Photobucket

Author Topic: Re: naa question... again...  (Read 1625 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Etek

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
Re: naa question... again...
« on: February 18, 2015, 05:29:55 PM »
I have both the Companion and Super Companion.
The factory supplied scoops are there to appease liability lawyers. Period.
I shot a squirrel from 8 feet with the 2.5 grain load FOUR times. The fur flew but he/she barely flinched and kept chewing a nut. I hit it with the last shot and the squirrel turned to me and implied, "If you shoot me again and I FIND OUT ABOUT IT I'll chew YOUR nuts!"

So I played around with loads. Never use 3FG.
A double load ~(5 gr.) of 4F works OK. Basically fill the cylinder with enough room left over to seat the bullet.
Same deal with the Super Companion.
I wanted to work up smokeless loads but I faced the same issues as everybody else. Why buy a can that you'll never use?

I then bought some .22 lr rounds, pulled the bullets and dumped the powder in the cylinders one by one. Works perfect. And it's cheap and safe.

« Last Edit: March 04, 2015, 10:19:45 AM by Captainkirk »

Offline Classanr

  • Administrator
  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 5136
  • BP, the original bug chaser!
Re: Re: naa question... again...
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2015, 11:08:55 PM »
I have both the Companion and Super Companion.
The factory supplied scoops are there to appease liability lawyers. Period.
I shot a squirrel from 8 feet with the 2.5 grain load FOUR times. The fur flew but he/she barely flinched and kept chewing a nut. I hit it with the last shot and the squirrel turned to me and implied, "If you shoot me again and I FIND OUT ABOUT IT I'll chew YOUR nuts!"

So I played around with loads. Never use 3FG.
A double load ~(5 gr.) of 4F works OK. Basically fill the cylinder with enough room left over to seat the bullet.
Same deal with the Super Companion.
I wanted to work up smokeless loads but I faced the same issues as everybody else. Why buy a can that you'll never use?

I then bought some .22 lr rounds, pulled the bullets and dumped the powder in the cylinders one by one. Works perfect. And it's cheap and safe.

I am going to be harsh, because it is postings like the above that mislead people into doing harm to themselves.

Etek, please, take the time to clarify the weaknesses that I list in the points below.

Here's why I make this request:
Your post makes it sound like you had ineffectual results when you used a Companion's BP dipper to make a Super Companion load with BP.  Your post then implies you achieved your desired results by switching to the (smaller) Companion and using smokeless powder from unidentified commercial ammo.

You did not blow yourself up, so you conclude that general use of some unknown powder of unknown weight with an unknown bullet will be safe to use in an unspecified NAA BP revolver, and that's OK because lawyers might have been involved.

==== Desconstruction of Etek's post.  Read if you wish to disagree with me. ========

Using 4F not 3F (which is exactly what the manufacture states to do) and filling so there is just enough room to "properly seat the bullet" turns out to be a manufacturer-recommended load FOR BP.  That is not a "double load".  Using BP or a substitute, it is accepted as a given that it is impossible to "double load" either of the referenced revolvers.  Etek's statement brings up the question how much BP did he *actually* put into the cylinders for the squirrel bothering test.  See Q#6 below for expansion on this question.  Further, Etek doesn't state which gun was used in his attempt to bother the squirrel.

Etek's statement of pulling the bullet out of a 22lr (without giving make or product name and lot number) and using the powder from same in the NAA is dangerously incomplete.

1. He did not state *which* cylinder he used for the .22lr smokeless powder.  The Companion capacity is .22lr, the Super Companion is 22mag.  The capacities are considerably different.  But he did not document what quantity (by weight or by volume) he poured into which ever cylinder he used.

2. Etek did not state *which* bullet he used (the pulled or those supplied by NAA, nor the weight of the bullet).  The two projectiles are considerably different for depth of seating purposes.  See also #4 to further expand on the bullet question.

3. His statement that "double load...work OK" is not countered in his text "... dumped the powder in the cylinders one by one."  Did he continue to use "double load" with smokeless?  In other words, exactly how much smokeless powder by *weight* was he pouring into each cylinder?  "One by one" is not a technical loading term describing volume or weight, nor does "one by one" guarantee that he meant "For each chamber of X cylinder, I poured the quantity of unknown powder type from one unknown commercial 22lr."  His statement could just as easily be interpreted "For each chamber of X cylinder, one by one I filled the chambers with double loads of unknown powder type from commercial 22lr."  A person can definitely "double-load" smokeless into the Super Companion.  That would be seriously over the Generally Accepted As Safe 2gr by weight of Bullseye *in the Super Companion*, and most certainly a "double load" (if a person can even get it all in) into the Companion.

4. He used the term "2.5 grain load" and presented that as an ineffectual load for bothering squirrels.  Despite the fact that bothering squirrels is not a basis to ascertain pressure in the gun, nowhere does he document what the projectile was that he used for testing on squirrels.  For all we know, he tried to save some *more* money (saving money being a stated objective) and used a 12gr (in weight) pellet of .220 diameter.  Getting back to the "2.5 grain load": which measurement type does he mean by "grain" (by weight or by volume)?  Load of what powder?  When posters are mixing descriptions of BP and smokeless in the same paragraph, but don't state what powder the measurement is for, then "2.5 grain load" is too easily mis-interpreted.  2.5gr weight is *considerably* different from 2.5gr vol.

5. What are the CC markings on the two dippers Etek was using?  Without that information, there is no way to verify or test his observations and conclusions.

6. What dipper size did he use for which cylinder?  "The ones supplied by NAA" is not a useful description.  Dippers could be wrong for the purpose he was testing, especially if purchased from a third party.  It is critical to know actual dipper size *as marked on the dipper* (as well as knowing for which cylinder that dipper was used) to make any sense of what Etek was posting.  He might as well have said "I used the yellow dipper to fill the stainless cylinder, as provided by NAA".

Etek's squirrel test results strongly suggest that he did not actually accomplish manufacturing load recommendations (BP powder volume, bullet type, bullet seating depth, cap type) for the Super Companion.  Failing to get his desired results, he presumed that lawyers were hindering his objectives.  He resorted to using pulled commercial ammunition to operate his BP revolver.  Although Etek's approach is not recommended,  my primary objection is that he then posted his personal opinion on a public forum as if it were scientifically-proven fact, without also posting any *easily-acquired* scientific evidence or weights/measures to back up his opinions.  To make matters worse, he was negligently incomplete in describing what he did, leaving room for others to mis-interpret his posting.

Normally, as an Administrator, I would pull any post (such as Etek's) based soley on it being dangerously unclear and misleading.  In this case, I am offering Etek the opportunity to be considerably more accurate in what he posts on the subject of using smokeless in the NAA BP revolvers, because it is possible that when he does make clarification, his clarified post will merely restate one particular situation that others in the past on this Forum (and on NAA's forum) have demonstrated as *probably* safe.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2015, 12:05:47 AM by Classanr »
Jim Beam me, Scotty!  Life here is more intelligent than I.

Offline Etek

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
Re: Re: naa question... again...
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2015, 10:06:05 PM »
Easy there Mr. Administrator!

My message is quite simple and I believe you are reading WAY too much into it.
Relax.

The .22 Lr Companion scoop is marked ?2.5? and has a piece of aluminum foil jammed in the bottom to do what?
I do not trust such an instrument! Is it 2.5 Grain? 2.5 cc?
Regardless whether it is filled with 4FG or 3FG the firearm will barely bother a squirrel at a few feet.
We all know a full charge of the appropriate BP is safe IE fill the chamber with enough left over to seat a projectile.
Leaving an air gap beneath a projo can be dangerous when using BP.
Using the "2.5" scoop does this but as I said BARELY pushes the bean out of the bottle.

Looking for a SAFE load for the Companion should NEVER require buying pounds of different smokeless and tinkering around with loads. That's idiotic.

NAA BLACK POWDER .22 Companions come in .22 lr and, .22 Magnum sizes. They have twins in both calibers in smokeless.

I was simply saying that instead of playing around with dubious smokeless loads that one simply use the powder load out of an approved load from their smokeless counterpart IE pull the bullet from a .22 lr and use that.

I think everybody...well some folks got that. This is not rocket science. We are simply trying to say; "Instead of buying POUNDS of powder and possibly causing dangerous conditions just use a load that the factory approves in a twin gun." (IE a .22 lr load)

So in your Companion if you want a SMOKELESS load just;
Take the bullet off a .22 Lr.
Pour the powder into a chamber.
Seat a factory suggested 29 grain bullet.
Repeat four more times.

These are not high pressure loads, they are .22s.
The firearms barely have enough barrel length to consume a factory load.
Nobody is suggesting doing something stupid like flash powder with a 55 grain bullet.

My suggestion works, is safe and uses common sense.
You get .22 lr smokeless performance out of a .22 BP.

I was simply trying to throw some easy to do and common sense information into a conversation.

Go easy Bro, no need to get bothered.

Respectfully,

Etek

Offline mazo kid

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 5679
Re: naa question... again...
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2015, 01:58:03 PM »
Etek, I think I am seeing your analogy between the NAA BP cylinder and 22 LR cylinder. I also can see Classanr's point about no mention of type of powder nor mention of amount, whether by weight or volume. You state that "fur flew", but did you ever actually hit the squirrel? And the squirrel sat there calmly chewing a nut while you fired five rounds at it! Not like any squirrels we have around here! I would like you to further your testing by actually measuring the powder, grain weight would be nice, and trying to find the type of powder used. At least the brand name. Years ago, I had the 22LR version (I have the Magnum BP one now) and I never could get any kind of accuracy with it 'cause it rotated so much in my hand....just not enough grip to hold on to!

Offline Hawg

  • Administrator
  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 8499
  • You done went and done it now!
Re: naa question... again...
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2015, 05:13:22 PM »
If somebody made a post on my forum talking about and recommending using any amount of smokeless in any bp gun I would delete the post and ban the poster without any further ado. You are lucky the majority of the admin here are so lenient.
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy, and taste good with ketchup.

Offline Etek

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
Re: naa question... again...
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2015, 11:18:56 PM »
Guys,

I'm simply stating that a .22lr load works in a .22 BP firearm that has a TWIN in .22 lr.
The .22lr load is of course safe in a .22 revolver that has a twin in .22 MAGNUM.

The factory suggested load of the .22 BP is a 'scoop' of 3fg or 4fg. The supplied 'scoop' is a plastic dipper with no markings except 2.5. WTF is '2.5'? The scoop has a PIECE OF ALUMINUM FOIL glued and jammed into the bottom! WTF is it? This load as I said barely pushes the projectile out of the barrel.
The SAME Freedom Arms advertises using xxx of Unique or whatever and that's Gospel but me suggesting using a Factory .22lr load is off the wall?

Everybody was talking about a .22 smokeless load for the NAA Mini talking bout x grains of this or that then I suggest using a FACTORY load then suddenly I'm the bad guy?

Get a grip.


Offline Classanr

  • Administrator
  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 5136
  • BP, the original bug chaser!
Re: naa question... again...
« Reply #6 on: March 04, 2015, 12:56:07 AM »
Guys,

I'm simply stating that a .22lr load works in a .22 BP firearm that has a TWIN in .22 lr.
The .22lr load is of course safe in a .22 revolver that has a twin in .22 MAGNUM.

The factory suggested load of the .22 BP is a 'scoop' of 3fg or 4fg. The supplied 'scoop' is a plastic dipper with no markings except 2.5. WTF is '2.5'? The scoop has a PIECE OF ALUMINUM FOIL glued and jammed into the bottom! WTF is it? This load as I said barely pushes the projectile out of the barrel.
The SAME Freedom Arms advertises using xxx of Unique or whatever and that's Gospel but me suggesting using a Factory .22lr load is off the wall?

Everybody was talking about a .22 smokeless load for the NAA Mini talking bout x grains of this or that then I suggest using a FACTORY load then suddenly I'm the bad guy?

Get a grip.

Etek, you are setting yourself up for a major fail here.  You have named the wrong smokeless powder, but you label that "gospel", then you claim that any 22lr smokeless load is "FACTORY" for the NAA BP pistol.  You have not measured the dipper - and admit you have no clue what it is, but you use it anyway.

Here is what the NAA instruction manual says for the Companion cylinder:
"Using the furnished powder measure (which holds 2.5 grains black powder FFFFH or Pyrodex, for the NAA Companion LR, ...), pour into each chamber 1 (one) level measure full. CAUTION - do not overload or use other than the recommended powder. Place a 30 grain .22 caliber bullet..."

Had you read the NAA instruction manual that came with the pistol, you would have learned WTF that "2.5" marking means, plus that the bullet is 30gr, not 29gr.

29gr bullet is Freedom Arms' bullet, not NAA's bullet.

Clearly, you are operating only from information gleaned from the Internet and not bothering to start with the manufacturer's operations manual.

The other posters were speculating, asking questions, and the responses were to not go down the directions they were considering.  There is but ONE recognized load of ONE smokeless powder in each of the two NAA cylinders.  You, however, are firm in your stance that any 22lr can be dumped un-measured into the NAA 22 BP, based solely on your presumption that NAA's 22lr and NAA's BP 22 are "twins".

Continuing to define your serious misunderstanding of why your approach is BAD, the design of the BP cylinders is NOT a "twin" of the 22lr or 22mag cylinder.  If you look and measure the inside, you will note that the BP chambers are stepped.  These are not "twins".  They are radically different designs, "twin" only by nomenclature.

You urging the use of pulled commercial 22lr loads as "safe" in BP revolvers ignores the public fact that factory loads are sometimes double-loaded.  Winchester has a current recall on factory loads because they didn't get it right.  Factories screw up.  Worse, they don't tell you about it until several guns blow up.  If you are going to dump powder from some other form of ammunition, at least *measure* the damned stuff as if you got it out of a factory 1lb container!

So far, you *still* have not even said *which* factory load you use.  There are dozens out there, each with different volumes/weights mixed of different blends of powder, each with significantly different pressure curves.  There is no such thing as a "common" 22lr load.

Yeah, we got a grip on this.  Screw the PM and politeness, I retract my apology.  You want to save a few bucks and make your own smokeless gun out of an NAA, go ahead.  But don't tell us to "get a grip" on your piss-poor-powder-practice.

Consider this your final warning on this subject.  Tell us the requested details or you will be locked out of this thread.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2015, 08:53:55 AM by Classanr »
Jim Beam me, Scotty!  Life here is more intelligent than I.

Offline Etek

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
Re: naa question... again...
« Reply #7 on: March 04, 2015, 09:48:30 AM »
The NAA BP mini bullet is 29 Grains according to NAA.
The 2.5 cc load is anemic.
3FG can be used according to NAA in the Q&A section on their webpage.
I am not suggesting doing anything stupid, just a factory load of smokeless out of a .22lr with a 29-30 grain bullet in either the Companion or Super Companion.

I think some folks are misreading my posts and then grind the pencil down to a nub.
Let's stop beating a dead horse here.

I consider the subject closed.


Offline Captainkirk

  • Forum Caesar, Administrator Extraordinaire, Part-Time Gunslinger, Savior of used and abused, and neglected Remmies
  • Administrator
  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7408
  • Black Powder Nut & Remmy fanatic
Re: naa question... again...
« Reply #8 on: March 04, 2015, 10:22:16 AM »
I consider the subject closed.

So let it be written, so let it be done.

"You gonna pull those pistols, or whistle Dixie?"