy BH209 again however. The added cost isn't worth the slight increase ( 75gr BH209 vs 85gr T7) in performance and the extra effort required to keep the residue at the crown in check while using a plinking load.

I stopped into GunMart yesterday and asked about the cost of BH209 and it's sells there for $75. (Note: I bought this bottle there two years ago for $62)

I stopped at CT in Brockville, their listed price for T7 is $55 but I got lucky and found one on sale for $46. Almost 1/2 the cost of BH209...so I'm going back to using it.

It was fun going thru the paces again with a new powder; surprising and frustrating all at the same time...but never a bad day on a range making smoke.

https://i.imgur.com/jB27yNtm.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by js4fn

Just wondering why 60grs when most are between 90grs - 110grs
Three of us in are group are extremely happy with blackhorn209. 15+shots and easy loading one guy with bone collector was 22shots using Barnes bullets

---

Resurrecting the old thread .....

Last week, I had tried Barnes T-EZ 250gr with both 100 and 110 gr of BH209 that apparently didn't perform well in my rifle (TC Bone Collector). I intend to venture out again and try different volumes.

My rifle shoots both TC Shockwaves and Hornady SST 250gr very well with 110gr of BH209. Presently, I have that sighted in 2in high at 100m.
https://i.imgur.com/E4eV5JS.jpg

Old target from a few years back when I had first started using BH209 ...
https://i.imgur.com/vCakg9G.png

Didn't have much luck with Federal BOR Lock 270gr either (seats easily even though the bore on my TC is quite tight) - tried everything from 80-120gr BH209 going up in 5gr increments. Target shown is with 100 and 110gr of powder. I really liked that bullet .....
https://i.imgur.com/rRSI5mu.jpg
That ought to read 270gr ....

I have never used the T-EZ but I do use the T-MZ bullets and my TC Impact loves them. They are the 250grain being pushed by 100 grains of BH209. Are the EZs too loose?

As a matter of fact, the T-EZ is tight in the bore. Guess I need to try different powder volumes. I will try out the TMZ as well ...

Why are you moving away from the TC Shockwaves? Slug expansion concerns?

That's the thought - terminal performance perspective, would much rather prefer to use Barnes if possible.

Thing of beauty!