Hodgdon specifically suggests H4895 for reduced loads rather than IMR4895 because they say the results are normally more consistent than IMR4895.
However, I�ve seen too many exceptions to that, probably partly because for years IMR4895 was far more available in most places I lived here in Montana. Also, the present version of H4895 didn�t appear until sometime in the 1990�s, when Hodgdon started importing the Australian version.
In fact, in the years before H4895 became available I used IMR4895 for a bunch of more-or-less reduced loads in several cartridges and can�t remember one where accuracy wasn�t sub-inch at 100 yards. Off the top of my head, there was a turkey load with the 75-grain Speer flat-point at 25-20 velocities in the .257 Roberts Ackley Improved, a varmint load with the 90-grain Sierra HP in the .270 Winchester (1/2� accuracy), and a moderate-range and recoil deer load for the .338 Winchester Magnum, using the 200-grain Speer Hot-Cor at 2650 fps.
More recently I spent considerable time for an article on creating �rimfire equivalent� handloads in various .22 caliber centerfires. One of the two most consistent loads, in both accuracy and minimal velocity spreads, was 16.0 grains of IMR4895 with the Speer 40-grain for about 1600 fps in the .223 Remington�and yes, I tried it with H4895 as well.
The major difference I�ve seen between the two powders is H4895 being more temperature resistant (one of the reasons for its overall consistent results), but IMR4895 isn�t bad there either. In fact if somebody doesn�t insist on using it in loads outside its normal �comfort zone� it can rival the Hodgdon Extremes in that respect.
