Currently use imr4831 inn7x65r - 51.5g under a hornady 139g flat base softpoint. Seems to work OK, but 4350 seems to give higher velocity for the same charge, but would it be more consistent / accurate?

Would like some opinions before I splash out on a tub of powder - we don't get much change out of £50 on a tub of powder now.

You poor Brits sure get screwed on Fuel and Powder.

quote:

but would it be more consistent / accurate?

Only your rifle will be able to tell you for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:

quote:

but would it be more consistent / accurate?

Only your rifle will be able to tell you for sure.

Sadly, that is probably about as accurate a prediction as you are going to get. Suck it and see....

When you say

quote:

4350 seems to give higher velocity for the same charge

Does this refer to reloading (book/manual) data?? If yes, and if you would like more velocity than IMR 4831 gives you, maybe it would be worth a try - even at 50 GBP a can... In general, IMR 4831 and 4350 are not miles apart, so I would be surprised if the velocity difference would amount to much more than 100 fps, say. You need a fairly slow powder for the 7x65R, although less so if you load lighter bullets - as you seem to do.

Loading density is another indicator for a suitable powder. I personally like using powder which gives me a load density of, say, 95-99%. That seems to ensure the powder is always positioned fairly consistently in the case, and rules out double charges. I'll compress if I must, but I prefer to stay just below 100%.

In general, I have had great results with IMR 4350 - both in terms of accuracy and velocity. But a lot of people can say the same about 4831...

FWIW...

- mike

Ive had good success with 4350 in both my mosins, and my K31.