Has anyone found load data for New IMR Blue powder

March 21, 2018, 09:35 PM

The IMRreloading page defaults for Hodgdon and I can’t find IMR blue there and queries yield little except a few cryptic web pages one says is just like Bluedot and another that’s says Read the MDS is different enough to not do that. I will work up a load in any event and should have gotten the IMR target as that is in some of the new Hodgdon manual. anyone know any more or would kindly point me to some straight actionable information thanks in advance

March 24, 2018, 06:17 AM

sourdough44

All I see for ‘Blue’ is a few 12 ga shotgun loads, on the Hodgdon/IMR website.

You could try emailing Hodgdon with your intentions and see what they say? The powder shows available for over a year, they should have some data coming by now.

And they may wonder why many of us like to stick with our favorites? Yes, slight changes over time and different lots, but easy to work with.

March 24, 2018, 03:01 PM

markstempski

quote:
Originally posted by sourdough44:
All I see for ‘Blue’ is a few 12 ga shotgun loads, on the Hodgdon/IMR website.

You could try emailing Hodgdon with your intentions and see what they say? The powder shows available for over a year, they should have some data coming by now.

And they may wonder why many of us like to stick with our favorites? Yes, slight changes over time and different lots, but easy to work with.

Good idea I used their contact form. Will communicate results of query if I get ny info back everything I have seen and there is damned little says by volume is interchangeable with Blue Dot but that is just enough information to be dangerous

March 24, 2018, 03:31 PM

sigcrazy7

quote:
I will work up a load in any event and should have gotten the IMR target

Target is supposed to be IMR's version of Bullseye, so that is a long way from Blue. You have to go through Unequal (Unique) and Red (Red Dot) to get to Blue (Blue Dot). If your application requires a slower powder, then working out some data for Blue would be better.

If I were to do what you're attempting, I'd start with the Blue Dot minimums and work up from there. If the data from Unequal vs Unique is any indicator, I bet when next years data comes out with Blue data, we'll find that the data runs very close to Blue Dot.

March 24, 2018, 03:39 PM

sourdough44

On the official IMR powder burn rate chart, ‘Blue’ is two positions faster than ‘Blue Dot’, so very close.

http://bulletin.accurateshoote...ive-burn-rate-chart/

As we all know, these burn rate charts are mostly general guidelines.

March 24, 2018, 05:01 PM

markstempski

quote:
Originally posted by sourdough44:
On the official IMR powder burn rate chart, ‘Blue’ is two positions faster than ‘Blue Dot’, so very close.

http://bulletin.accurateshoote...ive-burn-rate-chart/

As we all know, these burn rate charts are mostly general guidelines.

I saw this as well but the burn rate is at best ordinal data know one is slower or faster than another but not how much more which would be interval data. I could have easily picked up a pound of target and probably should have, oh well

March 24, 2018, 05:06 PM

markstempski

quote:
Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
quote:
I will work up a load in any event and should have gotten the IMR target

Target is supposed to be IMR's version of Bullseye, so that is a long way from Blue. You have to go through Unequal (Unique) and Red (Red Dot) to get to Blue (Blue Dot). If your application requires a slower powder, then working out some data for Blue would be better.

If I were to do what you're attempting, I'd start with the Blue Dot minimums and work up from there. If the data from Unequal vs Unique is any indicator, I bet when next years data comes out with Blue data, we'll find that the data runs very close to Blue Dot.

I have several applications for Blue Dot and got a couple pounds of it along with IMR Blue. Haven’t seen Blue dot in awhile so was full of confidence and thus silly and didn’t check nor ask the helpful proprietor. I too suspect that it will be very close to Blue dot

March 24, 2018, 06:10 PM

sourdough44

I realize you already have the powder, but what loading do you have in mind?

If known, we could all chime in with our favorite powder for the application?

March 24, 2018, 09:31 PM

markstempski

quote:
Originally posted by sourdough44:
I realize you already have the powder, but what loading do you have in mind?

If known, we could all chime in with our favorite powder for the application?

Pretty pedestrian I like Blue dot for heavier 357 magnum loads 158 grain and up
Have also used Little gun and of course 296.

And even though I have used Long shot and HS 6 in 357 sig I find the Blue Dot loads are more accurate. Haven’t had Blue dot in awhile even 4 pounds doesn’t last forever. I was told Blue is cleaner and a little less flashy than Blue dot.

March 25, 2018, 06:37 AM

sourdough44

That sounds right in the ballpark. Most of my 357 loads are in the mid range, though I do have the Win-296 around for the 180 grn hardcast.

Right now I’m still working on a supply of 30-06 for the 1953 H&R M1 Garand we picked up last Fall. I’m running a bit low on 150 grn FMJ bullets and H-4895 powder. I feel a bulk order coming. With the slightly shorter sticks, the Hodgdon 4895 meters noticeably better than the IMR 4895.

March 25, 2018, 04:04 PM

markstempski

quote:
Originally posted by sourdough44:
That sounds right in the ballpark. Most of my 357 loads are in the mid range, though I do have the Win-296 around for the 180 grn hardcast.

Right now I’m still working on a supply of 30-06 for the 1953 H&R M1 Garand we picked up last Fall. I’m running a bit low on 150 grn FMJ bullets and H-4895 powder. I feel a bulk order coming. With the slightly shorter sticks, the Hodgdon 4895 meters noticeably better than the IMR 4895.

Which sort of begs the question can one use H4895 as direct replacement for IMR 4895? I use the IMR version for M1a 167 to 175 grain projectiles. I suspect that my rifles might be happier with the 150s but have standardized on the 167 and only adjust for Lake City or other military brass.

March 25, 2018, 08:20 PM

sourdough44

No I do not try to use the H version of 4895 as a direct replacement for IMR-4895. It is right nearby on the burn rate chart and very similar, almost identical applications. The charge weights are very close.

I do a lot of cross referencing, IMR-4895 is one of the ‘standards’ with the Garand, but there are a handful. I just like to get to reliable cycling with reasonable pressures, no reason to go beyond that for casual shooting.

March 25, 2018, 11:57 PM

markstempski

quote:
Originally posted by sourdough44:
No I do not try to use the H version of 4895 as a direct replacement for IMR-4895. It is right nearby on the burn rate chart and very similar, almost identical applications. The charge weights are very close.

I do a lot of cross referencing, IMR-4895 is one of the ‘standards’ with the Garand, but there are a handful. I just like to get to reliable cycling with reasonable pressures, no reason to go beyond that for casual shooting.

I looked in the latest Hodgdon magazine reloading guide and yeah they are very close. Lots of people like Varget but I started with IMR 4064 and 4895. Varget seems to be more readily available. Not yet time to bunker Primers and powder but maybe some judicious squirreling away might be in order.