Has anyone used 4198 powder for the 445 supermag? I'm loading it for use in a 22 inch barreled rifle, and had only moderate accuracy results with 296. I see most recommend AA 1680, but that has now gone out of production. The next slower powder on my shelf is IMR 4198. I don't know how much slower it is but falls about two powders away from these on a burning rate list. I want to stay safe, and it SEEMS that if it's too slow I'll just lose performance. With a single base powder I don't forsee a pressure problem, but then I am an ameteur and eager for advice. Thanks a lot. Other suggestions for this round will also be appreciated.
cptmclark
cptmclark,
Welcome to the forum, if nobody has said so yet. Rules are to participate and be polite and not post anything you'd be embarrassed to explain to a youngster (we have some among our readers).
296 works best in cases where the powder volume in the case has a shorter aspect ratio than your round does. For example, it does well in the .357 Magnum, but poorly in the .357 Maximum. It is famously difficult to ignite, and it seems to be hard to get a good working load of it in a taller cartridge.
I am wondering why you would jump from 296 straight to 4198? 4198 can't meet the 445 SM maximum pressure under a 240 grain bullet, even when highly compressed. It is too slow. I would look at Hodgdon L'il Gun, which is just a fraction slower than 296 and pretty much matches its velocities in your chambering. L'il Gun is designed to burn well even at .410 shotgun pressures, so it should exhibit no ignition problems in the .445 SM. I don't own a gun in this chambering myself, so perhaps someone with actual experience will have another suggestion?
I will move this thread to the Handloading forum so it can get more attention.
Welcome to the forum, if nobody has said so yet. Rules are to participate and be polite and not post anything you'd be embarrassed to explain to a youngster (we have some among our readers).
296 works best in cases where the powder volume in the case has a shorter aspect ratio than your round does. For example, it does well in the .357 Magnum, but poorly in the .357 Maximum. It is famously difficult to ignite, and it seems to be hard to get a good working load of it in a taller cartridge.
I am wondering why you would jump from 296 straight to 4198? 4198 can't meet the 445 SM maximum pressure under a 240 grain bullet, even when highly compressed. It is too slow. I would look at Hodgdon L'il Gun, which is just a fraction slower than 296 and pretty much matches its velocities in your chambering. L'il Gun is designed to burn well even at .410 shotgun pressures, so it should exhibit no ignition problems in the .445 SM. I don't own a gun in this chambering myself, so perhaps someone with actual experience will have another suggestion?
I will move this thread to the Handloading forum so it can get more attention.
Have you tried Hodgdon's H4227? I know its still available, and may be what you are looking for as far as accuracy is concerned.
445 powders
Thanks for the info and advice. It sounds like maybe the powder choice might be the problem. Re: 4198; good question. That's the only powder I had on hand that would come even close. You are right of course, that I couldn't get enough in.
I have searched for 4227 in the area and not found it so far. I did find and purchase some H110 today. Will that have the same problem as W296, with ignition and aspect ratio? I was told that is the same as W296. Do you know if that's right? I was hoping to go a tad slower, but it shows up on the rate chart right next to 296. Side by side it does look like 296. I'd like to learn more about applying aspect ratio to powder selection. Max published charges of 296 do not require any compression.
I see Lil Gun is right next to H110, on the quicker side. Is that a ball powder?
Thank you very much. I really enjoy learning about this stuff.
P S: Now I just read in some other threads where H110 is identical to 296. Also about "symptoms" of poor ignition. I have had consistently (100 rounds) smudging of the cases, which I thought was indicating oversize chambers or weak charges. My charges are not weak, and the chambers are within .005 of starting diameters. I get noticeable recoil so thought I was getting normalish pressure. Might the powder choice be the problem with this too? I didn't mention that my 296 is 20 years old.
One other piece of the pie, my groups have terrible vertical stringing, like an inch wide and five inches tall.
Thanks for the info and advice. It sounds like maybe the powder choice might be the problem. Re: 4198; good question. That's the only powder I had on hand that would come even close. You are right of course, that I couldn't get enough in.
I have searched for 4227 in the area and not found it so far. I did find and purchase some H110 today. Will that have the same problem as W296, with ignition and aspect ratio? I was told that is the same as W296. Do you know if that's right? I was hoping to go a tad slower, but it shows up on the rate chart right next to 296. Side by side it does look like 296. I'd like to learn more about applying aspect ratio to powder selection. Max published charges of 296 do not require any compression.
I see Lil Gun is right next to H110, on the quicker side. Is that a ball powder?
Thank you very much. I really enjoy learning about this stuff.
P S: Now I just read in some other threads where H110 is identical to 296. Also about "symptoms" of poor ignition. I have had consistently (100 rounds) smudging of the cases, which I thought was indicating oversize chambers or weak charges. My charges are not weak, and the chambers are within .005 of starting diameters. I get noticeable recoil so thought I was getting normalish pressure. Might the powder choice be the problem with this too? I didn't mention that my 296 is 20 years old.
One other piece of the pie, my groups have terrible vertical stringing, like an inch wide and five inches tall.
I'm not sure about 20 years ago, powder formulations do change over time. H110 is the same as W296 today. I'm also not sure about Lil' Gun, I haven't used it or seen its configuration. H4227 is a short stick powder if I remember correctly.
My Sierra manual only lists 296, H4227, and AA1680. Hodgdon's website lists H110, H4227 and Lil Gun.
I use H110/W296 in my .45 Colt, .44 magnum, and .357 Magnum loads and even though a Magnum primer is specified, I use standard primers and my chronograph shows exactly the same velocity.
My Sierra manual only lists 296, H4227, and AA1680. Hodgdon's website lists H110, H4227 and Lil Gun.
I use H110/W296 in my .45 Colt, .44 magnum, and .357 Magnum loads and even though a Magnum primer is specified, I use standard primers and my chronograph shows exactly the same velocity.
My Sierra manual only lists 296, H4227, and AA1680. Hodgdon's website lists H110, H4227 and Lil Gun.
I use H110/W296 in my .45 Colt, .44 magnum, and .357 Magnum loads and even though a Magnum primer is specified, I use standard primers and my chronograph shows exactly the same velocity.
AA 1689 is out of production, as I'm told is W 680 (any meaning to the name similarity?). The ignition problems unclenick mentions in this post and others would provide a welcome answer to my vertical stringing problem. If I had used a chronograph I'd have better data to share with you. If the wind will drop below gale force for a few hours in a row here I'll take it out. Wish I hand't cracked those 4198 and h110 cans. Oh well, I'll use them for something. It sounds like I need a stick powder like has always worked for me in bottleneck rifle cases. If poor or incosistent ignition can cause sooty cases (poor sealing) I'd like to know that. If I can get my vertical to match my horizontal dispersion I can make a cheap tackdriving Indiana hunting rifle out of this thing. Then to learn to load cast bullets for an accurate single shot...it would be worth all the trouble.
I think I'll just bite the bullet (so to speak) and pay the hazmat charge get what I want to start with. 4227, lil gun, and any other suggestions from theory and experience?
I use H110/W296 in my .45 Colt, .44 magnum, and .357 Magnum loads and even though a Magnum primer is specified, I use standard primers and my chronograph shows exactly the same velocity.
AA 1689 is out of production, as I'm told is W 680 (any meaning to the name similarity?). The ignition problems unclenick mentions in this post and others would provide a welcome answer to my vertical stringing problem. If I had used a chronograph I'd have better data to share with you. If the wind will drop below gale force for a few hours in a row here I'll take it out. Wish I hand't cracked those 4198 and h110 cans. Oh well, I'll use them for something. It sounds like I need a stick powder like has always worked for me in bottleneck rifle cases. If poor or incosistent ignition can cause sooty cases (poor sealing) I'd like to know that. If I can get my vertical to match my horizontal dispersion I can make a cheap tackdriving Indiana hunting rifle out of this thing. Then to learn to load cast bullets for an accurate single shot...it would be worth all the trouble.
I think I'll just bite the bullet (so to speak) and pay the hazmat charge get what I want to start with. 4227, lil gun, and any other suggestions from theory and experience?
I only checked Natchez, but they have AA1680 in stock, and Accurate's website shows it as daily production.
www.natchezss.com
www.accuratepowder.com
http://www.natchezss.com/category.c...entID=productDetail&brand=00&category=6&subCategory=0&catLevel=1&prodID=AA16801
I really like using Accurate powders, mainly because they are just down the road from me.
www.natchezss.com
www.accuratepowder.com
http://www.natchezss.com/category.c...entID=productDetail&brand=00&category=6&subCategory=0&catLevel=1&prodID=AA16801
I really like using Accurate powders, mainly because they are just down the road from me.
It looks like 1680 is still good to go. Can't find any indication that a 1689 ever existed, and I have a copy of Accurate's reloading manual #1.
H110 and 296 have always been the same. A Hodgdon tech told me H110 came out first and Winchester decided to follow suit. Same St. Marks Powder Company (General Dynamics is the owner) product packaged with the different brandings.
L'il Gun is closer to H110 and QuickLOAD says it will match the velocities pretty well. the 4427 is a little slower and will cost you 100 fps with 240 grain bullets. I don't know what bullet weight you intend to use, however?
H110 and 296 have always been the same. A Hodgdon tech told me H110 came out first and Winchester decided to follow suit. Same St. Marks Powder Company (General Dynamics is the owner) product packaged with the different brandings.
L'il Gun is closer to H110 and QuickLOAD says it will match the velocities pretty well. the 4427 is a little slower and will cost you 100 fps with 240 grain bullets. I don't know what bullet weight you intend to use, however?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
