Relationship between maximum load, velocity, & recoil

[Riomouse911]

IMR 4227 has been around longer than the “magnum pistol.” I copied this from another site about IMR Powders:
“IMR # 1204 powder appeared in 1925 for short lever action cartridges like the .25-20, .32-20, .38-40, and .44-40. Grains of 0.025-inch diameter were 0.021 inches long with 8% DNT coating. IMR # 4227 replaced IMR # 1204 in 1935 for small capacity cartridges like the .22 Hornet, .25-20 and .32-20. Grains of 0.024-inch diameter are 0.023 inches long with 6.5% DNT coating.”
The interesting thing about this is, the parent powder, IMR 1204, was made for the OP’s cartridge of choice, .32-40. But when the new and improved powder, IMR 4227, was introduced to replace it, that cartridge was delisted as a primary use. That could mean a lot of things - and I don’t want to speculate - but I-4227 remains a very good choice as a multi-use rifle powder and was recommended for the .32-40 at least into the 1970’s.

From Hogdons site about 4227:

https://shop.hodgdon.com/imr-4227/

“a medium speed, magnum pistol propellant..”

This powder is also good for .22 Hornet, 218 Bee, etc. This is how it is marketed today, and how the OP should treat it and the data published for his gun.

Unique is another powder often used in lever gun loads like the .32-40, usually around 8-9 grains or so, which is far below even 4227 charge weights.

My point was to let the OP know that trying to extrapolate data from one powder to another is not good, as every powder has its own burn rate and pressure curve. Basically, I am saying that just because powder x uses 25 grains, it does not mean powder y can use 25 grains, too.

Stay safe.

 

[Charlie98]

My point was to let the OP know that trying to extrapolate data from one powder to another is not good, as every powder has its own burn rate and pressure curve. Basically, I am saying that just because powder x uses 25 grains, it does not mean powder y can use 25 grains, too.

+1

 

[orpington]

From Hogdons site about 4227:

https://shop.hodgdon.com/imr-4227/

“a medium speed, magnum pistol propellant..”

This powder is also good for .22 Hornet, 218 Bee, etc. This is how it is marketed today, and how the OP should treat it and the data published for his gun.

Unique is another powder often used in lever gun loads like the .32-40, usually around 8-9 grains or so, which is far below even 4227 charge weights.

My point was to let the OP know that trying to extrapolate data from one powder to another is not good, as every powder has its own burn rate and pressure curve. Basically, I am saying that just because powder x uses 25 grains, it does not mean powder y can use 25 grains, too.

Stay safe.

No arguments there. I NEVER deviate from published loads and have never even loaded to a maximum load, either.

I might consider loading with FFg and a cast bullet and see what happens, in time. With regards to accuracy. That would have been an original load. (40 grains black powder).

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

From Hogdons site about 4227:

https://shop.hodgdon.com/imr-4227/

“a medium speed, magnum pistol propellant..”

This powder is also good for .22 Hornet, 218 Bee, etc. This is how it is marketed today, and how the OP should treat it and the data published for his gun.

Unique is another powder often used in lever gun loads like the .32-40, usually around 8-9 grains or so, which is far below even 4227 charge weights.

My point was to let the OP know that trying to extrapolate data from one powder to another is not good, as every powder has its own burn rate and pressure curve. Basically, I am saying that just because powder x uses 25 grains, it does not mean powder y can use 25 grains, too.

Stay safe.

I would appreciate it if you were to read the second part of the post you’re quoting. The part after, “The interesting thing about this is,”. I never suggested going over, or even approaching a maximum load. I kinda resent the insinuation that I would. I also never suggested going against any published data. Ditto on resenting the insinuation. I made the point that, long before Bruce Hodgdon sold his first flake of powder, IMR 4227 was considered the ideal short-action lever rifle powder. I know what Hodgden advertises but if we, as a community, are expected to do a mind-wipe, ignore everything that we knew yesterday, every time a new advertisement is released, then this board, and all like it, serves no purpose.

 

[Riomouse911]

Wow.

I was not insinuating nor implying anything you did, period. The OP was asking why 4227 loads are a lot lower than 3031 loads. These powders are not similar at all, THAT is what I was pointing out.

I merely quoted the Hogdon site as it was written.

This is the same info I have read about IMR 4227 in old IMR literature, like this (page 4): https://marvinstuart.com/firearm/Ma...ess Powder Reloading Guide --- April 2004.pdf

So, it may have been considered rifle powder, lots of powders do dual duty (Some do triple as shotgun powder, too.) But based on IMR’s own description in old pre-Hodgon days, 4227 was marketed by IMR as magnum pistol powder.

I’m done with this thread.

 

[orpington]

So…

IMR 4227 being generally a magnum pistol primer, and IMR 3031 having superior velocities relative to my IMR 4227 loads, am I well advised to try other loads using IMR 3031 vs IMR 4227, as long as they are within published ranges?

 

[Charlie98]

So…

IMR 4227 being generally a magnum pistol primer, and IMR 3031 having superior velocities relative to my IMR 4227 loads, am I well advised to try other loads using IMR 3031 vs IMR 4227, as long as they are within published ranges?

it depends on what your velocity expectations are. If they are met with the IMR4227 load, then there is no reason to look further, assuming the accuracy is there, etc. All IMR3031 is going to give you is more velocity.

 

[orpington]

Velocity, to me, means getting from point A to point B at a certain rate, and if I am experiencing too much drop from point A to point B, I might want to increase my velocity, which is easier done with IMR 3031 than IMR 4227.

IF I wanted to take a deer with this rifle, then increased velocity might be desirable as well. Are there any other reasons why an increased velocity would be desirable? But, given that I am relegated to state game lands and, because of this, haven’t had a shot in years, I use a .30-06 or .270 with a scope. If I had my own game lands, I would use a rifle like this Savage 1899, but if you know what land is worth in southeastern Pennsylvania these days, you would be well aware that this is a pipe dream.

 

[P Flados]

For hunting, you would want to push velocity.

For long range shooing at metal gongs and such, velocity can be helpful.

For fun shooting at closer ranges, a medium velocity using a faster powder makes sense to me. Accuracy tends to increase the fun factor more than velocity for this type of shooting.

 

[orpington]

In reality, how much faster does IMR 4227 burn than IMR 3031? In the “Relative Burn Rate Chart”, p 301, Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook (4th Edition). It shows 114 different powders, and IMR 4227 is 53rd out of 114 on the chart and IMR 3031 is 68th. Neither are all that far off from the middle of this chart.

 

[Charlie98]

IMR4227 is about as far from IMR3031 as IMR3031 is from IMR4064... or fairly significantly. Further, it's not necessarily how much faster it is, but how it burns as well.

Velocity, to me, means getting from point A to point B at a certain rate, and if I am experiencing too much drop from point A to point B, I might want to increase my velocity, which is easier done with IMR 3031 than IMR 4227.

That's your answer, then... IMR3031 is likely a better choice for you than IMR4227. FWIW, I use IMR4198 for most of my cast bullets, including in my Savage 99's in .30-30 and .308, but when I step up to jacketed bullets, I go to IMR3031... it is simply a better powder for that purpose.

 

[orpington]

Okay, so IMR 3031 it is! I’ll try and fine tune those loads. I never would have considered IMR 4227 in this round except published data suggested it. Inherently, I’ve always liked IMR 4227 loads I’ve worked up. But that’s also the case with IMR 3031 rounds as well.

 

[orpington]

So, adjusting the tang sight, I ended up loading 10 rounds using 27.0 grains IMR 3031 powder. 3 shot group of 1 3/8” at 50 yards. Hits 2” high. Then at 100 yards, hits true to 1” low, 3 shots, 2” group. So, I’ll stick to this load.