Substitute H4895 for IMR 4895 in .223 Rem?


December 21, 2011, 01:04 PM
Please read before commenting.

I have multiple reloading manuals, and I was looking at trying a 55 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip with H4895 powder in .223 Remington. The Nosler manual doesn't list it with H4895, but it does with IMR 4895; at 23.5 to 25.5 grains. I also noticed that the Nosler manual has Varget and Benchmark powder (Both made by Hodgdon, one is faster, one is slower than H4895. Both the Varget and Benchmark are listed at 23.0 start and 25.0 max in the Nosler Manual.)

I also looked in my freebie Hodgdon manual, and it lists 26.0 grains max H4895 with a Speer 55 grain SP, and 26.2 grains max IMR4895.

Speer #14 Manual lists 23.5 to 25.5 H4895 with 55 grain bullets; FMJ, HP, and SP.

Hornady 7th doesn't list .223 Remington, 55 grain bullets with H4895 powder. (It does list IMR 4895 with a max of 25.1)

So my question for everyone is: Do you think I could safely load my 55 Nosler Ballistic Tips with 23.5 (start) to 25.0 (max) grains of H4895? I appreciate anyone's experience or input in this matter. :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Substitute H4895 for IMR 4895 in .223 Rem?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
December 21, 2011, 01:19 PM
You'll be fine, just work up slowly. Keep your coal @ 2.2 or longer. You could probably push it a little past 25grs if you wanted to.

December 21, 2011, 01:26 PM
Sounds like a light load to me.

(subtract 100 FPS from indicated velocities for this load fired in gas-operated gun)

December 21, 2011, 02:17 PM
Thanks W.E.G.!

Looks less than ideal, that's for sure. I might not.

How does the quickload data look if Benchmark is put in instead (keeping everything else the same); say at 24.4 grains? (My AR really likes 55 NBTs with 24.4 Benchmark; consistent 0.75" groups for 5 shots at 100 yards.)

December 21, 2011, 03:30 PM
I would not hesitate for a second to shoot either flavor of 4895 in a .223.
Especially if you already have a bunch of the stuff, and you don't feel like saving it for a gun you don't own yet, or for your grandchildren, of for the Fire Marshal.

Just understand that you won't get quite as much velocity out of 4895 than if you ran the "perfect" powder for your bullet weight.

Let me tell you, the target can't tell the difference.

If you are using significantly compressed loads, when you seat you bullets, consider double-pumping, or even triple-pumping the ram arm to be sure the bullet is fully seated and centered. I hate caddywampus and long rounds.

I shoot a crunchy 107% compressed load of Varget in the .223 (and its not a very hot load).
I hit the ram on the Rock Chucker three times to be sure.

Here are the Quickload numbers for your Benchmark powder.

December 21, 2011, 03:43 PM
Looks like a low pressure problem with starting loads of H4895, if you study the data for both powders. 1 gr less drops the pressure 9300 CUPs Sierra Data shows H4895 for bolt actions only. Have a look here >

December 21, 2011, 04:09 PM
Lyman 45th Edition (1970) lists 55 grain Remington Jacketed bullet with 21.5 grains IMR 4198, 2967 FPS as the most accurate load tested. (21.7 Max load)

Firearm used Colt AR-15 20" Barrel

The 52 grain speer HP was also listed the most accurate with 20.0 grains of IMR 4198, 2777 FPS. (21.6 Max)

All loads tested with Remington Brass and primers.

FWIW: I've been using these loads for 40+ years and they are very accurate.

December 21, 2011, 05:44 PM
Thanks a ton W.E.G.! I really appreciate that data!

Edit to add: Quickload might be a bit off on Benchmark's load capacity. 24.4 grains is definitely not compressed at all; it's more like 95% in my LC brass. Even 24.8, the highest I've tried, wasn't compressed. (Could hear it shake if held to the ear and moved briskly.)

December 21, 2011, 08:43 PM
I use H4895 in my T. Contender 223 because it's very versatile, and it's not temperature sensitive like IMR4895.

26.5gr of H4895 under a 52gr Nosler Custom Competition, using a CCI SR primer is a consistent, accurate load in my Contender.


December 22, 2011, 08:37 AM
From my experience, you can't get too much H4895 powder in the .223 case for a 55gr bullet. The few I've shot with H4895 were accurate, however.

The above mentioned 4198 load is a good one. I had an AR15 that shot best with that load; however my Rem. Mod-7 dosen't care for it. It "likes" BLC2 and Acc2460 like most other .223's.....

December 23, 2011, 12:21 AM

Thanks for putting up this web site! I found some very interesting things to print off and read, appreciate this, Re:


December 23, 2011, 01:28 AM
You checked a lot of different sources but didn't check the Hodgdon Load Data Site???

Hodgdon lists a starting charge of 25.0gr H4895 and a Max charge of 26.0gr H4895 with a 55gr Speer SP bullet. (IMR4895 = 23.0gr to 26.2gr)

I've been using Varget in my .223 ammo used in a bolt action rifle.

December 23, 2011, 10:55 AM
ArchAngel, I technically didn't check their website, but as I mentioned above I have Hodgdon's free handout with load data with the exact same load that you just listed. (It's in my OP) :)

December 24, 2011, 01:23 AM
CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

The 1950 designed .222 case head with small rifle primer is good for 75 kpsi with custom handloads.
Pressure sign: loose primer pockets make for short brass life

The .223 is SAAMI registered for 55kpsi, and is good for 75 kpsi.
36% extra pressure is ok... still gets long brass life.

Contrast that with the 270 Win that uses the 1889 7.65x53mm Mauser case head built with a large Boxer primer pocket. It is registered for 65kpsi an good for 67 kpsi with custom handloads.
Pressure sign: loose primer pockets make for short brass life.
3% extra pressure is ok... still gets long brass life.

So if you are worried about the differences between powders in a 270, and might get shorter brass life, I can understand.

But worrying about the .223 H4895 vs IMR4895 load book data based on SAAMI registered pressures is lame.

If you enjoyed reading about "Substitute H4895 for IMR 4895 in .223 Rem?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!