Is IMR 4064 forgotten?

armednfree · May 11, 2018, 10:35 AM

I looking at all these sights at 22-250 data. All these different powders, rarely is IMR 4064 mentioned.

That was always the top powder for 22-250. It seems that if I drop 35.8 grains behind a 55 grain bullet it shoots great, in everything. Now granted another powder might shave .1 or 2 off a group but in the field that makes no real difference ( I don't shoot prairie dogs).

It seems these new powders are running the tried and true out. I'm ok though, I have 14 pounds of IMR 4064. 80's vintage stuff.

T. O'Heir · May 11, 2018, 01:00 PM

"...14 pounds of IMR 4064. 80's vintage stuff..." How has it been stored for 30 plus years? That's the only thing that matters.
"...it shoots great..." That's all that matters too. And no, IMR4064 hasn't been forgotten. It's one of the 'go to' .30 cal match load powders.
"...don't shoot prairie dogs..." They don't live everywhere.

1stmar · May 11, 2018, 03:35 PM

Almost all i use. 3006, 308, 22-250, 223, 35 rem. May not always produce the highest velocities or the tightest groups but exceptional across the board superb powder. I get very tight groups with these cartridges.

std7mag · May 11, 2018, 04:11 PM

Not hardly.
A little hard to find in my area.

308Loader · May 11, 2018, 04:37 PM

IMR 4064 is my go to for .308 rifles. seems to be very prevalent in my area. Cabela's, Gander mountain , fleet & farm, LGS... good stuff. Ive noticed it is not in some of the loading books as much any more, plenty at the store.

Charlie98 · May 11, 2018, 05:45 PM

I use in in my bolt .308 loads, and I can sub it in on about 4 other rifle cartridges I load for... .348, .45-70, 6.5CM, and .30-30. With the exception of the 6.5CM, I normally load low velocity cast bullets in the other 3 cartridges, but when I load jacketed, I reach for IMR4064.

Oddly enough, my dependency on IMR4895 has waned a bit... split between IMRs 3031 and 4064, believe it or not. If it wasn't for the M1 Garand, I probably wouldn't have IMR4895 on the bench.

1stmar · May 11, 2018, 06:16 PM

Charlei try 47gr 4064 168 tben you wont need 4895

jmr40 · May 11, 2018, 06:16 PM

I use a fair amount of it in my 308 when I'm looking solely for best accuracy. I prefer Varget or RL15 for hunting loads. It can be used in 30-06, but there are better options.

Between the 3 I get virtually the same speeds and a smidge better accuracy with 4064. But not enough to matter in a hunting situation. The difference is temperature stability. You can see 150-200 fps difference between +20* and +90* with 4064. With Varget or some of the other temperature resistant powders you'd see around 20-25 fps difference. I think that is the primary reason it is used less than in the past.

muzzleblast... · May 11, 2018, 06:25 PM

As far as I am concerned, IMR 4064 is... "indispensable."

hdbiker · May 11, 2018, 07:04 PM

Oh hell no !!!. IMR 4064 is my go to powder in all my rifles, I've used one powder after another for for 45 years and setteled on IMR4064. It mayby not the very best in.223, .243, .270, 30-30, .308 and 30-06 but its at or near the top in velosity in my guns. It's also the most versible powder out there. hdbiker

armednfree · May 11, 2018, 10:14 PM

I came in from work and read my post. Lord, I sound like my father. Then I look at all your responses and see "Senior Member".

Kevin Rohrer · May 11, 2018, 10:27 PM

It is what I use for the 22-250.

bamaranger · May 11, 2018, 11:29 PM

I read somewhere that 4064 was an "old man powder".

I still use it for .308/150, '06, and .243.

hdwhit · May 12, 2018, 12:12 AM

Quote:

bamaranger wrote:
I read somewhere that 4064 was an "old man powder".

Well that's fine. I'm an "old man" so I should be able to use it.

AL45 · May 12, 2018, 12:16 AM

Loaded some 7.35 mm with IMR 4064 about an hour ago. Also use it in my .308.

Road_Clam · May 12, 2018, 02:54 AM

4064 is a tried and true powder. The only downside is it's a stubborn stick powder. When I say "stubborn" I'm speaking strictly in reguards to metering through a drum powder dispenser. 4064 is like chopping matchsticks. There are many outstanding substitutes such as Varget, 4895, and 748 that meter so much better . However 4064 does serve as the go to powder for my 1903A4 with the 168 Nosler CC. For dumping 4064 I only use my RCBS chargemaster 1500 , and no annoying "chopping matchsticks" with the 1500 !

armednfree · May 12, 2018, 07:53 AM

I find that stick chopping disturbing. I used to dip it and then trickle.

Kevin Rohrer · May 12, 2018, 08:56 PM

I tried moving to a more "modern" powder like Varget, but nothing beat 4064 for accuracy.

Heavy Metal 1 · May 12, 2018, 09:54 PM

I use it in my Mosin Nagants and my 8MMs where it really shines for me. It is "like chopping matchsticks" through a RCBS Uniflow, but not in my Lee powder measure. The Lee outfit runs smooth and consistent with IMR sticks.

Scoits · May 13, 2018, 06:03 AM

I buy it in 8# bottles

Road_Clam · May 13, 2018, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Rohrer

but nothing beat 4064 for accuracy

Your opinion only. Maybe in your rifle(s) but many of mine respond with better accuracy to alternate powders such as Varget, and Win 748

**Unclenick** · May 13, 2018, 09:53 AM

IMR4064 is nowhere near dead. Federal still uses it in their Gold Medal Match .308 ammunition and in the Mk. 316 Mod 0 sniper ammo they developed to improve on M118LR and eliminate the peaky pressure problems they had in the desert with RL 15 (used in M118LR) and ball powders. It's true they order special lots, with things like flash suppressant added for the military ammo, but given their resources, if there was something noticeably better for .308 production ammunition accuracy (where you can't work up the load separately for specific guns) I think they'd have identified it by now.

In the 1995 Precision Shooting Reloading Guide, Dave Milosovich described an experiment in which he loaded IMR 4064 and 4895 to specific velocities for a .308 bolt gun firing 180-grain bullets. He found that for velocities below 2400 fps it took a lighter charge of 4064 than of 4895 to reach a specific number of fps, suggesting to him that 4064 was faster burning. At 2400 fps the charge weights were the same (within a tenth of a grain). Above 2400 fps it took more 4064 than 4895 to reach a given velocity, suggesting to him that at higher pressure 4064 burned more slowly.

If you make a graph of Milosovich's data, what you see is simply that it takes a bigger change in the charge weight of 4064 to get the same velocity change you get with 4895 in the .308. This limits upper velocities with it, but also means anything that changes pressure and velocity, such as a charge weight error or a change in temperature, is going to produce less velocity difference with 4064, making it effectively more stable for a wider range of conditions.

Varget, which was originally intended to compete with 4064, changes pressure per grain of charge change even less than 4064 does in .308. This has a plus and a minus. The plus side is even better temperature and charge weight error immunity. The minus is less barrel time and velocity tuning range. If you have a good Varget accuracy load it should stay good through a lot of conditions, but in some guns and bullet weight combinations, you might not find such a load within the range of velocities Varget can produce. Indeed, I think this explains why you see some people find Varget the best thing since sliced bread, while others are unimpressed by it.

One other factor in the .308 is 4064 bulk density. Federal GMM loads with the 168 grain Sierra bullet that I've pulled down are all very slightly compressed; about 0.5%. This means that compression tends to lock the powder in place at loading, so it doesn't settle during transport. In the same 1995 PSRG as Milosovich's information, Dan Hackett made mention of having loads he'd developed that worked fine when he loaded them at home, but that caused sticky bolt lift and other pressure signs if he loaded them at the range. He finally traced it to the fact the vibration of transporting the loads from home to the range was changing the packing density of the powder in his cases, lowering the effective burn rate. This is the one area where spherical propellants have an edge over stick powders: sticks can rearrange themselves with more difference in how they pack, so their bulk density is changed more by vibration, drop tube length or anything else that affects powder packing. This is one reason finding a load that fills cases and locks in place by slight compression will keep its performance more consistent as you ship it around the world, as Federal does.

That tendency to pack under vibration is the reason grain cutting in drum measures can be an issue for 4064. It isn't the cut grains themselves that matter, but the fact the powder measure is jerked by the sharp movement of cutting grains. That motion causes powder in the hopper to settle so the next charge thrown is heavier than those unaccompanied by grain cutting. There are solutions. The JDS Quick Measure does not cut even 4064 grains at all. The Lee wipers in their Perfect and Deluxe Perfect and the now-discontinued Classic powder measures cut grains much less frequently than standard measures and are another way around the problem. If I get grain cutting in a powder measure, I put the next two throws back in the hopper on the assumption they'll be heavy. Afterward, they go back to what was set up originally.

IMR 4064 is a long-time favorite in the Garand, going back to John Clarke's Garand loads from the 1980's and before. This is, in part, because it fills the big .30-06 case better than IMR 4895. It is mainly used with the 168-grain and heavier match bullets, though. For 150's I get even better case fill and consistency with Vihtavuori N135 and have moved to that. Very generally speaking, though, any single-base powder whose maximum .30-06 bolt gun load is 53 grains of powder or less, will also not produce excess gas port pressure in the Garand.

Charlie98 · May 13, 2018, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Charlei try 47gr 4064 168 tben you wont need 4895

I still have a good quantity of IMR4895, I bought 32# of it about 10 years ago when I started loading for both the M1 and my M1a... so I'll keep using it until I run it dry, but after that, I may just drop it from the roster and switch to IMR4064 in my M1. I don't shoot 168grn bullets in the M1, just 150's at a reasonable velocity, I'm sure 4064 can push them right along as well.