[Crashbox]

I'm in the process of stashing away some more powder, and have been trying to find more info/comparisons on the two aforementioned IMR powders to use in my M1A. I do know that '4064 has been thoroughly time-tested and proven, and '4166 is a new kid on the block that is supposed to be comparable in a few ways to '4064 plus less temperature sensitivity, copper fouling reducing, and so forth.

At this point, I'm just wondering if anyone has had good or bad shooting experience with IMR 4166, and whether the supposed benefits are worth the extra cost of the powder. How it meters is irrelevant to me since I weigh each rifle charge, and we all know that '4064 meters as well as old growth timber!

Thank you very much in advance.

 

[gtanba]

and we all know that '4064 meters as well as old growth timber!

HA! Good one, haven't heard that analogy on 4064 metering before. Have you tried any loads with 4166? Couple months down the road won't be a good time to find out your rifle hates that powder. If you have good loads developed with 4064 I'd stick with it for the time being. That way you know what you have. If it's not broke, don't fix it.

 

[Gort lives]

I have used both and don't have any complaints.

 

[SA762]

I havnt tried that powder but I have a feeling there is gonna be another "drought" starting the day after Nov 8th. Right now I'd say stock up on the stuff you already know works for you. Good luck

 

[JEFFJP_N_JJ]

Have not tried it or 4064 and as just use throwers I am leaning to sticking with H4895 and WW748 for my rifle

 

[Skinnable]

Like you, I've already begun packing away my "go-to" powders and such... since January actually.

I've gone with IMR 4064 because it works for me very well. I'm sure IMR 4166 is an excellent powder with many benefits, but as gtanba mentioned ~ "if it ain't broke... don't fix it." All of my variables are listed thoroughly in my reloading-journal anyway.

I've actually got a surplus of Varget stashed from the last drought, as well. Then, IMR showed up with 8208 XBR... and, I found great performance in it, as well. (Already put some cases of that back, too.)

 

[NWDave]

Oh sure Alex (crashbox), you know I just scored 8 lbs of 4064, just cuz, to go along with the 4895 and now you raise an inquiry????? I think you're a dedicated troublemaker. First, your NM, my response.. Loaded to play big brother to my standard.... now this.......

Maybe you'll be out to the range Friday? Bring your baby....we'll make Paul jealous.

 

[Crashbox]

Oh sure Alex (crashbox), you know I just scored 8 lbs of 4064, just cuz, to go along with the 4895 and now you raise an inquiry????? I think you're a dedicated troublemaker. First, your NM, my response.. Loaded to play big brother to my standard.... now this.......

Maybe you'll be out to the range Friday? Bring your baby....we'll make Paul jealous.

LOL, Dave... sadly, I work this Friday-

 

[Crashbox]

Now the plot thickens.

I just tried ordering through Powder Valley and I keep getting a "Secure Connection Failed" error... I can't even access their main page now!!! Anyone else having this issue??

 

[Crashbox]

Hmmm...it went through right after I complained here about it.

 

[Crashbox]

It was awfully early in the morning and I was in a hurry, and I forgot to mention what I ordered- I went with the IMR 4064 per the advice here. I reckon in the future if I have a hankerin' to get more powder in this burn rate, I'll give the 4166 a whirl.

Thanks a bunch y'all.

 

[tflorman]

I had decent luck with 4166 shooting 140 grain Custom Comp Bullets (44.5 grains seated to 2.75 in lc Brass). I didn't really try that hard to get the 168's or 175's shooting well. All that said, in my opinion, it's not worth the extra cost compared over 4895 or 4064 and both of those powders are tried and true in the M14. Of course, this is just my opinion. I'm pretty sure I posted a thread with 4166 target photos in it.