H4895: opinions, comments, strengths?

MEATSAW · November 15, 2014, 11:19 PM

Picked up some H4895 at Cabelas the other day because I have heard generally good things about it as a versatile rifle powder. I am curious as to where it really shines? Is it best for small caliber (like 223) have you had better success in medium calibers? I also read that it's good for reduced loads? Anyone have experience with that?

Rimfire5 · November 16, 2014, 07:12 AM

I've shot about 16 lbs of H4895 in my .308s over the years and until I found N140, I considered it my most accurate powder for my .308s. I have tried Varget, Reloader 15, N140, N150 and even H335. Only N140 is more accurate - I believe because it meters slightly better because the pellets are smaller.

I also load it in my .223s with a 1:7 or 1:8 twist with bullets heavier than 65 grains and it performs well.

wogpotter · November 16, 2014, 11:10 AM

It works well in medium capacity cases. I like it in .308/7.62 & .303 Brit. Just remember to NOT use IMR4895 data for it.

Bart B. · November 16, 2014, 11:31 AM

"H" versions of 4895 are bulk lot versions of "IMR" versions that are close to, but not the same as the IMR ones. They often will show a greater muzzle velocity average and spread across lots than IMR ones as they're not a tightly controlled. But they give virtual identical results in cartridges. And both meter very consistantly in high speed loading machines used by commercial and arsenal ammo plants.

Slightly slower powders, such as IMR4064, have consistantly given better accuracy in .308 and .30-06 size cases as their pressure curves are more repeatable and have a smaller spread. But 4064 doesn't meter as accurate as 4895 which is why mass produced ammo used 4895. Both versions were popular when the .223 Rem was first used in competition with heavy bullets.

Most folks won't see the difference

Jimro · November 16, 2014, 11:37 AM

H4895 is made by ADI in Australia.

IMR4895 is made by GD in Canada.

H4895 is more temp stable and handles reduced case loading densities much better. Similar burn rates mean similar performance, but they are definitely different powders and the data is not interchangeable.

Jimro

ZippyDude · November 16, 2014, 12:12 PM

I like H4895 quite a bit.

Depends on what I am loading and for what purpose. Mentioned the other day I have a 308 that loves this stuff with light bullets.

I suppose some may say it is better or worse for such .... all I know is it put 4 rounds in a dime at 75yds. Plenty good enough for me.

Reduced loads, not as sensitive to temp ... not much not to like imho

Colorado Redneck · November 16, 2014, 06:50 PM

H4895 works great in my 204 Ruger. Consistent and accurate (after I found the right combo.) I am interested in using H4895 in my 270 with 130 gr. Speer bullets. Velocities are supposed to be a bit slower than slower burning powders but I gave up on the velocity worship thing a few years ago. Have the rounds all loaded and ready to go, waiting for Christmas when Mrs. Santa promised me a new stock for that 270 if I am a good boy.

Clark · November 16, 2014, 07:25 PM

For the first 10 years of reloading, IMR 4895, 4895 bulk, and H4895 were my go to rifle powder. I had most powders, but only used that.
I used it in 223, 222, 243, 257RAI, 6.5x55, 260, 270, 7x57, 30-30, 300Sav, 308, 30-06, 8x57mm, and 45/70.

Lately I have been using the slower H4350 because I have gone to an over bore cartridge, 7mmRemMag, because it gives my low skill level a little more range without having to be good at wind, range, or even shot placement.

10 Spot Terminator · November 16, 2014, 08:22 PM

I found H4895 to be the powder that delivered where others wouldnt in a fast twist ( 1 in 8 ) Tikka .223 for me . I bought this to shoot heavier than standard bullets in the windy country where I live . The H4895 although not the fastest horse in the barn with my 60 gr. Hornady soft points at 2850 fps it will deliver sub 1/4 inch groups on days when the wind lays down . Prior to that about 1/2 inch groups were the best I could wring out . I will take that kind of accuracy over speed any day of the week .

MEATSAW · November 17, 2014, 01:04 AM

I will see what I can do with it in my AR, though Im not sure how much better it will be than TAC. I also will try it in my .308.

I think it would be fun to try some loads in my 7.62x54r and 7.5x55 swiss. Potentially some good reduced loads for those.

snolden · November 17, 2014, 09:44 AM

In my experience with 5.56 and 4895 powders, you run out of case volume right as you get to desirable velocities. Having a full case is a pain to me, because the powder will too frequently spill. Nothing wrong with that and the accuracy has been good but it is a pain to work with.

I like TAC and H335 better.

HJ857 · November 17, 2014, 10:12 AM

I ran TAC in both 308 and .223 for a few years now. It may not be so much of an issue in Texas but here in the north TAC shows a lot more temperature variation than you may think it should. H4895 on the other hand can go from dang cold to dang hot and have almost no variation.

If you aren't shooting precision or you're within 200 yards then it probably isn't worth worrying about.

wogpotter · November 17, 2014, 11:46 AM

Quote:

In my experience with 5.56 and 4895 powders, you run out of case volume right as you get to desirable velocities.

That would be consistent with what I've found in .303 Brit & .308/7.62.
I get about a 90% fill with the bigger case when I'm at the upper end of the load data. The smaller, higher pressure rounds probably would be running out of space as ball powders give more bang to the cc.

flashhole · November 17, 2014, 07:45 PM

It's my go-to powder for 223 and 45-70.

Pathfinder45 · November 18, 2014, 02:42 AM

Good 30-30 powder.

Jim243 · November 18, 2014, 09:13 PM

H-4895 works very well for bullet weights of 62 grains or higher, I use it for 62, 69 & 75 grain 223's. 85, 95 & 105 grain 243's, 130 grain 270's, 150 grain 30-06 and 185 grain 35 Remington's. It will work for 7.62x39 Russian but not with good results. There are some better powders out there for these calibers but none as versatile for a wide range of calibers as H-4895.

Jim

November 15, 2014, 11:19 PM	#1
MEATSAW Senior Member Join Date: May 1, 2009 Location: Burnet, TX Posts: 727	H4895: opinions, comments, strengths? Picked up some H4895 at Cabelas the other day because I have heard generally good things about it as a versatile rifle powder. I am curious as to where it really shines? Is it best for small caliber (like 223) have you had better success in medium calibers? I also read that it's good for reduced loads? Anyone have experience with that? __________________ Veteran OEF (2002) and OIF1 (2003) - US Army Member of the Burnet Gun Fighters, Inc. and of course the NRA Oregon State University alum -- Go Beavs!

November 16, 2014, 11:10 AM	#3
wogpotter Senior Member Join Date: September 27, 2004 Posts: 4,811	It works well in medium capacity cases. I like it in .308/7.62 & .303 Brit. Just remember to NOT use IMR4895 data for it. __________________ Allan Quatermain: “Automatic rifles. Who in God's name has automatic rifles”? Elderly Hunter: “That's dashed unsporting. Probably Belgium.”

November 16, 2014, 11:37 AM	#5
Jimro Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2006 Posts: 7,097	H4895 is made by ADI in Australia. IMR4895 is made by GD in Canada. H4895 is more temp stable and handles reduced case loading densities much better. Similar burn rates mean similar performance, but they are definitely different powders and the data is not interchangeable. Jimro __________________ Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.

November 16, 2014, 12:12 PM	#6
ZippyDude Member Join Date: November 10, 2014 Location: The WV Posts: 21	I like H4895 quite a bit. Depends on what I am loading and for what purpose. Mentioned the other day I have a 308 that loves this stuff with light bullets. I suppose some may say it is better or worse for such .... all I know is it put 4 rounds in a dime at 75yds. Plenty good enough for me. Reduced loads, not as sensitive to temp ... not much not to like imho __________________ hack spit

November 16, 2014, 07:25 PM	#8
Clark Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 1999 Location: WA, the ever blue state Posts: 4,678	For the first 10 years of reloading, IMR 4895, 4895 bulk, and H4895 were my go to rifle powder. I had most powders, but only used that. I used it in 223, 222, 243, 257RAI, 6.5x55, 260, 270, 7x57, 30-30, 300Sav, 308, 30-06, 8x57mm, and 45/70. Lately I have been using the slower H4350 because I have gone to an over bore cartridge, 7mmRemMag, because it gives my low skill level a little more range without having to be good at wind, range, or even shot placement. __________________ The word 'forum" does not mean "not criticizing books." "Ad hominem fallacy" is not the same as point by point criticism of books. If you bought the book, and believe it all, it may FEEL like an ad hominem attack, but you might strive to accept other points of view may exist. Are we a nation of competing ideas, or a nation of forced conformity of thought?

November 16, 2014, 07:12 AM	#2
Rimfire5 Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2009 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 923	I've shot about 16 lbs of H4895 in my .308s over the years and until I found N140, I considered it my most accurate powder for my .308s. I have tried Varget, Reloader 15, N140, N150 and even H335. Only N140 is more accurate - I believe because it meters slightly better because the pellets are smaller. I also load it in my .223s with a 1:7 or 1:8 twist with bullets heavier than 65 grains and it performs well.

November 16, 2014, 11:31 AM	#4
Bart B. Senior Member Join Date: February 15, 2009 Posts: 8,927	"H" versions of 4895 are bulk lot versions of "IMR" versions that are close to, but not the same as the IMR ones. They often will show a greater muzzle velocity average and spread across lots than IMR ones as they're not a tightly controlled. But they give virtual identical results in cartridges. And both meter very consistantly in high speed loading machines used by commercial and arsenal ammo plants. Slightly slower powders, such as IMR4064, have consistantly given better accuracy in .308 and .30-06 size cases as their pressure curves are more repeatable and have a smaller spread. But 4064 doesn't meter as accurate as 4895 which is why mass produced ammo used 4895. Both versions were popular when the .223 Rem was first used in competition with heavy bullets. Most folks won't see the difference

November 16, 2014, 06:50 PM	#7
Colorado Redneck Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2008 Location: Northeast Colorado Posts: 1,993	H4895 works great in my 204 Ruger. Consistent and accurate (after I found the right combo.) I am interested in using H4895 in my 270 with 130 gr. Speer bullets. Velocities are supposed to be a bit slower than slower burning powders but I gave up on the velocity worship thing a few years ago. Have the rounds all loaded and ready to go, waiting for Christmas when Mrs. Santa promised me a new stock for that 270 if I am a good boy.

November 16, 2014, 08:22 PM	#9
10 Spot Terminator Senior Member Join Date: January 3, 2008 Location: Central Oregon Posts: 348	I found H4895 to be the powder that delivered where others wouldnt in a fast twist ( 1 in 8 ) Tikka .223 for me . I bought this to shoot heavier than standard bullets in the windy country where I live . The H4895 although not the fastest horse in the barn with my 60 gr. Hornady soft points at 2850 fps it will deliver sub 1/4 inch groups on days when the wind lays down . Prior to that about 1/2 inch groups were the best I could wring out . I will take that kind of accuracy over speed any day of the week .

November 17, 2014, 01:04 AM	#10
MEATSAW Senior Member Join Date: May 1, 2009 Location: Burnet, TX Posts: 727	I will see what I can do with it in my AR, though Im not sure how much better it will be than TAC. I also will try it in my .308. I think it would be fun to try some loads in my 7.62x54r and 7.5x55 swiss. Potentially some good reduced loads for those. __________________ Veteran OEF (2002) and OIF1 (2003) - US Army Member of the Burnet Gun Fighters, Inc. and of course the NRA Oregon State University alum -- Go Beavs!

November 17, 2014, 09:44 AM	#11
snolden Senior Member Join Date: January 25, 2006 Location: N. E. AZ Posts: 387	In my experience with 5.56 and 4895 powders, you run out of case volume right as you get to desirable velocities. Having a full case is a pain to me, because the powder will too frequently spill. Nothing wrong with that and the accuracy has been good but it is a pain to work with. I like TAC and H335 better.

November 17, 2014, 10:12 AM	#12
HJ857 Senior Member Join Date: January 9, 2007 Posts: 447	I ran TAC in both 308 and .223 for a few years now. It may not be so much of an issue in Texas but here in the north TAC shows a lot more temperature variation than you may think it should. H4895 on the other hand can go from dang cold to dang hot and have almost no variation. If you aren't shooting precision or you're within 200 yards then it probably isn't worth worrying about.

November 17, 2014, 07:45 PM	#14
flashhole Senior Member Join Date: February 9, 2005 Location: Owego, NY Posts: 2,000	It's my go-to powder for 223 and 45-70. __________________ ,,, stupidity comes to some people very easily. 8/22/2017 my wife in a discussion about Liberals. Are you ready for civil war?

November 18, 2014, 02:42 AM	#15
Pathfinder45 Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2008 Posts: 3,224	Good 30-30 powder.

November 18, 2014, 09:13 PM	#16
Jim243 Senior Member Join Date: January 5, 2009 Location: Just off Route 66 Posts: 5,067	H-4895 works very well for bullet weights of 62 grains or higher, I use it for 62, 69 & 75 grain 223's. 85, 95 & 105 grain 243's, 130 grain 270's, 150 grain 30-06 and 185 grain 35 Remington's. It will work for 7.62x39 Russian but not with good results. There are some better powders out there for these calibers but none as versatile for a wide range of calibers as H-4895. Jim __________________ Si vis pacem, para bellum Last edited by Jim243; November 18, 2014 at 09:28 PM.