M14 Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey guys
I was wondering what exactly the difference between h4895 and imr4895 is. Now I have tried to do the proper googlefu and all I have been able to come up with is that h4895 isn't as temperature sensitive as it's imr4895 counterpart.
I am trying to figure out if it is faster or slower, I have worked up loads for both, h4895 41.00 gr. And 41.6 for Imr4895. Both seem to give me optimal accuracy for my rifle. Just looking for insight, opinions, heck just looking for a fun conversation, it's so boring on the night shift lol. Thank you for your time.
Mack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,503 Posts
I say that H is hotter than IMR4895 - produces higher pressures and higher velocities. So that should mean H is faster. Hodgdon will prolly say it is less temp sensitive.

I have one or 2 rifles that really like H4895 - but I think 41 grains is about my max load.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,634 Posts
Checking the Hornady reloading manual, and it appears that H4895 is slightly faster than IMR4895. For a given bullet weight and velocity, the H4895 uses/requires roughly .5 gr to 1 gr less powder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,006 Posts
Checking the Hornady reloading manual, and it appears that H4895 is slightly faster than IMR4895. For a given bullet weight and velocity, the H4895 uses/requires roughly .5 gr to 1 gr less powder.
Besides the above comment, I've heard that H-4895 is a shorter length extruded powder. This should meter thru a powder measure more consistently. Had I known that fact a few years ago, I would have gone the H4895 route rather than IMR 4895. I've got a quantity of IMR 4895 to use up. dozier
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,824 Posts
If both powders make you happy then I would pick H 4895. I have a software program called QuickLOAD that I use to help develop loads and it is pretty reliable. I have a standard load using a 168gr bullet and 41.5 grains of IMR 4895. I used that load information and I switched between the powders to see what changes there would be, the results were;



Notice that even though the chamber pressure and muzzle velocities are up a little the port pressure is down.

There have been a lot of discussions about what is a safe chamber pressure (go to this link and check out the last two posts http://m14tfl.com/upload/showthread.php?p=597391&highlight=chamber+pressure#post597391) but the bottom line is that due to changes in terminology and equipment most people are under the misconception that the max chamber pressure for the M1A is 50,000 psi when in fact it is closer to 60,000 - 62,000 psi (SAAMI standard for the .308 winchester) so even though H 4895 gives higher chamber pressures it is still within the max that the rifle can withstand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
wow guys, you all are quick, personally i do like the h4895, it is cheaper around here, and my rifle really seems to like it. through shooting and testing many loads, i have to say it is nice to see some numbers from a computer, to back up my i just felt that, my gut says lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
975 Posts
H4895 is usually slightly faster than IMR-4895. In 308 Winchester I find about a half grain difference although gas port pressure may be down a bit with H4895 compared to IMR-4895. In 30-06 with a 150 grain bullet 48.0 grains of IMR-4895 gives 2590 fps and 46.0 grain of H4895 gives 2600 fps. 48.0 grains of H4895 is over 2800 fps.

H4895 is not an off the shelf powder from a powder company but was specially developed for Hodgdon in 1999 by ADI of Australia to replace older, made in Scotland, H4895 and use the same load data safely. H4895 has been faster than IMR-4895 for many years.

I had great results with IMR-4895 in 308 Winchester and at first H4895 only seemed so-so. In 30-06 H4895 is less position sensitive than IMR-4895 and does much better than IMR-4895 in accuracy but powder position in the 30-06 case is still around 80 fps difference from tilt up to tilt down, but accuracy is much better. I started having better results with H4895 in 308 Winchester when I understood the differences. Recently my powder has been IMR-4064 but it doesn't measure as easily. The gas port pressure is lighter with H4895 than IMR-4895 but Varget is greater than IMR-4895. Varget seems like too much gas in the M-14 but works well in the Garand due to the correct Varget loads being on the lighter side of load data. H4895 is really starting to warm up on me. Too light a load can short cycle a rifle though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
yes i defintely noticed short cycling when i was first working up loads for shirley. Thank you all for the great info
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
Short cycling

This would mean that the bolt did not come back far enough to pick up the next round corect.

I have worked up a load with H4895 it is not suposed to be tempture sensitive.

IVI brass 168 BTHP
41.9 GR H4895

4 rounds through a crono
2628 fps average/ 18ES/ 7SD

and it shoots great in my rifle.
be safe have fun.DI5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
714 Posts
Ok...who knows the difference between H4895, IMR 4895 and Jeff Bartlett's old Russian 4895?
I'm pushing a Nosler 168BTHP thru USGI Brass and 41.5 gr.s of the Russian 4895 and it's printing very nice groups without over-powering the gas system or tearing up the brass.
I've never chrono'd it, so I admit I'm a wuss.

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
The H4895 is also part of Hogdons extreme series. supposedly a charge will only give a 10 fps difference between when the temperature is 0 and 125 degrees out. I use IMR but have been meaning to switch for this reason. I've been knwn to work up a load during the Texas 103 degree summer to be used hunting in a Colorado -10 degree winter.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
yes that is it exactly, not far enough to strip the next round, just frustrating enough to make you go what the he&*.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Maybe a bit off topic, but i used to think the mystery of the universe was women, Who would of known it is truly the mystery of rifle powder, and the quest for accuracy. Thank you all for your help, and what is turning out to be an interesting discussion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
359 Posts
This would mean that the bolt did not come back far enough to pick up the next round corect.

I have worked up a load with H4895 it is not suposed to be tempture sensitive.

IVI brass 168 BTHP
41.9 GR H4895

4 rounds through a crono
2628 fps average/ 18ES/ 7SD

and it shoots great in my rifle.
be safe have fun.DI5
Pardon me, sir, but what make bullet are you using? thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,665 Posts
Pardon me, sir, but what make bullet are you using? thanks!
168gr BTHP (he's short with words)

My limited experience is very close:
168gr SMK
41.8gr H-4895
New Winchester .308 brass
CCI #34 Primers
COAL 2.82"

10 round string avg 2,510
SD 9.3
ES 27

Very accurate (for me) in my SAI Scout. Attribute lower velocity to 18.5" barrel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,824 Posts
I think Big Bear might have been looking for the name of the manufacturer since there are a lot of different 168 gr BTHP bullets out there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,665 Posts
I think Big Bear might have been looking for the name of the manufacturer since there are a lot of different 168 gr BTHP bullets out there.
Yes. I should have read his question more closely. He did ask what "make". I skimmed past that & read "what bullet?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,824 Posts
Yes. I should have read his question more closely. He did ask what "make". I skimmed past that & read "what bullet?"
I've been there and done that enough times to have humbled me a little. It's usually my wife that catches me when I do that...I hate it when the wife is always right. DI5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
Bulllet Make

Sorry for the delay in a response.

Hornady is the bullet manufacture.DI5
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top