1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

IMR 4895 & H4895 Differences?

Discussion in 'Handloading and Reloading' started by possom813, Dec 26, 2012.

  1. possom813

    possom813 Well-Known Member

    None of my books, nor Hodgdon's website have load data for a 160gr cast boolit using IMR4895.

    They do have a 17.5gr starting load for that boolit with H4895.

    Go down the page to different 160gr factory bullets and they have data listed for both powders.

    All I need to know is if 17.5 will be a safe starting load to try the first 15 cast boolits.

    I very seriously doubt that I'll go ever go over 20grs of either.
  2. grumpy66

    grumpy66 Well-Known Member

    My Lyman's book lists IMR4895 for a 180gr & 190gr cast only.

    I can find no data in ANY of my books using 4895 with a 160gr.
  3. possom813

    possom813 Well-Known Member

    Well crap, I now have a quandary...I have a powder measure full of my last bit of IMR 4895...

    Guess I'll load some more jsp's and then switch it over to the H4895, I was trying to run out the last bit of IMR...

    Thank you Grumpy
  4. 56hawk

    56hawk Well-Known Member

    What cartridge are you loading? IMR 4895 is extremely versatile. I have loaded everything from 223 to 460 Weatherby with it. By the way, I have never had a problem using jacketed data with lead bullets. You might get leading with some combinations, but I wouldn't worry about the pressure.
  5. Patocazador

    Patocazador Well-Known Member

    I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but Hodgdon bought out IMR and is phasing out duplicate numbered powders. Several people have told me (and gave me the link which I have lost) that IMR 4895 always outsold H 4895. Therefore Hodgdon is only producing H 4895 and relabeling it as IMR 4895 so its sales won't fall off.
    Please research this before taking it as fact. I know it applies to IMR 4227 and H 4227 but am not positive about 4895.
  6. Surculus

    Surculus Well-Known Member

    H4895 was created to duplicate IMR 4895, & iirc was placed right below it on the chart of relative burn rates, so yes, you should be able to use that starting load. You can also interpolate btw the 150 & 180 gr loads for IMR & see how that compares... Go with whichever is lower & work your way up from there.
  7. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    If the OP would come back and tell us what caliber he is asking about, I might be able to dig up some data.

    Right know, I still don't know what to look for.

  8. oldpapps

    oldpapps Well-Known Member

    !IMR 4895 & H4895 Differences?!

    One has an 'IMR' in front and the other has a 'H'. Other than that, they are listed with different 'burning rate'.

    Someone that is versed in the use of both, most likely, should be able to extrapolate a suitable starting point when moving from one to the other.

    OK, I'm off of my soap box now.

    As rcmodel requested, it would be very beneficial to know what caliber/cartridge is involved.

    I would not begin to use data for one interchangeably with the other.
  9. 7.62 Nato

    7.62 Nato Well-Known Member

    Shouldn't the load for the heavier bullets be safe to use with a lighter bullet in the same cartridge?
  10. possom813

    possom813 Well-Known Member

    I have to sleep sometime, rc :)

    It's for 7.62x39, coming out of various rifles.

    I did read up on the H4895 and IMR4895.

    Everything I read stated that they were similar, but they were manufactured in two different countries. I forget exactly which two, but I believe the IMR is made in Australia and I forget the name of the other country.

    It's not too big of a deal, I just happened to have IMR already in the measure and it's my last little bit.

    I've already changed it over and loaded up the 15 prepped cases and boolits. 5 with 16 grain, 5 with 17 grains and 5 with 18 grains.

    I'm was going to take them out today and see how they acted, but it's cold and 30mph winds gusting up.

    I'll have to wait for this front to move on through before I get a chance to see how they work.
  11. Clark

    Clark Well-Known Member

    H4895 is a hair faster than IMR4895.

    But I bought 32 pounds of bulk IMR4895 that is so fast, it acts like H322.

    H4895 is more temp stable than IMR4895.

    I am no longer buying IMR4895 like I did for the last 15 years, I am buying H4895, because I am now doing long range hunting.
  12. grumpy66

    grumpy66 Well-Known Member

    but I believe the IMR is made in Australia

    IMR is made in Canada.

    Hodgdon now owns the IMR brand along with Winchester powders.

    But back to your origional query: NONE of my books list either 4895 powder OR 160 grain cast projectiles for the 7.62x39 cartridge.

    You might want to pose your question to the cast-boolit guru's over at castboolits.com
  13. possom813

    possom813 Well-Known Member

    I was reading a lot last night, couldn't recall what said what. I just mixed up locations.

    Thanks for the help.
  14. Krogen

    Krogen Well-Known Member

    Hogdon's website shows different loads/pressures/velocities for IMR4895 and H4895, at least in the .308 Win cartridge. This is unlike their listings for 231/HP38 and other powder pairs which show identical information. 231 and HP38 are well-known these days to be the same powder, although not necessarily so in the past. At any rate, the difference in information for IMR4895 and H4895 leads me to believe they are still distinct powders.
  15. splithoof

    splithoof Well-Known Member

    I have noticed pressure signs when loading H-4895 to achieve the same velocities as was normal for loading IMR 4895 in a few .308 Winchester chambers. The cases were all the same (and trimmed to length), COAL was the same, same primer, bullet, etc. However, the accuracy was notably better in four out of five rifles tested (all shooting was done from a machine rest ,90F, 4,000' elevation).
  16. kelbro

    kelbro Well-Known Member

    Do not interchange data for H4895 and IMR4895. They are not the same powders. I have seen significant differences between the two.
  17. joustin

    joustin Well-Known Member

    The new Hogdon reloading magazine has an article on the differences of the two.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
  18. CraigC

    CraigC Well-Known Member

    Got a reference for this? I was under the impression that the Winchester powder/primer/ammo brand was still part of Olin.
  19. Eb1

    Eb1 Well-Known Member

    I find H4895 to be more accurate in my 30-30 and .223 than is IMR4895
  20. USSR

    USSR Well-Known Member

    Actually, Olin sold the St. Marks powder plant in Florida several years ago to General Dynamics, and General Dynamics has merely given Hodgdon the exclusive distribution rights to Winchester powders.


Share This Page