Another BH209 Problem???
02-22-2011, 10:20 AM
#31
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Saxonburg Pa
Posts: 3,925
02-22-2011, 11:04 AM
#32
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,703
kb1
Let me add what I think I know... The flat face plug for the Vision was designed and brought out just prior to the introduction of BH-209. The design of the new plug was created to make it a cleaner NFPJ plug. This was accomplished by opening the and lengthing the 'flash channel' (putting the flash hole at the end of the plug instead of under the primer), both of these two aspects reduce the amount of blow back pressure felt at the nose of the spent primer and in that case reduce the amount of blow back escaping by the primer is reduced. I also believe Gordy also opened the 'flash hole' at least 0.001" to insure a more positve ignition of T7. You can see the effects in this picture although it is a bit blurry...
This picture shows the breech area after 12 shots of 110 grains BH209. This is far cleaner than than anything Knight had going at the time. But if you look closely at the opening of the flash channel in the BP you can see already a significant build up of carbon. I doubt that it would have made another 12 shots with out a hangfire or misfire. And even at the time I thought this was a very good plug for shooting BH. Today I would have to alter thought a bit.
Another thing I might mention Gordy has used the plug for 2 years but 95% of his shooting has been with T7. When Gordy created this plug he accomplished his design goals of a cleaner - reliable NFPJ for the Vision.
For myself only.... I believe this to be a fairly reliable plug for BH through 15 consecutive shots without cleaning the flash channel. Is it 100% reliable, not for me as I do so much target shooting, but for a hunter that shoots only a few shots - it works great as long as you clean the channel every-so-often.
Here is another projection I think will happen.... When Knight re-introduces the Vision, and since Lehigh is now under contract to Knight it will have a different breech plug in it - designed to shoot BH more relieably over an extended number of shots + be really clean.
Just passing on my thoughts...
Let me add what I think I know... The flat face plug for the Vision was designed and brought out just prior to the introduction of BH-209. The design of the new plug was created to make it a cleaner NFPJ plug. This was accomplished by opening the and lengthing the 'flash channel' (putting the flash hole at the end of the plug instead of under the primer), both of these two aspects reduce the amount of blow back pressure felt at the nose of the spent primer and in that case reduce the amount of blow back escaping by the primer is reduced. I also believe Gordy also opened the 'flash hole' at least 0.001" to insure a more positve ignition of T7. You can see the effects in this picture although it is a bit blurry...
This picture shows the breech area after 12 shots of 110 grains BH209. This is far cleaner than than anything Knight had going at the time. But if you look closely at the opening of the flash channel in the BP you can see already a significant build up of carbon. I doubt that it would have made another 12 shots with out a hangfire or misfire. And even at the time I thought this was a very good plug for shooting BH. Today I would have to alter thought a bit.
Another thing I might mention Gordy has used the plug for 2 years but 95% of his shooting has been with T7. When Gordy created this plug he accomplished his design goals of a cleaner - reliable NFPJ for the Vision.
For myself only.... I believe this to be a fairly reliable plug for BH through 15 consecutive shots without cleaning the flash channel. Is it 100% reliable, not for me as I do so much target shooting, but for a hunter that shoots only a few shots - it works great as long as you clean the channel every-so-often.
Here is another projection I think will happen.... When Knight re-introduces the Vision, and since Lehigh is now under contract to Knight it will have a different breech plug in it - designed to shoot BH more relieably over an extended number of shots + be really clean.
Just passing on my thoughts...
02-22-2011, 02:16 PM
#33
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 374
That plug is 100% not BH209 compatible. [/quote]
gentleman;when i first answered this thread i was just trying to help a fellow enthusiast,when i read the above i have to admit it irked me because it ran counter to my experiances. and the way its worded made it seem to say that the plug is no good at all.
grouse,sabotloader;i've learned alot from both of you and i believe your knowledge in muzzleloading far exceeds mine.
i'm sure any part on any muzzleloader can be improved upon but the statement above seems a little "over the top"to me ....karl
gentleman;when i first answered this thread i was just trying to help a fellow enthusiast,when i read the above i have to admit it irked me because it ran counter to my experiances. and the way its worded made it seem to say that the plug is no good at all.
grouse,sabotloader;i've learned alot from both of you and i believe your knowledge in muzzleloading far exceeds mine.
i'm sure any part on any muzzleloader can be improved upon but the statement above seems a little "over the top"to me ....karl
02-22-2011, 02:54 PM
#34
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,703
kb1
Karl, I still think it is the best NFPJ breech plug Knight has (T7 & BH) and it certainly is the best available for the Vision.
How each of us rates a product is always a toss-up - We can not even agree on a the best bullet, the best powder, or even the best gun... so agreeing on a BP is not much different...
Actually I think Gordy's statement to you is a little misleading also...
I am sure at the time Gordy wrote this he and I believed it to be a very valid statement, especially after his frustrations with the KP1 and attempts to make that one BH compatible. Also I think it was a far more compatible plug than any NFPJ for the DICS system. If I could have used in a DISC - I would have changed to it a long time ago.
The real problem, in my mind, there is a learning curve attached to shooting BH - when you master the curve - shooting it becomes easy.
Remember back in the day... Underclocked invented the term 'crud ring' for the hard residue T7 leaves in some barrels.... then BH came out with their statement to us was it is "non-corrosive" and does not create a "crud ring". since those early days we have found out that it is midly 'corrosive' and the 'crud ring' has moved from the bore to the breech plug.
So not much of anything is a 100%
If it was we would all be shooting CVA's...
grouse,sabotloader;i've learned alot from both of you and i believe your knowledge in muzzleloading far exceeds mine.
i'm sure any part on any muzzleloader can be improved upon but the statement above seems a little "over the top"to me ....karl
i'm sure any part on any muzzleloader can be improved upon but the statement above seems a little "over the top"to me ....karl
How each of us rates a product is always a toss-up - We can not even agree on a the best bullet, the best powder, or even the best gun... so agreeing on a BP is not much different...
Actually I think Gordy's statement to you is a little misleading also...
I got an email from "Gordy Edwards" at Knight Rifles - and he assured me that the breech plug - part # 900046 - for bare primers, is made specifically to solve any problems with shooting BH 209.
The real problem, in my mind, there is a learning curve attached to shooting BH - when you master the curve - shooting it becomes easy.
Remember back in the day... Underclocked invented the term 'crud ring' for the hard residue T7 leaves in some barrels.... then BH came out with their statement to us was it is "non-corrosive" and does not create a "crud ring". since those early days we have found out that it is midly 'corrosive' and the 'crud ring' has moved from the bore to the breech plug.
So not much of anything is a 100%
If it was we would all be shooting CVA's...
02-22-2011, 04:03 PM
#35
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Saxonburg Pa
Posts: 3,925
02-22-2011, 04:16 PM
#36
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Boncarbo,Colorado
Posts: 9,186
All it took for me was a .035" flash hole.
The 5/32" flash channel that grouse recommends does in fact help keep accuracy consistent. i noticed yesterday when shooting our apex that uses the factory flash channel, after 6 shots, i took 2 more and had them in the same hole, shot another that went 1 1/2" to the left, fired 2 more and the were still over on the left and started to climb higher. Keep the flash channels clean for consistent accuracy, thats all there is to it.
The 5/32" flash channel that grouse recommends does in fact help keep accuracy consistent. i noticed yesterday when shooting our apex that uses the factory flash channel, after 6 shots, i took 2 more and had them in the same hole, shot another that went 1 1/2" to the left, fired 2 more and the were still over on the left and started to climb higher. Keep the flash channels clean for consistent accuracy, thats all there is to it.
02-23-2011, 06:26 AM
#37
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,837
kb1
Remember back in the day... Underclocked invented the term 'crud ring' for the hard residue T7 leaves in some barrels.... then BH came out with their statement to us was it is "non-corrosive" and does not create a "crud ring". since those early days we have found out that it is midly 'corrosive' and the 'crud ring' has moved from the bore to the breech plug.
So not much of anything is a 100%
Remember back in the day... Underclocked invented the term 'crud ring' for the hard residue T7 leaves in some barrels.... then BH came out with their statement to us was it is "non-corrosive" and does not create a "crud ring". since those early days we have found out that it is midly 'corrosive' and the 'crud ring' has moved from the bore to the breech plug.
So not much of anything is a 100%
