one of us
| Thanks 'Joe! |
| Posts: 926 | Location: pueblo.co | Registered: 03 December 2002 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| SC stands for short cut, and was designed to meter better through the measures. |
| Posts: 66 | Location: Troy Montana | Registered: 28 March 2003 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| Yep to all the above.
Shorter grains burn faster, but the H4831SC has a different retardant coating on the shorter grains, to keep the burn rate slowed down to very close to that of H4831.
I heard somewhere that the H4831SC may be 2% slower than the H4831, but cannot quote the source.
Anyway, they are very close, but prudence would dictate at least a 2% backoff and work up when switching from one to the other, either way, as stated above. |
| |
one of us
| According to the manufacturer (ADI in Australia) they have "the same burning rate and bulk density (charge weights), but AR2213SC has improved metering characteristics through a shorter cut length of grain." AR2213SC is H4831SC in the US market. |
| Posts: 59 | Location: Australia | Registered: 30 August 2002 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| |
| Posts: 59 | Location: Australia | Registered: 30 August 2002 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| I switch back and forth between the two (whichever is on the shelf at the store when I need some) and do not see any difference in their performance using the same data for my loads. |
| |
one of us
| I went from "standard" to SC with no work up. Just switched when I ran out of standard. The use was for hunting rifles and it would have taken a much better shooter than me to detect any difference. |
| Posts: 2037 | Location: frametown west virginia usa | Registered: 14 October 2001 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| It seems Hodgdon says they have exactly the same burn rate. They show exactly the same load data for both on the side of the containers for H4831 and H4831SC. Coincidence or verified by Hodgdon, or assumed to be the same by Hodgdon? My what precision chemical engineering of retardant coating on the H4831SC! |
| |