IMR4759 same as SR4759 ?

[mikes farm]

I am looking at surplus Russian Powder described as can be loaded using IMR4759 load data. I looked at IMR website and they only list SR4759. Is anyone certain if IMR4759 the same as SR4759 ?
Thanks
Mike

[rockrat]

Looking at the same stuff and wondering about using it in the 357max

[Doc Highwall]

SR4759 never had a IMR (Improved Military Rifle) only SR (Sporter Rifle) prefix as far as I recall.

[Dean D.]

My new 1 lb. jar of SR4759 was made by the IMR Powder Co. Inc., that may be where you are getting the IMR reference. On the jar at the top it says "IMR" but below that it says "SR4759".

[Larry Gibson]

IMR and SR are accronyms synonimous with Dupont made powders of old. 4759 was used and sold as SR (Sporter Rifle) and using in military cartridges also where it would have an IMR (Improved Military Rifle) designation. Thus as noted it can be labled as both. It is however the same powder.

Larry Gibson

[mikes farm]

Larry,
The current Sr4759 is also used in reduced loads. This is why I use it. The IMR4759 that you speak of could also be used for reduced load like SR ?
Just trying to make sure there is no misunderstanding.
Mike

[Rocky Raab]

Again, IMR 4759 IS SR4759 SR4759 is manufactured by IMR.

To further add to the confusion rather than extirpate it, we might also say that because Hodgden owns IMR, the powder is Hodgdon IMR SR4759. But that's being outrageous.

Finally, a very minor quibble: "SR" stands for Sporting Rifle. That's "ing" not "er."

[Larry Gibson]

Mikes farm

Rocky is correct; both IMR and SR 4759 are the same, use the same data for both.

Rocky, yup it is "ing" not "er".

Larry Gibson

[spqrzilla]

Part of the confusion today comes from the fact that "IMR" was a label for a line of powders sold by DuPont. Now years later, Dupont is long gone, but IMR has become the trademark for all of those powders, even the ones not of the "IMR" line.

[felix]

Not confusing to folks who appreciate chemicals for what they are. Brand names mean nothing, per se, unless the brand name becomes a "personalized", a quasi scientific, name for a very specific product. Something like Kleenex and facial tissue. There is no guarantee that Kleenex will produce the same composition for each lot of their facial tissue. The same with these so-called gun powders that sound similiar via a personalized name. Besides that, an old powder lot with a certain lot number can be faster should the amount of "moisture" had been altered from intended as new for the lot number, no matter the actual brand name. Storage conditions can dramatically affect powder characteristics. ... felix

[405]

Regardless, it is a given that within any designated powder there will be lot to lot variations. The OP ? has been answered fairly well. I've always used Dupont/IMR powders designated the same..... as the same. Multitudes of warnings have been written and stated everywhere that one should start at suggested starting loads and work up to avoid surprises with any powder application. The 4759 thing is fairly simple. A justifiably more confusing situation exists with the various 4895s !!

The OP's confusion may be related to attached pic

[spqrzilla]

An excellent illustration of what I was describing. Those are the same powders in different trade dress before and after the change of ownership.

[mikes farm]

On Gilbrass.com They had a pulldown powder labeled 'loads the same as IMR 4759".
He has now changed it to read "Loads the same as RS4759". I bought about 20 pounds
of powder from him. My original question was because my only use for 4759 was in reduced rifle
rounds. I did not want 8 pounds of powder on the shelf that I did not intend to use often.
Thanks for all of your replies.
Mike

[Greg5278]

Watch that stuff Jeff is selling as 4759, it is not the same. I bought 16# of the last batch 2 years ago, and it is not 4759. It was a finer, shorter grain, and was olive drab in color. It looked like 4227 with a different color.I called Jeff at GI Brass and asked him about it, he said it was IMR 7641.
He also mentioned using the same loading data. I loaded some and sent them to be pressure tested, they were way overpressure with a starting load. I was expecting under 12K PSI, but the load generated 17K+ PSI.
I mentione dit to him, and he said that is was the first he had heard of it. Start at a beginning load, and watch closely for pressure signs.
Greg

[Rocky Raab]

I don't mean to come off as a grumpy Gus or some wheezin' geezer, but the risk of using surplus, pull-down and (even worse) foreign non-canister powders is just too high.

Ask any reloader what to do with an unknown powder and the reply is always "Don't use it!" Well, that's what ALL non-canister powders are: unknowns.

We read here of a situation which (if it's true) is a guy selling an unknown powder, giving verbal load advice with apparently NO testing having been done to even remotely confirm the burn rate of the powder in question.

And we buy this stuff because it's cheap? Compare the price of good canister powder to the cost of a new gun - or a few fingers - or an eye. Or worse. Cheap?

It's crazy.

[leadman]

Some of the older surplus U.S. powders were pretty simple to use as the sellers probably knew what the original use was. 4895, 4831, Wc680, WC845, etc.
With the powders coming in from overseas it is a much more dangerous business now.

I use some surplus powders now. Still have some WWII 4831, WC845, WC680. The WC powders were purchased from Pat's Reloading and he provided some good data with it. This is not the case with some vendors though.