The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 27, 2020, 09:01 AM   #1
BobCat45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: East Bernard, TX
Posts: 360
IMR 4064 vs IMR 4895 metering?

If you have used both powders and have an opinion on whether 4064 is significantly worse (more inconsistent) metering than 4895, please tell.

IMR 4895 does not meter well through my RCBS Uniflo but it does very consistently through my Lee (laugh if you will).

Running low on 4895, a friend has extra 4064, and I know 4064 is highly regarded in the Garand (people tell me it is better than 4895).

So I'm tempted but having read that 4064 has a reputation for difficult metering I'm wondering how much "worse" it is compared to 4895.

Any light you can shed on this will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
__________________
Retractable claws - the *original* concealed carry

http://www.bayourifles.org
TinyURL.com/qgdojvh
BobCat45 is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 10:21 AM   #2
scatterbrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2015
Posts: 125
Should powder really by rated by how it meters? If my load is important to me I short measure with the RCBS Uniflo and then trickle up to the exact amount. It is part of the reloading experience and always enjoyable.
scatterbrain is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 10:33 AM   #3
ballisticxlr
Member
 
Join Date: April 25, 2020
Posts: 84
Both are mediumish size stick powders. I've never had really great luck getting any stick powder to meter as well as I need. Anymore I just don't use volumetric dispensing with stick powders, ball only. If I use stick I weigh every charge. I've had about the same results with both of those powders. It's not usually hard to get +/- .3gr out of my Dillon or RCBS measures but I don't find that that kind of variance is useful for what I do. I require +/-.1gr.
ballisticxlr is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 11:13 AM   #4
BobCat45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: East Bernard, TX
Posts: 360
Thank you gentlemen.

I'm willing to weigh each charge if necessary, but I failed to mention this is for 200 yard Garand matches, so the actual variation is probably not that critical.

Plus or minus 0.3 grains might not matter, it is only 200 yards and my hold may not be that good.

The Lee measure holds plus or minus 0.1 grain with 4895. This works well. The IMR 4895 load I've been using easily holds the 10-ring prone - even with me holding the rifle.

Our club holds four Garand matches a year; that is 220 rounds. Plus some for me to just shoot / practice, I'm looking at loading about 300 rounds or so, loading all of it at once to minimize disturbance of my die setup. I load a lot more .223 (for XC and midrange prone) than 30-06, so I like to load the 30-06 all in one go.

I'm willing to weigh 300 charges if need be, but if 4064 meters not much worse than 4895, throwing them might be an option. That's why I asked for other people's experience / observation.
__________________
Retractable claws - the *original* concealed carry

http://www.bayourifles.org
TinyURL.com/qgdojvh
BobCat45 is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 12:31 PM   #5
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 18,603
IMR 4895 grains are 0.032"×0.056" D×L
IMR 4064 grains are 0.031"×0.083" D×L

The greater length of 4064 grains generally makes them a bit harder to meter uniformly than 4895 grains. However, the Federal GM308M (308 Winchester Match with 168-grain MatchKing bullet) used 43.5 grains of 4064 in the past with ±0.2-grain metering precision in the boxes I pulled down long ago, and it and their 30-06 match load shot just fine to 600 yards. I don't know what their 30-06 match load charge level of 4064 was, but don't expect it was any more precise. I don't think the Garand shooting at just 200 yards will be nearly that picky. The Lee Perfect should do fine with it.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle
Unclenick is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 12:55 PM   #6
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 23,156
I use both in an RCBS Uniflow measure. There is no difference I can detect. Both sometimes bind the drum a bit, both give the occasional "crunch" of a cut kernal. And both give the same approximate variation in charges +/- 0.1gr.

Your results may be different...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 01:01 PM   #7
BobCat45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: East Bernard, TX
Posts: 360
Thank you Unclenick!

My thinking is that small charge weight variations will show up as velocity variations, and at only 200 yards such variations will cause insignificant elevation variations.

The only rifle matches I've ever won outright are Garand matches at 200 yards. I have ammunition loaded for the January match but none for March; have primers and bullets, not enough 4895. So the offer of 4064 was very welcome but I was troubled by the reputation for being difficult to meter.

I will jump on the 4064 and try it through the Lee measure. Will weigh charges if it becomes necessary, but it seems overkill for the application.

44AMP - thanks! Looking forward to trying it out. An adventure for the New Year!
__________________
Retractable claws - the *original* concealed carry

http://www.bayourifles.org
TinyURL.com/qgdojvh
BobCat45 is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 04:21 PM   #8
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,404
IMR4064 in weighed exact charges has proved more accurate than IMR4895 so measured in 30-06 and 308 ammo with 160 to 180 grain bullets. Metered charges is better with IMR4895 as proved in tests at one of the arsenals some years ago.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 163
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master
Bart B. is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 05:45 PM   #9
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 18,603
One factor to mention is that powder measures anchored very firmly to a bench throw more consistently than those on flexing or free-standing, but inadequately heavy stands. This is because when grains are cut a vibration goes through the measure that is bigger when the measure is not screwed or clamped firmly to the bench. The vibration settles powder in the hopper tending to cause the next throw after a crunch to be heavy, and the bigger it is, the more it settles. Firm clamping can come close to eliminating that if your technique is consistent.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle
Unclenick is offline  
Old December 27, 2020, 06:20 PM   #10
BobCat45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: East Bernard, TX
Posts: 360
Bart B. - thanks! When I actually get the powder I'll try it through the measure and see how consistent it is.

I'm loading 49 grains of IMR 4895 and a 150 grain bullet, and expect the 4064 load to be similar (according to manuals and so forth). So even if it varies + or - 0.2 grains instead of 0.1 grain, the difference between 48.8 to 49.2 versus 48.9 to 49.1 seems small percentage wise. If it is much worse than 0.2 grains I'll throw light and trickle up. I can read my beam scale to 0.1 grain; electronic scale reads finer resolution but I have no confidence in that.

Unclenick - thanks, the mount is pretty stout but beefing it up will be easy enough. And when I feel the measure start to bind like it's going to cut a granule I generally am going slow enough to stop, wiggle the handle, throw that charge without cutting, dump it back in the hopper, and keep going.

When I actually get the 4064 and try it I'll post an update on this. Friend hasn't emailed me back saying he still has it so not counting my chickens yet.

Thank you for your help and assurance.
__________________
Retractable claws - the *original* concealed carry

http://www.bayourifles.org
TinyURL.com/qgdojvh
BobCat45 is offline  
Old December 28, 2020, 12:00 AM   #11
pwc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2018
Location: AZ
Posts: 233
Metering......hmmmm

I have used both powders in my Lyman 55, and yes, you will cut grains. Doing so, the powder throw is not as smoooooth as flake, more like smo ot h. But then, I do not require complete exactness. After set-up, I do 5 drops and weigh them then take the average as the measure's capability for that weight of powder. That is sufficient for what I do.
pwc is offline  
Old December 28, 2020, 12:15 AM   #12
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 5,575
In my Hornady powder measure they both suck . The best I could hope for was +/- .4gr . Was that the norm , no but often enough to be unable to ignore it .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive !

I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again .
Metal god is offline  
Old December 28, 2020, 12:38 AM   #13
hounddawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2009
Posts: 3,532
I remember a couple of years back one of the posters on another forum posted a pic of a electronic target that was shot at 1000 yards. It was one of those targets that showed the POI and the velocity. His velocities were pretty inconsistent and the POIs and velocities just did not make sense with higher velocities hitting lower and vise versa. Near as I can remember the score was in the high 190's. At the time I blew it off as a fluke but now I am doing some serious rethinking on my reloading practices and wondering if ES and SD really have that much to do with the accuracy.

I had horrible velocity consistency today at 300 on a pair of 10 shot groups that would have all been in the ten ring at a F class match with a lot of X's. All of the charges were weighed on a FX120 and were plus or minus .02 grains from the designated weight yet the ES's were awful

I remember that poster claiming that the barrel harmonics made up for the velocity inconsistency and at the time was sceptical but am now having second thoughts.
__________________
“How do I get to the next level?” Well, you get to the next level by being the first one on the range and the last one to leave.” – Jerry Miculek
hounddawg is offline  
Old December 28, 2020, 07:45 AM   #14
BobCat45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: East Bernard, TX
Posts: 360
pwc - "That is sufficient for what I do. " - Exactly! It comes down to what is 'good enough' to give one confidence that the ammunition is reliable and consistent enough to hold the 10-ring.

In this case, I'm talking about a 75-year-old battle rifle, 72-year-old eyes, and only 200 yards.

I think I originally posted looking for reassurance that trying 'something new' would be ok. Reading that 4064 meters poorly made me apprehensive, but since 4895 has a similar reputation (but works great for me) I wanted feedback on how they compared to each other.

Metal god - +/- 0.4 grains sounds pretty inconsistent. Your post tells me that once I get the 4064 I need to load 10 rounds - throwing light and trickling up - at 48.5 grains, and the same number of rounds at 49.5 grains, and shoot them prone at 200. Maybe ask a friend to hand me the rounds one at a time so I don't know which is which, and see the results on paper.

hounddawg - we shoot electronic targets in the prone matches and as you say, they give a velocity for each shot and SD. I've scored for people who consistently shot pretty darned well - like, 199-9x - and noted their SDs were in the mid 20s - i.e. worse than most people want. Made me wonder about the accuracy of the readings as well as the relationship between velocity spread and accuracy on the target.

Thanks gentlemen.
__________________
Retractable claws - the *original* concealed carry

http://www.bayourifles.org
TinyURL.com/qgdojvh
BobCat45 is offline  
Old December 28, 2020, 09:59 AM   #15
GeauxTide
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 20, 2009
Location: Helena, AL
Posts: 4,045
Before Electronic

Quote:
Should powder really by rated by how it meters? If my load is important to me I short measure with the RCBS Uniflo and then trickle up to the exact amount. It is part of the reloading experience and always enjoyable.
My method with a Uniflow for 40 years. Recently upgraded my old Lyman DPS 1200 with an RCBS Chargemaster 1500. Heavenly.
__________________
223, 243, 6.5GR, 260R, 6.5-06, 280R, 7mmRM, 300HAM'R, 308, 30-06, 338-06, 9mm, 357M, 41M, 44SPL, 44M, 45 Colt, 450BM.
GeauxTide is offline  
Old December 29, 2020, 10:51 AM   #16
hdbiker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 19, 2012
Posts: 282
After over 45 years of trying this powder and that powder, with only a nickel worth of difference any of them in all my rifles, .223, 243, 270, 308, 30-30, 30-06, I now use only one powder in all my rifles. IMR 4064. I learned long ago accuracy us much more important than velocity hdbiker
hdbiker is offline  
Old December 31, 2020, 01:11 PM   #17
Road_Clam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,598
I can tell you from personal experience that dropping 4064 through the RCBS Uniflow is the equivilant if chopping wooden matchsticks. I gave up after a year of trying and ended up buying an auto powder dispenser. Matchstick problem solved.
__________________
"To be old an wise you must have been young and stupid"
Road_Clam is offline  
Old December 31, 2020, 01:49 PM   #18
pete2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,451
I use IMR 4831, Lee Scoop and a trickler. If I shot a lot of rifle I would do my best to come up with a ball powder that was accurate. I had some luck with CFE in .223 but Varget seems better. I've not tried Varget in a measure, may work.
pete2 is offline  
Old December 31, 2020, 02:25 PM   #19
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,435
I scoop 4064. I can get +- .2 like that. I just started using it but it is an excellent powder. My go to .303 British load uses it.
__________________
Support the NRA-ILA Auction, ends 03/09/2018

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=593946
5whiskey is offline  
Old January 7, 2021, 10:20 PM   #20
rodfac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 22, 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 3,390
Uniflo here...with both 4064 & 4895, my drops vary +- 0.2 grain...never found it measurable in groups shot out to 200 yds in my Garands and '03's. In my Sako .308 with a 7x Leupold mounted and a firm bench, there was likewise no difference. Bench resters and maybe the F Class crowd might find a winner though. Rod
__________________
Cherish our flag, honor it, defend it in word and deed, or get the hell out. Our Bill of Rights has been paid for by heros in uniform and shall not be diluted by misguided governmental social experiments. We owe this to our children, anything less is cowardice. USAF FAC, 5th Spl Forces, Vietnam Vet '69-'73.
rodfac is offline  
Old January 7, 2021, 10:52 PM   #21
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 18,603
Whether I use QuiclLOAD or data from Hodgdon's published measurements, going from 48.5 grains of IMR 4064 to 49.5 grains (a 1.0-grain span or ±0.5 grains), I get a 46 fps velocity difference. With the 150-grain Hornady FMJ, at 200 yards the total drop difference is 0.3 inches. So, by itself, that isn't enough to matter. What will matter is whether your barrel times change the angle of departure enough to see the difference at 200. The odds are good they won't be. However, if you shoot a ladder to see that you are in the middle of a deadspot in muzzle rise or fall with your center load value, that is what will offer the most immunity to charge error at that range. It won't be that 46 fps number unless your SD is zero. It will be more like the 46 fps addition plus your highest extreme spread number at 49.5 grains verses not having the added 46 fps and the lowest extreme spread number. If you suppose that takes you across about 100 fps of velocity range, you have more like a 0.8" drop difference. Still pretty hard to see with a service rifle target.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle
Unclenick is offline  
Old January 8, 2021, 02:13 AM   #22
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 5,575
Quote:
(a 1.0-grain span or ±0.5 grains), I get a 46 fps velocity difference.
I don't understand what you said there . As I read it you say two different things . 1gr only has a 46fps difference and .5gr has a 46fps difference . As someone that has chronoed many hundreds of rounds using IMR 4064 in a 308 shooting 168 through 200gr . Working up in .5gr increments . Your .5gr increment producing 46fps difference from the the last and the next is spot on . which also means 1gr difference is likely 92fps . Your ES will be that and that's going to be the best it can likely be .

That's what I've seen using 4064 through a chrono and is why I find my .4gr +/- throws unacceptable . My avg is more like +/- .25 but I've never thrown 15 times or so and didn't see that +/- .4gr come up . Obviously my Hornady powder measure is not as good as some others which I'm starting to see with most Hornady products . Good and in some cases pretty good but rarely top shelf products .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive !

I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again .

Last edited by Metal god; January 8, 2021 at 02:20 AM.
Metal god is offline  
Old January 8, 2021, 11:17 AM   #23
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 18,603
The Hodgdon data for a 150-grain Nosler Ballistic Tip has 47 grains producing 2743 fps and 51 grains producing 2928 fps. The difference is 185 fps. When when you divide that by the 4-grain difference in start to max charge, you get 46.25 fps/grain. So I'd meant for the whole grain to produce a 46 fps difference and 0.8" drop difference. But in real guns, you get those velocity rises and flat spots that don't appear in computer simulations, nor do you know if it messed with the fps/grain figure of the Hodgdon data. The drop is from a ballistics program that gives you a difference for a perfectly rigid gun that doesn't have muzzle rise or deflections due to recoil moments or the effects of the shooter's position and solidity. So, with none of that taken into account, what you are seeing (and, in someone else's chamber, possibly the opposite) can happen despite Hodgdon's numbers. The bottom line is that it is in the noise of most folks shooting service rifle at 200.

If I use Hodgdon's data as valid for test barrels, the military velocity for the 152-0.3 grain (150.5-grain average) M2 bullet would read 2790 fps at 15 ft from the muzzle (where Hodgdon will have measured it) and will read 2740 fps at 78 ft from the muzzle as traditionally measured by the military (an average velocity between 2 and 52 yards, or at 78 feet). So their test barrel, if there were no velocity flat spots or rises, would hit that military velocity number right at 48.0 grains of 4064 using their component combination. So that should mimic a military load fairly closely.

In a Garand, the velocity won't match Hodgdon's or the military's test barrels. What I have done in the past is match Hodgdon's load and components and get a velocity from my gun, in position, then switch to LC brass and the #34 primer and the Hornady or Sierra FMJ bullet and check that no major change occurred. Assuming not, that's my starting point from which I look for the best accuracy charge by laddering a grain and a half in both directions.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle
Unclenick is offline  
Old January 8, 2021, 11:42 AM   #24
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 5,575
In my test .5gr regularly produced a 40fps increase in velocity at each increment . I’d need to go back and look but if I recall I was surprised how consistent that was even with different powders of the same burn rate . They may not have been the same velvet cities but the incremental velocity increases were very similar.

I’ll go take a look at my logs and see if I’m remembering all this correctly . Boy would I feel silly if those consistent increments are actually 20fps :-(
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive !

I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again .
Metal god is offline  
Old January 8, 2021, 05:37 PM   #25
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 5,575
Ok , the data I have/used was from 2013/early 2014 which was just before I changed my hold on the rifle helping reduce my ES/SD . Many of the ES's in the data I just looked at were in the 40's and low 50's which I believe screws with my results as far as the most recent topic about increments of velocity per 1gr and .5gr charges .

All my data was using 4064 going up in charge by .5gr increments shooting 175gr smk . I'll add I looked at 4 different load developments with the only difference being cases used or charge weights . Most were 41gr though 43gr but one was 38gr through 41gr .

I'm not going to write all the numbers down but will if asked . I'm basing this off my 5 shot avg's , it looks to me I generally was averaging around the mid 30fps difference from charge to charge . there were a few in the 50's and a couple in the 20's .

Based on my ES's my data leads me to believe Unclenicks data is likely more correct then what I remembered .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive !

I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again .
Metal god is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2020 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.10852 seconds with 10 queries