4895 in a .44 Mag.

[C Younger]

I tried something a little different. I was looking online and found a PDF of an old IMR reloading manual from 2003. Under .44 Mag Rifle, there was data listed for IMR 4895. The recipe called for 28 gr compressed under a 240 grain bullet with a WLP primer. This should generate around 1250 FPS and a little over 18K CUP.

I’ve been looking for a low pressure load to see if a gentle push would reduce leading in my R92 carbine. I emailed Hodgdon to see what they had to say, and they advised against it.

Well I didn’t listen. I loaded mine with 24 gr IMR 4895 and 240 gr Missouri Bullet RNFP. Accuracy was ok (3/4” at 50 yds) and there was no leading. There was, however, a lot of unburned powder in the barrel and casing, which I expected. Recoil was ridiculously light, so I would be surprised if I was pushing 1000 FPS. I think I found an alright plinking load, but I might try increasing the load slightly to 26 gr and a heavier crimp to see if I can increase pressure enough to burn off a little more of the powder.

 

[illinoisburt]

Interesting, though honestly it's really easy to download with Unique or make powderpuff loads with Trailboss.

 

[Hooda Thunkit]

I communicated with a fellow several years ago that was using 4895 in a 44 Mag. I was intrigued, but never did anything with it on my own.
One thing he stated, was that it was impossible to fit enough 4895 in a 44 Mag case to get into pressure trouble.

Unfortunately, the pressure is so low that unburnt powder is something to be expected.

I've often thought of trying 4198 instead. A bit faster, but I think still slow enough to not be concerned about pressure problems.

 

[C Younger]

Interesting, though honestly it's really easy to download with Unique or make powderpuff loads with Trailboss.

I’ve tried downloading with Trail Boss and Titegroup, but I still get leading issues. I’ve never tried unique though. It’s not powder puff loads I’m after, it’s low, steady pressure. Trail Boss and Titegroup both have a high pressure spike early on even at low velocities.

 

[C Younger]

I communicated with a fellow several years ago that was using 4895 in a 44 Mag. I was intrigued, but never did anything with it on my own.
One thing he stated, was that it was impossible to fit enough 4895 in a 44 Mag case to get into pressure trouble.

Unfortunately, the pressure is so low that unburnt powder is something to be expected.

I've often thought of trying 4198 instead. A bit faster, but I think still slow enough to not be concerned about pressure problems.

The old IMR book that I found lists IMR 4198 in addition to some other medium to slow powders. Here’s a screen shot of their .44 rifle data. Some of them are just plain slow.

 

[BBarn]

Before Hodgdon began marketing the IMR Powders, IMR Powder Company published their own Handloader's Guide booklet with pressure tested data. There was 44 Magnum data in the rifle section that included all the IMR rifle powders available at the time (except for IMR-7828). All of the maximum loads were compressed and produced lower pressures and velocities than IMR-4227.

I've used one of those published loads in the 338 Win Mag using IMR-4198. It was a nice reduced load that gave decent accuracy. But Hodgdon dropped nearly all such loading data that is outside typical norms when they took over the marketing of IMR Powders. However, they do suggest the use of H4895 for reduced rifle loads in certain calibers. Hodgdon's website has more detailed information.

 

[C Younger]

Before Hodgdon began marketing the IMR Powders, IMR Powder Company published their own Handloader's Guide booklet with pressure tested data. There was 44 Magnum data in the rifle section that included all the IMR rifle powders available at the time (except for IMR-7828). All of the maximum loads were compressed and produced lower pressures and velocities than IMR-4227.

I've used one of those published loads in the 338 Win Mag using IMR-4198. It was a nice reduced load that gave decent accuracy. But Hodgdon dropped nearly all such loading data that is outside typical norms when they took over the marketing of IMR Powders. However, they do suggest the use of H4895 for reduced rifle loads in certain calibers. Hodgdon's website has more detailed information.

H4895 works ok for reduced loads in my 45-70. What I’ve found, however, is that the more room the powder has to move around the more of an extreme spread I was getting (sometimes over 70fps) and large groups even at only 100yds. I haven’t tried a compressed load of H4895 yet to see if it tightens up my groups.

 

[BBarn]

A reduced load of H4895 in the 338 Mag also worked well.

 

[BBarn]

As far as I can determine, H4895 does not meet Hodgdon's recommendation criteria for use in the 44 Mag.

 

[C Younger]

As far as I can determine, H4895 does not meet Hodgdon's recommendation criteria for use in the 44 Mag.

Neither does IMR 4895 according to the email I received from them. However, it meets my requirements. Not a bad group and no leading.

 

[Bfh_auto]

Neither does IMR 4895 according to the email I received from them. However, it meets my requirements. Not a bad group and no leading.

You might try moving to a little faster extruded powder. It would give you less unburned powder and still not meet the high velocity of imr4227, h110 etc.
I tried the same thing you are using cast in rifle cartridges by compressing slow powder. I go similar results. I found titewad gives much better accuracy in low velocity loads than Titegroup.

 

[C Younger]

You might try moving to a little faster extruded powder. It would give you less unburned powder and still not meet the high velocity of imr4227, h110 etc.
I tried the same thing you are using cast in rifle cartridges by compressing slow powder. I go similar results. I found titewad gives much better accuracy in low velocity loads than Titegroup.

I might give the titewad a try if I can ever find any. I’ve got some H4198 which would be higher pressure and higher velocity than IMR 4895, but still slower than IMR 4227.

 

[243winxb]

I loaded mine with 24 gr IMR 4895 and 240 gr Missouri Bullet RNFP.

A revolver may be very different with this load. The cylinder gap will allow pressure loss thats much needed .

SAAMI-

SQUIB LOAD
A cartridge or shell which produces projectile velocity and sound substantially lower than normal. May result in projectile and/or wads remaining in the bore.

Make sure all bullets clear the muzzle on firing.


Be careful.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?media/albums/kaboom.24/

 

[Hooda Thunkit]

The old IMR book that I found lists IMR 4198 in addition to some other medium to slow powders. Here’s a screen shot of their .44 rifle data. Some of them are just plain slow.

Interesting.

That max load of 4198 is no slouch at 1500+ fps. I think 240 grains at that speed is more than sufficient for anything I do. I may have to try it.

So many powders, so little time. Sigh....

 

[black mamba]

Going to a heavier bullet and crimp will help with the unburnt powder, and you will still have no problems with high pressure.

 

[illinoisburt]

I’ve tried downloading with Trail Boss and Titegroup, but I still get leading issues. I’ve never tried unique though. It’s not powder puff loads I’m after, it’s low, steady pressure. Trail Boss and Titegroup both have a high pressure spike early on even at low velocities.

I thought the conventional wisdom was always push hard cast fast and soft lead slow to avoid leading? Honestly I've never encountered a leading issue with my 44 loads, though they have all been in revolvers. 8.5 grains of unique with commercial 'cowboy' type TC bullets is my general go to for plinkers. Haven't chronographed but around 1000 fps or so would be my guess. If it needs to move faster, I go xtreme plated or jacketed for full house loads. Is the bullet you are using hard cast or softer lead?

 

[mdi]

I can't address the powder question as I never considered 4895 for anything except my Garand loads and I have several pounds of WC820 left. But you mentioned leading in a 44 Magnum rifle. A little known fact is that 44 Magnum barrels are larger in groove diameter than hand gun specs. SAAMI recommends .431" groove diameter for rifles and .429 for hand guns and my Puma slugs at .432", kinda big but still in spec. I use .433"+ cast bullets to eliminate leading with nekkid cast bullets...

 

[illinoisburt]

I can't address the powder question as I never considered 4895 for anything except my Garand loads and I have several pounds of WC820 left. But you mentioned leading in a 44 Magnum rifle. A little known fact is that 44 Magnum barrels are larger in groove diameter than hand gun specs. SAAMI recommends .431" groove diameter for rifles and .429 for hand guns and my Puma slugs at .432", kinda big but still in spec. I use .433"+ cast bullets to eliminate leading with nekkid cast bullets...

That is interesting! Got out the google-fu and see Rossi was making them as much as 0.435" at one point. Imagine a slugging is in order for the OP.

 

[C Younger]

A revolver may be very different with this load. The cylinder gap will allow pressure loss thats much needed .

SAAMI-

Make sure all bullets clear the muzzle on firing.


Be careful.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?media/albums/kaboom.24/

I wouldn’t dream of trying it in a revolver. Not enough barrel to use that kind of powder if it cleared the barrel at all like you said.

 

[C Younger]

I thought the conventional wisdom was always push hard cast fast and soft lead slow to avoid leading? Honestly I've never encountered a leading issue with my 44 loads, though they have all been in revolvers. 8.5 grains of unique with commercial 'cowboy' type TC bullets is my general go to for plinkers. Haven't chronographed but around 1000 fps or so would be my guess. If it needs to move faster, I go xtreme plated or jacketed for full house loads. Is the bullet you are using hard cast or softer lead?

I tried different magnum powders at magnum velocities to get the bullet to obturate, but just couldn’t make it work. Even light cowboy loads with the faster powders were causing leading.

Missouri Bullets lists these at 18bhn.

 

[C Younger]

That is interesting! Got out the google-fu and see Rossi was making them as much as 0.435" at one point. Imagine a slugging is in order for the OP.

My first one was .435 and the lands would barely touch a jacketed bullet. Accuracy with any bullet wasn’t even comparable to a sling shot. I sent that one off to Rossi and they replaced it (6 months later) with a new one. This one slugs at .433 groove diameter and .424 bore diameter. Still big, but at least it spinning the bullet.

 

[PO2Hammer]

Have you looked at AA 5744? Might be just right
Data over at accuratepowder.com

 

[C Younger]

Have you looked at AA 5744? Might be just right
Data over at accuratepowder.com

I love AA5744 in my 45-70 (most accurate load so far), and it works great for jacketed .44 mag also. Unfortunately i get leading when I use it in the .44 with cast bullets.

 

[C Younger]

Someday I’ll either start sizing my own bullets or find a company that’ll size them to .434, but until then, I’ll probably just stick with the 4895. I still need to test 4198 though. Another option I’ve considered is coated bullets, but I’ve got a lot of cast ones to use up.

 

[frankmako]

you need to slug your rifle barrel to see what size bullet you need. the correct size bullet will stop your leading.