A very great thank you to all who replied to my question about IMR 4064. All these IMR powders are virtually unknown to us here in Britain.

I have been reloadng for thirty five years but all we have ever had here until just a few years ago have been the old Nodel powders, Hercules products and, of course, the "usual suspects" on Norma, Vihatavouri and other European powders. Plus, once for a few years, the Winchester-Western powders.

So, to me as "a Brit", whilst I've read about these IMR powders and it use as a "go to" load by Jack O'C in the 270 and the 130 grain bullet we are really virgins when it comes to how they behave.

Now.

My aim, my ideal, with these IMR powders is to get a low flash powder for my 150 grain bullets in my 24" barrel 270 Winchester.

I've tried H4831 and Re-22 but want something with less flash and also less grains of powder!

So having considered IMR 4064 I am asking if with a 150 grain bullet IMR 4350 would give better potential?

My reasoning is that it has a slower burn rate, I read, than 4064 but is still faster than Re-22 so less flash? Right or wrong?

Now does that also mean that with the heavier bullet I'll get better velocity with less pressure?

I really want a load that gives about 2,750fps to 2,850fps (certainly no more and certainly no less) but without being a primer flattener.

My concern over IMR 4064 is that it only seems "good" to about 2,650fps with a 150 grain bullet in 270 Winchester?

So.

Knowing that IMR 4350 is excellent with 130 grain bullets in 270 Winchester how does it compare with IMR 4064 with the 150 grain bullet weights in the 270 Winchester?

Thanks for your patience with this. These IMR powders so far have very little "local" British feedback to help me. Your input is very welcome!

It is a reasonable assumption (but only an assumption), that IMR 4350 will be better suited to the .270 Win/150 grs combination than IMR 4064 - at least as far as muzzle velocity is concerned. This simply due to the difference in burn rate, and published data.

IMR 4350 is listed by Hodgdon at max 51.6 grs with a 150 grs bullet, so that is very likely less weight than what you'd load with RL22. But,,, since the two powders are not equal in density or grain size, this tells you relatively little about the load density you can expect. You'll have to experiment to verify whether IMR 4350 gives you the load density you'd like. (Personally I think this attribute more important than how many grains of a powder I load).

I have personally experienced quite a bit of muzzle flash with RL22 in .270 Win - a powder I otherwise like and use a lot. But I have primarily observed this in loads with lighter bullets, and in shorter barrels (22") than what you use. Will IMR 4350 flash less than RL22 for your purpose? Suck it and see.

In general, I find IMR 4350 a very useful powder, and one which has often provided me with decent velocity and accuracy. I don't like the way it measures, but other than that, I like it. Will it work for you? Only you can tell... It is not a bad place to start, if you are unhappy with the powders you have tried thus far.

- mike

Hodgdon burn rate chart.
http://www.hodgdon.com/burn-rate.html

I agree with MHO to me something like 4350, RL17 "should" give you less blast than rl22 or other slow powder. 2800 should be easy to do with 4350. I haven't loaded 4350 in a 270 for years so my load is about 3-4 grs higher than what mho says hodgdon now has has max.

H414 would be another I would consider.

I normally never worry about blast so I look to RL22 7828 etc.

Thanks gentlemen for your two responses. Here in UK and Europe a lot of hunting is not only in open moorland but in forests.

And indeed some wild boar shooting at night. From tree stands at full moon. Also running wild boar. Both of which I am hoping to do once I sort out a low flash load.

So the "flash" issue is a big thing. As in shaded woodland or even at dusk (legal here to shoot) I don't want to loose my "night vision".

Also on a moving target I don't want it obscured with a big flash.

So this is just the sort of feedback that is really useful especially also that I can still get an honest 2,800fps which is also important as achieving that speed was my worry with 4604.

The powder chart was most helpful too. I've long experience of Vihtavouri N140 and N150 so seeing where IMR 4064 and IMR 4350 rank against them was useful.

That alone now clearly indicates to me that for this cartridge and with that bullet weight IMR 4064 is not as good a choice as IMR 4350.

Enfield, considering what's avaliable on your side of the pond, had you considered something like Norma 204, or VT N550?

Norma 204 is not easy to obtain and way, way expensive!

That's the same reason I am trying to move away from Vihtavouri powders.

N550 I won't consider as it is double base and I've seen too many rifles "shot out" (or at least with poor throats) with such powders to like them!

Got ya.
Then for your purpose, here are the american powders I'd try.
W760/H414
RL 17
Ramshot BigGame
H4350/IMR4350

In my three 270 Winchesters, any of the 4350s, IMR, H or Accurate are about as good as it gets with the exceptions of RL-19 or IMR 4831 for certain bullets. Never had any luck with RL-22 or even H-4831 for some reason. Never have tried anything faster than 4350 though.

I've not loaded IMR 4350 behind 150s, but last spring a year ago I took a handloaded partial box of Core-Lokt 130s seated to the cannelure in front of 54 grains of IMR 4350 and shot pigs at lazered distances of 257, 270, and 280 yards with my BDL 270.

Kind of a funny story: I had loaded the rounds about ten years ago on recommendation from a friend, and had about half a box left. As I didn't want to waste Grand Slams on hogs, I grabbed these without sighting the rifle for the new load, hoped for the best and just took things as they happened. I think the 4350 load performed quite well!

In GENERAL, the less powder, the less the muzzle flash. Some powders have a flash suppressant -- mostly those formulated for military use. However, those powders are typically double base ball powders which tend to flash more than the single-base stick powders which is why the flash suppressant is needed in the first place.

I doubt that you would find a discernable difference in the flash generated by loads of equal chamber pressure between IMR 4895 and IMR-4350, so I would recommend using the 4350 since it will generate higher velocities at the same chamber pressure in your .270.

270 Win, 150 bullet, 51.0 grains IMR 4350. 24" barrel, Fed 215M primers.

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
Got ya.
Then for your purpose, here are the american powders I'd try.
W760/H414
RL 17
Ramshot BigGame
H4350/IMR4350

I would agree with the exception of Ramshot Big Game. I think AS meant Ramshot Hunter. Big Game would be a little too fast burning for optimal results with a 150 gr bullet in the .270 Win, IMO.