IMR4227 and the 45Colt - Page 2

rclark · August 11, 2014, 05:26 PM

Quote:

WLP is all I've used for 25 years or so, now.

I am on the other side of the fence... Never used WLP much except in 'hard times' when they were the only ones available.... When I need a standard primer I use one (CCI), and a Magnum primer same way. WLP tries to 'straddle' the fence so to speak and appears to work ok for most situations. Chronograph tells the tale though and of course the target!

Here is another example I tested:

Trail boss 7.5g under 255g SWC, 45 Colt

CCI-300, 822 fps, 73 ES
___WLP, 823 fps, 50 ES
CCI-350, 831 fps, 34 ES

black mamba · August 12, 2014, 08:40 PM

Primers do react differently with different powders. In some loadings in the bigger bores (.44 - .50 caliber) the WLPs have given higher velocity than CCI-350s. Not often, but occasionally.

In my Ruger stainless Bisley 45 Colt, 20 gr. of 4227 seems to be a magic load with any cast lead bullet from 300 gr. TC Silvercast up to the BTB 345 gr. I've tried lighter and heavier, but 20 gr. just seems to work. I have NOT tried I-4227 with any bullet lighter than 300 grains.

buck460XVR · August 13, 2014, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hunter Customs:

Here's a little something to ponder, I've read and have been told that as the gun heats up the velocity and pressure will rise when using IMR 4227.
There may be something to this as my 10 shot string shows this to some degree.

That's an interesting tidbit. One reason I prefer IMR4227 in .44 mag and .460 mag is because it seems to be less sensitive to changes in ambient temperatures than H110/W296. Here in Wisconsin temperatures during the deer hunting season can vary from 80 degrees to minus 20. While these extremes can make a difference in POI from POA with H110/W296, it seems to be less when I use IMR4227. But this is in magnum type loads with close to max charges. As I stated before tho, this is where I find IMR4227 to shine. Heavy bullets pushed hard. Could be at lower pressures the powder is more susceptible to heat? Or is it the gun heating up itself that makes a difference?

Hunter Customs · August 13, 2014, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Could be at lower pressures the powder is more susceptible to heat? Or is it the gun heating up itself that makes a difference?

buck460XVR, I really don't have the answer to your questions.

However as for the last question, if the velocity and pressure was changing because of gun metal changing from heat I would think the velocity and pressure would be more inclined to drop.

I do know that test I've done with most other powders in the gun while shooting 10 shot strings I do not have the extreme spreads and large velocity differences.

I do have them with 2400 though, so it may be something to do with slower burning powders and not filling the case enough.

I do know 2400 works great for me in the 44 mag, but it's a heavy load that fills the case.

Best Regards
Bob Hunter
www.huntercustoms.com

buck460XVR · August 14, 2014, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hunter Customs:

buck460XVR, I really don't have the answer to your questions.

However as for the last question, if the velocity and pressure was changing because of gun metal changing from heat I would think the velocity and pressure would be more inclined to drop.

I used to think that too, but then a friend told me, that the metal is expanding from heat, not the holes in them. Thus he claims that cylinders , throats and forcing cones get smaller as the metal around them expands. Tighter cylinders and throats=more pressure. I dunno, and would appreciate someone with more knowledge to join in.

Hunter Customs · August 14, 2014, 11:00 PM

Quote:

I used to think that too, but then a friend told me, that the metal is expanding from heat, not the holes in them. Thus he claims that cylinders , throats and forcing cones get smaller as the metal around them expands. Tighter cylinders and throats=more pressure.

buck460XVR, I never thought of it that way either, but your friend has some good points of view.

I do know that cylinder gap can tighten up from heat and I would think that would increase velocity and pressure some, how much I'm not sure.

Best Regards
Bob Hunter
www.huntercustoms.com

Airman Basic · August 15, 2014, 04:53 AM

Got to the range yesterday with the Blackhawk and 45 Colt rounds loaded with 25 grains of 4227 and Lee's 255 grain RF. Also had same boolit with 10 grains of Unique and 7 grains of recently acquired 700x. Recoil, accuracy and fired cases almost identical in all three loads. Maybe a bit more primer flattening with the 4227. My practiced ear detected little difference in end performance on our steel plates. Thinking I might need to go up with the 4227, otherwise not worth the extra powder. What y'all think?

Hunter Customs · August 15, 2014, 09:27 AM

Airman Basic,I've used and loaded all three powders you mentioned.

As a matter of fact I'm currently loading 700x because I get good velocity and it makes for some cheaper practice ammo when you are getting a 1000 loads from a pound of powder.

Right now my hunting loads are loaded with Unique as I'm getting better velocity and more consistent numbers with it over IMR 4227.

I'm going to do a little more loading with IMR 4227 and mag primers to see if my numbers change.

I've done some loading with HS6, it's an excellent powder and is one I would use if it was more available.

I'm also very fond of Win 231 but I'm reserving what I have for my 45 ACP loads.

As for now the powder situation being what it is I just have use what I can find and I have 16 pounds of IMR 4227.

Best Regards
Bob Hunter
www.huntercustoms.com

Airman Basic · August 15, 2014, 09:56 AM

Yeah, I've got an 8# jug of 4227, and 700x, plus about 5#s of Unique, so they're my in quantity powders. Also got a 4# jug of Steel, my last resort pistol powder. Still waiting to replenish my 2#s of Bullseye. Haven't seen 231 in years.

elrotundamundo · August 19, 2014, 12:19 PM

I contacted Hodgdon on July 29th re: the interchangeability of data on these two and they said they were different. Maybe they've changed suppliers again.

My question:

Message: I recently bought some IMR 4227 because the H110 and WW296 I usually use for 460 S&W is unavailable. Is IMR4227 and H4227 data interchangeable?
The IMR 4227 I bought, says it was made in Canada.

Their reply:

It is almost the same but you need to use the starting load and work your way up watching for pressure signs.

Mike

Airman Basic · August 19, 2014, 05:06 PM

Quote:

It is almost the same but you need to use the starting load and work your way up watching for pressure signs.

Good CYA answer and good advice for any powder or lot number. Still think they're the same powder.

sig220mwxxxx · August 21, 2014, 11:36 PM

I load for a Ruger Bisley in 45 colt. I am using starline brass and a 265 grain Cast Performance WFN with gas checks over 22 grains of imr 4227. According to my Hodgdon manual this is not a hot load but my shooting hand tells me it may be. I wear PAST shooting gloves to help. I talked to a rep from hodgdon about h4227 vs imr 4227. He said they were the same which is one of the reasons they quit making h4227 which I had been using. I called to find out why I couldn't find any more of it. I liked the h4227 but now I like imr4227 so all is ok.

krag1899 · October 21, 2014, 10:50 AM

I'm relatively new to reloading and when I seat that 240g XTP bullet on top of my charge, and I think I'm only using 23.5g of 4227, it scares the bejesus outta me. How the hell are ya getting 25g in that case ? A whole lotta lead to be smashing down on that powder charge. Just doesn't look safe to me but I'm new to this reloading. I also saw a previous post somewhere where the author reported the H4227 and IMR4227 WERE NOT the same, and shouldn't be confused.......Anybody found something different ?

Pathfinder45 · October 21, 2014, 02:22 PM

They used to be different, but they've always been close. What I read was that the IMR version always outsold H-4227 by a wide margin. And that after Hodgdon aquired IMR, they decided to only have one 4227 since they were so nearly the same. But which to keep? Apparently, they decided to keep the better selling name, but let it be made by their Australian supplier. I believe they also dropped the label, "H-4227". So if you have a container of IMR-4227 that is made in Australia, it is in fact H-4227 relabled. I don't think they should have done it that way, but they were both excellent powders that were among the most identical without actually being identical, and there is little likelihood of bad consequences in their decision. It's not like H-4831 vs IMR-4831 where there is a substantial difference.

mmb713 · October 22, 2014, 09:34 PM

Australian made IMR 4227 is the exact same powder as the now discontinued H4227. Newly manufactured IMR 4227 and H4227 are made in Australia by ADI which calls them AR2205. Check out Hodgdon's MSDS page here and the actual MSDS here.

If your IMR 4227 is labeled made in Australia you can use H4227 data with confidence. The Canadian made IMR 4227 was not the exact same powder as H4227 although they were very close, covered the same applications, and their data overlapped. Australian made IMR 4227 is the exact same powder as H4227, ADI's AR2205.

H4227 was part of Hodgdon's Extreme Extruded Powder lineup and was temperature insensitive. This trait carries over to new IMR 4227. What you get in the summer you get in the winter.

August 19, 2014, 12:19 PM	#35
elrotundamundo Member Join Date: August 14, 2011 Location: North Idaho Posts: 56	Hodgdon's recent reply on H4227 vs IMR4227 I contacted Hodgdon on July 29th re: the interchangeability of data on these two and they said they were different. Maybe they've changed suppliers again. My question: Message: I recently bought some IMR 4227 because the H110 and WW296 I usually use for 460 S&W is unavailable. Is IMR4227 and H4227 data interchangeable? The IMR 4227 I bought, says it was made in Canada. Their reply: It is almost the same but you need to use the starting load and work your way up watching for pressure signs. Mike

October 21, 2014, 10:50 AM	#38
krag1899 Junior Member Join Date: May 17, 2008 Location: South Florida Posts: 6	IMR4227 I'm relatively new to reloading and when I seat that 240g XTP bullet on top of my charge, and I think I'm only using 23.5g of 4227, it scares the bejesus outta me. How the hell are ya getting 25g in that case ? A whole lotta lead to be smashing down on that powder charge. Just doesn't look safe to me but I'm new to this reloading. I also saw a previous post somewhere where the author reported the H4227 and IMR4227 WERE NOT the same, and shouldn't be confused.......Anybody found something different ?

October 21, 2014, 02:22 PM	#39
Pathfinder45 Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2008 Posts: 3,224	IMR vs H 4227 They used to be different, but they've always been close. What I read was that the IMR version always outsold H-4227 by a wide margin. And that after Hodgdon aquired IMR, they decided to only have one 4227 since they were so nearly the same. But which to keep? Apparently, they decided to keep the better selling name, but let it be made by their Australian supplier. I believe they also dropped the label, "H-4227". So if you have a container of IMR-4227 that is made in Australia, it is in fact H-4227 relabled. I don't think they should have done it that way, but they were both excellent powders that were among the most identical without actually being identical, and there is little likelihood of bad consequences in their decision. It's not like H-4831 vs IMR-4831 where there is a substantial difference.

August 12, 2014, 08:40 PM	#27
black mamba Senior Member Join Date: September 13, 2011 Location: SW Florida Posts: 890	Primers do react differently with different powders. In some loadings in the bigger bores (.44 - .50 caliber) the WLPs have given higher velocity than CCI-350s. Not often, but occasionally. In my Ruger stainless Bisley 45 Colt, 20 gr. of 4227 seems to be a magic load with any cast lead bullet from 300 gr. TC Silvercast up to the BTB 345 gr. I've tried lighter and heavier, but 20 gr. just seems to work. I have NOT tried I-4227 with any bullet lighter than 300 grains.

August 15, 2014, 04:53 AM	#32
Airman Basic Senior Member Join Date: April 12, 2013 Location: South of Interstate 20 Posts: 219	Got to the range yesterday with the Blackhawk and 45 Colt rounds loaded with 25 grains of 4227 and Lee's 255 grain RF. Also had same boolit with 10 grains of Unique and 7 grains of recently acquired 700x. Recoil, accuracy and fired cases almost identical in all three loads. Maybe a bit more primer flattening with the 4227. My practiced ear detected little difference in end performance on our steel plates. Thinking I might need to go up with the 4227, otherwise not worth the extra powder. What y'all think?

August 15, 2014, 09:27 AM	#33
Hunter Customs Senior Member Join Date: March 26, 2005 Location: Osborn, Missouri Posts: 2,697	Airman Basic,I've used and loaded all three powders you mentioned. As a matter of fact I'm currently loading 700x because I get good velocity and it makes for some cheaper practice ammo when you are getting a 1000 loads from a pound of powder. Right now my hunting loads are loaded with Unique as I'm getting better velocity and more consistent numbers with it over IMR 4227. I'm going to do a little more loading with IMR 4227 and mag primers to see if my numbers change. I've done some loading with HS6, it's an excellent powder and is one I would use if it was more available. I'm also very fond of Win 231 but I'm reserving what I have for my 45 ACP loads. As for now the powder situation being what it is I just have use what I can find and I have 16 pounds of IMR 4227. Best Regards Bob Hunter www.huntercustoms.com

August 15, 2014, 09:56 AM	#34
Airman Basic Senior Member Join Date: April 12, 2013 Location: South of Interstate 20 Posts: 219	Yeah, I've got an 8# jug of 4227, and 700x, plus about 5#s of Unique, so they're my in quantity powders. Also got a 4# jug of Steel, my last resort pistol powder. Still waiting to replenish my 2#s of Bullseye. Haven't seen 231 in years.

August 21, 2014, 11:36 PM	#37
sig220mwxxxx Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2011 Location: Marshall, Texas Posts: 104	I load for a Ruger Bisley in 45 colt. I am using starline brass and a 265 grain Cast Performance WFN with gas checks over 22 grains of imr 4227. According to my Hodgdon manual this is not a hot load but my shooting hand tells me it may be. I wear PAST shooting gloves to help. I talked to a rep from hodgdon about h4227 vs imr 4227. He said they were the same which is one of the reasons they quit making h4227 which I had been using. I called to find out why I couldn't find any more of it. I liked the h4227 but now I like imr4227 so all is ok.

October 22, 2014, 09:34 PM	#40
mmb713 Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2011 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 421	Australian made IMR 4227 is the exact same powder as the now discontinued H4227. Newly manufactured IMR 4227 and H4227 are made in Australia by ADI which calls them AR2205. Check out Hodgdon's MSDS page here and the actual MSDS here. If your IMR 4227 is labeled made in Australia you can use H4227 data with confidence. The Canadian made IMR 4227 was not the exact same powder as H4227 although they were very close, covered the same applications, and their data overlapped. Australian made IMR 4227 is the exact same powder as H4227, ADI's AR2205. H4227 was part of Hodgdon's Extreme Extruded Powder lineup and was temperature insensitive. This trait carries over to new IMR 4227. What you get in the summer you get in the winter.