The Fact About h4831sc load data That No One Is Suggesting
The Fact About h4831sc load data That No One Is Suggesting
Blog Article
I picked up a 50ct. box of a hundred and sixty Nosler Accubonds, but I am hesitant to burn off the powder and projectiles on workup when all I've is 50 bullets. But I really need to find a bullet while in the 160 course that my more mature rifle likes.
Not surprisingly, the Hodgdon tech would not endorse my mixing of different lot quantities, but I believe I realize why. It's a litigation-pushed environment, and many idiot would absolutely deduce that he could mix H380 and H110 and think of his personal customized blend of powder. What a earth.
Liberalism; The unachievable still recognized Idea that it is fully achievable to pick up a turd because of the clear finish.
Caution employing SC or SSC created loads with prolonged cut, back again off and do the job up. Use safe loading approaches.
The one big difference as I realize it would be that the SC was built to function through powder measures improved (which it does). The for a longer time grains never feed effectively in the slightest degree in some actions. Thats my 02 :grin:
Liberalism; The unachievable nonetheless accepted Idea that it is entirely possible to select up a turd with the clear finish.
You may have for making a handful of a lot more posts to receive cleared to carry out PM's. Once you get to that status I'd post within the classified reloading section to see if any individual is in your area for the trade.
Like said above, exact same stuff. Everything differs is the scale with the kernels. I did listen to somewhere that they're going to only h4831sc make the SC Sooner or later. I don't know if that is definitely accurate or not but would sound right to me. I use SC since that's what I found in the eight lb jug and it works.
At this time applying IMR 4831 inside of a 300WSM, and find out the H4831sc is a popular choice for this caliber and yields a little more velocity. Other than it being short cut, what is the difference in both h4831sc load data of these powders, and may I change to H4831sc?
Why would I point out this? What precisely is my place? I'm not sure that there's a authentic valid point in addition to exactly what is common with most has not been popular with me in the slightest degree in these situation. Do I just Possess a powder jinx or something? In order to demonstrate how insane I actually am, tomorrow I'm vary screening a friends new .
As for that 4831 vs 4831SC, they are precisely the same/equivalent powder cept for grain size. Load data is interchangeable.
It can be probable that no even more discussion is required, wherein scenario we advocate commencing a fresh thread. If nevertheless you really feel your reaction is required you can continue to do this.
I'm sure the H4831SC offers a greater load density But I do think I've adequate home in my situation for the traditional H4831.
I sawed a single in 50 percent to discover how thick the jackets were, and h4831 vs h4831sc they had been simply 2 times as thick to be a fifty-grain hollow point was. Ditto for your 64-grain Electrical power Position, as these bullets are designed for deer, not prairie pet dogs or woodchucks. You now know everything I know about the 22-250 and slow-burning powders, and I do not know anything whatsoever regarding the 223. I doubt that you're going to get anyplace with that cartridge and 4831, but let us know the way it goes.