Dumb question

[Thumbcocker]

I have been reloading since March of 1986 and should probably know this, but I don't. Rifle powders are often referred to by numbers i.e. 4895, 4831, 4198 etc.

What do the numbers stand for?

[Outer Rondacker]

Ill bump this dumb question as I too would like to know if there is a rhyme to the reason here.

[guzma393]

Following, popular belief is that they are simply just identification numbers for manufactures and consumers. Would like to know if there is any other significance to them.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

[1006]

They stand for nothing. Like Glock Model Numbers.

[Winger Ed.]

Everything I've read sounds like the numbers and some of the names are rather arbitrary.
Sort of like the names for cars and don't really relate the animals they're named after.
(Mustang, cougar, impala, etc.)

One example is H380 was named that after it was developed because 38.0 grains of it was a favorite for Bruce Hodgdon's .22-250.

[Baltimoreed]

Powder names make a little sense, Bullseye is an old powder developed for target pistol shooters, Red Dot has red flakes in it, Clays and Clay Dot are shotgun powders but work great in cas rifle and pistol loads. Tin Star and Trailboss are cas powders. Can’t think of any others.

[Texas by God]

The old Norma Magnum Rifle Powder( MRP) was easy to figure out. Other than that or Varmint/ Target= “Varget”; I’m clueless.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

lil'gun was designed for 410 shotgun. that's a little gun

[Walks]

I think 2400 allowed .22Hornet to reach 2400FPS with .40gr or .45gr bullet ??? maybe ?

Unique; cause you can use it in anything.

[Kraschenbirn]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the "4895, 4831, and 4198" numbers were the old Dupont product codes as in IMR4895 was the designator for "Improved Military Rifle (powder) #4895", etc.

Bill

[ulav8r]

3031 was introduced as a standard for the new 30 caliber cartridge introduced by Winchester in 1895. 31 grains of this new powder was the proper load, but I don't remember which bullet it was intended for. So the 3031 referred to 30 caliber, 31 grains.

[Rapier]

The numbers are code numbers for specific scientific chemical formulas. By Federal law, no propellent may carry the same code ID unless its performance is within 10% of the average performance of that code # as in an existing ID. This is the actual reason for, the back off 10% and work up.

It is important to know that H, IMR and AA of similar numbers are not the same, close perhaps, but not the same. As always, back off at least 10% and work up.

[Shawlerbrook]

But Lil gun works great in the 357 mag. for 180 gr. hard cast bullets.

[1006]

Rapier:

I would like to know where you got the information regarding the code numbers.

I have read more than once in the reloading magazines that they mean nothing regarding the chemical composition of the powder. But, I could understand that some of them might have had some significance when they were first invented. There are more examples of the name being derived subjectively than there are of it being part of a chemical code.

[M-Tecs]

The numbers are code numbers for specific scientific chemical formulas. By Federal law, no propellent may carry the same code ID unless its performance is within 10% of the average performance of that code # as in an existing ID. This is the actual reason for, the back off 10% and work up.

It is important to know that H, IMR and AA of similar numbers are not the same, close perhaps, but not the same. As always, back off at least 10% and work up.

Please provide a source or reference for this?

https://www.1911forum.com/threads/wh...s-mean.417357/

Unfortunately the meanings are esoteric. There is no scheme useful to understanding.

Different companies have different numbering schemes, based on their own history.

No, larger numbers are not slower. Hodgdon's 869 is so slow the sun comes up before burn is complete.
4895 is faster than 4831. 4064 is between the two. Go figure.

No, numbers aren't a product of some technical characteristic.
H380 was named because Bruce Hodgdon liked 38.0 grains in his 22-250.

Go look up a conversion chart from ADI (an Australian company) and our U.S. powders.
You'll see that each company has some scheme that makes sense only to them
for the very same exact powders that each relabels with its own number!


IMR numbering (4895, 4831, 4064) originated with R&D development to meet government contracts.
Like M16 and M1 (used twice!) and M9 and M240 for US military guns.
Probably had something to do with purchase order numbers, not technical characteristics.
Often lower numbers came after larger numbers, so they aren't even sequential.



Similarly numbered products like IMR4895 vs H4895. We'll use that for example.
I heard a talk by one of the Hodgdon sons (I don't remember which one)
which included this question. When 4895 powder is ordered from the mill
the purchaser sets his own preferences for coatings, flash characteristics,
amount of carbon for flow and anti-static, dry density, temperature sensitivity,
energy density (joules per gram), ignition initiation temperature, and so forth.
It's all 4895, but it can be custom tailored for the purchaser depending upon
the characteristics each distributor wants to push in its marketing.
So the two are very similar, if you can develop a great load for your rifle using one of them,
you will probably be able to develop an excellent load with the other (although
the two loads will be at different powder charge obviously).


It seems clear that Olin started a numbering system for spherical powders
(the ones we know as Winchester Ball Powders) where the higher number is slower.
Not only is 296 slower than 231, but rifle powders like 748 and 760 are way slower.
But they used to have the 500 and 600 series that were in between 231 and 296,
and they also have powders like WST and WSF that don't follow the rule, so go figure.


Some manufacturers like Ramshot only use names. Ha! So much for what the numbers mean.


Sorry, but if you hoped to find a magic hidden meaning you are now disappointed.
But probably a little more knowledgeable anyhow.

[Ithaca Gunner]

Hatcher's Notebook may have the answer.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

I am a fan of Alcan AL-7 (and their AL-5 and AL-8)

Then...
I am a fan of Accurate Arms No. 7 (and their No. 5 and No. 9)

Then...
I am a fan of Alliant Reloder 7

Are they using 7, because it's lucky?

[rintinglen]

3031 was introduced as a standard for the new 30 caliber cartridge introduced by Winchester in 1895. 31 grains of this new powder was the proper load, but I don't remember which bullet it was intended for. So the 3031 referred to 30 caliber, 31 grains.

Ummm, no. IMR-3031 was introduced by Dupont in the 1930's, for use in the 30-06 Government cartridge, replacing MR-17 1/2. Charges were 40-47 grains, depending on bullet weight.

Between 1932 and 1936, Dupont released Improved Military Rifle powders 4227, 4198, 3031, 4064 and 4320. Replacing older, WWI era powders, Phil Sharpe rhapsodized these "modern" powders as cleaner, and more efficient that were a boone to pre-WWII reloaders. The numbers have no ballistic significance and were simply assigned to various chemical compositions. One wonders though, were there 3032-4197 powders that didn't make the cut?

[GregLaROCHE]

Don’t count on the names or numbers telling you how much of a change is safe. Always go to a reloading manual for you loads. If you just look at a powder burn rate table, you will see that generally the difference names and numbers don’t usually make any sense. What does make sense is how BP is graded.

[alfadan]

I'm always a fan of product numbers or model numbers that make sense. Like aa2,5,7,9. I've never used them but the Reloader series makes sense and you can get an idea of powder speed and appropriate uses from the numbers.