IMR4227? VS H4227
- Thread starter lowe357
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
My experience with Hodgdon powders is that they are approximately one grain slower than the IMR powders of the same designation. Occasionally one can go two grains more with the Hodgdon, but not normally.
And if you look at load data for a particular projectile/cartridge and both 296 and H110 are listed, you will see virtually no difference in velocity OR pressure for the same charge weight. This to me indicates that if they are not one and the same they are so close as to be indistinguishable from each other.
I hope this helps...
And if you look at load data for a particular projectile/cartridge and both 296 and H110 are listed, you will see virtually no difference in velocity OR pressure for the same charge weight. This to me indicates that if they are not one and the same they are so close as to be indistinguishable from each other.
I hope this helps...
ArchAngelCD
Moderator, SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
H4227 and IMR4227 are not the same powders but W296/H110 are identical.
From everything I've read H4227 was switched over to IMR4227 and even though the name IMR4227 is still alive the original IMR4227 powder is no more. The current IMR4227 is really H4227 relabeled.
The two 4198 powders are not the same either although very close.
Just for future reference:
W231 = HP-38
W296 = H110
W540 = HS-6
W571 = HS-7 (both discontinued)
W760 = H414
WAP = Silhouette
From everything I've read H4227 was switched over to IMR4227 and even though the name IMR4227 is still alive the original IMR4227 powder is no more. The current IMR4227 is really H4227 relabeled.
The two 4198 powders are not the same either although very close.
Just for future reference:
W231 = HP-38
W296 = H110
W540 = HS-6
W571 = HS-7 (both discontinued)
W760 = H414
WAP = Silhouette
First you have to keep in mind that Hodgdon doesn't make powder, they distribute it.
After WWII Hodgdon bought tons of military surplus IMR (improved military rifle) powder. It was relabeled using the same numerical suffix and was identical. As these powders dried up, Hodgdon went to various manufacturers to duplicate them. To answer your question, they are very close to being the same, but they are not the same.
As for the Winchester powders, again, Hodgdon doesn't make powders. Their powders sources vary but they are nothing more than someone else's products in a different can. H110 and Win 296 are the same. If you look at Hodgdon's containers, in addition to "their" location they will also list the location where the powder was actually made.
After WWII Hodgdon bought tons of military surplus IMR (improved military rifle) powder. It was relabeled using the same numerical suffix and was identical. As these powders dried up, Hodgdon went to various manufacturers to duplicate them. To answer your question, they are very close to being the same, but they are not the same.
As for the Winchester powders, again, Hodgdon doesn't make powders. Their powders sources vary but they are nothing more than someone else's products in a different can. H110 and Win 296 are the same. If you look at Hodgdon's containers, in addition to "their" location they will also list the location where the powder was actually made.
Last edited:
Nemo288
Member
If that is the case, they would have to keep the properties very near identical as folks will be using the old IMR loading data.
I am one of them and have an 8 pounder, relatively new.
Should last me a good part of the rest of my life.
Works very well in the 1.6" revolver cartridges if you don't expect every last fps out of them.
Accuracy is more important IMHO.
If you listen to Bruce's latest interview he goes into this a bit and verifies that H4227 is no more.
Chris Hodgdon « Ultimate Reloader Reloading Blog
And, yeah, the two 4198s are fairly different. They even look different. The H version has smaller granules and a greenish-grey tinge to the color. It also is a little more dense in the case and burns a little slower.
The big difference is that the H is now an "extreme" powder and thus less temperature sensitive.
It also meters way better and I have gone to it over the IMR until I run out which may be never.
I can only shoot so many 444 rounds
===
Nemo
Last edited:
Ivan the Butcher
Member
In a nutshell: the current data is good for the current powder.
A friend that has been a commercial reloader since the mid 70's was using one of the 4227's and went to add the next pound into the powder drop and noticed a change of color. He stopped production and called Hodgdon. They looked both batch numbers and said the second batch was really "DuPont" because they ran out, and they swapped them back and forth all the time. This was in the mid to late 80's. So stay within you guidelines and you'll be fine. Ivan
A friend that has been a commercial reloader since the mid 70's was using one of the 4227's and went to add the next pound into the powder drop and noticed a change of color. He stopped production and called Hodgdon. They looked both batch numbers and said the second batch was really "DuPont" because they ran out, and they swapped them back and forth all the time. This was in the mid to late 80's. So stay within you guidelines and you'll be fine. Ivan
ArchAngelCD
Moderator, SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Not when both powders are so similar the load data is almost exactly the same. Yes they were different, but not very different.That would be alarming to say the least.
H4227 vs IMR4227 vs H4227
Well in my opinion, I think Hodgdon has created a confused mess with these.
I thought I'd use 4227 as my "burn-thru" powder in the cavernous 460 Mag I just started reloading for. It's slow, but not too slow, pretty plentiful & not too over-priced around here. The only one of the two powders available in several shops around here though is IMR4227, which didn't matter one way or the other to me.
Hodgdon's online Reloading Data Center website:
- almost exclusively has data for H4227 on it for (15) big-bore pistol cartridges, 460Mag included.
- IMR4227 is only listed for (3) big-bore pistol cartridges: 44Mag, 45Colt/Ruger only, & 480Ruger.
- IMR4227 & H4227 are both listed for the 45Colt/Ruger, but not together for the same bullet, each by themself with different bullets/types.
- No pistol cartridge lists both together with the same bullet/type.
- Both powders are listed together with the same bullet only for the 357Mag (125gr & 158gr HDY XTP) & 44Mag (240gr Nos JHP -attached-) in the rifle section & both powders have the same exact reloading data/specs: bullet type/grs./fps/psi/COL.
I've read all the talk about which one's still made, & if they're made in Australia they're the same no matter which label is on it, etc...
The (2) bottles I bought were both made in 2014 in Canada.
I decided to see what Hodgdon had to say about this & sent them an email asking if they're the same now & I only find IMR4227 available currently. This is the complete response: "They are not exactly the same but you can use the same loading data using the starting load and working your way up watching for pressure signs. Mike"
I think it's commonly stated that pistol over-pressure signs aren't always obvious. (One low pressure cartridge it's listed for is the 38 Spcl.) I've seen where other people say Hodgdon told them they're the exact same. Either they are the same powder or they aren't. Hodgdon should be able to make this prefectly clear. It's not clear to me, though their select reloading data seems to say they are exactly the same, but if they are not the same exact powder they should publish data for each. Most reloading manuals list each powder separately & with different data, if they're together, though it's largely dated material. Hodgdon can give us current data now on-line.
Since the 460Mag has a max. pressure of 65K psi & most reloading data only goes to about 55K psi there's plenty of headroom in this cartridge but what about others? I wish they'd do better.
.
Well in my opinion, I think Hodgdon has created a confused mess with these.
I thought I'd use 4227 as my "burn-thru" powder in the cavernous 460 Mag I just started reloading for. It's slow, but not too slow, pretty plentiful & not too over-priced around here. The only one of the two powders available in several shops around here though is IMR4227, which didn't matter one way or the other to me.
Hodgdon's online Reloading Data Center website:
- almost exclusively has data for H4227 on it for (15) big-bore pistol cartridges, 460Mag included.
- IMR4227 is only listed for (3) big-bore pistol cartridges: 44Mag, 45Colt/Ruger only, & 480Ruger.
- IMR4227 & H4227 are both listed for the 45Colt/Ruger, but not together for the same bullet, each by themself with different bullets/types.
- No pistol cartridge lists both together with the same bullet/type.
- Both powders are listed together with the same bullet only for the 357Mag (125gr & 158gr HDY XTP) & 44Mag (240gr Nos JHP -attached-) in the rifle section & both powders have the same exact reloading data/specs: bullet type/grs./fps/psi/COL.
I've read all the talk about which one's still made, & if they're made in Australia they're the same no matter which label is on it, etc...
The (2) bottles I bought were both made in 2014 in Canada.
I decided to see what Hodgdon had to say about this & sent them an email asking if they're the same now & I only find IMR4227 available currently. This is the complete response: "They are not exactly the same but you can use the same loading data using the starting load and working your way up watching for pressure signs. Mike"
I think it's commonly stated that pistol over-pressure signs aren't always obvious. (One low pressure cartridge it's listed for is the 38 Spcl.) I've seen where other people say Hodgdon told them they're the exact same. Either they are the same powder or they aren't. Hodgdon should be able to make this prefectly clear. It's not clear to me, though their select reloading data seems to say they are exactly the same, but if they are not the same exact powder they should publish data for each. Most reloading manuals list each powder separately & with different data, if they're together, though it's largely dated material. Hodgdon can give us current data now on-line.
Since the 460Mag has a max. pressure of 65K psi & most reloading data only goes to about 55K psi there's plenty of headroom in this cartridge but what about others? I wish they'd do better.
.
Last edited:
Nemo288
Member
I have been organizing my chronograph results for the last 6 months
and can report that IMR-4227 (Australia, about a year old) is definitely temperature sensitive.
The same load (31 gr. under a Sierra 240 JHC in a *- 445 case with a WLR primer (I drilled the pockets))
gave 1807 fps @ 80F and 1826 @ 90F.
These are averages of 10 shots apiece.
The gun is a 12" Encore.
That is about the same as adding a half grain of powder in this load.
Meanwhile 31 gr. under a Hornady 300 XTP (rear cannelure, same everything else)
gave 1792 fps @ 90F and 31.5 gr. gave 1764 @ 80F.
That's 28 fps more @ 90F with a half grain less powder.
You can also see that this powder is more efficient with the heavier bullet.
I don't plan on shooting at any higher temps.
Several of the print gurus have said to develop loads in the summer
because you know they will be safe in the winter.
I just hope the bullet gets out of the barrel.
I'll try to get some data when it's a lot cooler and report back then.
===
Nemo
and can report that IMR-4227 (Australia, about a year old) is definitely temperature sensitive.
The same load (31 gr. under a Sierra 240 JHC in a *- 445 case with a WLR primer (I drilled the pockets))
gave 1807 fps @ 80F and 1826 @ 90F.
These are averages of 10 shots apiece.
The gun is a 12" Encore.
That is about the same as adding a half grain of powder in this load.
Meanwhile 31 gr. under a Hornady 300 XTP (rear cannelure, same everything else)
gave 1792 fps @ 90F and 31.5 gr. gave 1764 @ 80F.
That's 28 fps more @ 90F with a half grain less powder.
You can also see that this powder is more efficient with the heavier bullet.
I don't plan on shooting at any higher temps.
Several of the print gurus have said to develop loads in the summer
because you know they will be safe in the winter.
I just hope the bullet gets out of the barrel.
I'll try to get some data when it's a lot cooler and report back then.
===
Nemo
venomballistics
Member
Kinda like the old coke being replaced by the new coke, and the old coke returning as coke classic back in the 80s
Nemo288
Member
Heh!
And to make it an even more accurate analogy I will swear, having been there at the time,
that Coke Classic is not quite the same as the old Coke which used real sugar.
Mexican CocaCola is closer.
We also used to think that Coke in the little bottles tasted better than the big bottles.
Why that was is still a mystery.
===
Nemo
