Dear Experts,
When looking through reloading data, I'm having a hard time finding much on the 4831SC specifically. Can data for H4831 and 4831SC be interchanged? Thanks.

BTW I'm loading up a 25-06 for 110gr. Accubonds and 90 gr Sierra HP's.

Senator

yes, if you are talking H 4831 Vs H 4831sc (you omitted the second "H")

It comes from the same manufacturer and the SC (short cut ) is a marketing strategy only. The burning rates are identical though may vary as with usual lot to lot variation.

AGW

+1, same powder, just lots variation per usual.

The only rifle I'm shooting H4831 right now is my 270 Win.

When I started working up loads for that rifle, I went with regular H4831. Then I tried H4831sc. Accuracy was the same with both versions, but the same charge of H4831sc provided more ideal load density, minimal power compression, somewhat higher velocities, and more consistent chronograph readings, not to mention better metering through the powder measure.

The faster speeds may well be a lot-to-lot variations thing, but I deliberately went out and bought another can of H4832sc from another lot, and it provided the same results as my first lot of H4831sc.

So from what I've seen, H4831sc does have some very meaningful advantages over regular H4831, especially with smaller-capacity cases like the 270 Win.. It's not just about marketing......on that point I respectfully disagree.

AD

Denser, slower burning powders like H4831sc are what can give cases like the 270,30/06, 7x57, etc, a shot in the arm and increase velocities. I remember the hoopla when Norma 205 came and guys were getting some pretty hairy velocities from the 30/06 and 7x57, over more traditional powders. I have interchanged H4831 with H4831sc with no ill effects.

AD, Bob,

I agree, to the extent your talking about better load density giving better or more consitent results. The Hodgdon website, somewhere, or in their book I read that you can sub each 4831s data.

Guess I better add: that I have shot both and for me the velocity results were so close as to be insignificant...That way somebody doesn't think I just read data in a book and don't shoot

AD
This is all true and most handloaders would find the same or similar results which is why Hodgdon informs us that the powders are interchangeable.

My comment as to the marketing aspect, was to inform/imply that marketing is the determination of an idea that generates additonal sales. By shortening the granule size, the sales pitch can lean towards that market segment that prefers to use a powder thrower, thereby creating a need.

We never used deodorant until marketer's told us we stink, nor chewed minted gum until we were told we all had goat's breath.

I studied marketing at college so have an understanding of what it is and how it applies to sales, as well as having over 20 years in sales and marketing behind me.

Hope this clears up my perhaps, too flipant, comment.

AGW

Same here. The primary reason I use H4831SC over the vanilla flavor is metering.

I do find IMR4831 gives me more velocity per weight, but it meters so poorly I�ve quit using it.

+1

Yup, the Hodgdon SC has higher density, and meters better.

There are cartridges where you can't get enough of the old version in a case to get to the maximum allowable pressure and velocity.

Interesting. When I switched several 270's from H4831 to SC version accuracy was the same, ES stayed similar, and I saw higher velocity. Enough increase in velocity with the same charge that I came to the conclusion that the SC was faster burning. When I tryed a second lot of SC, the same thing occured.

I decided to keep life simple and stick with the H4831 regular stuff. Although I have been considering trying the left over canisters of H4831SC in my 243W.

Casey

Thats what I always liked about H450, it seemed to be a ball powder version of H4831. Same charges produced about the same velocities with the metering advantages of ball powder. Now that its gone I'm going to try some of the H4831sc.

It is difficult to offer difinitive advice when you try a powder or powders in a rifle or two which is what most contributors are doing her.

Apart from myself and MD, I do not know any other contributor who has the range of rifles and calibers behind them to make reasonably informed comment, and I say this not to inflame, rather to clarify, that too many disagreements, particularly on my input come from contributors who claim their 2 or 3 rifles can do it all and there is no need to research any longer, just go hunting.

My background evolved as a writer to assist hunters by offering them short cuts and assistance by testing all the new components and rifles and reporting on what I found. Bias was never a consideration as they all, but a very very few, went back to the distributors. The 3 that stayed over all those years, I paid for.

Hope this clears this point when reading anothers results or opinions.

AGW

Not difficult when the manufacurer says it's the same powder with the same burn rate....as stated lots may vary so prodeed with caution.

I sure as shootin' don't know everything, far from it, but I do know this much:

I've been handloading the 270 Win. cartridge for right at 30 years. I've fired thousands and thousands of rounds through various 270 Win. rifles in that time, and I've tried just about every suitable powder, including all of the various 4831s.

Now, when I say that H4831sc meters better, fills the case better (without undue compression), and provides higher and more consistent velocity than does regular H4831 in my current rifle, how much more honest or "informed" do I need to be than that in order to start reaching an applicable conclusion, at least as far as my own rifle is concerned?


Based on some of the rest of the "uninformed" testimony that's been furnished here (admittedly, none as worthwhile or as informed as yours, I'll conceed that much)), there are at least a few others who have experienced about the same sort of results that I've had.

AD

Care to share which three they aire?

Shooting 180's and 200's in a 30-06 I couldn't tell any difference between H4831 and H4831SC.

I tested and bought a Marlin 1895 SS back in the early 90's after using them on and off since their re-release back in the early 70's and another Marlin 1895 Cowboy some years later. Also got one of the first S&W .500 Magnums sent to me for review.

All these were purchased based on the accuracy levels I obtained during review.

All my other rifles were chosen or obtained during horse trading over a long time.

AGW

Aha, thanks. Actually I thought you meant three firearms. But three rifles is ok too. Maybe a couple of them will breed. Then again, I know you have more than three.