IMR 4350 / .260

[KeithR41]

I found loading data for 142 SMK and IMR 4350 in a new loading book, although I don't remember which one it was. Maybe Lyman? Anyway, after checking the depot, I only found one load with IMR. All the rest are with H4350. Any reason?

Keith

 

[BLAWTON]

Re: IMR 4350 / .260

IMR i believe is just the slightest bit faster... As long as you start at least 5% less you shouldn't have any problems.

 

[KeithR41]

Re: IMR 4350 / .260

The book listed 39.5 starting and 44 max

 

[former naval person]

Re: IMR 4350 / .260

Since Hodgson now owns IMR there probably won't be much difference. Use either and start 2 grains below max and work up. JMHO

 

[E.Shell]

Re: IMR 4350 / .260

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: former naval person</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Since Hodgson now owns IMR there probably won't be much difference. Use either and start 2 grains below max and work up. JMHO </div></div>
As NotAGuru notes, the IMR type is a bit faster. Hodgdon has not changed any formulations and IMR-4350 is still different than H-4350.

I have excellent results with H-4350 in my .260.