Varget vs H4895 ?

[nekshot]

Call me slow, call me late but don't call me late to dinnner! I recently bought my first pound of Varget. I thought I would set it in the cabinet for such a time as who knows when. Well I started using it in place of H4895 on certain pet very accurate loads for various guns and when the jungle carbine turned in a 1 1\4 inch groub of five shots at 80 yards I got to thinking this stuff is consistantly giving a wee bit better accuracy then H4895 with PC cast. Any one else find this to be true? Can it be reduced down like Lee's Reloading manual does for cast boolits? All these new things I have been learning recently(PC) and now this is almost more than I can bear!

[tomme boy]

I find that Varget is just a weeee bit slower. In 223 with jacketed anyway. In 308 win with jacketed, Varget seems to be about 1.5 to 2 grs slower than H4895. Meaning I have to add 1.5-2 grs more to get the same velocity as the 4895. I have also reduced both the same levels. But they both like a little dacron to help keep the powder in place to help it ignite.

[DR Owl Creek]

I've had good pretty good luck with Varget. I'm going to try BLC-(2) as soon as the weather warms up a little more. Hodgdon's burn rate chart shows it being a little slower than Varget.


Dave

[runfiverun]

varget is closer to 4064 than 4895.
if you used it grain for grain you lowered your pressures [and most likely your velocity] accounting for the better accuracy.

[RogerDat]

varget is closer to 4064 than 4895............


ADI the Australian manufacture lists varget and 4064 as being equivalent and when I called Hodgdon they confirmed, accidentally saying "the same" before correcting themselves and saying "close enough to be used as equivalent". I was looking for powder and load data for heavy .303 British, ADI had the load data I needed for their powders and the US powders that were equivalent.

[Larry Gibson]

H4895 is a bit faster burning and does ignite and burn more efficiently than Varget at the lower level pressures used with some cast bullet loads, even when a Dacron filler is used with both. This is especially the case with medium to light weight heavier cast bullets for the cartridge.

Have to say that Varget has become my "go to" powder for bolt and gas gun match loads of .223 with 60 - 70 gr jacketed bullets and for my .308W and '06 match loads with 175 gr match bullets.

Larry Gibson

[Lloyd Smale]

ill be the negative here. When varget came out everyone raved. I bought a 8lb keg and tried it in about everything and never found it to do better then the best load I already had for any gun I owned. It never did pourly just never impressed me and I haven't bought anymore.

[dragon813gt]

I have a few pounds and it worked well. Nothing to rave about. And w/ the current prices for Varget I won't be buying any more. They ask $40 a pound for it around here. 4895 is $25 so it's a no brainer.

[Tackleberry41]

Friend of mine raves about Varget, all he looks to buy for his 308. Have not found it to be any better than anything else. Have been using benchmark in 223. Just bulk pulled FMJ in once fired military brass. Found I can get right at 300rds to a lbs with benchmark and a decent load. Vs slightly less with Varget. The math is easier a bottle of Benchmark is 300rds.

[lotech]

I use both powders for jacketed bullet loads, but find H4895 slightly more useful. As for cast bullet loads, H4895 has done very well, so well, in fact, I've seen no reason to try Varget. However, it may also be a great cast bullet powder. Never found a need for a filler with H4895, at least for use in cartridges like the .32-40, .30-40 Krag, . 308 Winchester, .30-06, .38-55, and .405 Winchester. I suspect fillers would also be unnecessary with cast / Varget loads.

[GabbyM]

ill be the negative here. When varget came out everyone raved. I bought a 8lb keg and tried it in about everything and never found it to do better then the best load I already had for any gun I owned. It never did pourly just never impressed me and I haven't bought anymore.

Since after the first year Varget was introduced. Was noted that lot to lot variance was unfriendly to complacent shooters. Those five italicized words replace a simpler four letter word. But I'm just off a ten day suspension for using one of those four letter words. lo que será sera .

In past years I ran through an eight pound jug of Varget in my 223 varmint rifle. Got excellent accuracy but about 150 fps less velocity than published. With 50 grain bullets 3,250 fps from a 26" barrel bolt gun. That with more than listed max load to fill up the neck sized cases and flatten Federal match primers. Did well with 53 grain SMK's also. 3/8th inch 100 yard groups and hit P dogs at 400 yards. Made me a believer in the temp insensitivity of the Hogdgon Extreme line. Now other brands are utilizing those coatings. It's the shot to shot consistency that hits P dogs at a quarter mile. Your first shot almost always misses. You view and adjust then shoot another. Your second and following shots chamber in a hot barrel where the powder starts to heat up. There is enough going on there other than dealing with how many seconds your round has been cooking in a hot chamber.

Prairie dogs are two inches wide and you need to hit that at a quarter mile. Varget worked for me and after I was teased for loading it before a match in Illinois. Next year lots of shooters discovered it. Worked for some then not for others. Alliant Reloader #15 is the same way. I got 300 fps E.S with 53 grain bullets in a 223 with it. Figured out it's hard to lite. light bullets and mild Federal primers are not a good mix in a 223. It is after all at the extreme slow end of 223 powder burn rates. So perhaps that's why you see shooters of heavy for caliber bullets using it? Varget is also probably better used in the heavy 22 bullet loads. But Varget has worked far better for me in a 223 when lit with Federal match primers. Very mild power primer.


I have moved on from Varget. Used mine up and just do not short change others experience with it to roll the dice. Besides the velocity on my jug was way low. Now I've run into a 16 pound batch of Ramshot TAC for my 55 grain AR loads and for match bullets. H-Benchmark, AA LT-32. For the heavies. Alliant AR-Comp. A reformulated RL 15. Supposed to be treated with temp insensitivity coatings and made to lite better than RL 15. You'd need to check Alliant's web site for the brag up. I've only been playing with it for a few weeks in my heavy AR's. The AA LT-32 is the bees knees in my 12" twist featherweight AR. It always liked 4198 over the slow powders. LT-32 is slower but faster than H-335 or WW748. My old SP-1 will not get under two inches with slow powder. This LT-32 is boosted as a reproduction of the old Thunderbird powder first used in Stoners AR-15. So far it seams to work but I need a year to play. Slow powder with heavy bullets work in my heavy AR's. Two completely different animals.

If you look into the load sheets. You will see, AR-Comp gives top end velocity in both 20 inch AR barrels and 26 inch varmint rifle barrels. H-4895 gives you top velocity in the 26 inch barrels but not the 20 inch barrel's. So yes it would be nice to get my powder inventory down to under ten powders. Ball powders like the new Alliant 2000 or 4000 will give you an extra 100 fps from an AR-15. Plus the price is quite a bit less. Way better than the old H-335 but you still have the down side. May mean nothing depending upon your intended usage. IME with the ball powders. You use a hot CCI mag or Rem 7 1/2 primer in an AR. Start with the SAMI max load then work up to the NATO 62,000 psi load. I personally have never in my life loaded a 223 at over SAMI max and have no intention of starting now. Just to Cheep to wear out barrels and brass. Then I own bigger guns than a 223 anyways.


What I just tried to say is: Varget and H-4895 are both getting long in the tooth. Varget has been somewhat unobtainable for the last few years. Since IIRC the plant it was made in was the one that blew up in Australia. They are back on line a of this winter. So it's all new then it's a given they know more than me on how to make gun powder. Chances are the new Varget will be better than ever and hopefully void of the old issues. Or they could have new plant start up issues. Who knows?

[tomme boy]

The plant in Australia that had the fire did not touch the rifle side of the plant. Varget was being made the whole time. I was getting it the whole time others were having problems. The problem was everyone bought up the whole supply in the chain. You just had to be in the right place at the right time.

And depending on temp that you are shooting in and what weight of boolits you are shooting MAY need the use of dacron. It also depends on the cartridge that you are using. It has to do with case capacity. Certain ones are just easier to use than others.

[Bubba w/a 45/70]

I have a few pounds and it worked well. Nothing to rave about. And w/ the current prices for Varget I won't be buying any more. They ask $40 a pound for it around here. 4895 is $25 so it's a no brainer.

The Varget is $40/pound around here also, and it is my favorite powder for my .308. That being said, I laid in a 8# keg of 4064, as this is the equivalent, and the only difference (so I've heard/read) is the temp sensitivity product isn't in 4064 like Varget.

[nagantguy]

Both powders mentioned by the OP are useful and versital I'm fairly new on the 4895 band wagon but I'm there with both feet! However I won't be without varget on my shelf, in .223 and .308 it is just on the slow side fps wise but it is consistent, I've found the "sweet" spot with barged in both those calibers that are my go to starting loads and they never seem to fail. Varget not being temperature sensitive is also.a reason to love it, -30° below zero Michigan winters or 90° + MI summers my point of impact does not shift on a vote of woodchuck. And I was very happy to find on my last trip to CO extream elevation nor temp changes made any difference at least not to my meeger shooting skills. If I could only have one rifle powder I'd be hard pressed to pick between the two!!!!

[tdoyka]

i bought a 1 lb can of varget about a year and half ago and it sat on my shelf until this week. when it stops raining for a couple of days:mad: i'll start shooting the 30-40 krag. i have about 10 rounds for it in 165gr ranch dogs and i have it in boolits that where sent to me(examples), 190gr cast rnfp.

i was going to try rel7, but i did a few extra cases and loaded up varget (165gr - 32.0-33.0gr/ 190gr - 32.0gr) just to see what happens.

[sthwestvictoria]

Both great powders however I feel that H4896 (ar2206h in Australia) is more useful for cast bullets due to the Hodgdon H4895 60% rule. Varget is where I start to call powders slow and won't reduced them. Having said that I have some accurate cast loads for 30-30 with min Varget loads.

I use Varget (ar2208) mostly in jacketed and as others have said heavy for calibre - 100grain in 243; 225grain in 35 whelen. Varget likes a bit of pressure for ignition - projectile mass, crimp or narrow neck.

[hcpookie]

varget is closer to 4064 than 4895.
if you used it grain for grain you lowered your pressures [and most likely your velocity] accounting for the better accuracy.

My friend and I loaded some Varget just to see how well it would burn, since we are worried about long-term throat erosion by using the hotter powders like 4895 in our military collectibles. Dotted the X on the bullseye at 100 yards using Hornady's load data. Can't complain about that out of a service barrel!

I'm on the fence as my dad is a die-hard 4064 fan, and he and I are going to be testing some loads with that powder next... we just have more 4064 between us than Varget at this point.