I picked up some wc846 which is like? Imr 4064
and military Imr 4198 that is like? Imr 4198?
has any one used the powders and do you have any comments about loads and pressures.
I have some info but need to know what the burn rate is for each of these powders
thanks dave

I would advise too read again it is really loaded with BLC 2 data. Take care. This is a great .222, 223 powder.

[ 11-06-2002, 19:56: Message edited by: Oleman ]

As suggested by Oleman, WC 846 is identical in spec to BL-C2 (and to WW 748). This does NOT mean that it will behave identically, because the lots do vary, and since each separate lot of powder is treated by the ammunition manufacturer as a "new" powder, the actual performance of these three designations of the same powder may not be the same.

WC 846 is manufactured specifically for the 7.62 Nato (.308 Winchester), but performs very well in a variety of cartridges needing a "medium" speed rifle powder like the .223. It is similar in overall burning rate to WC 844/H335 (designed specifically for the .223), but exhibits more favorable burn characteristics in cartridges of the capacity of the .308 and is therefore a bit more versatile.

Use "starting" data of either WW 748 or BL-C2 and work up using the time-tested methods.

[ 11-06-2002, 21:11: Message edited by: Stonecreek ]

found some info at gibrass.com on the wc486 and they showed it to be like bl-c(2).. 7.62 nato to be loaded with 44 to 45 grains..
I have compared the mil pwder imr 4198 to duponts imr4198 and the cylinders of the mil powder is much shorter. I have not found any info for loads does any one know if it the same as imr4198 made by dupont?
thanks dave

I have never seen or heard of any reference to surplus 4198.

I have lot of wc846 that is very hot I am at a full 20% under max for bal C 2 and getting the same vel. Be very careful.

P dog: I don't doubt the results you are observing, but I'll bet that the powder you have is something other than WC 846 and was sold under a mislabel. After all, it is nearly impossible to tell the difference between the various ball powders by physical comparison, and somewhere back up the line in the "food chain" of surplus dealers it would be easy for someone to mislabel a lot of powder. That's one more reason to be very careful with surplus powders. They are every bit as good as canister powders, but may vary substantially by lot and CAN be mislabeled. Thanks for the warning!

On a similar note, there are two different "lots" of alleged WC 852 floating around out there -- one of which is very close to its commercial twin, H-380, and the other being more the speed of 4831. I suspect that this "other" WC 852 is actually the surplus equivalent of the now discontinued H-450, but have no personal evidence or experience. Just another caution -- be careful, start conservatively, and know how to read pressures if you want to enjoy the economy of surplus powders. If you are an occasional reloader who doesn't own a chronograph, just stick with the commercial canister-grade stuff.

Thanks pdog for the warning.
I will heed you advice and start at a 20% reduced load for the wc846 to see how it fires.
The sales guy said the Imr 4198 is mil surplus.
It is diffrent than imr's 4198, allthough the info he gave me says it is the same.
I like to have more than one source for the powder, that way it keep me out of trouble with over pressure loads..
Thanks dave

A comment on the two WC852s floating around.
In a conversation years ago, Jeff Bartlett told me he was AMAZED at the variation in "speed" the government accepted with this powder. He was most amazed because this variability was not accepted or seen in any of the other powders.

I have both, use both and several others including M-9 (very unusual appearance, works fine) and still using surplus 4831 purchased in the 60s.

LouisB

TCLouis: I am still using surplus 4831 and can't imagine the world without it. I'm just glad I stumbled into a bunch of it cheap 30 years ago.

About what does your "slow" lot of WC 852 seem to correspond to? Can you give us some sample loads?

I've shot surplus 4198, 4895, 4831, WC-870, WW-680, and gallon jugs of unmarked powder for 40 years. In fact I VERY seldom shoot any non-surplus powder. It's all good stuff and at 53 cents a pound (what I paid for most of it in 1960) it's great stuff. I still have over a hundred pounds of it.

I've used a bunch of W846. My particular lot is a trifle slower than my last lot of W748, at least in 223, 7 TCU and 308. In my 223 VLS and 308 VSSF, it's produced some really tiny groups. Quite economical to boot.

There is generally SOME data available from gibrass.com, or wherever, on the various powders. As long as you don't start out at MAX, you should have no problems.

R-WEST

If I understand correctly.....
Surplus powder was made for a certain appllcations.
A certain velocity at a certain pressure was the goal. Surplus powder is just that...this aint the same stuff that you buy at your local MART.

Well the fact is that Hodgdon does not manufacture powder they buy it from various other companies. Not in all cases but many cases surplus powder is the same powder you buy at the Mart. The problem is that the burn rates are not as consistent that is why you must really use some care in its use. There are those powders that are designed to be used for specific purposes and you are correct there for sure. A very good example of that are the WC852 powders which run the gamut from H450 to H4895 and H380 all the same powder just with different burn rates. It has all worked well for me you just need to keep this in mind and really take care in you load development and use those "safe practices" they refer to. Remember the surplus powders made for the military don�t have to deal with the issues of liability that the commercial counter parts have to protect themselves form.

[ 11-08-2002, 23:06: Message edited by: Oleman ]