![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Our gun club sells both powders. I am ONLY going to reload 30-06 for the M1. I have used the search but can't find the "Specific" answer to my question.
We have 8 lb. jugs of IMR 4895 and H4895. Price is about $160 for either (I think the IMR is $158). Reloading manuals show both powders for the M1. I plan on using 150 grain bullets only. Which powder is best? The IMR seems to be the original. I have an old book from 1930's (Reloading) by Phillip Sharp (extreme amount of priceless info)..and they refer to the IMR. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
I shoot IMR, since I have many Lbs. of it. Great for 308 too.
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hodgon 4895 is one of their "Extreme Powders".
From their web site.....Our exclusive line of extruded rifle powders – Hodgdon Extreme™ – was developed to give shooters consistent performance, load after load, in even the most extreme heat and cold. TW56 |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
I prefer H4895 but really do not have a good reason. i would buy IMR4895 in a heartbeat if I could not find H4895.
For my M1, the loads for each powder vary a little to get the same velocity from the M1. I consider them different powders and not interchangeable.
__________________
Chuck |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Either is fine.
I use Hodgdon. H414 for my bolt 30-06, 6.5 Swedish Mauser and .308W, H4895 for 5.56 and the Garand and H38 for .38, .357, .380 and lil gun for the carbine.
__________________
Although one form of bribe over another will probably not make any difference - a significant donation on the order form over and above the cost of the product would probably work best.
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
They are almost, but not quite, the same. Velocities and pressures will vary as identical loads increase.
As to being "Extreme": H4895 was developed for, and is tested over, a broader range of temperatures than IMR4895. I developed a very accurate load for my Garand using IMR4895 during the Summer only to find it turn into a shotgun pattern that Winter. H4895 didn't do that. I also noticed that the velocities and standard deviation over the chrony are more consistent with H4895. I've heard IMR has reformulated their 4895 for better temperature stabilization, ignition consistency, etc. They're probably just using H4895 with their label since they're all the same corporation. But I've made the switch and not looking back. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Essentially the same. You really have to look behing the left ear to notice much difference. Sort of like the difference between a GMC or Chevrolet truck. It's the badging.
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
H4895 meters better for me, so that's what I'd use.
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I agree completely. It meters much better and is essentially the same powder. Like IMR 4064 and Varget. The data closely matches but Varget meters better.
Larry Last edited by lapriester; 10-20-2012 at 10:38 AM. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|