Is there any difference between current manufactured IMR 4227 and Hodgdon 4227? If not, is the burning rate of IMR the Old Hodgdon or is Hodgdon the old IMR?
Printable View
Is there any difference between current manufactured IMR 4227 and Hodgdon 4227? If not, is the burning rate of IMR the Old Hodgdon or is Hodgdon the old IMR?
Yes, always assume there IS a difference until proven otherwise with EACH application at home. ... felix
http://www.assra.com/cgi-bin/yabb/Ya...num=1346335533
Vintage 2007 Communication
Quote:
The product name H 4227 has been discontinued. All future lots of IMR 4227 will be manufactured by ADI in Australia. It will look about the same as the old IMR 4227 but will have the advantage of being unaffected by changes in temperature like the Hodgdon line of Extruded Powders.
Within the next year or so ADI will also begin manufacturing IMR 4198. It of course will also be unaffected by changes in temperature. To the best of my knowledge H4198 in it's current form will continue in the Hodgdon Line.
Mike Daly
Customer Satisfaction Manager
Hodgdon Powder Company/ IMR Powder Company
For a few years, the Hodgdon reloading center had both imr 4227 and h 4227 for the same cartridge with the exact same specs. The bullet, powder charge, velocity, and preassure were exactly the same. I compared it to reloading data from before the merge and the data was the exact same as the old h 4227, not the imr version. I just looked to confirm and the site now has only imr 4227 version. The current imr 4227 is the same as the old h 4227.
Checking the Hodgdon site load for 44 magnum pistol, the load shows only Imr 4227 but I checked it to the 2005 Hodgdon reloading manual with h4227 for a 240 gr nos jhp and the loads are identical. 24 grains for 1458 fps and 36,100 cup.
I treat them as different lots of the same powder and my results confirm my assumption so far.
Big, big hint:
It is likely the "new"IMR 4227 you are now loading is the old H4227. It looks just like it save for the graphite, is also less temperature sensitive like the H4227 was, and quite frankly there's no good reason for ADI to drop their already suitable, less temperature sensitive powder for the IMR product.
It is very, very, very, very likely that they in fact did not.
Just use the current data and you will be fine, but don't fool yourself that ADI is using the old "IMR 4227" formula. Figure on H4227 instead.
Hodgdon's current loadings for the two 4227's in .357 Magnum mirror each other. I wonder if the same will be true for both versions of 4895?