BR-2 Primers

[Kmccord]

I have always used CCI Primers in all my loading, with a few Federal Primers when I could not find CCI, my question on this thread, is there a big difference between using BR-2 Primers versus regular LR? Those that have used both, did you see a difference in ES or group size? I am curious if the price difference is worth it.

 

[VinceMule]

BR-2 and 200s are the same, the BR are sorted for quality control.

 

[mfran615]

That doesn't really answer his question(s). Are the BR2s worth the price difference?

 

[VinceMule]

When a guy is chasing tiny groups for accuracy, often they spend at tad more in a lot of areas.

Honestly, I have never tested one against the other regarding the BR-2s, and admit that I should have. I shoot a lot of BR-4s that have a thicker cup than the CCI 400.

 

[waveslayer]

It has to be tested for yourself to see if it is really worth it. I always get a load and then test different primers, it has helped me to shrink down some groups.

Is it worth it? Depends, buy some and see if you think it is, for some yes, others no

 

[haisardao]

I've tried both, and for my hunting loads be seen no difference, but well that was for a single rifle/cartridge so not really scientific

 

[unclecroc]

I'm not sure there is a huge difference using a match primer. But using a match primer makes me feel warm and fuzzy.

 

[FEENIX]

I have always used CCI Primers in all my loading, with a few Federal Primers when I could not find CCI, my question on this thread, is there a big difference between using BR-2 Primers versus regular LR? Those that have used both, did you see a difference in ES or group size? I am curious if the price difference is worth it.

As with anything else, YMMV."My" primer preference is order of precedence is CCI, Fed, Winchester, and Remington. However, I have been using Remington 9 1/2Ms with excellent results, and they seem to be in abundance lately. I have been using BR-2s with excellent success since 2012. I am not aware of the current prices, but all of mine are from the early 2000s. Good luck!

 

[Winkfish]

What I have found is that testing of the various components will aid in guiding you. For example, in some calibers and rifle combinations I have had an equal or lower SD and ES with CCI-200 when compared to the BR-2. In other examples there is clear difference in the other direction. If the difference isn't there or small enough that I determine it is acceptable. Then I tend to go to the lower cost primer option if practical.

I also like to set expectations when developing a load with a combination of components. If it is for a hunting rifle that will never see a shot over 100 yards. I am willing to accept a larger ES and SD. If it is for a 1,000yd gun then my combination should be producing low single digit SD as that variance will really start to show up at distance. I am willing to pay the price for the lowest SD with my long range guns where a gun hunting from a blind at short distances, I will not see the added variance in velocity or group size.

To answer your question, yes, I have seen 100 yard group size change measurably by just switching primers and keeping all other variables the same. The tough part is having an inventory of all the various components to see what your combination and rifle likes the best.

 

[GBWS]

As with anything else, YMMV."My" primer preference is order of precedence is CCI, Fed, Winchester, and Remington. However, I have been using Remington 9 1/2Ms with excellent results, and they seem to be in abundance lately. I have been using BR-2s with excellent success since 2012. I am not aware of the current prices, but all of mine are from the early 2000s. Good luck!

Aloha Ed
Bought a case of BR 2 two months ago came out to $1,025 looked at the prices of my other boxes at home. A case back then came out to $125

 

[GBWS]

What I have found is that testing of the various components will aid in guiding you. For example, in some calibers and rifle combinations I have had an equal or lower SD and ES with CCI-200 when compared to the BR-2. In other examples there is clear difference in the other direction. If the difference isn't there or small enough that I determine it is acceptable. Then I tend to go to the lower cost primer option if practical.

I also like to set expectations when developing a load with a combination of components. If it is for a hunting rifle that will never see a shot over 100 yards. I am willing to accept a larger ES and SD. If it is for a 1,000yd gun then my combination should be producing low single digit SD as that variance will really start to show up at distance. I am willing to pay the price for the lowest SD with my long range guns where a gun hunting from a blind at short distances, I will not see the added variance in velocity or group size.

To answer your question, yes, I have seen 100 yard group size change measurably by just switching primers and keeping all other variables the same. The tough part is having an inventory of all the various components to see what your combination and rifle likes the best.

This right here!

 

[FEENIX]

Aloha Ed
Bought a case of BR 2 two months ago came out to $1,025 looked at the prices of my other boxes at home. A case back then came out to $125

Aloha, Brother Dom! I hope all is well at your end and look forward to seeing you in 2026, when I visit my niece in Pearl City.

That seems to be the going price for primers these days. There is no point in comparing prices based on what they used to be, regardless of the reason. I am just glad they are available. At the end of the day, we must pay to play.

Aloha!

Ed

 

[Phil Rizzo]

BR-2 and 200s are the same, the BR are sorted for quality control.

I've been told Federal blue-box and match are designated such because of who is working the line, QC basically. Have no idea if that's true.

 

[lancetkenyon]

I have tested the BR2 vs 200 in a couple rifles/loads.
To be honest, shooting 20 of each really hasn't shown a difference in ES or SD. I haven't shot 100 vs 100 of each to see if there are any outliers.

But, having that extra step of QA/QC is an ease on my mind. One more step to try and lessen variables is worth it to me.