IMR4198 and me

  • 4.9K Views
  • Last Post 03 May 2008
CB posted this 08 October 2007

IMR4198 is used by a lot of cast bullet shooters, loads are in many of the manuals. I haven't seen it as often in the equipment lists for the past years. I've never used any of the H powders (4198,4831, etc) just to keep the number of variables down.

I used IMR4198 in my wife's 222 Rem, and have tried it in cast bullet guns from 22 Hornet to 45/70. I gave up some years back, and was able to get most guns to shoot cast bullets well with Unique, AA#9, IMR4227, SR4759, etc. Also, IMR4198 must be dribbled, it goes through the measures poorly. It has never proven the “best” powder for accuracy in any gun.

Talking to some guys at the range who are very sick of me babbling about my M54 30 WCF and how I can't get it to shoot well, George H. suggested I try IMR4198. I suspect he just wanted me to shut up. You're not alone.

Willing to take any advice, I started with that powder, and have shot with IMR4198 and 311299, 314299 and 31141 for the past few Wednesdays.

Particularly with 31141 it shoots quite a bit better than the other powders used to date, with many groups under an inch and five group averages at 100 yards starting with 1.0 and 1.1. This, in the words of the Chairman, is a Great Leap Forward.

I wonder why some powders shoot way better than others, I wonder how often this happens-it's happened to me several times-, and I wonder if the accuracy search protocol shouldn't be modified to include many different powders.

joe b.

 

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
CB posted this 08 October 2007

Joe,

When I used to shoot my military guns a lot 4198 was all I used probably because I  read it worked well so I bought a lot of it. 20 grs in the 06, 18 in the 308, and 17 in the 6.5x55.

There used to be a guy at the gun shows around here that'd sell IMR powders for 11 bucks a lb. but those days are gone and with the price of powder nowadays if I ever get back into shooting them it'll be with something that's works as well and uses less. 

Modifying the accracy search protocal to include as many powders as possible is a good but not inexpensive proposition.

Attached Files

leadburner posted this 13 October 2007

Joe, I use H-4198 as it now comes in shorter a cut that meters better through a powder measure,much better than the older,longer cut.As for why certain powders give better accuracy,it usually has to do with proper pressure(in cast bullets anyway).There is a good look at this in Lee's 2nd Modern Reloading about bullet hardness and pressure.It made me look at loading cast differently.

Attached Files

CB posted this 22 October 2007

Joe,

To complicate the question even further why would a powder that produces excellent uniformity in velocities and has a reasonable burning rate, not shoot well.

I get large ranges and SD in muzzle velocities in most loads for the 223, even those that shoot very well at 100 yards.

Hodgdon's Lil Gun cuts those SDs to less than half but I have not been able to find an accurate load to take advantage of it. I find that some powders both faster and slower burning than Lil Gun can be made to shoot well. I have found Lil Gun to be excellent in some jacketed bullet loads as have others.

John Alexander

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 22 October 2007

I once talked to Ken Ramage at Lyman and he explained that Lyman's so-called “accuracy loads” were never groupsed on paper, but only reflected the combinations which gave them the smallest velocity and pressure standard deviations. Homer Culver and Col. E.H. Harrison both told me that this was nonsense and that the only way to find an accurate load was to fire not less than 30 shots on paper, and to take into consideration ALL of the data, not discounting any “called” shots, or excuses. Then when you have a load which will deliver the goods on-demand, it's OK to check it over the chronograph, but only to establish a a benchmark to help you approximate it again when you open the next can of powder or brick of primers of a different lot. Because IT WILL be different.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

454PB posted this 22 October 2007

I have a love/hate relationship with all the IMR powders. I love them because they allow me to shoot very small groups at predictable velocities. I hate them because of all the powders I've used over the last 37 years of handloading, the IMR's are the only ones that have ever gone bad. I had two cans of IMR 4198 and one of IMR 4064 that had to be pitched when they turned red and began emitting ammonia. These were stored right along side many other sperical and flake powders that are still fine.

The end result is that I only buy small quantities of extruded powders, and replace them when they are gone. On the other hand, I've used some Unique powder my grandfather gave me that was at least 50 years old with great results.

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 27 October 2007

Hi, after you got minimum sd, did you adjust your tuner (g) .....  ya know, getting minimum sd doesn

......... and minimum sd's probably are indicative of really good ignition, but still maybe out of tuner ” sweet spot” ...

BUT .. if ya got a minimum SD, and then dial in your tuner ( or tune the barrel some other way ) that should be a dyn-0-mite accurate load.

( along with throat fit, bullet distortion, bad lube , bad scope or mounts ( very common sigh ) ......

Trivia R Us, ken campbell, deltawerkes

Attached Files

Carl Dalcher posted this 01 November 2007

How do I tune in my barrel ?? My barrels do not have knobs.  I too, have loads with velocity spreads of 6 to 30 FPS and they will not do better that 4” at 100 Yds.

 Carl

Attached Files

billwnr posted this 01 November 2007

Ed Harris wrote: I once talked to Ken Ramage at Lyman and he explained that Lyman's so-called “accuracy loads” were never groupsed on paper, but only reflected the combinations which gave them the smallest velocity and pressure standard deviations. Homer Culver and Col. E.H. Harrison both told me that this was nonsense and that the only way to find an accurate load was to fire not less than 30 shots on paper, and to take into consideration ALL of the data, not discounting any “called” shots, or excuses. Then when you have a load which will deliver the goods on-demand, it's OK to check it over the chronograph, but only to establish a a benchmark to help you approximate it again when you open the next can of powder or brick of primers of a different lot. Because IT WILL be different. Ed, that goes along with what I've heard about number of shots.  I have a local shooter/mathematician and he says 26 is the magic number for assessing accuracy and POI.  He said anything less gave incomplete data. 

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 01 November 2007

Tuning a Barrel ... let us skip * IF * it works, and also skip pretty much * Where You Get One * ... this has been discussed somewhat on this forum ....   must be some way to find that discussion ... if you cant find such discussion, I would glad to start another thread on this...  deja vu, again ... no problem ...

In My NS Humble Opinion (g) .... the best tuners are pretty simply a threaded weight that you very slightly move forward and backward on your barrel, usually nearly at the end, and probably on a floating barrel so everything else doesn't interfere with tuning results.  ....   a NUT on a Bolt.... the barrel being a bolt.  On a rimfire, even a one inch 20 inch long stiff barrel .. the nut is moved only 0.001 at a time between groups ... this makes a difference .... like WOW, right??? (g)

Most shooters consider them ugly ( me too ) and so far I haven

But I did shoot .22rf for several years, and the experience of me and buddies, and MILLIONS of rounds fired ... has led to no competitive shooter ( ok, probably one guy out there yet ) NOT using a tuner.

One interesting shortcut that seems to hold... is that if you shoot 2 shots, and get a bad group.... with a match grade rig, it probably really is a bad group (g) ... if you get a great group, then you might need another 25 shots .... or at least 2.  at 20 cents each for match ammo, I usually shot until I got some ” flyers” then went to the next tuner setting ...  

Oh, a tuner doesn

DANGIT !!!!!!!!

Hope this helps, ” To Tune or Not to Tune “  is a 2 year thread over on Benchrest.com.... a lot of the old timers are fighting the idea all the way .... probably because they are ugly ... oh, and they consider rimfire shooters as dumbutts also.

Hi, my name is Ken , I was a rimfire shooter ......  

Attached Files

Chuck 100 yd posted this 09 February 2008

I love IMR 4198 and the 311041 bullet in my .30-30`s.

18 gr. with WLR primers clocks at 1595 from my 336A.

This is a 50 yd. group, and is what I have come to expect from this combo.

Attached Files

cityboy posted this 09 February 2008

Chuck

Your grtoups are very impressive. Does your rifle have a conventional 30-30 throat and do you do anything to fit the bullet to the throat? My experience suggest that fitting the bullet is a vital factor in the accuracy equation.

Cityboy

 

Attached Files

Chuck 100 yd posted this 09 February 2008

My rifles all have standard chambers. This mold just seems to be right for them.

Cast of Wheel weights +2% tin the 311041 comes out to 180gr. with check and

50/50 lube.  I have pushed them on up to 23gr. or so but the groups steadily open as the speed goes up.

No need for high speed with a good bullet. Have fun!;)

I forgot, I cast them then size and seat checks in a Lee push through die I polished out to a tad over .3095 and lube them in my Saeco sizer with a .310 die.

The bullets are very true. The nose is loose in the bore but the long bearing surface makes up for that IMHO.:cool:

A medium heavy roll crimp completes the load.;)

Attached Files

CB posted this 09 February 2008

This is a 50 yd. group, and is what I have come to expect from this combo.

Chuck 100 yd,

If your combination will reliably shoot groups like that , I hope you will enter postal match #21 “Light Production” for practical rifles. It would be nifty to see a lever action win.

John

Attached Files

Chuck 100 yd posted this 10 February 2008

John, I will watch for it in the Fouling Shot. I read and look forward to it but have never entered. Sounds like fun.;)

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 February 2008

J Alexander mentioned Postal Match #21 for you to try. As Match #21 is a scope class only you may want to consider Match #16 (Lever/Pump?Auto) with your Marlin.

CBA Larry

 

 

Attached Files

Chuck 100 yd posted this 10 February 2008

Thanks Larry, My early marlins are not D&T for scope and doing so would destroy a large part of their value. I  will check out #16.;)

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 February 2008

Chuck, If you would like a guide please forward your address. Or you can view the postal guide on the CBA Web sight under Postal Matches.  Larry 

Attached Files

444Hal posted this 03 May 2008

I like the IMR 4198 because it works well in several of my rifles, specially my “big bores". Yea, there's others that may give me just a little bit smaller groups but doesn't work as well across the board. I figure if things get tight(and it may be getting that way), I'll invest in a bulk supply to cover my needs. 3031 & Varget are my other options for my 30/30 up to the 45/70.

Attached Files

Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close