So, can I use the same load info for H4831SC as what is listed for H4831 or do I need to allow variance for the short cut powder?
Thanks
Thanks
H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
- Thread starter rocky_lange
- Start date
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
I remember reading in one of the yearly hodgdon guides that it was. I use it to and have had no problems, just do you normal load work up.
I remember reading in one of the yearly hodgdon guides that it was. I use it to and have had no problems, just do you normal load work up.
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
Am I right in assuming that the short cut powder would take up a little less volume as they would "stack" tighter in the cartridge therefore slightly lowering the the chamber pressures and velocities or do I have that backwards?
Am I right in assuming that the short cut powder would take up a little less volume as they would "stack" tighter in the cartridge therefore slightly lowering the the chamber pressures and velocities or do I have that backwards?
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
In my mind, more fuel = more go... but I have been wrong before.
In my mind, more fuel = more go... but I have been wrong before.
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Niles Coyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In my mind, more fuel = more go... but I have been wrong before.
</div></div>
Agreed, but I am talking about using the same weight of powders. The SC should take up less space in volume.
But yes, I could then "top off the tank"
Or seat longer bullets deeper without compressing so I can reach mag length.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Niles Coyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In my mind, more fuel = more go... but I have been wrong before.
Agreed, but I am talking about using the same weight of powders. The SC should take up less space in volume.
But yes, I could then "top off the tank"
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
GT, I use this powder in my 25/06. I used to use H4831 and went to H4831SC. I used the same data from H4831 TO H4831SC and got the same results. Hodgon said that the SC was for better metering through a powder thrower and it would meter better because the kernels were shorter. Contact Hodgon if you are worried but I would (and do) use the same data. My 25/06 shoots lights out with this powder with several different bullets. just my .02
GT, I use this powder in my 25/06. I used to use H4831 and went to H4831SC. I used the same data from H4831 TO H4831SC and got the same results. Hodgon said that the SC was for better metering through a powder thrower and it would meter better because the kernels were shorter. Contact Hodgon if you are worried but I would (and do) use the same data. My 25/06 shoots lights out with this powder with several different bullets. just my .02
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: guntard007</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Niles Coyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In my mind, more fuel = more go... but I have been wrong before.
</div></div>
Agreed, but I am talking about using the same weight of powders. The SC should take up less space in volume.
But yes, I could then "top off the tank"
Or seat longer bullets deeper without compressing so I can reach mag length. </div></div>
They are ballistically the same, as per Hodgdon. One meters better than the other, that's the only difference.
I've used both in a 338LM and noticed no appreciable differences.
Chris
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: guntard007</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Niles Coyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In my mind, more fuel = more go... but I have been wrong before.
Agreed, but I am talking about using the same weight of powders. The SC should take up less space in volume.
But yes, I could then "top off the tank"
They are ballistically the same, as per Hodgdon. One meters better than the other, that's the only difference.
I've used both in a 338LM and noticed no appreciable differences.
Chris
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
They are the same.
I wish Hodgdon would use that technology on some of their other powders.
They are the same.
I wish Hodgdon would use that technology on some of their other powders.
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
Results were same/same in my experience with .270 Winchester.
Good luck
Jerry
Results were same/same in my experience with .270 Winchester.
Good luck
Jerry
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
I experienced no difference with the two. The SC seamed was easier in the powder trickler.
I experienced no difference with the two. The SC seamed was easier in the powder trickler.
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: guntard007</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Am I right in assuming that the short cut powder would take up a little less volume as they would "stack" tighter in the cartridge therefore slightly lowering the the chamber pressures and velocities or do I have that backwards? </div></div>
The SC appears to take up less space by volume, but it really doesn't. If you put equal weights of each powder in identical cases, they will each have the same air space left in them -- but the non SC version will have a lot more of that airspace intermingled with the kernals.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: guntard007</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Am I right in assuming that the short cut powder would take up a little less volume as they would "stack" tighter in the cartridge therefore slightly lowering the the chamber pressures and velocities or do I have that backwards? </div></div>
The SC appears to take up less space by volume, but it really doesn't. If you put equal weights of each powder in identical cases, they will each have the same air space left in them -- but the non SC version will have a lot more of that airspace intermingled with the kernals.
Re: H4831 and H4831SC interchangable?
Per Hodgdon, we should treat them as the same propellant.
Technically, they are simply different length grains of the same cylindrical powder. The SC (Short Cut) version is formulated to flow better in powder measures.
While it may be technically true that the powder will settle differently, and other minor characteristics may differ; these differences are not significantly consequential unless you are doing other things that fall outside the boundaries of conscientious handloading, like loading over max.
It is easy to become obsessed with details. I'd simply suggest that getting the basics right is a primary goal. Doing the basics in a more and more consistent manner will often buy you as much, or more, than getting bogged down on additional details.
The more steps you do, the more steps there are for you to make a mistake doing, or more importantly, for you to worry about, thus undermining your confidence. If you keep it simple, and stick to the plan, it's a lot easier to relax and concentrate on the shooting.
That's why we load in the first place; and when we start getting into troubled waters unnecessarily, we can lose sight of the main goal.
Keep It Simpler and Prosper.
Greg
Per Hodgdon, we should treat them as the same propellant.
Technically, they are simply different length grains of the same cylindrical powder. The SC (Short Cut) version is formulated to flow better in powder measures.
While it may be technically true that the powder will settle differently, and other minor characteristics may differ; these differences are not significantly consequential unless you are doing other things that fall outside the boundaries of conscientious handloading, like loading over max.
It is easy to become obsessed with details. I'd simply suggest that getting the basics right is a primary goal. Doing the basics in a more and more consistent manner will often buy you as much, or more, than getting bogged down on additional details.
The more steps you do, the more steps there are for you to make a mistake doing, or more importantly, for you to worry about, thus undermining your confidence. If you keep it simple, and stick to the plan, it's a lot easier to relax and concentrate on the shooting.
That's why we load in the first place; and when we start getting into troubled waters unnecessarily, we can lose sight of the main goal.
Keep It Simpler and Prosper.
Greg
