Loading H 4831 vs H 4831 SC

[centershot]

Loading manuals do not seem to differentiate between the two. Should one be loaded lighter than the other?

 

[Bill Norris]

Loading manuals do not seem to differentiate between the two. Should one be loaded lighter than the other?

Never saw a difference in the loads with the two.

 

[358WCF]

Everything I've read, heard, or seen says they are the same weight for weight except loading density & lot to lot variations.

 

[jr600yd]

SC version meters a little better in my powder measure otherwise they seem to be equal

 

[30378]

Burn rates seem to be the same. The difference comes with load density which will avg roughly 4% less with the SC version.

 

[nakneker]

SC just makes it easier to meter, same results, at least with the two rifles I tested both powders in. A 280AI and a 7 Saum. I still use the SC version, it’s easier to work with imo.

 

[GWY]

As 358WCF previously posted, lot to lot variation can be a factor.

I use 4831SC and have had up to a 50 fps difference when changing to a new 8 lb jug with the same powder charge. Other powders may also have a lot to lot variation.

IMO, whenever using a new bottle of the same powder (if its a different lot), start lower and break out the chronograph.

 

[xr650rRider]

From Hodgdon

H4831SC is an Extreme extruded powder and the exact ballistic copy of H4831. Physically, it has a shorter grain size which earned it the “SC” designation for “short cut.” The shorter, more compact kernels allow the powder to flow through the powder measures more smoothly, helping to alleviate the constant cutting of granules. With the smoother flow characteristics comes more uniform charge weights, while the individual grains orient more compactly, creating better loading density.

https://shop.hodgdon.com/hodgdon-h4831sc/

 

[M-61]

Never found any difference.

 

[FeMan]

The only difference I have found is one needs a shoe horn.