imr 4227 powder?

D

dcb

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Location
ohio
anyone use this for 357mag loads?
I have a pound to get rid of its been around for a while. I tried it for some rifle loads and did not get good results.
Dave
 
Register to hide this ad
Too fast for most serious rifle loads. Reduced lead bullet rifle loads are OK with it.

It meters like large boulders but does give some pretty good velocities and the reported accuracy is good too.

If you wanted to weigh each load and use a trickler, I suppose it would be OK.

I just found other powders that worked better for my uses so I left it alone long ago.
 
dcb said:
anyone use this for 357mag loads?
I have a pound to get rid of its been around for a while. I tried it for some rifle loads and did not get good results.
Dave
Click to expand...

4227 is not my first choice for any revolver cartridge but it certainly falls within the range of burning rates which make it applicable to this use. Go to www.hodgdon.com and you should find useful data. Hodgdon is now the distributor of both IMR and Winchester powders and has data for both.
 
I have used IMR 4227 in .357 mag, .44 mag, 500 S&W, and .22 Hornet. I like it and it gives good velocities. I use a Pact electronic scale and weigh
my charges for magnum loads so metering is not an issue for me.
 
I tried it a while back in a .222 but didnot get good groups .
I ran some through my autoscale and it meters like ball powders.
I tested 15 drops at 15.5 grains and they were all 15.4 to 15.5.
I loaded up 20 -357 158gr xtps for a test. ill run them across the chrono and check for speed. accuracy. see what if any pressure signs. i got the powder at a gun shop off the clerance table for $8 bucks.
thanks Dave
 
Outta my Uniflo, it meters very well and I have had good luck with it in .357 in both of my 6'' 686s and my 20'' model 92 carbine. I also use it for my hunting loads in .460 S&W.
 
WW-296 is a much better powder in the .357 IMHO. Cleaner burning and it meters much more consistently.
 
IMP 4227 will make perfectly good .357 mag loads with 140gr and heavier bullets. I had tried it years ago but went back to 2400 for most of my magnum loadings.

It is supposed to be good for small case .22's like the .22 Hornet.
 
It works very well in 45 Colt performance loads at standard pressures, but 4227 has never been a powder that I would choose for .357 Mag.
 
I have used IMR4227 for 20 years with great success in the 41 Magnum. It works very well with both cast and jacketed bullets, best accuracy in the 1100 fps range with 210 grain bullets. It works so well with cast bullets that I rarely if ever fire a jacketetd bullts.

IMR4227 should work very well in the 357 in the same velocity range. I have tried it every now and then in the 357 with jacketed bullets, but have yet to find a load to equal my results with Unique, Lil Gun or H110. I suspect that this powders niche is 158 grain hard cast bullets in the 1100 fps range.

Checking Lyman Pistol & Revolver Handbook 3rd Ed., I find 2 cast bullets in the 150 to 160 grain range which list IMR4227 as their accuracy load, both the the 1330 fps range. Those are some pretty hot loads and my experience is that this powder works best at about 1100 fps.
 
I tried some 2400 with good results a while back in the 357.
15.5grs of imr4227 should give me about 1200f/s ill load 5 rounds for comparison at aprox 1100f/s 14grs.
I will be shooting these out of a 66-1 4" barrel, not real sure what ths will give me for velocity. the reloading data is based on a 6" barrel
Dave
 
Be careful of what you feed that 66. As you probably well know, 125 grain JHP 357 factory ammo gained a reputation for cracking forcing cones of K-frame guns due to the cut out where the crane fits under the barrel. I have placed an 1100 fps speed limit on ammo for my K-frames and frequently shoot 38 Specials out of them. L-frames were designed as full time 357s, but K-frames are part timers, primarily 38 Specials. I consider K-frame magnums to be true +P38s.
 
It's my go to .30 M-1 Carbine powder. And wonderful at it too!
Never tried it in a .357?
I'm down to my last 8# can of my "old" IMR 4227 stuff, so at this point I'm reserving it for that.
 
I started reloading .357 mag using IMR4227 some 50 years ago. The loads did exactly what I wanted and did what was predicted in the reloading manuals. The knock against IMR4227 was that was difficult to throw consistent weights thru any of the then available powder measures. As other powders came along that would go thru the powder measure easier and more accurately I stopped using IMR4227. With today's electronically automatic powder measures I would probably go back to using IMR4227. But with just a few years left for me to reload, I will just stick with my Redding Benchrest measure and other powders. ... Big Cholla
 
big, Do you still have any of your load data? I was looking at the diffrences in imr4227 and 2400.. the 2400 runs at a higher pressure than the 4227. say with a 158 gr bullet, full boat loads, its the opposite with loads on the low end.
 
dcb: No, sorry I don't have any records back that far. I did look in a Hodgon No. 26 loading manual. I don't know if you are talking about jacketed bullets or lead bullets. There is a significant difference in pressures developed to get these two types of bullets moving down the barrel with the jacketed bullet developing the most. As I recall, because of that I didn't have to crimp the jacketed bullets when using IMR4227 as much as I did the lead bullets. The crimping was to achieve the best ignition possible. IMR4227 is a stick powder and the burning rate curve will be slower to get to the peak than most of the ball or flake or short stick powders. Hold the bullet back a little with a crimp and the powder burns more completely and to its max achievable pressure while the bullet is still in the barrel.

With 158 gr. JHP, Hodgdon's No. 26 says start with 13.5 grains of IMR4227 and max is 14.5. You can use these same weights of powder for the use of lead bullets of the same weight as the jacketed bullet, but not vice versa.

With 200 gr. lead, Hodgdon's No. 26 says start with 10.5 and end with 12.0.

Those loads are very close to what they recommend for 2400 with 2400 being 1.5 grains less at max across the board.

If you use a modern electronic powder scale your use of IMR4227 will be very acceptable and will develop accurate loads. Stay below max loads by about 10% for the most accuracy. You could also hand trickle the powder loads using a 'trickler', but that is very slow. If you mechanically measure IMR4227 with a common powder measure stay well below max because of the occasional heavy 'throw' of up to 1 whole grain more than intended. I highly recommend any Hodgdon reloading manual and all of their products for that matter. ......... Big Cholla
 
Last edited:
4227 will work well enough for the .357 Magnum if you want to burn off some powder. It's accurate enough too for the most part. It's usually used in larger cases for Magnum type applications like the 460 Magnum and 500 Magnum but I know a guy who uses nothing but 4227 in his .44 Magnum rounds. I was much more popular back-in-the-day before we had all the "new and better" powders available to us. It does better with heavy-for-caliber bullets than light bullet applications from what I've seen. I would suggest loading 158gr bullet over 125gr bullets with 4227.
 
4227 being an "Extreme" powder doesn't do much for Peter down in Houston, but it may be a factor further north, like Ohio.

There has been some juggling of powder by Hodgdon lately and I'm not sure if the current batch is H4227 or IMR 4227, but there's only one powder now. It might make a difference in data, depending on which it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top