IMR 4350 v. IMR 4831, 200 grain Speers, .338 WM.

[huntinlever]

Looking for H4831 and H4350 for new load development with my .338 WM. In the meantime, I've got on hand both IMR 4831 and IMR 4350. For now sticking with 200 grain SNFP.

Would you guys generally prefer the 4350 for this bullet weight, choosing 4831 if moving up to 225 grain bullets and beyond?

[huntinlever]

Bump, and a more general question. I have nothing to compare it to so just trying to get a general handle on burn rates, barrel length and bullet weight for caliber.

I am currently choosing from among 4 powders. From fastest to slowest, using these: IMR 4350, Hogdon 4350, IMR 4831, Ramshot Hunter (right next to IMR 4831), Hogdon 4831. (I don't have the Hogdons, but will, if that's a better call especially in cold weather shooting). (I also don't know if there's a functional difference between the "standard extreme" Hogdon powders and the "SC" or short cut powders - whether that's more about metering and doesn't affect much functionally otherwise).

My barrel is 24," so I'm presuming that favors a slower magnum powder relative to a significantly shorter barrel.

My bullet is 200 grains SPJ, and I am presuming this is considered light-mid for caliber - that 225-250 on up would start to be getting into heavy for caliber. Pretty uncertain if that's accurate. Presuming that as I move into heavy for caliber bullets, this favors slower burning magnum powder usage.

So the picture is unclear which among these 4 powders would be the likely winner to start load development. Seems like a lot of guys like all four powders, and I can't yet see a correlation between this preference and barrel length, bullet weight, or other variables.

I've got my headspace dialed in well, I think (shoulder set-back 0.002"), and have a good freebore measurement (though I am seating to SAAMI 3.340" COAL for now), so given components are so rare, don't want to take a swing and a miss on a powder and need to start from scratch with another powder, if possible.

Note: I can get 8# Ramshot Hunter locally for $193. That's a very tasty enticement relative to the others, if it works. I've seen a few Hunter users saying they don't like to use it until they get into 225 and above bullet weights.

[TurnipEaterDown]

Paul,
Having never used a 338 WM (though I badly wanted one decades ago) myself, I took a look into Ken Waters Pet Loads.
IMR 4831 and IMR4350 consistently pop into accuracy lead on loads he had.
Whether that pans out in another particular gun would need to be evaluated, but often good loads do translate well, though occasionally needing minor adjustment.
Due to lot changes of components and dimensioning of a particular firearm parts, I would never start at a particular published load. It should be worked up.

I wouldn't expect obvious correlation on powder for accuracy to barrel length.
For instance, I found for use in a 30-06 Encore 15" & Springfield 03 23" sporter, the exact same loads worked really well. From 220s w/ I4831, 180s w/ Surplus 4895, 165s w/ H414, etc. Just a mention to note that some published guidance on using faster powders in shorter barrels never was proven true to me (jab at Lyman's guidance on rifle cartridges in pistols).

Look at any of the free ballistic models like GRT, and you will find that as long as the pressure is in design capability range, peak burn is actually fairly close to the breach. It isn't the case where 4895 is burnt up at 2" travel, and 4831 at 12". After peak pressure point, combustion nearly stops. So, you can figure out distance to ~99% combusted, if not directly provided. Mostly expansion from that point onward.
Muzzle flash is secondary combustion: high temperature residuals reacting w/oxygen in air, Not primary combustion of the self oxidizing nitro compounds.

Sometimes powders that seem to fast or too slow work really well for accuracy. For instance, I had personal experience w/ two 'huh, what do you know, look at that' loads:
Friend had a factory 300 WM years ago, we found it shot 180s really well w/ AA8700. Like, 5 shots ~ 3/4" at 100 yd.
A 35 Whelen Imp I have shoots 250s well w/ XMR4350.
Both of these also gave speeds comparable to max expected, just had to deal w/ considerable compression during loading.
Never know until you know.

[huntinlever]

Paul,
Having never used a 338 WM (though I badly wanted one decades ago) myself, I took a look into Ken Waters Pet Loads.
IMR 4831 and IMR4350 consistently pop into accuracy lead on loads he had.
Whether that pans out in another particular gun would need to be evaluated, but often good loads do translate well, though occasionally needing minor adjustment.
Due to lot changes of components and dimensioning of a particular firearm parts, I would never start at a particular published load. It should be worked up.

I wouldn't expect obvious correlation on powder for accuracy to barrel length.
For instance, I found for use in a 30-06 Encore 15" & Springfield 03 23" sporter, the exact same loads worked really well. From 220s w/ I4831, 180s w/ Surplus 4895, 165s w/ H414, etc. Just a mention to note that some published guidance on using faster powders in shorter barrels never was proven true to me (jab at Lyman's guidance on rifle cartridges in pistols).

Look at any of the free ballistic models like GRT, and you will find that as long as the pressure is in design capability range, peak burn is actually fairly close to the breach. It isn't the case where 4895 is burnt up at 2" travel, and 4831 at 12". After peak pressure point, combustion nearly stops. So, you can figure out distance to ~99% combusted, if not directly provided. Mostly expansion from that point onward.
Muzzle flash is secondary combustion: high temperature residuals reacting w/oxygen in air, Not primary combustion of the self oxidizing nitro compounds.

Sometimes powders that seem to fast or too slow work really well for accuracy. For instance, I had personal experience w/ two 'huh, what do you know, look at that' loads:
Friend had a factory 300 WM years ago, we found it shot 180s really well w/ AA8700. Like, 5 shots ~ 3/4" at 100 yd.
A 35 Whelen Imp I have shoots 250s well w/ XMR4350.
Both of these also gave speeds comparable to max expected, just had to deal w/ considerable compression during loading.
Never know until you know.

Fantastic, thanks for another ringer, and for the generous post.

[Ithaca Gunner]

Going through my load books, issues of RIFLE and HANDLOADER magazines, and PET LOADS certain powders keep coming up for the .338 Win Mag, RE-19, RE-22, H-4350, H-4831, IMR-4350, IMR-4831, and W-760. Quite possibly the one I see most over-all is RE-19 followed by H-4350, but any of that bunch will probably do you well. You may want to look into temp. sensitivity if that is a concern. Ramshot Hunter, I never tried it and don't know anyone who has, but it's right in the sweet spot for proven powders in the .338 Win Mag, #162 between W-760 #147 and RE-22 #174. I have no data on Hunter for .338 Win Mag though other than a few ''boutique'' bullets on the Hodgdon site. The price IS tempting, and It'll probably work at least okay, but it's your money.

[pworley1]

You should be able to start at 69 grains with either powder for both bullets and work up from there to get what you want. About 75g of either powder works good for me with either bullet you mentioned.

[Bigslug]

Looked at the Hodgdon and IMR version's data on Hodgdon's site. Not a great deal to choose between the offerings of either brand across the full range of 200-250 grain bullets. . . HOWEVER H4350 does that at a very slightly lower pressure WITHOUT going into compressed loads. 4350 seems to win for speed either way. . .but not by any significant amount.

H4831 to me has been a phenomenal target powder for use in LONG barrels, and in that format, it has delivered very consistent velocities, which is what I want on a known-distance range.

H4350 has delivered similar consistency of speed, but HIGHER speeds, which is what I want in a hunting rifle when I don't know the exact range.

But seriously, 4350 and 4831 are so close for the .338 - - load em both and see how they group.

[Ithaca Gunner]

Most likely you're gonna use at least two different bullet weights and types. Spoken from one who doesn't enjoy the thrill of load development as much as I used to...I would choose my end use bullets, then look for THE powders for them. In choosing a bullet for deer and black bear, the choice isn't critical with a .338 Win Mag, a lead core jacketed bullet of between 200 and 225gr. will do the job and then some. Okay, the Speer 200gr. bullet is a very budget friendly and effective bullet for woods hunting critters in your area and possibly longer shots on similar size game elsewhere. Either of your IMR powders will work fine, (I wouldn't drive that bullet at max velocity for woods hunting, it may break apart). Here's a load John Barsness published In HANDLOADER 186, April 1987 for that same bullet for woods hunting, 200gr Speer-60gr. IMR-4895-Winchester case-CCI 200 primer-2,645fps velocity. His notes, ''Fine woods deer load''.

I imagine you would want a 225gr. bullet for elk at near max velocity. Here I'm not sure I would go with the budget friendly Speer 225gr. Spitzer boat tail for a once in a lifetime hunt. The Speer 225gr. ''Hot Core'' or Hornady 225gr. ''Interlock'' would be better choices, short of a Barnes solid copper ''X'' bullet or Nosler ''Partition'', but that's something I would work out with a guide local to where you plan on hunting and choose powder more compatible to the actual bullet you'll be using rather than a ''generic'' 225gr. bullet.

Call a guide service in the area you want to hunt, tell them you plan on booking a hunt in the future, (3 years advance booking isn't unreasonable) tell them the rifle and caliber you plan on using and what bullets they recommend. They'll be glad to help you. They DO inspect equipment and ammo prior to the hunt and have you prove your shooting ability. Decide your exact bullet and buy a bunch of them for sighting in and practice for (hopefully) that one shot that matters.

[jaydub in wi]

4350 should work fine with the 200 gr bullet. I've used IMR 4831 with 225 noslers about 15 years ago with good accuracy.
The last load I used was a 225 Swift A frame with RL 19. My model 70 loves that combo. A black bear in Michigan(2019) did not.
I know RL 19 isn't as temp stable as the Hodgdon powders. Don't have experience with that Ramshot powder. Any of your other choices should work well.
Good luck

[huntinlever]

Most likely you're gonna use at least two different bullet weights and types. Spoken from one who doesn't enjoy the thrill of load development as much as I used to...I would choose my end use bullets, then look for THE powders for them. In choosing a bullet for deer and black bear, the choice isn't critical with a .338 Win Mag, a lead core jacketed bullet of between 200 and 225gr. will do the job and then some. Okay, the Speer 200gr. bullet is a very budget friendly and effective bullet for woods hunting critters in your area and possibly longer shots on similar size game elsewhere. Either of your IMR powders will work fine, (I wouldn't drive that bullet at max velocity for woods hunting, it may break apart). Here's a load John Barsness published In HANDLOADER 186, April 1987 for that same bullet for woods hunting, 200gr Speer-60gr. IMR-4895-Winchester case-CCI 200 primer-2,645fps velocity. His notes, ''Fine woods deer load''.

I imagine you would want a 225gr. bullet for elk at near max velocity. Here I'm not sure I would go with the budget friendly Speer 225gr. Spitzer boat tail for a once in a lifetime hunt. The Speer 225gr. ''Hot Core'' or Hornady 225gr. ''Interlock'' would be better choices, short of a Barnes solid copper ''X'' bullet or Nosler ''Partition'', but that's something I would work out with a guide local to where you plan on hunting and choose powder more compatible to the actual bullet you'll be using rather than a ''generic'' 225gr. bullet.

Call a guide service in the area you want to hunt, tell them you plan on booking a hunt in the future, (3 years advance booking isn't unreasonable) tell them the rifle and caliber you plan on using and what bullets they recommend. They'll be glad to help you. They DO inspect equipment and ammo prior to the hunt and have you prove your shooting ability. Decide your exact bullet and buy a bunch of them for sighting in and practice for (hopefully) that one shot that matters.

OK, thanks. RE 19 has actually been on my radar but outside of Brownell's offering 5#, nothing yet in 1# and I'm not ready to commit to an untried powder yet for a 225 grain, though I'm almost certain now it will perform really well. I do have some H 4350 and H4381 coming to compare with their IMR counterparts, but at the range yesterday, sunny, very mild wind, I got MOA with 70.2 grains I 4350 and these 200 grain Hot Cor's. I do expect brutal cold during hunting season so am definitely interested in the Hogdon powders.

I really like your idea of choosing an elk bullet then building a powder and load around that. I actually have some 225 Hornady SST's coming from Midsouth, but from everything I've been reading most guys say they're really frangible up close, especially on elk. They don't seem to mind them on deer, but yes, I'm looking down the road to the elk hunt.

Bend your ears on a premium elk bullet? None are available right now but I'm on the hunt for a premium 225 grain:

Looking at:

- Nosler Partition 210,
-Nosler Accubond 225; my bent tends always to a heavier bullet, so bias towards the Accubond;
-Barnes 225 grain Tipped Triple Shock X ("TTSX"), though I prefer not to use a cannelure in my bolt action.

[huntinlever]

4350 should work fine with the 200 gr bullet. I've used IMR 4831 with 225 noslers about 15 years ago with good accuracy.
The last load I used was a 225 Swift A frame with RL 19. My model 70 loves that combo. A black bear in Michigan(2019) did not.
I know RL 19 isn't as temp stable as the Hodgdon powders. Don't have experience with that Ramshot powder. Any of your other choices should work well.
Good luck

Thanks. Per above, the 4350 did really well with the 200 gr Hot Cor SP, over 70.2 gr I 4350. I'm heading back to drop up or down a bit and confirm the 70.2 is bankable.

I'd love to try out the RE 19 when I move to a premium 225 grain bullet. Same with the 4831, and Hunter (gotten some good anecdotal info it works well for 225 and above bullets).

[huntinlever]

Forgot to mention, I plan on zeroing at 250 yards for an estimated 3" high at 100, -4" at 300, -10" at 350 and -17" at 400.

[Ithaca Gunner]

My experience with HvsIMR powders. I think it was the 90's when Hodgdon introduced Varget, the first temp. insensitive powder marketed that I know of. I tried it and liked it, started replacing my IMR4064 loads with Varget. It wasn't universal, but I was loading more Varget loads than 4064. Enough that I bought an 8# of Varget.

Around the same time I was doing a lot of groundhog hunting and had switched from a 6mm Remington to a heavy barrel .30/06 loaded with a Speer 125gr. TNT bullet and the neighborhood of 60gr. IMR-4350, (results were spectacular). Talking with a tech from Speer he suggested H-4350, promising even better speed and accuracy. He was right, I tried it and bought a 8# jug and It's been a go to powder ever since.

All I can say about bullets is, get on notifications and wait it out. Speer has three different 225gr. bullets for .338, the common BTSP that Midway has in stock, the Grand Slam SP, and the Trophy Bonded Bear Claw. The BTSP and Grand Slam share the same data, the Bear Claw has it's own load data. What ever bullet you choose, I do suggest using data for that bullet brand and type as jackets can vary in thickness and bullets can vary in hardness. Something I've learned over the years is, a BT bullet will usually have a thinner jacket than a flat base bullet with a cannelure, and the BT bullet is more likely suffer jacket seperation at shorter ranges. The Speer Grand Slam, Hornady Interlock, Barnes X bullets, Nosler Partition, and other flat base bullets are probably a better choice over BT's for penetration and staying together. I used to use Sierra 150gr BTS bullets in my .30/06 but noticed almost every bullet shed it's jacket, and those that didn't had little lead core left with a space between the jacket and lead base. I now use Hornady interlocks in .30 and haven't recovered a bullet yet, complete penetration on deer.

Alaskan Ballistics on youtube does a lot of videos with different bullets in the .338 Win Mag shooting at meat targets with water jugs behind to catch the bullets, (they agree, the Hornady SST sucks).

[huntinlever]

Great info as usual, thanks!

I'm finding some in 250 grains, but not in 225. I.e., Midway says the 225 Grand Slam is discontinued (I've queried Speer), but the 250 is still being produced (confirmed on Speer's site); Brownell's is showing 250 grain Interlocks in stock, but not finding any 225 grain. For the Barnes, showing Midsouth has 250 grain Triple Shock and again, no 225 grain. I don't mind the recoil, but everything I've read seems to point to 225 grains as an "ideal" weight for elk and similar. Any thoughts?

[TurnipEaterDown]

SST -- Super Shock Tip. Meant to expand very rapidly.
Really, my understanding of this was it was a response to the Nosler Ballistic Tip in light big game (i.e. "deer") calibers, where people thought the Nosler BT was magic (and drove a LOT of sales). The Nosler BT in the smaller calibers expands violently too, though they are built tougher to expand slower in larger calibers.

If using a 338 Federal on something, the SST might be the way to go (lower muzzle speed, lessened expansion at distance as the resulting impact velocity is lower). If shooting deer w/ the 338 WM, the SST may well be fine.

Just about matching the product to the job.
Unfortunately I think some producers don't really list design impact speeds, or if so not in a useful way.

I do think Hornady lists recommended impact speeds, but I don't remember them telling you 'recommended to do what'. So, still lacking in my view.

BTW: Hornady HP varmit bullets in some sizes make nice deer/antelope bullets in cartridges that launch them slower. Point being: some rapidly expanding bullets do fine on larger game when slowed down.

[huntinlever]

SST -- Super Shock Tip. Meant to expand very rapidly.
Really, my understanding of this was it was a response to the Nosler Ballistic Tip in light big game (i.e. "deer") calibers, where people thought the Nosler BT was magic (and drove a LOT of sales). The Nosler BT in the smaller calibers expands violently too, though they are built tougher to expand slower in larger calibers.

If using a 338 Federal on something, the SST might be the way to go (lower muzzle speed, lessened expansion at distance as the resulting impact velocity is lower). If shooting deer w/ the 338 WM, the SST may well be fine.

Just about matching the product to the job.
Unfortunately I think some producers don't really list design impact speeds, or if so not in a useful way.

I do think Hornady lists recommended impact speeds, but I don't remember them telling you 'recommended to do what'. So, still lacking in my view.

BTW: Hornady HP varmit bullets in some sizes make nice deer/antelope bullets in cartridges that launch them slower. Point being: some rapidly expanding bullets do fine on larger game when slowed down.

Awesome, thanks to you as well for this wealth of information. It figures heavily in my notes developing the load.

So, either one of you (or others) - 250 grain, unnecessary (I won't say overkill) for these purposes? Is Petzal et al right, and 225 in a premium, modern bullet about right (he favors the A-Frame).

Also, sorry for the elementary question, but I've only crimped for the .30-30 and 45-70. Never used a bullet with a cannelure on a bolt action like this. Do you roll crimp, taper crimp, or, as I do with both the levers, I use the LFCD, rather than the RCBS bullet seating die itself? If so, I imagine a very light crimp only is in order?

[TurnipEaterDown]

I wouldn't agonize over 25 gr difference, re: 225 or 250.
Look up the trajectory and decide what you need/want, then get a "best" controlled expansion bullet to use on your pricey hunt. Partition, Barnes X, Scirocco II, A Frame, Hornady CX, etc.
Look at different BCs from different makers if an inch or two drop difference is part of your consideration.

I shot a good number of things w/ my 35 Whelen Imp using 250s: Deer, Hogs (Boar), and an Elk cow. Never really cared it was a 250. I bought a bunch of seconds from Lolo's that I couldn't figure why they were seconds. Never got around to shooting anything w/ the 225 BT or BT Accubond out of that (yet, I suppose).

[huntinlever]

I wouldn't agonize over 25 gr difference, re: 225 or 250.
Look up the trajectory and decide what you need/want, then get a "best" controlled expansion bullet to use on your pricey hunt. Partition, Barnes X, Scirocco II, A Frame, Hornady CX, etc.
Look at different BCs from different makers if an inch or two drop difference is part of your consideration.

I shot a good number of things w/ my 35 Whelen Imp using 250s: Deer, Hogs (Boar), and an Elk cow. Never really cared it was a 250. I bought a bunch of seconds from Lolo's that I couldn't figure why they were seconds. Never got around to shooting anything w/ the 225 BT or BT Accubond out of that (yet, I suppose).

OK, thanks. Brownell's has the Interlock 250 RN. I just did a quick Hornady ballistics calculator and was surprised to see how little drop difference there is between the two shapes (spire and round nose). (Both zeroed for 250 yds). The SP pencils out to -5.1" at 300 and -22.1" at 400, while the RN comes to 5.8" and 26.2" respectively.

Edit: Corrected the SP at 400 yards. -22.1, not 26.1.

Edit 2: Midsouth has the 250 Barnes TSX. I've never used mono bullets like this. I seem to recall some kind of caution that in some rifles, copper buildup with these (or other mono's from other manufacturers?) can be an issue? What do you guys think of the 250 TSX for this purpose?

[Ithaca Gunner]

.338'' seems to be a red headed stepchild for bullets and .338 Win Mag for brass right now.

[huntinlever]

.338'' seems to be a red headed stepchild for bullets and .338 Win Mag for brass right now.

That can't be good.