4831

bill k · January 23, 2005, 11:50 PM

What's the differnence between IMR4831 and H4831sc. I know one is IMR the other is Hodgedon. The reason I ask is I have IMR4831 and want to try it in my 300ULTRA mag. My nosler manual doesn't give info for the IMR but does for the H4831sc, my spear manual doesn't have anything for the ultra's. Can anyone shed a light for me. What manual did you get the info out of?
Thanks ,
Bill

steveno · January 24, 2005, 07:21 AM

IMR-4831 and H-4831sc are NOT interchangeable. IMR-4831 is a faster burning powder than H-4831sc

bill k · January 24, 2005, 01:05 PM

I found reload info at the IMR web site and it said 81.4g of IMR4831 with starting loads 10% less. I'm still not convinced on doing this till I see it in writing and get get more data. Has anyone out there loaded IMR4831 and H4831sc in their 300's, preferably the ultra mag. If you have, which powder provided the best results.

Robert M Boren Sr · January 24, 2005, 02:32 PM

Bill, I have used RL-25 in my sons 300 win mag with excellent results. He uses a 180 scirroco. But wants to change to a 200gr accubond once he uses up what he has. One other thing is look at different bullet weights or type. Speer has an updated load info on their web site you might want to check out too.

PhotoRecon · January 24, 2005, 04:25 PM

The "sc" is for short cut. Hodgdon developed 4831 with a shorter stick that matches the ballistics of their 4831. As mentioned above IMR and Hodgdon 4831 are not the same.

If you prefer IMR powder in your Ultra Mag IMR 7828 might be a better choice. Hodgdon also has powder developed specifically for these newer high powder capacity magnums. I want to say its called Retumbo but would have to check their website to be sure.

Walter · January 29, 2005, 01:41 AM

The Hornady Handbook of Cartridge Reloading, Sixth Edition, gives loading
data for both IMR 4831 AND Hodgdon 4831 for the 300 Rem. Ultra Mag.

It's a pricey book, a two-volume set, but it has a lot of new data.
I bought it for loads for the 300 WSM.
I'm still working on that.

Walter

Jump boot · January 30, 2005, 08:06 AM

Bill,
My new Lyman 48th edition book gives loads for the 300 ultras using IMR 4831 and H4831.What gr. of bullet where you going to load?

HankL · January 30, 2005, 08:59 AM

In Hornady's 6th Edition I found the following comparison between IMR 4831 and H 4831 regular in the 300 RUM. Using a 110 grain bullet they report
3800 fps with 93 gr. of IMR and 101.4 gr. of Hodgdon. The heaviest bullet they show IMR data for is in the 150-155 grain range.

Just looking at Hornady's data I would have to give Reloader 22 a try for the mid weight projectiles.

bill k · January 30, 2005, 11:33 AM

I'm reloading nosler 150 and 180 accubond.

HankL · January 30, 2005, 12:25 PM

This time from Sierra Edition V.
300 RUM
They were using Remington Cases, Remington 9 1/2 M primers and a Savage 116 with 26" 1x10" tube.

150 gr bullet no listing for either powder

165/168 gr. bullet IMR 4831 maxes out 50 fps faster than H 4831-SC but a full 100 fps slower than RE-22.

You know, comparing the data in Sierra and Hornandy side by side is a bit confusing. Bill, I suggest that you gather all of the data available, a good chronograph if you don't already have one and proceed with caution.
Be Safe.

arthurrh · January 30, 2005, 05:31 PM

I would think that if IMR put a test load on their website, it should be pretty safe to give it a try.

Ackley Improved User · January 31, 2005, 09:29 PM

I've found Reloader 25 to be one of the very best powders in any over-bore big mag. R25 is also good in many other cartridges as well. H870 is too dirty for my taste, and I haven't found the 50 caliber slow burning powders to improve performance over that achieve by R25.

January 23, 2005, 11:50 PM	#1
bill k Senior Member Join Date: December 9, 2004 Location: Dog Creek, CA Posts: 457	4831 What's the differnence between IMR4831 and H4831sc. I know one is IMR the other is Hodgedon. The reason I ask is I have IMR4831 and want to try it in my 300ULTRA mag. My nosler manual doesn't give info for the IMR but does for the H4831sc, my spear manual doesn't have anything for the ultra's. Can anyone shed a light for me. What manual did you get the info out of? Thanks , Bill

January 31, 2005, 09:29 PM	#12
Ackley Improved User Member Join Date: January 31, 2005 Posts: 56	Reloader 25 best for the over-bore big mags. I've found Reloader 25 to be one of the very best powders in any over-bore big mag. R25 is also good in many other cartridges as well. H870 is too dirty for my taste, and I haven't found the 50 caliber slow burning powders to improve performance over that achieve by R25.

January 24, 2005, 07:21 AM	#2
steveno Senior Member Join Date: June 18, 2004 Location: Minden , Nebraska Posts: 1,407	IMR-4831 and H-4831sc are NOT interchangeable. IMR-4831 is a faster burning powder than H-4831sc

January 24, 2005, 01:05 PM	#3
bill k Senior Member Join Date: December 9, 2004 Location: Dog Creek, CA Posts: 457	I found reload info at the IMR web site and it said 81.4g of IMR4831 with starting loads 10% less. I'm still not convinced on doing this till I see it in writing and get get more data. Has anyone out there loaded IMR4831 and H4831sc in their 300's, preferably the ultra mag. If you have, which powder provided the best results.

January 24, 2005, 02:32 PM	#4
Robert M Boren Sr Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2004 Location: NW Montana Posts: 269	Bill, I have used RL-25 in my sons 300 win mag with excellent results. He uses a 180 scirroco. But wants to change to a 200gr accubond once he uses up what he has. One other thing is look at different bullet weights or type. Speer has an updated load info on their web site you might want to check out too.

January 24, 2005, 04:25 PM	#5
PhotoRecon Member Join Date: November 29, 2004 Location: Central Montana Posts: 42	The "sc" is for short cut. Hodgdon developed 4831 with a shorter stick that matches the ballistics of their 4831. As mentioned above IMR and Hodgdon 4831 are not the same. If you prefer IMR powder in your Ultra Mag IMR 7828 might be a better choice. Hodgdon also has powder developed specifically for these newer high powder capacity magnums. I want to say its called Retumbo but would have to check their website to be sure.

January 29, 2005, 01:41 AM	#6
Walter Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2004 Location: North Texas Posts: 641	The Hornady Handbook of Cartridge Reloading, Sixth Edition, gives loading data for both IMR 4831 AND Hodgdon 4831 for the 300 Rem. Ultra Mag. It's a pricey book, a two-volume set, but it has a lot of new data. I bought it for loads for the 300 WSM. I'm still working on that. Walter

January 30, 2005, 08:06 AM	#7
Jump boot Member Join Date: November 22, 2004 Posts: 74	Bill, My new Lyman 48th edition book gives loads for the 300 ultras using IMR 4831 and H4831.What gr. of bullet where you going to load?

January 30, 2005, 08:59 AM	#8
HankL Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 1999 Location: The Sunny South Posts: 2,174	In Hornady's 6th Edition I found the following comparison between IMR 4831 and H 4831 regular in the 300 RUM. Using a 110 grain bullet they report 3800 fps with 93 gr. of IMR and 101.4 gr. of Hodgdon. The heaviest bullet they show IMR data for is in the 150-155 grain range. Just looking at Hornady's data I would have to give Reloader 22 a try for the mid weight projectiles.

January 30, 2005, 11:33 AM	#9
bill k Senior Member Join Date: December 9, 2004 Location: Dog Creek, CA Posts: 457	I'm reloading nosler 150 and 180 accubond.

January 30, 2005, 12:25 PM	#10
HankL Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 1999 Location: The Sunny South Posts: 2,174	This time from Sierra Edition V. 300 RUM They were using Remington Cases, Remington 9 1/2 M primers and a Savage 116 with 26" 1x10" tube. 150 gr bullet no listing for either powder 165/168 gr. bullet IMR 4831 maxes out 50 fps faster than H 4831-SC but a full 100 fps slower than RE-22. You know, comparing the data in Sierra and Hornandy side by side is a bit confusing. Bill, I suggest that you gather all of the data available, a good chronograph if you don't already have one and proceed with caution. Be Safe.

January 30, 2005, 05:31 PM	#11
arthurrh Senior Member Join Date: December 2, 2004 Posts: 189	I would think that if IMR put a test load on their website, it should be pretty safe to give it a try.