I have been having a problem with erratic performance out of this powder since I began using it. I get several different levels of felt recoil out of the same batch and I often notice unburned kernels of powder in my barrel and on my hands. I am using CCI magnum small pistol primers, 15 grains of IMR 4227, and 125 grain flat nose bullets. I trimmed all my cases to 1.280. I was using Titegroup at 7 grains for a moderate load and felt pretty good about that. This really only seems to be an issue with my revolver and not my lever gun. I'm about to ditch this powder but I am concerned that I may have this problem with a new powder. Any help would be appreciated.
Unburned IMR 4227 in 357 mag
- Thread starter misfitx05
- Start date
- Status
I would say it's a moderate crimp. Some may call it light. I keep my powder and primers in my safe with desiccant packs when I'm not using it. I bought the powder a month ago from my LGS and they've been a reliable supplier in the past.
Arkansas Paul
Member
I have noticed this too with 4227. I even took a pic of it once in the cylinder of my Blackhawk.
I have not noticed a difference in recoil within the same loads though.
I put up with the unburned powder because I get good accuracy with it.
Try a firmer crimp and see if that doesn't help with the consistency issue.
I have not noticed a difference in recoil within the same loads though.
I put up with the unburned powder because I get good accuracy with it.
Try a firmer crimp and see if that doesn't help with the consistency issue.
KeithET
Member
IMR-4227 works best at higher pressures. 15 grains seems kinda light for a 125g bullet. You will likely get less unburnt powder if you increase the charge. I have found that the closer I get to max the better the burn as well as more consistent velocity.
Not really the "best" powder for lite bullets in the 357mag. Add to that you're under the starting load doesn't help either. Heavy bullets (170gr+) heavy loads and heavy crimps do better with 4227 in the 357mags. But even then there's a lot better choices in powders.
DocRock
member
Works best with heavy crimp and heavy bullets. Still burns dirty. I like it.
Did the same thing years ago using the the 870 pull down powder. Used to put it in 30-06 cases and would fill them until the powder was up to the datum line on the base of the neck of the case. No measuring weights/powder charges, just fill the case up and tap then stuff a cast bullet on top (311467 or 311414) & use them for practicing offhand in the springfields and garands & 100yds.
Decided to chronograph them 1 day & peppered the heck out of the readout screen.
Decided to chronograph them 1 day & peppered the heck out of the readout screen.
mrawesome22-250
Member
Not good. Expect erratic performance.
Last edited:
243winxb
Member
CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.
Your powder charge is to light. 18.5 is a maximum compressed powder charge.
I used IMR 4227 with 158 gr cast, when 2400 was unavailable.
Avoid the powder residue by ejecting shells with the muzzle pointing up.
View attachment 977804
Your powder charge is to light. 18.5 is a maximum compressed powder charge.
I used IMR 4227 with 158 gr cast, when 2400 was unavailable.
Avoid the powder residue by ejecting shells with the muzzle pointing up.
View attachment 977804
Charlie98
Member
I agree. I also 2nd what others are saying about the light charge.
I use a LOT of IMR4227 in my .41MAG, even fired in my 20" Marlin, a starting charge left junk in the barrel and didn't burn well. Once I bumped the charge up into the midrange, things cleaned up nicely. It's still not my favorite for pistol loads... I prefer W296/H110 for full-house loads, or a good charge of Unique for mid- to upper-level loads.
Mr_Flintstone
Member
Well, here’s an example of Hodgdon’s failure to get accurate information out to their customers. IMR 4227 is an excellent powder, but Hodgdon lists most of their handgun data using H4227. A few years ago, I wanted to load some 125 gr XTP with IMR4227 for my Henry rifle. When I looked in the pistol section for .357 Mag, it didn’t list this combination. It did, however, list 20 gr as the max in the rifle section. When I contacted Hodgdon about it, they told me I could use the data interchangeably as long as I started low and worked up (sound advice for any load).
I realize that there is still some H4227 floating around out there, but when you find data on their site for a bullet that lists both H4227 and IMR 4227, it is exactly the same. This leads to some confusion when someone loads for a revolver, because it doesn’t show all the data for IMR 4227, but it is there for H4227. Hodgdon should clean up their data a little so some of their older powders that have merged Hodgdon and IMR into a single powder, like 4227, is easier to find data for.
They do something similar for H110 and W296. Some loads list H110 while others list W296, but they are the same powder. There are other examples too, but the point is they (possibly unintentionally) spread some confusion with their data.
I realize that there is still some H4227 floating around out there, but when you find data on their site for a bullet that lists both H4227 and IMR 4227, it is exactly the same. This leads to some confusion when someone loads for a revolver, because it doesn’t show all the data for IMR 4227, but it is there for H4227. Hodgdon should clean up their data a little so some of their older powders that have merged Hodgdon and IMR into a single powder, like 4227, is easier to find data for.
They do something similar for H110 and W296. Some loads list H110 while others list W296, but they are the same powder. There are other examples too, but the point is they (possibly unintentionally) spread some confusion with their data.
Charlie98
Member
Much of it has to do with load testing at the time, and by whom. Winchester probably did the tests with old W296 data, and Hodgdon with their H110... even if it was the same powder at the time. I don't know if H4227 and IMR4227 were always the same powder. I agree, however, I wish there was more complete, up-to-date data for IMR4227... I use it quite a bit. Coming up with pressure all standardized to PSI would be a good start.
I had sort of the same thing happen... in reverse. I finally ran through my IMR4198 this week, but I was able to score 2# of H4198... not the same powder, but the data is quite close. A simple reduction of 5% and a quick work up should have me in business.
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
Every time I read someone complaining that IMR4227 is burning dirty or leaving kernels, this phrase pops into my head:
"MOAH POWDAH!!"
And it seems to always be the problem.
"MOAH POWDAH!!"
And it seems to always be the problem.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,085
Yes, the OPs start load is pretty low for IMR4227. My experience with IMR4227 in all of my magnum calibers is the same......a full case, either compressed or nearly compressed, standard for caliber or heavier bullets and a heavy crimp. It also likes long pipes when used in a revolver. In larger cases like .44 and .460 I don't use a magnum primer, but in .357 I do. Even then, I am not a fan of IMR4227 in .357. I think the case capacity, even with a compressed load is just too little to get a consistent burn. Once you get to larger cases like the .44 mag and .460 mag, the powder starts to shine. It is my preferred powder in .460 and for use in my .44 carbines. Velocities are less than with H110/W296, but accuracy and consistency is better.
Mr_Flintstone
Member
The truth is that IMR 4227 is a SLOW pistol powder; slower than H110, N110, Lil Gun, and 2400. It does great with larger magnum cartridges where you can get enough powder in the case. In truth, it was designed (or so I’ve read) for 22 Hornet and straight wall rifle cartridges. It does its best with long barrels and heavy bullets.
One good thing is that it is very hard to overload most cartridges with IMR 4227, especially magnums; although it can be done with lower pressure rounds like .38 Special. Another good thing is that because of the low density, there is little variation in hand loaded cartridges; making it one of the most accurate powders for these types of cartridges. When I load 4227 for my revolvers, I use a minimum of 140 gr XTP (preferably larger), a top third load, and a heavy crimp. When I go with lighter bullets or want lighter loads, I use something like Unique, Titegroup, or 231.
One good thing is that it is very hard to overload most cartridges with IMR 4227, especially magnums; although it can be done with lower pressure rounds like .38 Special. Another good thing is that because of the low density, there is little variation in hand loaded cartridges; making it one of the most accurate powders for these types of cartridges. When I load 4227 for my revolvers, I use a minimum of 140 gr XTP (preferably larger), a top third load, and a heavy crimp. When I go with lighter bullets or want lighter loads, I use something like Unique, Titegroup, or 231.
Don't store powder or primers in a hardened steel container......
Yes, there will be many people reply with "I have been doing this for 44 years". Only means in 44 years, there has not been a problem at your house.
243winxb
Member
Still does. View attachment 978021
Armorer 101
Member
Light charges of 4227 in a handgun or shotgun will give you unburnt powder and if the charge is low enough, yellow balls of a glue like material. If you simply increase the charge to near max the problems disappear like magic.
Catpop
Member
I had same issue when I first started using 4227. This thread got me on tract as to me using too light a load.
Slowly Working up to max levels solved the “kernel” problems.
Thanks thread
Slowly Working up to max levels solved the “kernel” problems.
Thanks thread
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
