I went to the sporting goods store today to pick up some H4895.

They were out, but had some IMR 4895 on hand.

In my loading manuals these are listed side by side for burning rates.

Anyone ever substituted one for the other?
I realize you can't just switch them grain for grain, but working up sensibly the IMR version looks like it should give very similar results.

Anyone?

Garrett

They are basically identical.

I always use 5% less on either and work up since there are a lot of different "lots" out there. I think IMR is cleaner than H...you may not agree...both are fine powders!!

I have to disagree with my fellow forum members above....


I find IMR 4895 very accurate, in about any caliber I use it in... It is not very finicky about achieving accurate loads out of it...

H 4895 on the other hand, has always given me fits... It was first powder I started to handload with....It seems to have a Sweet Spot on every load, and Lord knows where you will find it at....

H 4895 is way down on my list of powders, I need to have any on hand with.. IMR 4895 on the other hand.. If I only have 8 lbs left, I am getting low and need to pick up some more........

I am thankful that Hodgdon bought IMR's powder line and keeps making it.....and didn't drop IMRs 4895 and only sell Hodgdon's H 4895.....

Hope that answers your question....

cheers
seafire

As far as being "basically identical", I don't buy it. I have loaded the exact same loads with both powders and compared the results from known accurate rifles. The IMR loadings always produced better accuracy.

They are identical enough to safely use the same load data.

Whether or not the accuarcy is the same, thats where the difference is.

H4895 is faster.

I've found like seafire/B17G that I get a lot more consistant results with IMR 4895.

Burn Rates

Excellent powder for the 308 Win. used it for years.

43.6 @ IMR 4895
165 Sierra GK
Fed 210 Match Primer
WW cases

This particular application is for the 400 Whelen Improved.

Excellent deer and varmint round, except for the fist size exit holes.

Garrett

Loading data for both are on the internet and also printed free to anyone that want's it. Why are we asking to substitute?.......

Go to www.hodgdon.com or www.imrpowder.com and get the loading data. As to any accuracy of one over the other you'll see when you shoot. The experience of others in their guns is interesting but of little help.

Like SeaFire, I find IMR 4895 the more accurate powder.

I have used 53gr of IMR 4895 in my 35 Whelen pushing a 250 gr Speer for over 30 years and have had excellent results on paper on game.

I have tried lots of other powders but get overlapping clover leafs with 4895. Barrel is a 1 in 10" twist, and also does equally well with heavy 275gr or lighter 225gr bullets.

Barstooler

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
... As to any accuracy of one over the other you'll see when you shoot. The experience of others in their guns is interesting but of little help.

Astute, clear and concise.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
... As to any accuracy of one over the other you'll see when you shoot. The experience of others in their guns is interesting but of little help.

Astute, clear and concise.

Very true, but it is quite interesting. I too have found IMR 4895 to be more accurate than the Hogdon version. I Also like IMR 4350. But I use H4831 or the short cut version. I don't use other IMR powders till I get down to 7828. It does seem some powders are just better in that range.

Maybe I just haven't had enough time to load, and shoot enough of all of them. I need a money tree! Nate

I chronoed the 4895's last week in my .30'06. 48 grains of H-4895 pushed a 150 grain Win. Power Point to 2678 fps.
48 grains of IMR-4895 with same bullet produced 2713 fps.
H-4895 did seem a bit more dirty burning, but was ever-so-slightly more accurate. HTH

I've used both and like the IMR powder better. Due to the coatings I find that the IMR powder meters better. The Hodgdon is more affected by static.

I've had some ignition troubles with the "youth" loads in Hogdon's data (to be fair I didn't duplicate the loads with the IMR powder).

Overall they are both very similar with the Hogdon version being a little faster. For the cartridges I load the slightly slower burn of the IMR is an advantage.

Which of the H-4895's and which of the IMR-4895's are you guys referring to?

The first 4895 was a DuPont-produced military powder, subsequently repackaged and sold as surplus by Hodgdon. When that supply ran out, Hodgdon contracted with ICI in Scotland to produce their H-4895. At about the same time, DuPont was producing and marketing their own commercial IMR-4895 in the U.S.

Later, Hodgdon switched their 4895 production to ADI of Australia. DuPont sold their powder operations to IMR, which began producing IMR-4895 in Canada. Now, IMR has been sold to Hodgdon, and Hodgdon is (for the moment, at least) continuing to market both the ADI and the IMR product as H-4895 and IMR-4895 respectively.

So, when you paint with your broad brushes and wise pontifications about the relative merits of "4895", do you mean as compared to military surplus, DuPont-, ICI-, ADI-, or IMR-produced powders?

Ironically, despite all of the different sources from three continents and four countries, the various 4895's seem to perform much more like one-another than other "pairings" such as various the 4350's and 4831's. I've found that you can treat them as you would (or at least, SHOULD) treat two lots of the same powder. Which "lot" performs best under which circumstances may certainly vary.

You guys probably have more experience with the difference in these two powders than I do...not to argue, but I find there are too many variables out there for me to make up my mind...like primers, wind, temps, whether I got laid the night before I shoot and so on.....suffice to say...I have 11 pounds of IMR and 2 pounds of H4895 in my bunker so unless I get a great buy on H, I'll be using IMR for awhile.

If you shoot Aussie powder does it make the bullets spin backwards like the toilets?

I am glad to hear replies as I wondered too having bought a good supply of the IMR long ago, found a good use for it in my 7BR Rifle.

Shoots real well of course that ctg/rifle usually does, but it has both accuracy and velocity in that round.

I believe it works well with many 308 based rounds and even well in the 350 RM.

Never had any issues on IMR quality. Hope it stays that way.

I in the past, right or wrong, substituted load data for one brand over the other. No problems with my experience.