Lets Talk Primers

There are no right or wrong answers here, but all comments are welcome. I am sure that we all have our own thoughts on the matter and that is what I am after. - Firecat

Firecat,
Actually, there are right and wrong answers here, they just don't come down to brand preference or opinion. Unfortunately, there's no SINGLE "right" answer.

The answer is, yes, primers can (and usually do) make a significant difference in long-range accuracy. While one brand may perform a bit better than others in a given rifle, it doesn't end there; there's differences between lots from the same manufacturer as well. In other words, this lot number of CCI BR-4s will perform better than that lot of CCI BR-4s. All this comes down to a matter of of testing, and there's really no way around that. All this primer selection is fairly well known among Long Range competitive shooters, and we tend to devote a fair amount of energy to it as a result. Most hunters, at least in my observation, tend to be a bit less concerned about primers. Good to see the topic getting some attention. As Sam Wilson once said, "you don't 'know' what you 'think'; you only 'know' what you MEASURE!" Performance and accuracy can be measured with regards to primers, and it's time well spent.

Kevin Thomas
Lapua USA
 
Kevin, I appreciate your comments a great deal. Are there any articles that you are aware of on the topic of primers? I would agree with you that hunters do not seem to be as concerned generally. At least this is my experience having talked to many reloaders who mainly do so for hunting. I am always interested in how things work and finding a better way if one is available. Have you ever noticed any trends when testing different primers that you would think of value to someone else?

For those of you using Federal primers. Do you prefer the regular 210's and 215's or do you prefer the match 210's and 215's? Why?
 
For those of you using Federal primers. Do you prefer the regular 210's and 215's or do you prefer the match 210's and 215's? Why?

I haven't really shot enough of the 210M's yet to really get a feel for which is better or if there is really a difference. I think I noticed a bit of a group size difference, but not enough to really draw a conclusion yet.

Tank
 
What do you all think about using Mag, 215's and the like, primers when using slow burning powders like Retumbo in 06 size cases?

A good example is the 6.5-06 or 6.5-06AI. I've read where alot of guys are using Retumbo in these when loading the 140gr bullets. Are Mag. primers necessary with this combo or would 210's be a better choice????

I use std primers in my 6.5 Sherman with retumbo and get great accuracy and velocity. The reason you get higher velocities with magnum primers is simply because you are raising pressures just as you would by adding more powder.In my opinion, the only good reason to use a magnum primer in an '06 sized case is if during testing of both, you find the magnum gives better accuracy overall. Simply changing the primer is not a FAIR evaluation because of the increased pressure i.e. (increasing the load by 1 gr. of powder might accomplish the same thing. My experience........Rich
 
Firecat,
Some of the more extensive tests that I've seen done on this topic have been posted over on 6mmBR.com, since they're more competition oriented. German Salazar has done some and written them up beautifully, as he usually does. Some years back, there was also a series of tests done by Bob Jensen (Jensen's Custom ammo; he loaded the ammo for the '92 Palma Matches fired at Raton that year) using a series of photos (essentially, spark photography) of primers detonating against a grid paper backdrop. This allowed you to actually see/measure the varying degrees of brisance between various primers, and the difference is tremendous. I recall that he also chambered up a centerfire rifle action in the format of what became a very high dollar BB gun; a case modified to be loaded with a standard .177" steel BB, with a very short "barrel" that allowed him to chronograph the BBs with the primers being the only variable. Very interesting results in terms of SDs and ESs denoting the consistency of each of the various makes of primers.

That said, I should caution, primers change. Manufacturers make adjustments to their compounds, their cup thicknesses, anvil designs, etc.. These tests should give you some inkling of just how much difference there is between the various makes, but I wouldn't assume that the primers today are exactly the same as what the results that these tests show. As a general rule, you want a primer that's capable of giving complete ignition, and no more. The less violence or shattering effect (brisance) that a primer generates, the better it is for accuracy. Balancing that, the primer has to be capable of reliably igniting that powder charge, or we get hangfires, poor accuracy and other annoyances. The 215s are probably the most violent primers out there, but for a very large case stuffed with a big dose of slow burning powder, they're still the go-to choice for priming. I just wouldn't use them for a 308 Match gun, since they'd be out of place there. Regardless of the combination we're talking about though, it pays to do some work to isolate a good primer/load combination. It may not make the slightest bit of difference at 200 yards, but it certainly will at five times that distance.

As far as the Fed 210s and 215s, I use both, but as I said, they both have their place. Ditto for most others. One other thing I'd stress here is, don't get too married to a single primer. Some years back, most of us Service Rifle shooters were using the same make of primer, and all of us were quite satisfied. Then we all suddenly started having major pressure problems, or pressure signs, anyway. No other changes in the loads, but we all suddenly started blowing primers. Pressure testing showed that our loads were still within the boundries, so the change was in the primer itself. Turns out the manufacturer decided to increase sensitivity of their primers (which none of us had problems with!), by thinning the cup ever so slightly. The result was a major problem for us, and this community left them in droves. Today, they're now a very minor player in this particular competitive community, and you rarely see them being used these days by Service Rifle shooters. My point is, things change, and you should never take these things for granted.
 
Firecat,
Some of the more extensive tests that I've seen done on this topic have been posted over on 6mmBR.com, since they're more competition oriented. German Salazar has done some and written them up beautifully, as he usually does. Some years back, there was also a series of tests done by Bob Jensen (Jensen's Custom ammo; he loaded the ammo for the '92 Palma Matches fired at Raton that year) using a series of photos (essentially, spark photography) of primers detonating against a grid paper backdrop. This allowed you to actually see/measure the varying degrees of brisance between various primers, and the difference is tremendous. I recall that he also chambered up a centerfire rifle action in the format of what became a very high dollar BB gun; a case modified to be loaded with a standard .177" steel BB, with a very short "barrel" that allowed him to chronograph the BBs with the primers being the only variable. Very interesting results in terms of SDs and ESs denoting the consistency of each of the various makes of primers.

That said, I should caution, primers change. Manufacturers make adjustments to their compounds, their cup thicknesses, anvil designs, etc.. These tests should give you some inkling of just how much difference there is between the various makes, but I wouldn't assume that the primers today are exactly the same as what the results that these tests show. As a general rule, you want a primer that's capable of giving complete ignition, and no more. The less violence or shattering effect (brisance) that a primer generates, the better it is for accuracy. Balancing that, the primer has to be capable of reliably igniting that powder charge, or we get hangfires, poor accuracy and other annoyances. The 215s are probably the most violent primers out there, but for a very large case stuffed with a big dose of slow burning powder, they're still the go-to choice for priming. I just wouldn't use them for a 308 Match gun, since they'd be out of place there. Regardless of the combination we're talking about though, it pays to do some work to isolate a good primer/load combination. It may not make the slightest bit of difference at 200 yards, but it certainly will at five times that distance.

As far as the Fed 210s and 215s, I use both, but as I said, they both have their place. Ditto for most others. One other thing I'd stress here is, don't get too married to a single primer. Some years back, most of us Service Rifle shooters were using the same make of primer, and all of us were quite satisfied. Then we all suddenly started having major pressure problems, or pressure signs, anyway. No other changes in the loads, but we all suddenly started blowing primers. Pressure testing showed that our loads were still within the boundries, so the change was in the primer itself. Turns out the manufacturer decided to increase sensitivity of their primers (which none of us had problems with!), by thinning the cup ever so slightly. The result was a major problem for us, and this community left them in droves. Today, they're now a very minor player in this particular competitive community, and you rarely see them being used these days by Service Rifle shooters. My point is, things change, and you should never take these things for granted.

Great post Kevin! What an innovative idea with the BB gun!.....Rich
 
Kevin, that is an excellent write up. I will check over at 6mmbr.com. There may be quite a few on this site that would benefit from similar technical articles. I being one of them. Would you be willing to put something together for this website with Len's supervision/approval of course?
 
I worked at Jensen's Custom Ammunition in Tucson in the early 90s during summers. It's where I got my start on loading, and more in depth ammo, shooting, etc.

Regarding primers, I started out with WLR and WLRM and have always been able to find a suitable load for hunting with them, even to this day. However, if I recall correctly, we got quite a few cases of Fed primers in one summer so I tried them as well. During my early years, I never could tell any difference. Then someone who was a regular customer told me he ONLY used the match grade primers from Federal, so I took his advice and pretty much bought a case of those for every brick of Winchesters.

Truth be told, since I loaded for my brother, I would use the 210M and 215M for me and the Wins for him. He never knew any different and he likely wouldn't care anyway.

Then in the late 90s I had some gun store owner talk to me about primers and he went on and on about how "consistent" the Remington primers were and why he liked them so much. Turns out that's all he sold so I felt hoodwinked when I bought some for large rifle and some for my 300 WM. The whole batch was a bunch of duds. I got maybe one fire for every 5 misfires. He wouldn't give me my money back so I had to send them to Remington and they gave me new ones that I sold. I will never even try Rem primers again.

So, since I began reloading, I've used more 210M and 215M than all others combined. Looking over my shoulder, I have 25,000 stacked by my gunsafe and this 75% of my total. I've been very fortunate to have a gunstore locally who gets all types of Fed primers on a regular basis.

I will use 210 and 215 as well as I have about 5000 each on hand but they will be used in the event I can't use match primers. In fact, I have way too many! I'm a hoarder and admit it. I could easily part with 20,000 primers and never miss them.
 
Kevin, that is an excellent write up. I will check over at 6mmbr.com. There may be quite a few on this site that would benefit from similar technical articles. I being one of them. Would you be willing to put something together for this website with Len's supervision/approval of course?

Don't know quite what I might contribute, but sure, I'm always up for stuff like this. And thank you for the kind words, too!
 
During the component shortages I thought my world was comeing to an end. I started useing what I could get. My world got bigger and possibly better. Once you switch you may never go back. Federal lost me as a customer, I will never be brand dependent again. In a nut shell, if its safe and works well for you, put any dog gone primer in that hole you want to, proof is in the pudding not in the size or brand of eggs you make it with. Did I mention safety. Powders, temperatures, bullet weight, seating depth, case capacity and all that stuff.
 
During the component shortages I thought my world was comeing to an end. I started useing what I could get. My world got bigger and possibly better. Once you switch you may never go back. Federal lost me as a customer, I will never be brand dependent again. In a nut shell, if its safe and works well for you, put any dog gone primer in that hole you want to, proof is in the pudding not in the size or brand of eggs you make it with. Did I mention safety. Powders, temperatures, bullet weight, seating depth, case capacity and all that stuff.


Amen to that one! I started using Wolf primers because they were readily available and work quite well.

Tank
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts

Top