IMR 4895

Creeker

Creeker

Well-Known Member
For several years I've used this powder for reduced loads [mostly 50% case capacity] in my rifles with any bullet. While I don't subscribe to Handloader Magazine anymore I do get the Wolfe Tracks Newsletter & the March edition has a download for Handloader March/April. I find this at the bottom of page 7:

After my article “Reduced Rifle Loads” appeared in Handloader No. 306 (February 2017), Hodgdon contacted me with new information. After considerable testing, they recommend against using IMR-4895 for reduced loads, suggesting only H-4895 and Trail Boss. – John Barsness

Guess I should contact Hodgdon...........Creeker
 
Rick

Rick

Moderator
Staff member
Interesting. I've used a ton of 4895 but only the H variety but I've always thought them to be pretty close. Seems not though huh?
 
9

9.3X62AL

Guest
Same here, Rick. Hard to know what is going on with this advisement--maybe the info is a "steer" toward their own products (and away from IMR's), or maybe there is info based on actual R&D. A whole lot of folks have used both 4895s almost interchangeably since almost forever.
 
Rick

Rick

Moderator
Staff member
Dunno Al since IMR, WW and Hodgdon are all under the Hodgdon banner these days. Possibly future plans on dropping the IMR 4895 to reduce duplication but that's just speculation on my part.
 
Creeker

Creeker

Well-Known Member
I'm using powder from a 55 gallon drum at present. Who knows how old it is. I've had no problems in 30-30 or 30-06 loading to 50% capacity +or- a couple grains. Go figure. Also loaded 50% capacity for a friend 300 RUM & a 150 grain Hornady with no complaints.
 
RicinYakima

RicinYakima

High Steppes of Eastern Washington
I think Rick is correct. All "4895" is now made in Australia, so they are prepping folks for the disappearance of IMR branded powders, same story as the SR branded powders. To the best of my knowledge, only Canada is now making "single base" powders. Modern "stick" powders, like Norma's, are based on the same chemistry as ball powders, i.e. double base with nitroglycerin.
 
Pistolero

Pistolero

Well-Known Member
Since Hodgdon owns IMR and the Hodgdon brands, I see no reason to "steer" one way or another. Either way,
they own it. I think the issue is that the IMR-4895 technology is from about 1920s, and probably isn't as
consistent as load density drops down. The H-4895 is an Australian chemistry and apparently newer
development. AFAIK, the only powder that they had recommended for their reduced power "across the
board" rule was H-4895. Again, there has been no connection whatsoever between IMR-4895
and H-4895 except that they compounded H-4895 to be an approximately comparable powder to the IMR.
Back when that happened, IMR was DuPont brand and Hodgdon was a whole lot smaller.

Since they do the testing and watch the pressure curves and watch what happens when they run
reduced loads, I would trust what they say. I know people there and they are straight shooters,
never seem to get any games played from them, at least in my personal interactions. I always get
straight answers from the folks I know there - and right at the top.

Bill
 
Missionary

Missionary

Well-Known Member
Can ya imagine having about 400 pounds of any powder ! Can you imagine having 400 pounds of all powders combined !
 
Ian

Ian

Notorious member
I got caught up in this when I found out that Universal isn't made by ADI anymore. Somewhere I heard that 231 is going bye-bye as well. Thank goodness for our Canadian friends stepping up and expanding manufacturing of some of these powders so we still get to play with some of our favorites. Still, there seems to be a widening gap in the production of very fast-burning rifle powders suitable for reduced loads. That must be the segment of the market which is smallest, next to ultra-magnum canister-grade cannon powder, so is being phased out. Maybe some of these new-chemistry powders will turn out to be the cat's behind after all, or maybe not. Still, I wish for something with the density of Trail Boss and the burn behavior of HS-6.


Missionary said:
Can ya imagine having about 400 pounds of any powder ! Can you imagine having 400 pounds of all powders combined !
Click to expand...

I don't have to imagine about that, but do imagine having my own private 300-yard range where I can shoot anything I want any time of day without annoying anyone.
 
Creeker

Creeker

Well-Known Member
Kevin Stenberg said:
Creeker You have a 55 gal. drum of POWDER?!!!
Click to expand...

Not the whole thing. I have about 13 pounds left. I think the barrel was first purchased by Melvin Forbes & a local here purchased a couple buckets from him & I purchased some from him. I THINK.
 
Pistolero

Pistolero

Well-Known Member
W231 would be one of the powders made by St. Marks, which used to Olin (Winchester) and now
is owned by General Dynamics. St. Marks made powder for WW sales and for Hodgdon, which
how the various identical twins came about w296=H110, W540=HS6, W571=HS7, W231=HP38
If W231 is going away, will HP38 remain, which would just be a marketing move, no issue for
reloaders. If both go, like W571/HS7 did, it would be bad.

Bill
 
oscarflytyer

oscarflytyer

Well-Known Member
I sure hope HP 38 hangs on. I have great 45 Colt and 44 WCF loads for it. And regarding IMR 4895 - I got a couple older cans not long ago, and they are def warmer than today's loads - by about .5-1.0 grns. Not much, but just enough to notice
 
Missionary

Missionary

Well-Known Member
I could introduce you to a place where if you saw a 1 lb container of powder for sale you would be amazed and snap it up as fast as an ant eater slurps little crawly things.
Thank God our country was set on a path of Freedom !
 
Missionary

Missionary

Well-Known Member
Speaking of lead... Found one 1 oz wheel weight in the street out side a store this morning... That also is a rare moment down here. Been near 3 years since I beat the masses to a free piece of lead down here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.