IMR 4227 in 300 BLK?

[j8064]

My initial "go to" powder for 300 BLK supers using 145 gr M70 milspec projectiles was H110. But try finding H110 where I live... Plan B was "all other suitable powders" with published load data. Today I got lucky. Two cans of IMR 4227 followed me home.

I've never used 4227 in any loads before so I'm unfamiliar with its performance. Its burn rate puts it within the range I'm looking for.

So, I have a handful of test rounds built based on the low end of Hodgdon's published min/max charges for 150 gr bullets. No doubt they'll go "bang".

Anybody using IMR 4227 in 300 BLK? Can you share your experiences with "150-ish" reloads?

 

[navyis2]

I've used in in the 110-125grain supers. The accuracy was phenomenal and it was a very clean burning powder. No experience in the 150 range but Sierra lost data on their site for that weight range.

 

[edrod68]

Have had good luck with the Hornady 150 grain FMJ....looks weird but works pretty good...I will check my load data when I get home and post it up..

I use IMR 4227 exclusively for 110 grain Vmax, and 125 grain SMK along with the 150 load....have had gteat accuracy and zero issues with this powder

 

[Klunatic]

Have had good luck with the Hornady 150 grain FMJ....looks weird but works pretty good...I will check my load data when I get home and post it up..

I use IMR 4227 exclusively for 110 grain Vmax, and 125 grain SMK along with the 150 load....have had gteat accuracy and zero issues with this powder

What is your load for the 125 SMK?

 

[edrod68]

What is your load for the 125 SMK?

I am using 18.3 grains for it....COL is 2.210", and I use the CCI #41 military small rifle primers

It gave the best accuracy...I know Sierra says 18.7 grains was their "accuracy" load, but in mine (18" Wilson combat upper) 18.3 shoots about 1/8-1/4 inch tighter groups at 100 yds in my 300..

Now if you want accurate... my 110 gr. Vmax load will pretty much almost have all shots in a 5 shot group touching...I use 19.0 grains with the same primer and a COL of 2.05"

My plinking load ended up being the Hornady 150gr FMJ (w/cannelure) I use this in bulk for my 308 plinking/training rounds so I figured I would give it a try. Ended up with decent accuracy using 16.5 grains and a COL of 2.200".. looks weird but works pretty well.

My experience so far with the IMR 4227 is that it is slightly down on velocity to H110 and A1680, but not enough to really make a difference at the effective range of the 300 BLK..plus you can actually find 4227 and it works well enough for me that I will not be looking for the hard to find stuff any time soon...

 

[Pinecone]

The Sierra data I have lists H4227 (NOT IMR 4227) loads. Althought IMR and H 4227 are listed right next to each other on the Hodgdon Burn Rate Chart.

In order #63 - Lil' Gun, H110, WW296, IMR 4227, H4227. H110 and WW296 are the same powder, different containers.

Hodgdon data only shows IMR4227 loads. For 150 grain bullets:

IMR 4227 2.235" Min 16.5 1,785 41,800 CUP Max 17.8 1,908 50,200 CUP

Sierra loads for H4227 (I have the Sierra pages printed):

H4227 16.0 at 1800 fps to 17.5 at 1950 fps

COAL depends on the bullet. 150 Matchking is 2.105", 150 FMJBT Gameking is 2.040.

I picked up some IMR 4227 since it was available (Midsouth is cheaper than Cabela's if you purchase enough). But also managed to score some H110.

 

[navyis2]

Pinecone IMR is h4227. When hodgdon acquired IMR they discontinued the old formula of IMR 4227 and started selling only the one who which was the old h4227 formula. If you find a jug of imr 4227 that is more than 3 years old it will likely be a different formula but if newer it is likely the h4227 formula. This was originally just hearsay on forums but a few years ago a few official letters from.hodgdon confirmed it.

 

[Pinecone]

OK.

But Hodgdon does market H versions of powders that are NOT the same thing as the IMR with the same number. 4895 comes to mind.

Making a new powder under the same IMR label is just plain stupid. And dangerous.

 

[navyis2]

I agree, and I didn't believe it myself even after shown letters until I called hodgdon and asked. It seems bizzare that they would have done that, but they said the old powders were similar enough and mostly interchanged anyways. What exacerbates it even more is that some companies still list one or the other on load data.

 

[j8064]

The dialog is much appreciated. There's still some mystery around "H" vs. "IMR" powders. Some of the new production "H" powders are the same as "IMR"...but some aren't. That's part of the challenge when working up loads relying on published data from various sources that sometimes is several years old. Things change over time.

In any case I plan on testing about 20, 300 BLK rounds loaded with progressing charges of IMR 4227 based on Hodgdon data tomorrow morning. My bet is they'll go bang, I'll have fun and something new will be learned.

 

[edrod68]

Have fun...mine has been very fun working up loads and enjoying the results...plus much cheaper than factory ammo...

 

[Marauder]

Let us know how they work out. I have not tried IMR4227, I'm interested in your report.

 

[Pinecone]

The dialog is much appreciated. There's still some mystery around "H" vs. "IMR" powders. Some of the new production "H" powders are the same as "IMR"...but some aren't. That's part of the challenge when working up loads relying on published data from various sources that sometimes is several years old. Things change over time.

Powder specs should NOT change over time. If they change, they should be marked as a different powder. People have powder from a long time ago, would not be good if the powder specs changed and the person used current data with old powder.

I have Blue Dot and IMR 4350 from the 70s around.

 

[j8064]

Let us know how they work out. I have not tried IMR4227, I'm interested in your report.

Actually the 20 test rounds I tried today worked very well. I'm still breaking in the rifle barrel (cleaning after 5 rounds) so changing powders wasn't ideal, but not optional either.

After some adjustments, groups at 50 yards were better than ever before in this rifle. Hodgdon's data for IMR4227 calls for about a grain more than H110.
My rifle cycled perfectly with the starting charge of 16.5 gr for 150's. I had loads that worked up to 17 with no real change in accuracy or performance.

4227 seems to burn slightly cleaner than H110, but residue hasn't been an issue with either so far. I hope to get my Chrony to the range to see the difference in velocity with the two powders.

This was my first rodeo with IMR4227. I was pleased.

 

[j8064]

Powder specs should NOT change over time. If they change, they should be marked as a different powder. People have powder from a long time ago, would not be good if the powder specs changed and the person used current data with old powder.

I have Blue Dot and IMR 4350 from the 70s around.

I cannot speak to the changes manufacturers make to their products. I will say almost every reputable reloading book will advise that powders can change from lot to lot. That's one reason due diligence in working up loads is fundamental.

Published reloading data is based on controlled test conditions using specific components - not on anyone's unprofessional reloading bench or at the range where the loads are fired in our particular firearms. Published reloading data in books and from different powder manufacturers often varies with recipes that "logically" should be the same. Experienced reloaders know there are variables and take that into account on the reloading bench.

If everything was "static", ask yourself, "Why then would there be a need to have successive editions of reloading manuals?"

Facts are, things DO change.

 

[Marauder]

Actually the 20 test rounds I tried today worked very well. I'm still breaking in the rifle barrel (cleaning after 5 rounds) so changing powders wasn't ideal, but not optional either.

After some adjustments, groups at 50 yards were better than ever before in this rifle. Hodgdon's data for IMR4227 calls for about a grain more than H110.
My rifle cycled perfectly with the starting charge of 16.5 gr for 150's. I had loads that worked up to 17 with no real change in accuracy or performance.

4227 seems to burn slightly cleaner than H110, but residue hasn't been an issue with either so far. I hope to get my Chrony to the range to see the difference in velocity with the two powders.

This was my first rodeo with IMR4227. I was pleased.

Not bad. My best groups have been with 296/H110 and 2400 with 110gr bullets.

 

[Roadhawg]

If everything was "static", ask yourself, "Why then would there be a need to have successive editions of reloading manuals?"

Facts are, things DO change.

Because they need to add load tables for silly things like Beowulf and Blackout

 

[j8064]

Because they need to add load tables for silly things like Beowulf and Blackout

AND, "just maybe", updated data is based on more recent testing?

What a concept...

 

[j8064]

Not bad. My best groups have been with 296/H110 and 2400 with 110gr bullets.

That's interesting. Since 2400's burn rate is similar to H110 it makes sense it would work. I use them both in various handgun loads. 2400 is my go-to powder many pistol loads and small rifle loads like 30 carbine and 22 Hornet. 2400 is also a very nice powder for CB loads in rifle rounds.

I've not yet found published data using 2400 in 300 BLK supers behind 150 gr bullets. But there must be a way.

???

 

[Marauder]

That's interesting. Since 2400's burn rate is similar to H110 it makes sense it would work. I use them both in various handgun loads. 2400 is my go-to powder many pistol loads and small rifle loads like 30 carbine and 22 Hornet. 2400 is also a very nice powder for CB loads in rifle rounds.

I've not yet found published data using 2400 in 300 BLK supers behind 150 gr bullets. But there must be a way.

???

2400 does not work well with anything heavier then 110gr, I could not get my gun to run with 150gr FMJ with 2400.

From Hornady 9th
110gr V-Max, SP COL 2.050 RN, FMJ COL 1.790
2400 Start 14.3, Max 16.8

150gr all COL 2.220
2400 Start 10.8, Max 13.2