H4198 vs. IMR4198

[sb]

I was at a local gunshop today that had H4198 and IMR4198. Which is better and why? I'm shooting an H&R slufoot conversion and only plan to shoot single powders. I already have some H4198, 5744 and n110.
Thanks

[ratsnakeboogy]

I can't tell much if any difference between the two.

[edge]

IMR is a little bulkier and makes less pressure by a little bit.
Not sure if there is an ignition advantage one way or the other.

edge.

[timgunner]

Hodgdon's powders are coated in a chemical that they say makes them less temperature sensative. I have tested their claims on IMR 4831 vs h4831 and the Hodgdon's powder is much less temperature sensative. What this translates into is more consistent muzzle velocity regardless of the temperature difference. Say you develop a good load on a nice sunny fall day at 74 degrees but you hunt at a frosty 10 degrees the Hodgdon's coating will make for more consistent velocity and therefore more consistent long range performance. There is a video of a test on you tube done by Gunwerks that is interesting and covers the same thing.

[kennacl55]

I also have an H@R slufoot conversion and I use H4198 without any problems, I also use a 10-50 duplex 4759/4198 with great results in cold weather.

[12ptdroptine]

I shot a few rounds of IMR for the first time other day. First time. Seemed as though it had a differant percieved recoil to me. 77gn and 275BE not painful but a bit of a surprise But then up intil then I had only shot up to 76gn of H4198. When cleaning the IMR seemed a little mor diry than H4198 does.
Drop

[kbrezlin]

I am really only worried about ignition so I'm gonna boost IMR4198 with 5744, but this is straight off IMR's website:
"This fast burning rifle powder gives outstanding performance in cartridges like the 222 Remington, 221 Fireball, 45-70, and 450 Marlin. Varmint shooters with small-bore cartridges love it. Proven metering and necessary elements were added to make it extremely insensitive to hot/cold temperatures. IMR 4198 is outstanding in cartridges like the 222 Remington, 444 Marlin and 7.62 X 39."

I was told the H4198 will meter better and a little cleaner but that was about the only difference. However real world experience usually trumps manufacture claims.

[longrange]

Personally, I prefer the IMR. But to each their own.

[darrel]

RBinAkansas said H4198 ignited easier than IMR so I Have only used H4198. Lots of people use IMR with no problem.

[smokeeter]

both are fine in the .45 or 50 cal. the H is somewhat cleaner. I have used both in our cold Canadian climate and never had a failure to fire. I have resently went with 4759 duplex for a little added security.

[hawghunter]

I wondered the same thing when I got started with smokeless muzzleloaders. Use the search function and you will find additional opinions on the subject.

[rangeball]

Sept 26, 2015 9:42:47 GMT -5 timgunner said:

Hodgdon's powders are coated in a chemical that they say makes them less temperature sensative. I have tested their claims on IMR 4831 vs h4831 and the Hodgdon's powder is much less temperature sensative. What this translates into is more consistent muzzle velocity regardless of the temperature difference. Say you develop a good load on a nice sunny fall day at 74 degrees but you hunt at a frosty 10 degrees the Hodgdon's coating will make for more consistent velocity and therefore more consistent long range performance. There is a video of a test on you tube done by Gunwerks that is interesting and covers the same thing.

One thing to add to this is both can still lose performance/temp stability in colder temps as we are generally using bullets that are light for caliber these powders were intended for. This will vary of course with breech plug design, length of flame channel, flash hole size, etc, but you can still see performance drop off in colder temps from the lower ignition pressure present.