Friends-

H4831 has been a mainstay for higher capacity and/or magnum cartridges since the end of WWII. My question is; are the current formulations as good as the older ones in terms of the same potency, burn rate, etc?

Also, asside from "metering powders" are there any other advantages to the H4831SC over the original extruded powder.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks,

In my opinion 4831 is a finicky powder. There are some newer numbers that I feel are better. The SC cut is beneficial to getting large safe charges into the case without having to compress because it packs in denser.

I have tried both the "long grain" regular H4831 and the H4831SC in my 270 Winchester and 280 Remington.

To throw the charges I use a set of RCBS 304 scales and have tried and used, at various times, an RCBS Uniflow with RCBS's baffle, a Lyman 55, a Belding & Mull "Visible Powder Measure" and the old standby of Lee's yellow plastic "Popeye's pipes" measures.

I have never used an electronic dispenser.

I got rid of the RCBS Uniflow as I found that it just did not like H4831, especially H4831SC, and "bridged" the charge too much.

It did it often enough that it was quicker to just use the Lee "Popeye's pipes" and the RCBS 304 scales.

The Uniflow never let me down with pistol loads, or with shorter grain Vihtavouri N140 in my 303. But with H4831 or H4831SC it was terrible.

Better was the Lyman 55. That didn't "bridge" because it dates from a era when long grain powders were the usual "bill of fare" and so, seemed to have a better designed system with that knocker.

I used the Lyman to throw charges a few tenths of a grain short then trickled into a scale pan the rest with an RCBS Trickler on my RCBS 304 scales.

It was marginally faster than using the yellow Lee powder measures but as I had to carry out more stuff to and from where I do the powder charging AND more space was used on the bench I finished just by using Lee's yellow measures and dispensing with BOTH the Lyman 55 AND the RCBS Trickler.

I still have them, but they don't get used with H4831.

Now I am ahead of myself. I stopped using H4831SC as I found that it "bridged" WORSE than regular long grain H4831 and in 270 Winchester and 280 Remington didn't bulk fill up the case as well.

To me the more the case is filled the better the load functions as less chance for position of the rifle to affect the "lay" of the powder in the case.

So if I am WEIGHING a charge I now just use, for H4831 the yellow plastic Lee pipes....or...this:

I will use the Belding & Mull and throw it through a funnel from the "tube" into the case. I then either LEAVE IT ALONE so shoot it as a "constant volume" charge OR I'll when I have a block of fifty I'll pour each into the scale pan on my RCBS 304 and use the RCBS Trickler to "top up".

So for me I've stopped bothering with the SHORT CUT as for my loads...about 54.7 to 55.0 grains with a 150 grain bullet in 270 Winchester I prefer the fuller case given by regular long cut H4831.

And for weighing I either use the yellow Lee pipes for under thirty or twenty rounds OR use the Belding & Mull either by plain volume or by the scales and "top up" of any low charges.

I guess that the bulk of my rounds now, as I rarely load more than twenty of thirty at a time with H4831 are with Lee's yellow plastic pipes.

quote:

Originally posted by 30 Caliber Mag Fan:
Friends-

H4831 has been a mainstay for higher capacity and/or magnum cartridges since the end of WWII. My question is; are the current formulations as good as the older ones in terms of the same potency, burn rate, etc?

Also, asside from "metering powders" are there any other advantages to the H4831SC over the original extruded powder.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks,

The original H-4831 was changed 1973 again 1987 and that powder was suppose to be as close to the original H-4831. I got a copy of Propellant Profiles and Bob Hagel did a test back 1987 on the old H-4831 and new H-4831 only difference he could find was lot-to-lot variation experienced when finishing one can and opening another in velocity.

I still have some of that powder from the late 80's got couple 8lbs left and have 8lbs of the newer H-4831SC.

After H-4831 dried up I got that newer H-4831 from the 70's and it never shot good in my rifles. That powder made late 80's was good and I did chronograph a load for my 30-338mag in 1991. Sierra manual # 3 had max load of 72.5gr/H-4831 with 165gr bullet @ 3100fps from 28.5 long barrel with 1/12 twist barrel. I also talked to Fred Huntington Jr and he gave me load his dad used in the (first)30-338mag and they were still hunting with that rifle back then.

I settle on 73gr/H-4831 with rem 165 bullet @ 3017fps used 1/12 twist barrel 26" long. Took lot of elk/deer with that rifle. My 2nd 30-338 mag had build used a 1/10 twist barrel 26" and that rifle 75gr/H-4831 with 165gr Rem bullet @ 3140fps. My 3rd one had build couple years ago use 25.5" long Lilja barrel 1/11 twist barrel and on my work up loads 73gr/H-4831sc with 165gr AB @ 3034fps max 75gr/H-4831sc @ 3188fps.

I haven't tried H-4831 or H-4831sc in any other rifles wasn't much different between those powders. Only have two of the 30-338mags now.

I like the advantage of the SC.

I think that the new H4831 is a good powder. I really liked the old surplus 4831 but for sure most of it is finished.

I had an interesting experience recently comparing H4831 with the SC varity. In my 25/06 H4831 produced 150 FPS more velocity than H4831SC using the same bullet and same powder weight. I haven't got around to checking this out further but I just wonder if this difference came from different powder lots.

Regards, Keith

quote:

Originally posted by Keith1:
I think that the new H4831 is a good powder. I really liked the old surplus 4831 but for sure most of it is finished.

I had an interesting experience recently comparing H4831 with the SC varity. In my 25/06 H4831 produced 150 FPS more velocity than H4831SC using the same bullet and same powder weight. I haven't got around to checking this out further but I just wonder if this difference came from different powder lots.

Regards, Keith

I started loading mid 60's so got to use some of the old H-4831 only problem didn't start chronograph loads till the 1980's.

150fps is pretty good different and if you read Hodgdon deal on both powders H-4831sc suppose to be Ballistically equal. I got 8lbs of H-4831sc when it first came out.

I might have to try both powders in another rifle got a 270 had it build couple years ago doesn't have lot of rds fired maybe 80 or so. Been wanting to shoot some 130gr be a good project for the coming spring. Glad you posted

i dunno - still have 40#'s or so of old 4831 left

buchloc,
I had 20 pounds of the surplus powder but it mostly was used sending prairie dogs to the big round-up in the sky. It also helped to send the barrel of my old 25/06 to the same place.

Regards, Keith

The lot of current production H4831SSC that I have is definitely slower than original surplus 4831, apparently by about 5% according to chronographed comparisons. The current production powder also seems (in limited tests I have made thus far) to give wider swings in velocity. I'll be doing more tests in the near future, but at this point my jury is still out on H4831SSC. However, if the trend I detect is correct, then the Canadian-made IMR 7828SSC might be a better replacement for surplus 4831.

On the other hand, H4350, also a short cut powder from the former ADI in Australia, has yielded very consistent velocities and seems a very promising powder.

yup keith - that's just where my original 110#'s went

I used a lot of the surplus at $1 per LB then in the 80s I tried new and never was happy with it. Haven't tried it after 1987. Run mostly RL powders now.

Lately, 6 months or so I have been using more H4831. A friend bought a 7MM Mag last fall and I was helping him to find a salution for a hunting load for that rifle. Partition 160 grainers and H4831 teamed up and made a super game getter.

I just got a Savage 25/06 in December that I have been trying to get to know. It works good with that powder. Also after reading Stonecreek's earlier comments about IMR7828 I have returned to using that powder as a substitute for the surplus powder. I had noticed the simularity of the 2 powders about 25 years ago while working up a load for a long throated 300 Win Mag.

Everyone might as well admit that old 4831 is gone. Just don't try to use the same load data with the new powder as was reccomended for the surplus. I tried that one years ago and got bit in the a$$.

Regards, Keith

I bought H4831 when the local Gibson store sold it out of a paper barrel for $.50/lb. My last few pounds of it went bad in 1983 or 1984 and began stinking like nitic acid. I burned it in the street like a little funeral prye knowing those days ($.50/lb) were gone forever. I think much of its myth and reputation had more to do with the price than the performance.
I am old enough to have paid $.17 a gallon for gas. Even so on occaision I was able to get drip gas (Drip gas is another name for natural-gas condensate, a naturally occurring form of gasoline found near many oil and natural gas wells, in natural gas pipelines, and as a byproduct of natural gas extraction. It is also known as "condensate", "natural gasoline", "casing head gas", "raw gas", "white gas" and "liquid gold".) Some drip gas would run in my old car with out much knocking and when it did I drove for free.

There is a lot of legend around a product that works well but is relatively speaking - free.

Legend my ass.

I have reams of data collected through the years from loading and shooting a number of 20-lb kegs of Surplus 4831. Its velocity consistency (chronographed standard deviation) was always among the best of the slower powders. Its versatility was amazing, working well in not only the "magnum" cartridges, but rounds like .243 and .30-06.

My son and I went to Africa in 2007. He was shooting his favorite Sako .30-06 loaded with 180 grain Partitions and propelled by a full case of Surplus 4831 at 2780 chronographed fps. I shot my Sako .338 with 225 grain Nosler Partitions using 75.0 grains of Surplus 4831 for 2900 fps. Both of these loads were selected for their accuracy and good velocity. And I had no qualms about using 60 year-old powder on a hunt of a lifetime.

Looking back at data accumulated in 45 years of reloading, I find that I've used Surplus 4831 in .243, .244, .257, .25-284, .264, .270, 7mm STW, .30-06, .300 Win, and .338. There may be a few calibers I've overlooked. It has been the best powder, both in terms of accuracy and velocity, with at least one bullet in all of these.

having so much of it and with the price of powder today, i just reamed out a kimber 243 to 243ai just so i could get enough 4831 in the case to be worthwhile