Sub 3031 for 4475

[oneokie]

Ok, have done a search for IMR 4475 and found info. that it is close to IMR 3031.
4475 does not appear on any burn rate charts that I have looked at.
Can a load that calls for 4475 be used with 3031 by backing up the charge wt. by 10% and working up?

[Ricochet]

That seems like a reasonable approach.

[Ricochet]

5744 is a different powder from IMR 4475.

IMR 4475 is a DuPont noncanister powder that was used to load military 7.62mm NATO cartridges. Sold as milsurp with the advice that it's similar to 3031.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

does anybody have a price and where to get it?

Rich

[Buckshot]

does anybody have a price and where to get it?

Rich

............Check the supplier list in the sticky up top. BTW, I bought some IMR4475 and it reacts just like IMR3031. However 4475 has much smaller ad shorter grains, which is a good thing. I paid $80/8lbs. Locally all IMR and Hogden powders go for at least double that.

...............Buckshot

[TCLouis]

I checked the supplier list and did not find 4475.

Did I just miss something.

Have found several uses for 3031 or a look-a-like and I am running out of M-9.

[RayinNH]

TC, I think it's another long gone. I looked through my old paperwork and found that Jeff Bartlett sold it back in 2004. This was his write up for the powder "Original application as alternate use for U.S. 7.62mm NATO Ball M80 ammo, typically loaded around 43-44 grains. This is an extruded powder which can be loaded using IMR 3031 data. It is small grained, looks like IMR 4320, and meters very uniformly. This is pulldown powder. $72/8#...Ray

[TCLouis]

I passed on 4759 the first go around and aslo the 4475.

Got smart and snnagged some of the 4759 the second go-round and failed to get the 4475.

Fine grained 3031 substitute would be great. My M9 is like measuring rocks . . . every load has to be weighed (ball powder has spoiled me) and sometimes it bridges in my RCBS powder measure with large diameter drop tube.
And I only have a pound or so left.

Wonder if there would if there would even be any milsurp available, IF the govt could release it for sale?

I guess I had better buy some of the current WC820 before it is all gone.

[kycrawler]

i bought the last of the 4475 from jeff about a year and a half ago very nice powder in 308 and 8mm jacketed loads i have about 15 lbs left out of 35

[BerdanIII]

OT, but what is the burn rate of M9 and what was it originally used in?

[TCLouis]

100% comparable in the 3031 loads where I have used it as a substitute (338 Win Mag. 45-70, 7.92X57, 6.5X50, 6.5 TCU, 7mm TCU, and 30-30).

39 grains behind the Lee C339220 RN or Hornady 338 FN was accurate in my 338 Mag rifle and POI was exactly the same spot and about 1825 fps IIRC. Plenty of power for our little deer. So far I have not been able to match the Lee boolit accuracy with my RCBS 200 FN so far but keep hoping.

I plan to play more with Seafire's Blue Dot loads after January to see if I can get the accuracy out of the RCBS 200 FN.

M9 was a powder that Jeff warned about in a measure just like the recent 107 he sold. If I remember correctly he told me the powder was used to load for the 40mm grenade used in the M-79/M203.

I guess we had all better get used to the fact that Mil-Surp powder is soon to be gone, and primers will pricey for at least, the near future.

[Buckshot]

............Four to 5 years ago the M9 that was available was Chinese. It also had no flash deterant, which is no big deal for us.

.................Buckshot

[BerdanIII]

Thanks for the info. I saw the powder referenced in a manual, but from the burn rate and charge weight you're giving, it was another M9.

[twisted1in66]

Ok, have done a search for IMR 4475 and found info. that it is close to IMR 3031.
4475 does not appear on any burn rate charts that I have looked at.
Can a load that calls for 4475 be used with 3031 by backing up the charge wt. by 10% and working up?

Just as an FYI about IMR-4475 by DuPont. That was the powder that the original AR-15/M-16 was designed around. It is a very fast burning and clean burning powder and the first M-16's went to the Green Beret in Viet Nam where it performed flawlessly. Using ammo with that powder in it the firing rate was 750-800 rps and it virtually never jammed. It also ran much cleaner than previous rifles to the point they rarely had to clean them. When the word came down to outfit all GI's in Viet Nam with the M-16, the Ordnance Department had a fit. They wanted their own M-14 for that, had fudged tests, and generally did everything they could to keep that "outside design" from being used.

First thing they did was change the ammo from using the IMR-4475 powder they would have to buy from DuPont to their "Ball powder" they used on every other rifle and on artillery. It is a much slower burning and very dirty powder supplied by their favorite supplier. That move killed thousands of 18 and 19 year old kids. The slower burning powder gave them run away firing rates on their M-16's because the powder was still burning when it shouldn't be and that caused a lot of jams. It also fouled up the gas system to where it wouldn't work at all. And since the initial batch using IMR-4475 ran so clean they only supplied one or at most 2 cleaning kits per squad. Most of the young men who were killed during this died with jammed guns in their hands. It was so bad that the VC and NVA would strip dead US soldiers of everything except their M-16. Also, since it didn't have a chrome lined barrel the barrels rusted and pitted easily. After a couple of years of this a Senator got a letter from his nephew about it and he dug into it and finally got it sort-of fixed. They came out with the M-16A1, which had the chrome lined barrel, the bolt assist that wasn't on the original, and started using a faster burning and cleaner powder. But they refused to use the powder the rifle was designed around and they still got some run away firing rates. Instead of using the correct powder, they put a mechanical damper in the rifle that kept it from firing any faster than 650rps and they also made and issued a bunch of cleaning kits.

And then they decided to change the rifling from 1 in 14" to 1 in 12" to give the 5.56 bullet better stability in Arctic conditions. They then shipped the new optimized for Arctic M-16s to the sweltering jungles of Viet Nam. The faster twist did stabilize the bullet so well that it no longer yawed or tumbled when impacting flesh, which it needed to do to produce a wound channel similar to the 7.62 bullet (.308). So instead of producing a wound channel similar to the 7.62mm round, it just punched little .22 caliber holes straight through the enemy leaving a very small wound channel. There was no such thing as 1-shot/1-kill with the M-16.

About this time, DuPont discontinued making IMR-4475 and the Ordnance Department got what they wanted as far as powder use goes.

[pworley1]

That's good information, but this is a 15 year old thread.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Welcome to the Castboolits Forum, twisted1in66, glad to have you aboard.

DG

[725]

What the Mountain Hunter said. Welcome aboard, twisted1in66.