THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM FORUMS


Moderators: Mark
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
3031 vs 4895
 Login/Join
 
One of Us
posted
Hi everyone,

I've been poking through a few manuals comparing loads with imr 3031 and h4895, and the two powders seem to have very similar characteristics on a per weight basis. Nevertheless, when I look at the Hodgdon burn rate chart, it seems to indicate that 3031 burns substantially faster than 4895. What gives?

My reloading experience up to the present has revolved around bottlenecked rifle cases (too fast) and straight walled pistol cases (too slow), so I've never used either powder ...

edit: I typed 4831 for some reason in the first part of the posting.


analog_peninsula
-----------------------

It takes character to withstand the rigors of indolence.
 
Posts: 1580 | Location: Dallas, Tx | Registered: 02 June 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
IMR 3031 is faster than IMR 4895. Ive used both in 9.3x57. 4895 for 285 gr bullets also 232's , and 3031 for lighter 232 gr bullets.

I had thought 3031 would have less volume than 4895. Nope, lesser weight charge of 3031 is the same or more volume than 4895
 
Posts: 4821 | Location: Idaho/North Mex. | Registered: 12 June 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted Hide Post
For some reason I've gotten away with using IMR-3031 in places where slower powders should have worked......I think however it's bst relegated to functions requiring faster powders.

I no longer use it at all as I use ball powders for faster burns.


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I like 3031 a lot. and use a fair amount of it...

It will not pressure spike badly, and is actually quite forgiving on handloading screw ups compared to other powders...

it works quite well in a variety of cases... and has proven to be accurate over a wide range of charge weights...

IMR 4895 is also a good powder... I am always getting low when I am down to like 5 lbs or so of it..

Hodgdon 4895 sucks in my book.. too inconsistent in my book... both the IMR powders mentioned above are a lot more consistent and accurate....

3031 is my number one powder for the 7 mm Mauser, especially when the rifle has a finicky barrel...from 120 to 175 grain bullets, my standard charge is 40 grains of 3031.....
 
Posts: 16144 | Location: Southern Oregon USA | Registered: 04 January 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Thanks for the tips everyone. I appreciate the help.


analog_peninsula
-----------------------

It takes character to withstand the rigors of indolence.
 
Posts: 1580 | Location: Dallas, Tx | Registered: 02 June 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I like IMR 3031 and have used a lot of it.

I used to buy it in 20lb kegs.

I have used it in 223, 30-30, 308, reduced loads in 30-06, 300 Win Mag and 375 H&H, 350Rem Mag, 45/70, and in my 450 No2.

It has always given very good accuracy.


DOUBLE RIFLE SHOOTERS SOCIETY
 
Posts: 16134 | Location: Texas | Registered: 06 April 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
3031 is a good powder, but it is seriously faster than IMR-4895. I rarely use the H4895 for the same reasons as already mentioned, plus the US Army used IMR-4895 as standard for the .30-06 for many many many years, which is/was enough for me.

LLS


 
Posts: 996 | Location: Texas | Registered: 14 October 2004Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia