H4895 users?

[sectional_density]

I was wondering if anyone might be able to shed some light on H4895. I realize that H4895 is not IMR-4895...perhaps similar...but it seems that of the reloading manuals I've looked at the most (sierra, hornady, lyman) none of them list that many loads for H-4895, but do for IMR-4895. I'm looking for one powder that will work "reasonably well" for .223rem, 7mm-08, .308 win, .30-06, 7.62x54R.

Would y'all recommend H-4895 (or IMR-4895?), or Varget, or some other powder, that would work in a pinch in all the aforementioned calibers?

 

[rcmodel]

H or IMR 4895, BL-C(2), IMR4064, Varget, etc.

But a lot depends on what bullet weight you want to use in each caliber you listed.

Suggest you set down with a reloading manual and a notepad.

Then list the top choices for each caliber & bullet weight, and see what comes out a winner for your use.

rc

 

[depoloni]

For the calibers you listed I'd probably suggest either Varget or IMR-4064. Neither would be ideal in both the 223 and 30-06 on the large and small ends of things, but both would do and likely do better overall than H-4895.

Don't let me shy you away from H-4895 though - I use it as my primary powder for light (<=175) bullets in the 8x57 Mauser, as well as my primary all-around in the 30-30 Winchester. All three powders I mentioned here would probably get you adequate results though with proper workups. If I had to pick one it'd be varget or 4064 though all around.

EDIT: See that RC posted just before I finished typing here... anytime I end up recommending the same thing he does I know it was a good one...

 

[BsChoy]

+1 to RCmodel....any of those powders should do favorably. The 7mm-08 will lose a little velocity with such a fast powder but it would be doable.

 

[NuJudge]

I get good results with either 4895 in all of those. Particularly in the .223 and .308 I can not tell the difference.

Varget was intended to be a 'short cut' 4064, with essentially the same burning rate. I have not gotten it to shoot well for me in the .223 with 69 and 75gr bullets, but many swear by it.

I have no experience with the 7-08, so no comment there.

CDD

 

[sectional_density]

Thanks for the replies. Looks like good advice as far as picking a winner. I was just wondering why my Sierra manual, for instance, in 30-06 for a 165 grain bullet, lists IMR-4895 and not H-4895. My thought would be that they don't consider H-4895 to be a good choice, but maybe I'm thinking wrong here. The Hodgdon reloading pamphlet certainly lists it...so I guess I just need to try some do a little more homework and do some reloading, as it's all of 6 deg outside.

 

[rcmodel]

The thinking is probably that Seirra tested IMR-4895, and didn't test H-4895.

Hodgdon tested H-4895 because they sell it, and don't sell IMR-4895.

It has nothing to do with suitability or not.

They can't test and list every possible powder & bullet, and get it all in one book.

rc

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Hodgdon tested H-4895 because they sell it, and don't sell IMR-4895.

rcmodel,
Ummm, Hodgdon now sells both Winchester and IMR powders exclusively.

sectional_density,
In both my bolt action rifles shooting a 30-06 round I use H4895 over IMR4895 because in my guns it's more accurate.
If you need current load data for any Hodgdon/ Winchester /IMR powders use the Hodgdon Load Data Site. It's up to date and will have all the data you can wish for because it's updated as soon as they come up with new data unlike books that sometimes take years to come out. Don't get me wrong, load manuals are valuable but so it this tool. (they even have load data for the new .327 Federal Magnum)

 

[ants]

Well, perhaps we should go back and read rc model's posts on this thread. I seems to me that the guy is right on.



[Interesting Note: I saw an interview with one of the Hodgdon boys (either JB or Bob, I don't remember which one) at a SHOT Show in 1998 or '99 just after Bruce Hodgdon's passing. He was discussing the difference between the H and IMR powders that share the same numerical designation. He said they are essentially identical. But since they are obviously batched at different plants (and different times) you should work up loads independently just as you would with any other powder. Your experience may find their performance identical, or you may not. It depends upon the batching, and it depends upon your rifle, and it depends upon the conditions under which the shots are fired. Their published load data differs between the two powders because they are tested in different labs, with different universal receivers, with different brass and different bullets. It all sounded like good advice to me. You may or may not disagree.]

 

[GooseGestapo]

For the purposes listed, I prefer Reloader15. Faster and more accurate in the .30/06. Much faster and more accurate in the .223. (I've been unable to get more than 26.0gr of H4895 (or Varget!) in the .223, but can get upwards of 27.5gr of RL15 in the commercial cases..... But, I too prefer BLC2 in the .223.....w/up to 69gr bullets

However, I use H4895 exclusively in the .35Rem. Highest possible velocities and superlative accuracy.

I find H4895 to typically produce very good accuracy in the larger cartridges you mentioned, and it's a very good match for the .308wcf. My brother uses it exclusively in his .308.

For the 7mm08 I've found that my rifle prefers BLC2 and H or IMR4350. BLC2 with the 140gr and lighter, IMR4350 for accuracy and H4350 for velocity at 150gr and up.....