Took the opportunity to shoot across the screens this morning while I still could. Thunderstoms arriving in about an hour.

Velocity with 40 grs. of IMR-4895 was not as high as I expected....by quite a bit. It averaged barely over 1800 fps. I ended up at 44 grains in one grain increments, skipping 41 grs., to get an average of 1971 fps. Accuracy held good throughout, better than I expected after the 41 gr. performance.

Then I broke out the IMR-4064. I suspected it would shoot as accurately as the 4895 but got a surprise. A 9 round composite group was less than 1 inch at 50 yards with three different powder charges of 43, 44 and 45 grs. Surprisingly to me the velocity with 45 grs. averaged identical to the 4895 final load, 1971 fps. Pressure signs were fine throughout, which I imagine most of you suspect. I didn't make any head expansion comparisons but bolt lift, extraction and primer condition make one thing there's room for more 4895. With the cases I'm using there's only room for about 1 more grain of IMR-4064 before having a compressed load. With both powders the rifle would shoot the first two very, very close and nearly in the same hole with 4064, then put the third round slightly out of the group. Not much but it was evident and amazingly consistent which is why I'm not blaming me....yet. I suspect the recoil lug and/or the screw that goes through the bottom, middle of the forearm and into a boss on the barrel. I haven't done any of the things Iowa_303 told me to do but they are on the list for next.

From the data I've seen and what Iowa sent me it appears this rifle has a slow barrel or perhaps differences in powder lots...or something I'm ignorant of.

I also put my little Jeffrey Rook in 25-10 across the screens while I had them set up. Laughable is the word that comes to mind. 112 fps difference from hi to low with a load of 9 grs. of IMR-4227 and a 75 gr. bullet. The 9.3 shot the pants off the Rook but there's a world of difference in bore condition.