The short cut version fits into my moderate-sized cases better than the long cut version.
It was impossible for me to seat a 250 grain bullet in my 338WM with the long 4831, but they fit nicely with the short cut. 180 grain bullets in my 30-06 are also easier to seat with the short version of the powder.

I know the SC stands for "short cut" and I'm thinking the reason for it is it goes through powder measures better than the regular 4831. If that is correct, are there other differences, or is that it? I've been using standard H4831 for my 270, and I notice some books specify the 4831SC. Is load data interchangeable between the two? And can I expect similar pressures and velocities?

weight to weight it is supposed to be exactly the same.

According to Hodgdon, the burning characteristics are identical.

We use the H4831SC exclusively in our .416 Rigby's.

In theory, the short cut powder gives you more surface exposure. That may or may not make a difference. Hodgon says not.

Start a grain lower to be on the safe side, would be my recommendation.

Let us know if you find it to be a difference from you old load.

Cheers,

Sam

Big Sam what are your loads for your Rigby's? I use the same powder in mine. I use 105 gr behind a 400 gr SAF or Barnes X or GS CUSTOM FN solid. All shoot to same poi out to 100 yards. "D"

I haven't actually bought any of the SC version yet. I was hoping somebody here had experience with both the short and regular versions, in a case of similar capacity as the 270 Win. Sounds like I need to buy a pound of the SC and compare for myself. Or I may continue using the regular 4831, as it seems to work just fine. If I had unlimited time and money, I'd try every powder made! Thanks for the comments everyone.

Washington Hunter,

I have loaded both the Regular and the SC H4831 in the 270 win and they have both done the same as far as I can tell.

There was a gap in between the loadings of each but, the same data was used and I still achieved the accuracy of the previous loads.

Good Luck!

Reloader

I have used them both. Going from one to the other with no problems that I recall. I have just SC now. If I did as I normally do when changing cans of powder, I poured the last of the old powder into the new can and rolled it around for a bit to mix the two and went from there.

D,

I use 102.5 gr. with a 370 gr. North Fork bullet. I am getting 2525 fps. This is with a Lee Factory Crimp Die, at 1/2 turn.

Before I used the die, for the same velocity I needed 105 gr. I am getting 1/2" 5 shot groups at 100 yards. The highest scope setting is 4X. This rifle is Mag Na Ported, so I am loosing some velocity there I'm sure.

Later,

Sam

eclemmons@hotmail.com

Washington,

Hodgdon DOES state that the packing density is slightly more for the H4831SC than the long, and the particular tech I talked to at Hodgdon when I had the same question stated most rifles will like one slightly over the other and you should try both. Well, yes he may be trying to sell more powder, but I am glad he said it. My 300WM, though H4831 long did decent, loves the short cut and groups were cut to .3" on good days. The extra $17.00 for the other powder was worth it, and I imagine it may be for you too. If your gun likes both, hey, you have another pound to blast.

Well, I just might have to give it a try. Now that I've tried RL19, RL22, and H4350, and couldn't see any improvement over the old H4831 that I've always used. I think I will pick up a pound of it. Shilen, so what were the groups like with the regular H4831? 0.3 is a nice group!

Hey W. Hunter,

I had a win 70 rebuilt, and I put a shilen select match barrel on there along with just a pillar bedded hogue stock. I had everything trued up and the barrel floated. There wasn't a huge difference in group size from the long to SC, but I don't remember getting anything better than .6" with the long cut. If the SC works at LEAST as good though, use it. It meters and flows so much better. Honestly, you can't go wrong and you will be glad you tried it. If it doesn't work better, you'll hardly be able to tell the difference and I believe you will not hesitate to use it anyway. Many bench rest shooters using the 300WM swear by it (as well as the long cut, but the ones I have heard from personally use the SC). Hey, I always mention this even though it is not part of the subject, but if you do not have one yet, buy a stoney point bullet comparator so you can play with seating depth. The comparator attatches to your calipers and contacts the bullet low on the ogive. Bullets are not always consistant in the profile from batch to batch so when seating bullets from another lot without adjusting the seating die will seat your bullets deaper (relative to the ogive, where the lands touch the bullet) or shallower than a previous batch. Go to http://www.sinclairintl.com, find their phone number and give them a call. They have the comparator and bushings (which are very inexpensive by the way), and they will tell you first hand how much of a difference seating depth makes in most rifles. They are wise and well experienced in the ways of accuracy. Best $20 I ever spent. Shrunk groups in my custom 22-250 from .75" to .2".