Damn!
That and R19 are my two favorites. Pissed me off!
This spherical powder has a wide range of uses, from 22-250 Remington to 375 H&H. It is simply ideal in the 30/06.

“As with all of our spherical powders, it delivers incredibly consistent charge weights through nearly any type of powder measure. H414 yields similar results to H4350 in most cartridges, although charge weights will vary.

This powder was discontinued in 2020.”

I wonder if they are keeping Win 760 in the lineup. As Hodgdon gobbles more companies, I think we are going to see more of this.

I'm pretty sure Win 760 is not going away. They save money by not packaging the same thing in two different jugs. Call Hodgdon for the straight scoop.

Kinda like 4227 becoming just one label. Why keep two brands for one powder when you own both brands.

Just go with 760 and don’t look back.

DF

4227 used to be two different powders entirely between the IMR and Hodgdon versions, though, when they were made in different places.

I picked up a 357 Herrett barrel some years ago, and then found out the cartridge was designed around the specific density and burn rate of H4227. It's been a PITA trying to duplicate the performance claimed from the H4227 data using other powders.

Shouldn’t be an issue, H-414 vs 760.

DF

HuntnShoot,

Actually, there are three "kinds" of 4227, though it's somewhat confusing. H4227 is one of the Extreme temp-resistant powders, is made by Australian Defence Industries--but ADI also makes some IMR4227, though there are conflicting reports about how that differs from H4227. Hodgdon told me it was made to the same specifications as the IMR4227 made in Canada, but I have found reports on the Internet where ADI claimed it was the same as H4227. The Canadian IMR4227 is supposedly similar to the powder made by DuPont in the U.S. for many years.

Actually I'm surprised they didn't scrap the 760 label for the Hodgdon label.

In a more general comment, I wonder what will happen with W760 now that Hodgdon owns Western Powders. In my experience Ramshot Big Game is similar to 414/760 in burn rate, but is cleaner burning and far less temperature sensitive.

I still keep some 760 around for handloading article, where published data shows it to be a good choice for a specific application. But I haven't chosen it for any of my own rifle handloads since Big Game appeared about 20 years ago.

Wasn’t Accurate 2700 also identical to 414/760? I’m guessing if BigGame is the same but better then 2700 must have been discontinued awhile back.

JB, this is as good a time as any to ask a primer question. Do you use magnum primers with Big Game or at least a Win WLR? I have gotten away from Winchester primers and don't want to have to stock magnum primers. I know the WLR is supposed to be hotter than most if not all standard LR primers, more like a magnum of other brands. Will a CCI 200 be hot enough for use with Big Game? I think our resident Big Game expert, Pharmseller, uses Winchester Magnum WLRM primers in his 7MM08. I would be using it in a 243, 7mm08 and 7x57. Maybe a 6.5 Creedless. Thanks.

Really good info here guys, thanks!

On another track, is R19 discontinued or just unavailable at this time. Haven't seen it in ages it seems.

Love H414 in a 30.06 with a 165 grain bullet.

I will not lament the loss of H-414 as long as win-760 is available.....IMO they are the same adentical powder......and a darn good one at that.

My 7-08 likes H414 but likes Big Game just a tad better. I've got about 10 lbs of H414 so unless they quit making Big Game Ive got all I'll ever need.

What a mess...

Regarding my purposes, 4227 in its current IMR formula doesn't get me anywhere near the reported performance of the H4227 that Milek and Herrett used to develop the 357 Herrett. Lil Gun is the closest powder I've found so far, but the results have not yet been great. Any recommendations, John?

In your opinion? You don't believe Hodgdon's data? Or is that what you base your opinion on? :-)

You might try Alliant 300-MP. It's a little slower than Li'l Gun.

I have 760 and 414, good powder(s). Just don’t use it/them much these days, prefer the newer ones, like BG.

Technology moves on, so why shouldn’t I.

And no I don’t think smokeless powder is a passing fad....😎

DF

The WLR will work pretty well with Big Game as a "magnum primer" substitute, especially with smaller cartridges, say under .30-06. Have almost always seen a big difference in accuracy with the CCI 200 (and Federal 210), but it also depends on load density. The primer doesn't matter quite as much in a moderately compressed load.

But overall, I just go ahead and use magnum primers with Big Game, and have ever since it first appeared, when F215s cut the diameter of groups more than half in the .220 Swift. The last load I "worked up" with Big Game was with 140-grain Barnes TTSX's in my present 7mm-08, a lightweight semi-custom rifle on a tang-safety Ruger 77 action. Used 215s and 46.0 grains, and it grouped around .7 inch. It might have with CCI 200s or F210s too, but after 20 years of using Big Game I doubt it.

What do you have against magnum primers?

JB, I had to laugh at your question. I don't have anything against magnum primers but recently used up all my Winchester WLRs (old stock) and bought CCI 200s. I have a small supply of WLRMs and a couple hundred old CCI 250s. When they are gone, I'd like to keep it simple and just use CCI 200s. Right now, I'm using the WLRMs with the last of my H414. When it is gone, I intend to stick to powders that CCI 200s will light properly, Varget, H4350, IMR 4451, TAC. BTW it was on your advice that I switched to CCI 100s! I was afraid of Winchesters after all the piercing issues with some of the newer ones anyway. I had no problems with my 25 or so year old stash.

Hmmm. Standard CF thread. It veered off course!

I use Win primers almost exclusively. I did get a great buy on S and B primers a few years ago. They worked just fine, but I am just about out of them. CCI mag primers when I am trying variations on a theme.

I hope no one has abandoned Win primers because of a former bump in the road. Winchester has the bad lot no lists which you can get anytime.

Have found TAC to also sometimes respond better to magnum primers. It depends on the application. Any spherical powder can, though it's more common with slower powders. The burn rate in sphericals is not controlled by granule size, as it partly is in many extruded powders, because sphericals all have very small granules. Instead it's controlled by "coatings," which actually don't just coat the granules but infuse them them with a burn deterrent. (Many extruded powders feature such coatings these days, the reason we have smaller-granule, slow-burning extruded powders, such as the "short cuts.") This is why hotter primers tend to work better with spherical powders: They ignite the powder more consistently despite the deterrent coatings.

That said, it also depends on how much accuracy you want or "need." If you're hunting big game at "normal" ranges, say out to 300 yards, groups averaging 1-1/2 inches at 100 yards work fine. Thus the potential halving of group size with magnum primers is irrelevant.

But what I have found (and mentioned before here and there) is that the average handloading deer hunter is not just interested in actually killing deer, but how small his groups are compared to those of his handloader buddies. This is due to most handloading deer hunters spending far more time in their loading room and at the range than actually hunting. Thus the modern conviction that "half-minute" groups are necessary to kill a deer at 100 yards, much less 300.

But that's also why I write about how to handload for finer accuracy: That's what most readers want--along with higher velocity and a bunch of other stuff that also doesn't have all that much to do with killing deer, at least for 99% of us.

That has been my observation as well. Regardless of the cartridge or action type, the overwhelming concern most guys have is to own an accurate rifle that shoots under an inch.

Many years ago, when Re 15 and Varget first came out, I was testing them in my 303 and 308 rifles. They were far and away better than the 4895s, IMR4350, 4064 and 4320 with 150 to 180 gr bullets. Just prior to the release of Shooting and Reloading the 303 British, I said that most reloaders will find Re 15 and Varget are better performers. The old guard (the competition crowd) laughed at me. Acquaintances at the club brushed me off by saying, "Yeah, I'll have to try that some time..."

Then the magazines started featuring articles that showed how much better these powders were for most applications. As a result, hunters and shooters switched to these in F Class, milsurp matches and for hunting. I won several shoots with Re 15 powder, but I must have been lucky and the other shooters had an off week. :}

My point? People don't like to experiment and are slow to change. Hunters seem to think that they need sub MOA rifles and cartridges. It's laughable when you consider that few shoot beyond 200 yards. LR shooters excepted of course, but they are a minority.

Competition shooters are always tinkering, but the older ones are often loathe to try something new unless someone they trust has tried it and gives it the thumbs up.

Geez, I hope I don't turn into one of them!

Drat!

Picked up a .338-06 AI and H414 is the best by far in velocity and accuracy. Was sitting on the shelf gathering dust and tried it on a whim.

Well, off the the LGS to scarf up an 8 pounder.

Yeah, I kinda did, though they certainly treated me fairly. I was put off a bit because they didn’t put out the lot numbers so retailers could take them off the shelves too. Mainly, I bought a bunch of other brands and will likely only need to buy a limited number of LRs in the future. The list you mention is probably not needed after so much time has passed, but is also of no use when buying online.

Actually, the Winny primer whoopsie is why I now have plenty of primers of all types during this crunch.

My opinion is based solely on Hodgdon's data. Having said that there are a few that claim some minor differences such as coatings. Also, I have both in my cabinet and use them interchangeably.
Everywhere one looks at the Hodgdon data, if he sees data for one the identical same data is posted for the other. As far as I'm concerned, this is proof that the powders are identical to each other.

.

No worries.

I have a line on some S&B primers. I haven't bothered with keeping too many brands here. It reduces the possibility that I might use a brand other than what I worked up.

WRT H414, there are plenty of "close enoughs" around these days. I am glad that we have so many choices. Except for competition loading, I only keep testing if I am having difficulty getting a cartridge or bullet to settle in around an inch or an inch and a half. Or if a new powder hits the shelves.

I have found the S&B large rifle primers to perform just about exactly like Federal 210s.

Bought 1000 during the last "primer panic," and that's what I found during various trials.

Have been through several primer panics since the Clinton one in 1994, when the rumors said "new" primers would expire ("go dud") within six months--which is why some people started burying primers inside PVC pipes. Have a few primers made back then (and even earlier) and they still go bang.

Just found a 8lb jug.

At least my 7x57 will be happy for the rest of my life.

It also works good in the 458 SOCOM.

Mr. Mule Deer, I've read your articles for 25yrs at least. You're a great gunwriter and I've learned a lot.

I'd never tried Ramshot powders. And the only place I hear about them is from you. Do you have some sort of deal with them? Or, are they just really great powders?

I have found that H414/760 will tell you pretty suddenly when they think that you have gone far enough.

John, I have only used S&B SR and SP primers.

I used to buy whatever was on sale, but learned to stick to what worked, except....

I occasionally buy 100 primers other than my usual, to try them. Usually, when on sale. So far, with the exception of S&B SR primers, I have seen no reason to change.

But it's always fun to try and see if will work better.

I remember when the competition crowd chased a specific powder, down to duplicate lot nos, if possible. I never was that dedicated.

Thanks very much, but if "the only place I hear about them [Ramshot powders} is from you" then you haven't read much.

I don't have "some sort of deal with them." I am just one of a few gunwriters who was invited to Miles City, Montana, to "field test" the first few Ramshot powders on a prairie dog shoot 20 years ago. They worked so consistently, despite temperatures varying from around 40 to 90, that I also tested them at temperatures down to zero the following winter (by actually shooting at zero degrees, not just freezing the ammo) and they proved to be very consistent--and accurate. So I started writing about them--and also started using them for a lot of my hunting.

Dunno why other writers don't mention them much.

I have used H414 in 22-250 , .270 Win, 30-06, and .243 Win. I got a bunch for 7 bucks a lb 25 yrs ago at Gander Mountain. Then I got some military surplus that sais use as H414. It may be H414 or not, I dont know. I like the way it meters and never had a problem with it.

Try playing with H 380 then.... its a great performer in the 338/06...

I was a big H 414 fan, but in the 338/06, I got both even better accuracy and velocity out of H 380..
and H 380 is still available on a lot of the local shelves, while they are sold out on about everything else..

I love 2015 in the 223 & 22.250... and there is plenty of that available it seems also..

just bought 16 pounds of it in two 8 pound jugs..

I'll continue to use H 414.. it will just come in a container marked 760 or 2700....

dat's the way I look at it..

they'd just better leave W 748 alone....

JD,
First let me say that I am not a writer, but I am a shooter and a reloader. I’ve been reloading for 40 some years and have tried many different powders. And yes, the Ramshot powders are what I use the most in my reloading. I use TAC exclusively for my 223 and use Big Game exclusively in both of my 7mm-08’s. If you hang out in the Hunting Rifles forum or in the reloading section’s Big Game Rifles, you will see that Western Powder’s Ramshot line is a very popular product.

John, can you expand on this statement, please?

Just buy up every 8lb jug of WW-760 you can find.

Or BG, which I'm using where I may have used 760. I think it's cleaner and reportedly more temp stable.

Would like to see comparisons from those who have used both of those side by side in a round.

IME, it would be hard to beat BG in rounds like the '06, 7-08 and similar, although I agree that H-414/W-760 is pretty good.

DF


Edited to add, I agree with you on H-380 in the .338-06, although it's pretty close to Pw Pro 2000 LR and CFE-223, (some say those are very similar if not the same), also close to LVR, which is sorta a niche powder. I understand when something works, it's hard to go looking...

Those are all newer powders, may be cleaner, etc. Not sure but would suspect that to be the case. I haven't tried those in the .338-06. H-380 works.

BG and the like have always been unobtanum powders here, 760 will get it done, in the case of it and 380, the rifles I fire them in are not long range affairs, don't believe I can 'hold' the difference in the field to notice a few fps more or less in velocity.

Did you try my H-380 load in 338-06?

Yeah, H-380 is good stuff in the 338-06, for sure.

Powder Valley is a good source for powder you don’t see locally. I like BG better than 760, which is good, proven powder. BG just better, IMO

DF

10- foe neighbor, Thanks.

You and Seafire got me using H-380 in the .338-06 and it does work and very well. I'm not sure there aren't newer, better powders but I can see why you guys settled on that one for that round.

I have H-414 and W-760 sitting on the shelf, but use BG more because it's just that good, not that those aren't good. BG is just hard to beat in the '06 and 7-08. Pharmseller is right (he usually is)..

So, guess I'm sorta an ole fart, sticking with H-380 in the .338-06, but I'm moving on with BG, leaving 760/414 on the shelf. Now, if things get scarce and that's what's left, I'll use it.. Until then, it's BG for those selected rounds, 760/414 cans collecting dust.

DF

Got it, and, they certainly wont spoil waiting for lean times ; ]

I seen this coming. Now that Hodgdon has a virtual monopoly on powder, they will begin to discontinue many of the old favorites. Stock up while you can.

Hodgdon is about to become Hornady 2.0!

...it's not bad enough you have to stock up on powder (along with just about everything else) because of politician-induced panic buying, now you have to worry about powder you have used for years being dumped by the manufacturer, only to have to work up loads all over again.

Big jugs are your friend...

DF

Channeling Jorge?

This is simply a decision to simplify their inventory control management.
1 powder currently marketed as 2 individual powders = 2 inventory powders on hand and distributed for no gain in total sales for that powder type.

Delete 1 SKU and simplify the inventory management to distribute a single powder.

Interesting that they did not retain their own "self named" product. Just shows the product identification is greater in the market as Winchester 760 so that was the moniker retained. Its just smart business. I would expect to see more of this as their rationalize their product lines.

The bigger then better, the tighter the sweater...

Where does one buy those larger-than-8-lb jugs??

I would just start dumping WW760 in H414 jugs. Problem solved.

He may be onto something.



DF

Jorge,

The specific primer can play a definite role in accuracy, and to a certain extent temperature resistance in powders. But how much the powder fills the case can also be a factor in all of that.

In general, pressure labs have found most rifle powders to burn most consistently when the available powder space in a case/bullet combination is just about filled, and often even more so when the charge is slightly compressed.

All three factors--case fill, and the specific primer and powder--interrelate. Extruded powders in the medium burn-rate range tend ignite easily with just about any primer, so loads may not show much improvement with a magnum primer--though they still can when the powder charge gets to be big enough. The long-time rule of thumb is to use magnum primers in cases over about .30-06 powder capacity, and I have seen some very obvious examples. My .338 Winchester Magnum, for instance, gets great accuracy with 200-grain Ballistic Silvertips and a charge of 67 grains of Reloder 15, with 3-shot groups averaging around .6 to .7 inch. But that powder charge doesn't come close to filling the case, and is only accurate when ignited with a magnum primer. With standard primers it averages more like 1.3 inches.

Supposedly slower-burning spherical powders burn most consistently with magnum primers, due to being harder to ignite due to their deterrent coatings. I have found that to be generally true even in very small cases, such as the .17 and .22 Hornets, where CCI 450s tend to result in the smallest groups with "slow" powders (for the case size) such as Li'l Gun, Alliant MP-300 and CFEBLK. Haven't found it to be as true with faster-burning sphericals such as H110, where standard or even handgun primers sometimes work as well or better. But H110 burns enough faster than those other powders that with 40-grain bullets in the .22 Hornet it's not compressed, which may be why I've found it to work best with lighter bullets, in the 30-grain range.

Got an e-mail a month or two ago from a guy who had a new .22 Hornet and was getting 2-inch groups at 100 yards with H110 and 40-grain bullets, and was wondering if the barrel might be the problem. He knew I'd had one of those Hornets in the past and wondered how mine shot. I replied that it did very well with 40-grain bullets, Li'l Gun and CCI 450s--but not H110. He got some Li'l Gun and 450s and his groups shrank to well under an inch.

Another interesting example is my .375 H&H Whitworth with 300-grain bullets. I bought it almost 30 years ago and tried IMR4350, which needed some compression to reach the typical velocity of 2550 fps. Eventually H4350 appeared and wondered if I should switch due to it being more temperature resistant than IMR4350--but then I decided to see how my old load did in real cold. Tested it at zero F. and it only lost around 30 fps, right in the same range as H4350 does in other rounds. But in the .30-06 with 165s IMR4350 lost twice as much velocity, I am guessing because that powder charge isn't compressed. The load shot just as accurately at zero, but point of impact dropped two inches at 100 yards.

Thanks John. We've had this discussion before but I was asking about the differences between the two primers mentioned. i've tried to establish rules but the only one i can come up with is there are NO rules. Specifically, my 338s for example show definite improvement in accuracy when I use F210s vice 215s which is what all manuals call for and generally (for me), if I'm loading 79gr or less, non-magnim primers seem to work best, except for my Weatherbys. Also my most accurate 375 H&H load was with H416 (76gr) and F215 primers, yet with the TSX?TTSX and RL-15, (72-74gr depending on 270 or 300 grain bullets) F-210s were more accurate. Then the other day I picked up a Browing Safari in 338 and after a lot of testing with the 25 AB (not a fan but someone gave me a BUncH of them), the accuracy winner was H-4350 (72.5) and F-215 primers.

I don’t know but two of ‘em would more than a year’s supply.....for sure.......

I really liked this reply.

made me spit some water out.

Mathman nailed that one....

Out of the park...

DF

Well said however there is something to be said for loonyism also.

I hope they never stop making 4895 and 4350!
Ben

They won' t as long as people use lots of it. Hodgdon has bought up most of it's competition based on the premise in business " that if your going to have competition in your product market it might as well be by yourself". And it is , so at this point they improve their product lines, outdating old stand bys which are replaced "by better engineered, temp stability, copper erasing, consistancy and etc." (Cost more) Now were in the consolidating the product line to save manufacturing costs time frame. 4759, h414, 4320 and all those ww slowburners that were renovated every time you turned your head. Happening right now at Alliant also. The powder industry is in a constant state of change, better product, more market share, blahs blahs the only thing consistant about it is the price keeps going up and if the sales figures are down on a particular product get rid of it. My take MB

I have at least three rifles that I use H414 in and as I saw an 8lb at my local gun store a week or so ago I ran up there hoping to find some even in one pounders. No H414, H4895 or W760. I have a new 300 H&H that likes R19 so I picked up 8lbs of that. From now on when I find a powder I like I'll be buying 8 LBS of it at a time. I'm not a fan of change but I guess if I try to look at the bright side I'll be spending more time behind the rifles sorting out new loads.

GSPfan,

I have pointed out before on this forum that in most of the U.S. you can order powder from various websites and have it shipped to your door. I do it a lot, partly because I can often find powders on the Internet that aren't in any of the several good-sized local stores here in Montana. Quite often, too, even with the hazmat fee required, plus shipping, the price of an 8-pounder is similar to many retail stores.

I just looked at a number of sites, and 760 was listed in stock at most.

I considered W760 to be similar to if not the same as H414.

I mainly get powder off the internet or sometimes at gun shows. The sporting good stores and the different gun stores near here often only carry just a few ‘Common’ powders.

Coming back from Prairie Dog shooting this summer we stopped at a gun store and I found small rifle primers and powders I hadn’t seen available for a while.

I could have bought a nice rifle for what I spent that day.

The main problem with stocking up on reloading materials is the improvements in powder make me wonder why I have a couple 8 pounders of IMR4350 and such.

Even tho my 7-08 really likes H414, and I have 7-8 lbs stashed back, my 7-08 likes Big Game better with 150 gr NBT's. Ive got all the H414 I'll ever need.

Bugger,

We've gone through this before: W760 is EXACTLY the same powder as H4141, and has been for a long time. It's made by the same factory, in the same way, but goes into differently labeled canisters.

The reason SOME loading manuals list slightly different loading data for 760 and 414 is different manufacturing lots burn slightly differently. But ever since Hodgdon acquired the Winchester powder line (which has been a while now) their data for both powders is exactly the same, down to the 10th of a grain, feet-per-second and pressure.

That's what I believed, I don't see a big issue with H414 being discontinued.

I live in a portion of the country where the hunting season could be 70+ degrees F (or hotter) or it could be -20 degrees F (or colder). One year I might be hunting in short sleeve shirt and the next with full winter gear. I feel the 760 (and H414) are very temperature sensitive! If my rifle shot .1" groups with H414 that would be fine, but I would not consider using it hunting. The smallest groups under ideal conditions isn't as important to me as POI and pressure not changing with temperature. Plus I've had serious issues with those old Winchester powders when I sighted in at 45 degrees and hunted at high temperatures. I think the worst was with WW785, but WW760 and WW748 will never be on my shopping list either.
There are a few powders in the normal burning range of H414 or WW760, I'd be trying H4350 or IMR 4451 or even IMR4350, if my rifle 'liked' H414.

Yep, there isn't an issue with H414 being "discontinued," because the only thing really being discontinued is containers with H414 labels. The same powder will continue to fill W760 containers.

I have had temperature adventures with H414/W760 as well, to the point I swore off using either in my standard hunting handloads, though I keep some around to use in handloading articles, since many people like 'em--and apparently don't hunt where temperatures vary widely.

But H414/W760 may be more temp-resistant now, since I haven't done any serious temperature testing with it in quite a while.

This is a FWIW: I gave my H414 to my second son for his 7-08. But it proved no better in his M70 Featherweight than it did in mine. After never giving the accuracy for any bullet tried in mine from 139s to 175s, I did a lot more research and stumbled on the idea (from somewhere that I don't recall) that IMR 4064 might do what I was looking for... It did, and became a kind of miracle powder IN MY RIFLE! I'm going to suggest it to my son.

But before handing it over to my son, I also tried it in my 9.3 x 62 with the 286 Hornady and the 320gr Woodleigh. It gave good accuracy for each but MV wasn't as good as RL-15. I replaced RL-15 with RL-17 and that became my "miracle powder" for the 9.3 x 62. Nothing else has come close!

I mention this because H414, IMR 4350 and RL-17 are supposed to be within the same ball park as to burn rate. NOT SO! I've used enough of all those to know the differences. RL-17 works best when compressed in conjunction with a magnum primer, specifically the WLRM primer. It is a tad slower than H414 (W760), has more energy than IMR 4350 being a double base powder and doesn't change in any significant way with temp changes -- which RL-15 did! As someone here mentioned, H414 (W760) will let you know right away if you've gone too far! RL-17 doesn't have that habit.

So, while BG might be a good substitute for H414, so might RL-17. It's a tad slower than BG, but they are close. Just as H4895 can be compressed significantly for best results in a .458 Win with heavy bullets, so RL-17 works best with heavy bullets in the 9.3 x 62 when compressed and ignited by a magnum primer.

The point being: Experiment with something different, especially with some of the newer powders. IMR 4895 is made in Canada. H4895 is an "extreme powder" made in Australia which I much prefer over the IMR version, unless they've improved it -- likely MD would know about that. There are good substitutes for H414 that might work better, as I discovered for my 7-08.

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

I'd point out for those who can't stand reading their reloading manuals that in Hornady's burn rate chart #108 is 760, #109 is h414 and # 110 is Superformance. I have been getting good accuracy and velocity in various 30-06's with 165 & 180 gr bullet weights with Superformance. MB