That's definitely a "duh" statement for folks who've worked with this powder or H4895 but I recently tried taking the charge weights way below anything I'd done before.

A few things prompted this - I want to conserve powder bought when it was $26/pound, I have a butt load of Hornady 150 gr. Spire Points bought on sale at Cabelas 10-12 years ago and mostly, I'm getting to dislike recoil more and more so wanted to work up some 30-30 level loads or even slightly less in my 8+ pound Model 70 .30-06.

Started out trying some loads with Reloder 7 meant for cast bullets but almost all of them gave hang fires in 25 degree weather so abandoned that and went to IMR4895. Used the H4895 formula of 60% of max to determine a starting point of around 34 grains, most manuals list 44-47 grains of IMR4895 as starting loads.

Accuracy was so-so at 34, 36 and 38 grains but something clicked at 39 grains. Don't know if that flyer at 39 and 40 grains is me or not but the other four bullets went into .366".

Rifle is a LH Winchester Model 70 Extreme Weather ordered from their Custom Shop in 2000, I replaced the original barrel with a Pac-Nor sporter contour some years ago. These are all 5 shot groups at 100 yards. There looks like a wave function going here, not shown is a group using 42 grains which spread out and then 43 grains shrunk down to one raggedy hole again. Going to stick with the 39 grain load since it more than meets specs.

Probably dink with the seating depth some just to scratch the looney itch and see if those flyers are my shooting or the load, but that's about all the load development I'll invest in this.


Nothing ground breaking here, just reproving old knowledge.




Haven't chronographed this yet but my best guesstimate for 39 grains should be right around 2400 fps, i.e. factory .30-30 velocity. Right on target.

I've shot a gazillion 40gr/165 SierraBTHP loads with H-4895. Damned accurate, easy on me (in a 6 3/4lb. Mauser sporter), and deadly on deer (typical Eastern hardwood mountain distances).

On my list of projects is developing such a load for deer hunting in the timber. Less recoil and not tearing the meat up, along with vanilla C&C 150s helping keep costs reasonable are the goals.

I've loaded the 06 and a host of other calibers from 243 to 338/06 and 35 Whelen for youth loads and women. All the while using a load of 30 grains of 4198 ( either one ) or RL 7. It essentially makes the 06 a 30/30 equivalent. In the 308 its pretty close to the older 300 Savage.

I don't like reduced H 4895 for a number of reason, but I do like using IMRs version. Hodgdon's can be real erratic, and IMRs is pretty consistent. A gal who was an Army Vet and relocated to here from up in Washington, inherited her dad's 06 and it was beating the crap out of her. Her dad had passed so she wanted to keep the rifle.

I recommended it needed a new scope, which she bought a 4 x 12 with distance hash marks on the reticle. Loaded her up the 30 grains of IMR 4198, which she could easily shoot with a 150 grain Hornady SP. The load worked fine for her scope's hash marks out to 300 yds just fine.

She called me up 2 days into the season, and dropped a buck at right about 300 yds she said, hunting with her husband, who was using a range finder, and estimated the distance. Behind the shoulder at that distance with that load, and it dropped to the shot, DRT.

I've had a lot of Boy Scouts over the years also, that have used it and it worked for them in the 06 that granddad gave them, and it beat the snot out of them with factory ammo... not so with the 30 grains of IMR 4198.

Just passing this on, but its worked for a lot of folks for a decade or more around here.

I shoot the IMR 4895 exclusively in my M1 Garand. The powder was designed for the Garand so as not to bend the operating rod.
It shoots well in other cartridges. Not the best velocities and it fills a case, but a very versitile powder.

Not bad

Just for some interesting info regarding H-4895 which has become almost impossible to get. I have found that Ramshot TAC is virtually the same burning rate of H-4895, & very available. This is what my burn rate chart says..

TAC isn't that suitable for the type of reduced loads being discussed here.