IMR 4227 issues

[Blue1]

I've tried some Magnum loads in .357 and .45 Colt (Ruger loads) and have run into problems with IMR 4227 powder.

The powder is not burning completely. I loaded 19.1 grains in a new Starline case with 300 grain XTP bullet at 1.650" OAL and only got 837 fps. I expected at least 1100 fps out of this load.

I noticed probably .2 to .4 grain of unburned powder in the cases, explaining the poor muzzle velocity. This was with Federal (large pistol) Magnum primers. Actually, standard Winchester primers were a few percent better than the Federal Magnum primers.

With the .357 Magnum loads, I used 19.0 grains of 4227 under a 125 grain XTP bullet at 1.600" OAL, again with a Federal Magnum (small pistol) primer. This resulted in 1285 fps, when data suggested 1450+ fps. This also left some unburned powder in the case.

I have previously only used Winchester standard primers in my .357 Mag loads with other powders and have gotten good results. Using identical loads with the Winchester standard primers and the 4227 powder, I again got slightly better velocity, but still with unburned powder in the case after firing.

I don't think it is a case of bad primers as I used Winchester standard large pistol and Federal Magnum large pistol in the Ruger with the Colt .45 loads and Winchester Standard and Federal Magnum small pistol primers in the .357 Magnum loads. Could it be that Federal Magnum primers just suck that bad?

The powder came out of a new sealed bottle, so I would be surprised if it was the powder.

Anyone else ever experience this or have some suggestions of what I should try? I figure I'll try some other brand large and small pistol Magnum primers and see if that lights the fire completely.

 

[sean1129]

This is more than a bit coincidental--I just posted a very similar topic, having the same experience as you've described (thread was posted about a week ago on 357/44 mag 4227 issues if you want to take a look at my test data).

I've been experimenting with 4227 because of its availability, and here is what I've personally concluded:

Bottom line for me: I'm not convinced (yet) the STD/Mag primer really matters--its more about pressure in my experience. I load this exclusively in my 460 Encore with no issues whatsoever. However, the pressure is higher (around 35-40K CUP in my case). Last weekend I ran about a dozen test loads for 357 mag, and I finally got the powder to burn clean (very, very little unburned powder) with the loads near max for the bullet weight.

I'm using 158 grain cast and using Lyman 49th data, so I'm not sure if this compares to your load manual.

I can't comment on your velocity, but I can say I went from hard to extract (like really hard) case issues at min loads to higher loads and only a slight amount of powder left and no sticking cases whatsoever. Be sure to let us know what ends up working for you. I'm especially curious if anyone else out there has any comments about your bullet weight as a contributing factor.

Best of luck.

 

[Blue1]

Concerning bullet weights, think about this...in the small-bore I used 125 grain, which is kind of a middling-to-light bullet for the .357 Mag, but I used a 300 grain in the .45 Colt cartridge which is a little on the heavy side for that cartridge.

I might add that in all the other loads I've done (over 120 chronographed and documented combinations across four handgun calibers), I have never noticed ANY unburned powder in any of these loads. I first noticed grains of unburned powder in the Ruger's cylinders when I was reloaded the revolver; I then found a lot of unburned powder in the bag I put my used brass in after I got home and emptied the bag.

On subsequent trips, I carefully kept the barrel up and ejected the cases, then turned then upside down on the bench and poured out more powder.

I hope more people chime in on this.

 

[Comrade Mike]

I just loaded up 100 test rounds with 4227. 19.5 gns up to 21.5 under a Kieth style 240 gn .44 magnum.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

You will never match the velocities listed in published load data. Their data is collected in a lab under strict conditions and usually from a long test barrel. You are doing nothing wrong, welcome to the world of load data propaganda lol...

 

[Blue1]

I've noticed that my loads do not match data velocity, but I think unburned powder is an issue.

Others have said that a 125 grain bullet is too light for the slower burning 4227; but that doesn't explain the incomplete combustion in the 300 grain XTP bullet loads.

 

[Blue1]

Comrade Mike,

I have some 255 grain Elmer Keith style SWC hard-cast for the .45 Colt Ruger and would like to see your test results.

Please look for unburned powder in particular.

 

[dogrunner]

I haven't fooled with 4227 for quite a few years now, but I experience that same condition using Keith's loads in a .44 special with 2400.

Seems to make little difference in velocity and accuracy has always been superb.....got my curiosity up and I was just give three lbs of 4227 so I guess its time to give it a try.

 

[BigBore45]

4227 is a slow pistol powder/fast rifle powder it needs to be in the high pressure range. if your not gonna get into 35K PSI range do not use the 4227.

 

[bluetopper]

Nothing is wrong with any of your components or what you are doing, your just not using enough powder. Use compressed loads with 4227 powder.
I even use compressed loads of 4227 in the 357 Maximum cartridge.

 

[wbrco]

I'd try a heavier crimp.

 

[CLP]

A heavy crimp and higher charges resolved my issues with unburnt powder as noted in a previous thread.

Heavy crimp and higher charges (within published ranges) are where this powder works. I read all that before but still worked a load up and all that was previously documented about this powder proved true. I really like it and have three new bullets I'm working up loads for.

 

[Sunray]

"...noticed probably .2 to .4 grain of unburned powder..." Most likely carbon. The powder is not going to have any grains that are not burned. Unless said powder is extremely old or got wet.

 

[CLP]

"...noticed probably .2 to .4 grain of unburned powder..." Most likely carbon. The powder is not going to have any grains that are not burned. Unless said powder is extremely old or got wet.

This debate is ongoing. I read a proposed solution previously. Is it burnt or the "skeletal" remains? Solution: Shoot several dozen rounds over a tarp. Collect the suspected material, pile it up, and set it alight. If it burns then it was unburnt. If it doesn't then it wasn't.
Not that it matters because with heavy crimps and higher charges it's a non-issue.

 

[Ex]

'Nother vote for a tighter roll crimp on the .357. Holds the bullet for that pico second longer allowing pressure to build enough for more complete combution.


BTW, I am seeing 296 on the shelves here for the first time in a while... Phoenix area.
Bought a lb yesterday.

 

[Walkalong]

4227 tends to leave some powder kernels in .357 and .44 Mag. More so in .357. It's the nature of the beast. Shoots great though. When I had a .44 Mag carbine I had a great load with it and a 240 Gr JHP.

 

[Blue1]

It is unburned powder, not ash or carbon.

Some actually got under the extractor and prevented reloads to seat fully, preventing the cylinder from closing. I don't think carbon or ash would be that hard.

 

[Toprudder]

As far as not getting velocities close to the data, that is usually par for the course. Somewhere the data will list the equipment used, and quite often a 10" barrel is used for some calibers (I think 357 is one). Sometimes it will be a universal receiver used instead of an actual gun. This can make a difference when loading for a revolver as the revolver will lose pressure because of the cylinder gap.

Can't speak on the 4227, but any time I had lots of residue with other powders, it improved as I went up in charge.

 

[gotboostvr]

Had very similar issues in both 357 & 44mag at lower levels, including residue prohibiting closing of the cylinder.

Was about to give up on it until I worked up a hot 44 mag load with a 240gr xtp and a heavy crimp. Got one hole groups and a clean burn. Now I'm rethinking that 3lbs of 2400 I picked up And switching back to 4227 as it provides enough velocity to dismantle a deer (in practice, not just theory) and accuracy I hadn't thought possible from a lever action.

if it's dirty and extraction isn't an issue, keep going up in charge level and use a heavier crimp. Accuracy should improve as well as a bonus in my experience. I noticed accuracy improve almost parerell as pressure went up in both 357 & 44mag with cast and jacketed after I stocked to 2400 and was just playing with 4227 to use up what I had left over. Now I want to switch back!

 

[Blue1]

wow, great info here, will try heavier load with a tighter crimp and report results.

Also, will go to 158 gr jacketed or semi-jacketed .357 and check results.

 

[RPRNY]

Also just keep in mind that under the best of circumstances, 4227 leaves more particulate matter than other powders. This is residue rather unburned powder in most cases.

 

[Ex]

Looking forward to your report!

 

[627PCFan]

I'm going to chime in and I don't man to derail but my carry loads which were worked up based on accuracy is 18.7gn of 4227 under 125gn XTPs. Three shot string was 1403 1415and 1412. That is with mixed brass and tula primers. A firm crimp is a must otherwise you get a few kernels. I don't care for compressed loads but this one is a winner. 4227 does work with lighter jacketed bullets if you give it enough barrel

 

[Airman Basic]

+1 for heavier loads with 4227. I use 25 grains in 44 mag with a 250 grain Keith SWC. It is compressed. Very accurate. I don't believe you can stuff enough 4227 in 357, 41, 44, and maybe 45 cases to make an overpressure load.

 

[Bongo Boy]

But the OP is using a full grain over the published max load of 17.9 gr for the 125 gr XTP. The Hornady data publishes 1,400 fps with that load, and not from a long test barrel from an 8" Colt Python. I would expect that muzzle velocity is very sensitive to barrel length with 4227, and wouldn't be surprised if a 6" barrel was a few 100 fps slower--so what you're getting isn't all that surprising to me. Unburned powder surprises me though--my experience so far with 4227 is limited to about 800 rds of 44 Mag in what I'd consider 'medium' loads, but I've not seen any unburned powder. All loads with standard primers and a modest crimp--about as light a crimp as I though I could get away with.

I noticed this in my Hornady data though: they had to add a full grain, from 16.9 to 17.9, to get another 50 fps. I would NOT necessarily expect that trend to continue as you move up beyond the max load. So IOW, there is no real good reason to expect that moving from 17.9 to 19 gr would give you 1,450+. But, again, if you'd first loaded test loads to match the book (14.8, 15.8, 16.9 and 17.9) you might see a consistent delta between your actual MV and the book MVs. And to see deltas of 150 fps or more would seem reasonable to me, depending of course on what your barrel length is.

As for your expectations of 45 Colt, it sure looks to me like they may have been based on loads for the Thompson-Center with 10" barrel, with 19.5 gr making 1100 fps. The bigger delta there is also no big surprise. The only first-hand experience I have in monitoring the impact of barrel length on muzzle velocities obtained with different propellants was in measuring the impact on velocity between 5" and 16" barrels for loads using 4756, and similar loads using 800X. As I remember it, the impact was far more severe with 800X, with deltas between the two barrels being double (percentage wise) what they were with the 4756 loads. I only have one gun in 44 Mag so I can't test for sensitivity to barrel length there.

Did you find your loads felt kinda 'cushy'? My 44 Mag loads with this stuff felt like was running Trail Boss or something. Excellent for shooting decent loads 200 rds at a sitting.