IMR or H 4198

[ubetcha]

I was just paging through the Lyman pistol and revolver handbook for different powder to use in my T/C 14" 30-30. I was using SR 4759 and enjoyed shooting it. But now that 4759 is discontinued, I 'm looking for a replacement. Someone mentioned the use of 4198 at one time, but don't recall if it was IMR 4198 or H4198.. I shoot the RCBS 165gr Sil using Water dropped wheel weights and sized to .310. All decked out with lube and alum check, it actually weights 173 gr. Has anyone have any recommendations for 4198? I was also thinking about R7 too. This T/C is used to shoot IHMSA silhouettes so accuracy and knock down power is needed. Thanks

[kungfustyle]

I was looking at the same thing. 4198 and 4227 are calling my name. All can be used in just about every rifle cartage out there. I'm leaning to 4198. Both IMR and Hodgdon list 4198 as extreme powders as 72 and 73 on their burn rate chart. So close almost no difference. But when it comes to powder, Get the one you can find...... I don't think you can go wrong with any mentioned. Lyman cast handbook lists load for a 30-30 and 173g at 18(1600fps) to 23.5(1999fps) w/ IMR 4198

[ubetcha]

I loaded only 10 rds of 30-30 last night with 17grs of IMR 4227 just as a "give it a try" thing. I have been working up a load for my 357 max using IMR 4227, so while it was on the bench, I used it. Although, the last time I shot the 30-30, it would not hold a group at 50 meters worth a hoot. I thought I was shooting a shotgun load. I'm beginning to think my scope pooped out. Time to look for a new one. It has a Tasco 4x30 with target turrents and served me well for many years, but I have a Bushnell 3200 Elite on the Max and I really like it so far. I do like the target turrents though. Can't test a load if the scope is bad. I should use a load that I know shot good and see if there is truly a changed or is it just me. I will have to keep a look out for some 4198.

[Wayne S]

I was just paging through the Lyman pistol and revolver handbook for different powder to use in my T/C 14" 30-30. I was using SR 4759 and enjoyed shooting it. But now that 4759 is discontinued,

Watch http://gunbot.net/reloading/Powder/ I see 4759 in stock at several venders. as to either 4198 or RL-7 start at 16.gn and work up. I was using 18.5 H 4198 with a 185 gn. 311367 then switched to 10.0 gn of Unique w/ a Lg. pistol primer and the 31141 , [175 lubed], so my S/O and I could shoot the same load. The pistol primer produced single digit SD & ES and other that bad [very low ] hits was 100% positive on rams.

[kerreckt]

H4198 and IMR4198 have become so similar over the years that either should work just fine. Personally, I use IMR4198. The reason being that I bought 32lbs. of it a number of years ago for a great price.

[451whitworth]

I get a little better accuracy with the IMR version. I use a lot of RL-7 too and it is one of my favorite cast bullet powders.

[Pee Wee]

I just got a 357 herrett T/C, DUKE OF FLORIDA is helping with the loads. He loaded up min load of IMR 4198 seems to work good. So that's what we are going to use. The hornady book has a load page for the T/C 357 herrett and they only show two powders.

[FergusonTO35]

I am interested in this question because I am working up some hunting loads in .30 WCF for my 336 Texan. I am shooting the Lee C309-150-RF sized to .310, looking for around 2000 fps with good accuracy. I have SR4759, H4198, Reloder 7, IMR 4895, IMR XBR 8208, and IMR 4064. Any of these stand out as particularly good choices?

Interestingly, I have found alot more SR4759 available since it was allegedly discontinued.

[skeet1]

I have an additional question about 4198. What are we actually getting when we buy IMR4198? I purchased a 1 lb. bottle of it the other day expecting it to be made at the IMR plant in Canada but the bottle is marked "Made In Australia" where the former H4198 was made. So what have I actually got?

Ken

[Maximumbob54]

I used to use a lot of IMR powders but as soon as I bought a pound of Win 748 to try I've been hooked. Now I try to use all ball powders if I can. They are soooooo much easier to measure out and get consistent powder drops. If you are just hooked on the extruded stick powders then I would try one of the shorter cut new versions. But I will confess I burned up a lot of IMR 3031 in .30-30 for a long time.

[9w1911]

only problem with the ball powders is they do not like to be downloaded very much

[Blackwater]

As is usually the case when you're wanting to load an individual gun, the best thing to do is always let the gun tell you what it wants. It's always good to know what others have found in their own guns, but that won't tell you what'll work in yours. Always let the gun be the final determinant. There's really no other definitive answer.

The best thing to do is, if you know other reloaders who have the powders you have reason to believe should work, to "borrow" a little to try in your gun, and if that's not possible, get a 1 lb. can of the likely suspects and give them a try.

By doing it this way, and keeping a good log of your results, one day when you run out of your favorite load, you can go to the next best load, and keep on truckin'. This is what I've done, and helped others do, over the years, and it winds up saving us all money, time and keeps us as free of disappointment and bad surprises as can humanly be achieved. It just works, and works well for all of us.

And BTW, I generally buy the H version, but it's mostly because it works so well in .45/70 with smokeless loads, and I'm glad because the grains are shorter, and they meter better and more accurately than the longer grained IMR version. They are NOT the same powder, though, and the H is a tad slower than the IMR version, so they are NOT interchangeable. Close, but not interchangeable.

Another thing many disremember when talking about the long, stick powders is that they're made that way for a reason. When smokeless was first invented, they began looking for ways to regulate and control the burning rate. They found that powders made in long grains with tiny perforations through the center burned outward from the center as well as inward from the outside, thus giving bullets a longer, gentler "shove" forward, and this enhanced accuracy often, as well as improving velocity and general performance in many ways.

So if you don't like the long grained stick powders, that's OK, but you MAY well be missing some real advantages they offer, most particularly accuracy, and as already stated, most ball powders don't take to reduced loads very well. They are generally harder to ignite because of the deterrent coatings, and can get pretty squirrely when tried in reduced loads fairly often, so don't discount the flake and stick powders just because they're more challenging to meter well. Just learn how to handle them and they'll give you great results.

One last point is that Julian Hatcher, when he was in charge of the national armory, sought to increase the accuracy of issue match loads, and conducted tests with weighed charges vs. machine loaded rounds, and, quite to his surprise, found that the machine loaded ammo was MORE accurate than the hand-weighed powder charged ammo. This seemed contradictory, so he redid the experiment and got the same results! I think he did similar tests subsequently, and usually found that the machine loaded stuff, or metered through a powder measure, out-shot the carefully weighed charged ammo. This puzzled him for many years, and he finally opined that the only possible and likely explanation he could come up with was that the machine charged ammo had the powder dumped in rather more loosely, while the carefully weighed charges tended to pack down more compactly, reducing the air space between granules. Thus, he reasoned, the more loosely packed charges MAY have allowed the primer flash to penetrate deeper into the charge, thus improving consistency of ignition, which could have explained the better accuracy of the machine loaded rounds.

Reloading is full of surprises, and we need to be ever mindful of that so that we, too, can avail ourselves of the more positive ones. Things just aren't always gonna' turn out like we think they should, or expect, and when that happens, we need to find out why, lest we lead ourselves into trouble again some time, and to gain better performance from our guns and ammo and boolits. Just makes sense to fly by the seat of our pants, and to try things that might surprise us sometimes. This can lead us to a greater appreciation for what all is really going on when we do the things we do, and sometimes, lead us to great improvements in our shooting and reloading, and our understanding of what it is we're really doing in it. The more we know, through actual proving and testing our ideas, the better and more efficient our loads and loading can be. Very simple, but easy to lose sight of when we're always in a hurry, like so many of us usually are these days. FWIW?

[FergusonTO35]

Good post, I'm a fan of the IMR branded powders myself. Probably try 4895 first as I've always had very good luck with it. 4064 is scary accurate with j-words in .30 WCF so might try that one also.

[Maximumbob54]

Lots of good points. I admit I've not done many reduced loads unless I've gone all the way down to Trail Boss, 2400, or Unique.

Little to do with this but I swear by IMR 4198 for M1 Garand loads as I never want to find out about a broken op rod.