SmallCaliberCentral

I have googled and done other searches about the differences of the two powders. According to my Hornady manual, the burn rates are separated by only one powder so, I know they are similar. I see that many on here have had good results using H4895. Has anybody used IMR 4895 with similar results? I ask because I have a pound of the IMR shtuff sitting on the shelf and I'd like to use it if it would work alright.

I have never used H4895 but I have used IMR 4895 for many many years with excellent results. I just started using IMR 4895 in my Rem 700 204 VLS, also use it in my 22-250 243 and 25-06, 308, 30-06.

One thing to remember, most the reload books state you may use H4895 in IMR4895 loads, but never reverse IMR into H loads. IMR will produce higher pressures. Just a word of warning, to keep in mind. Best to follow the reloading manuals for each make of powder. Bill K

Bill K wrote: Best to follow the reloading manuals for each make of powder. Bill K

Yeah, I wasn't looking to use them interchangably. I guess I was really just wondering if anyone had used IMR 4895 in the .204 and which combo of charge and bullet worked well for them. Most reloading manuals have H4895 listed as a viable powder for the .204 but so far only one, Nosler, lists IMR 4895.

In the case of the 32 gr bullet, the Hodgdon online data site shows the same load for both the IMR and H versions of 4895: 29gr Compressed load.

http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

For the 35gr and 40 gr there's a tenth difference.....

I'm not saying they're interchangeable....just sayin' what the Hodgdon site reflects......

FYI, YMMV

I've had superb results with H4895 in my 204's. My only experience with IMR4895 was years ago in a 308 (it too was superb).

I have had great results with IMR 4895 with both the 35 and 40 grain Berger bullets, haven't messed with H4895, haven't had to!