Author Topic: Which is the better reduced load powder, SR 4759 or IMR 4198?  (Read 2042 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline goodconcretecolor

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 222
  • Gender: Male
The 4759 is touted by W. C. Davis as the best reduced load powder while C. E. Harris likes 4198 for such loads in the 30-06( which is my main rifle). I have gotten good results with both at the range but Harris claims the 4198 is insensitive to powder position while Davis cites the ease of ignition of 4759. This ease of ignition would seem to infer simiilar insensitivity.
The bottom line is which is less sensitive to position? I will test this at the range as soon as possible but I am interested in any test results you guys know about. I know 4198 is slower and so can go to higher velocities and bullet weights.

Offline Lone Star

  • Reformed Gunwriter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2359
  • Gender: Male
Re: Which is the better reduced load powder, SR 4759 or IMR 4198?
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2007, 05:04:49 PM »
To add more confusion, Hodgdon recommends H4895 as a fine reduced-load powder.   The slower the powder, the more of the case it will fill for the same velocity.  A fuller case means less position sensitivity.   I do not know the answer to your question, but I like BlueDot myself...and C.E. Harris says RedDot, calls it The Load.

.

Offline gary0529

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 85
Re: Which is the better reduced load powder, SR 4759 or IMR 4198?
« Reply #2 on: March 22, 2007, 12:06:59 AM »
Not meaning to hijack the thread but I too like Blue Dot for reduced loads.
You do need to watch for double charges however.
Have not found the BD loads to be position sensitive but I cannot say that I have really tried to get them to fail by canting the gun in unusual attitudes.
Have used BD in 22-250, 243, 270, and 30-06 all the way down to 1200 fps and .22 LR level recoil and report.
There are others who have developed much info on Blue Dot.
 Look around on the web.

Offline dw06

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1074
  • Gender: Male
Re: Which is the better reduced load powder, SR 4759 or IMR 4198?
« Reply #3 on: March 22, 2007, 04:22:49 AM »
Can't help you with using 4198 as I never tried it in reduced loads.Have used blue dot and SR4759.Use blue dot in my 223 and the SR4759 in ny 22-250 with great results.My reduced loads in the 22-250 shoot as well as my best load,and is only an inch or so lower at 100yards.The BD loads in the 223 do same but drop about 4inches more at 100 without changing the sight in of my normal loads.Still I can use it as on 4x scope setting it hits about halfway between crosshairs and where the thick part of the duplex starts.Already shot pop cans at 100 and can hit them easy using homemade shooting sticks.
If you find yourself in a hole,the first thing to do is stop digging-Will Rogers

Offline ron haralson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: Which is the better reduced load powder, SR 4759 or IMR 4198?
« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2007, 05:33:18 AM »
     Like some sage said 30 or 40 years ago, you have to ask your rifle.My 30 - 06 prefers 4198(about 22gr) to 4759, but others obviously have different opinions.
     Don't be put off by a powder not filling the case, just be sure you don't double charge. I've also had good results with 16 - 18gr 2400 and 16 - 17gr H110.
     These loads were used for cast bullets from 150 to 220gr and gave no indication of pressure problems in my rifle with any of those bullets.
     You really won't know 'til you try.
Best of luck.     Ron

Offline jgalar

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Gender: Male
Re: Which is the better reduced load powder, SR 4759 or IMR 4198?
« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2007, 12:53:18 PM »
IMR or H 4198 never worked that well for me, at least other powders worked better. I have used Reloader 7, Unique, 2400, IMR4759, AA5744, and AA1680

Offline The Gamemaster

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
Re: Which is the better reduced load powder, SR 4759 or IMR 4198?
« Reply #6 on: March 22, 2007, 01:54:08 PM »
What are you trying to do blow up the gun?

Why reduce the powder?

Why not just make one good load and leave it alone?

IMR 4350 is the prefered powder for accuracy and distance shooting in a 30 06 period!

If you want to screw around just use IMR 4320 - which has almost the same effect in the '06

The 4895 and 4064 will use less powder - but isn't going to give you any of the accuracy that the other two will.

Offline Lone Star

  • Reformed Gunwriter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2359
  • Gender: Male
Re: Which is the better reduced load powder, SR 4759 or IMR 4198?
« Reply #7 on: March 22, 2007, 03:29:56 PM »
Quote
What are you trying to do blow up the gun?  Why reduce the powder?
No, we are trying to have reduced power loads for smaller game using a big game rifle.  Or for target shooting, when you do not need full power loads.  Or low report loads for shooting in settled areas. Wear and tear on shooter and gun are reduced, and the fun is increased for many.

Quote
Why not just make one good load and leave it alone?
We want to use different loads.  We like to experiment with our loading, that is a large part of the fun of handloading.

Quote
IMR 4350 is the prefered powder for accuracy and distance shooting in a 30 06 period!
Don't tell the thousands of '06 shooters who used IMR4895 in competition loads for over 50 years in their .06s.  They got by just fine without using 4350 and set a lot of records along the way.

Quote
If you want to screw around just use IMR 4320 - which has almost the same effect in the '06.
Paris Hilton screws around.  While 4320 may meter better than 4350, therer are dozens of powders that are very suitable for loading the .30-06.  4350 is NOT the best powder for light bullets, and certainly not for reduced loads.  In heavily reduced loads it is dangerous.

Quote
The 4895 and 4064 will use less powder - but isn't going to give you any of the accuracy that the other two will.
If you bothered to try other powders you might sing a differnt tune.  But you seem to want to live in the 1970s - fine, those were good years for me too.   ;)