IMR VS Hogden 4831

samson · #1 10-13-2009, 02:23 PM

Is there much difference between these 2 powders, as far as a 300 wm is concerned?

Winchester 69 · #2 10-13-2009, 05:02 PM

These are not similar powders. All they share is the numeric designation.

Mikecr · #3 10-13-2009, 05:28 PM

Until recently they were different companys.
Truly, I never understood the similarity in numbering, and wish Hodgdon had stayed away from IMR.

I use both, but IMR is better for some cartridges, it's more consistant lot-to-lot, and as temp stable(if not more so) than Hodgdon, despite the hype.
I don't like them fiddling with good ole reliable IMR.

Anyway, do not assume they are the same because of the number designations.

Varmint Hunter · #4 10-13-2009, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winchester 69

These are not similar powders. All they share are the numeric designation.

Hmmmm - these two powders are always found together on the burn rate chart for a reason. They have very similar burn rate characteristics. In my experience they vary very little in actual use. A load could be tailored with either one. That's not to say they are the same or directly interchangeable, just very similar in their use.

Just my 2 cents from using both powders in a few cartridges.

Mikecr · #5 10-13-2009, 07:52 PM

This is an exmple of my basis for significant differences:
On a 6.5WSSM running 47.4gr IMR 4350, I get 3040fps with Lapua 139s..
Quickload 'what-ifs' for 55Kpsi(my pressure) AND </=100% case fill, all else equal:

IMR4350 comes right to the top at 98%fill and 3044fps.
Interesting and related in order below are:

Hodgdon H380 95%fill and 3033fps (needing same 47.4gr)
IMR 4831 100%fill and 2988fps
Hodgdon H414 90%fill and 2988fps
Hodgdon H4350 100%fill and 2966 (needing 48.6gr)

This tells me that H380 is closer to IMR4350 than H4350.

There were 15 other powders between these. And, in this case, any listed could be used safely. They just can't be assumed as same, and for sure one will best the others in your gun.