H-4895 vs IMR-4895

Happyhunter201 · May 22, 2013, 12:39 PM

Can someone help on this? Current load data for 30-30 AI is; POWDER: H-4895 / 36.2 gr...BULLET: Hornady 155 gr. A-MAX...Can't get h4895 but got a pound of imr 4895. Have been told both powders are mfg. by same company so no difference in them. Current load is not max so plan on starting with it to see if accuracy is the same (3/4" at 100 yds). Can anyone shed some light on this. Similarily, found out w296 and h110 are the same, just different brand names (ie chevy vs gmc).

Thanks for any input.

steve4102 · May 22, 2013, 12:55 PM

No, they are not the same and data is Not interchangeable.

IMR is made in I believe Canada, while H is made in Australia.

Brian Pfleuger · May 22, 2013, 12:59 PM

Don't go by what you've been told and do not switch powders (even the same exact kind and different lot #s) without decreasing at least 10% from max and working back up.

Hodgdon, who owns/distributes both powders, does not list them as being identical in load data nor on their burn rate charts. Unlike H110 and W296, which are identical and are listed exactly next to each other on Hodgdon's burn rate chart.

shastaboat · May 23, 2013, 07:36 PM

There is as much difference in lots of 4895 as ther is in H vs IMR.

RC20 · May 23, 2013, 10:16 PM

If you are on the lower or mid end, some of those powders are so close you can swap the data though the velocity and accuracy may change a bit.

On the upper end you shouldn't.

I don't push my stuff up there where its an issue, removes the aspect of the powder variation withing the lots.

I would have to look at how close those 2 are specifically.

steve4102 · May 24, 2013, 06:57 AM

Quote:

If you are on the lower or mid end, some of those powders are so close you can swap the data though the velocity and accuracy may change a bit.

I don't agree that swapping data from one powder to the next is a good idea no matter what their names and numbers are (unless they are indeed Identical). Just because they share the same name/number does not mean that data can be swapped. And neither does "being so close".

If "close" was all that was needed, we could swap data from all sorts of powders regardless of the name or number. Take TAC for example, It's right next to H4895 in Hodgdon's burn chart, close enough to swap data? Ramshot list 33gr as Max for the 30-30 with 150gr bullets, Hodgdon list 33.5gr as Max for IMR 4895 for 150gr bullet. Should we swap data between these two? After all, they follow the same criteria as 4895. They are close in burn rate, they are manufactured by two separate companies and there data is "so close".

jmr40 · May 24, 2013, 09:58 AM

Both are marketed by Hodgdon now and loads are listed on Hodgdon's website.

http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

They are similar, but I wouldn't interchange load data. The exact bullet you are using is not listed, but they show 33.5 gr of IMR4895 as a max load with a 150 gr bullet @ 2213 fps. H4895 shows a max load of 34 gr with a 150 gr bullet @ 2390. These are for standard 30-30 loads, not the AI version.

I'd feel pretty safe using the 150 gr IMR-4895 load data as a starting point if this is the only powder you can find. You should be able to work up a load that is acceptable until you can find some H-4895.

Sarge · May 24, 2013, 10:10 AM

IF you've got a question about powders for heaven's sake, call the powder manufacturer and listen to whatever they tell you.

**Unclenick** · May 24, 2013, 11:30 AM

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

Happy Hunter201,

As others have stated, these are different powders. Same distributor, but modern H4895 (since some time in the early to mid-1990's) has been part of the Hodgdon Extreme line, made in Australia. This is a change from the days when Hodgdon sold surplus powders, at which time H4895 probably did come from the same plant. It means that old load data (pre-2000, just to play safe) may be invalid, whereas old IMR data is often still valid because the basic formulations are the same now as they were sixty years ago (though pressure measuring is now more accurate than it was then, so still defer to modern load data).

Hodgdon doesn't list the .30-30 AI, that I can find, but in .30-30 Winchester, on average (and this varies with bullet weight), it takes about 6% more IMR 4895 by weight to reach the same velocity as a charge of H4895. The H4895 gets to that velocity at slightly lower peak pressure.

One of the good things about H4895 is it safer than many for using in low loads. So, I would just take the charges in your data for IMR 4895 and multiply each one by 0.94 to reduce them 6%. Then use the resulting 6% lower starting load first, and slowly work up toward the 6% smaller peak load, while watching for pressure signs.

May 22, 2013, 12:39 PM	#1
Happyhunter201 Junior Member Join Date: May 1, 2013 Posts: 9	H-4895 vs IMR-4895 Can someone help on this? Current load data for 30-30 AI is; POWDER: H-4895 / 36.2 gr...BULLET: Hornady 155 gr. A-MAX...Can't get h4895 but got a pound of imr 4895. Have been told both powders are mfg. by same company so no difference in them. Current load is not max so plan on starting with it to see if accuracy is the same (3/4" at 100 yds). Can anyone shed some light on this. Similarily, found out w296 and h110 are the same, just different brand names (ie chevy vs gmc). Thanks for any input.

May 22, 2013, 12:59 PM	#3
Brian Pfleuger Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Austin, CO Posts: 19,578	Don't go by what you've been told and do not switch powders (even the same exact kind and different lot #s) without decreasing at least 10% from max and working back up. Hodgdon, who owns/distributes both powders, does not list them as being identical in load data nor on their burn rate charts. Unlike H110 and W296, which are identical and are listed exactly next to each other on Hodgdon's burn rate chart. __________________ Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley

May 24, 2013, 10:10 AM	#8
Sarge Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2002 Location: MO Posts: 5,457	IF you've got a question about powders for heaven's sake, call the powder manufacturer and listen to whatever they tell you. __________________ People were smarter before the Internet, or imbeciles were harder to notice.

May 24, 2013, 11:30 AM	#9
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information. Happy Hunter201, As others have stated, these are different powders. Same distributor, but modern H4895 (since some time in the early to mid-1990's) has been part of the Hodgdon Extreme line, made in Australia. This is a change from the days when Hodgdon sold surplus powders, at which time H4895 probably did come from the same plant. It means that old load data (pre-2000, just to play safe) may be invalid, whereas old IMR data is often still valid because the basic formulations are the same now as they were sixty years ago (though pressure measuring is now more accurate than it was then, so still defer to modern load data). Hodgdon doesn't list the .30-30 AI, that I can find, but in .30-30 Winchester, on average (and this varies with bullet weight), it takes about 6% more IMR 4895 by weight to reach the same velocity as a charge of H4895. The H4895 gets to that velocity at slightly lower peak pressure. One of the good things about H4895 is it safer than many for using in low loads. So, I would just take the charges in your data for IMR 4895 and multiply each one by 0.94 to reduce them 6%. Then use the resulting 6% lower starting load first, and slowly work up toward the 6% smaller peak load, while watching for pressure signs. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle

May 22, 2013, 12:55 PM	#2
steve4102 Senior Member Join Date: December 23, 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,955	No, they are not the same and data is Not interchangeable. IMR is made in I believe Canada, while H is made in Australia.

May 23, 2013, 07:36 PM	#4
shastaboat Junior member Join Date: November 14, 2010 Location: Reno, NV Posts: 26	There is as much difference in lots of 4895 as ther is in H vs IMR.

May 23, 2013, 10:16 PM	#5
RC20 Senior Member Join Date: April 10, 2008 Location: Alaska Posts: 7,014	If you are on the lower or mid end, some of those powders are so close you can swap the data though the velocity and accuracy may change a bit. On the upper end you shouldn't. I don't push my stuff up there where its an issue, removes the aspect of the powder variation withing the lots. I would have to look at how close those 2 are specifically.

May 24, 2013, 09:58 AM	#7
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,808	Both are marketed by Hodgdon now and loads are listed on Hodgdon's website. http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp They are similar, but I wouldn't interchange load data. The exact bullet you are using is not listed, but they show 33.5 gr of IMR4895 as a max load with a 150 gr bullet @ 2213 fps. H4895 shows a max load of 34 gr with a 150 gr bullet @ 2390. These are for standard 30-30 loads, not the AI version. I'd feel pretty safe using the 150 gr IMR-4895 load data as a starting point if this is the only powder you can find. You should be able to work up a load that is acceptable until you can find some H-4895.