What factory .38 special use the hardest primers?

[Jessie]

I put a Wilson combat spring kit in my 442.
With the new Pachmayr compacs it's like a new and better snubby.
I want to shoot some known hard primer rounds and fully test it out before I carry it.
Thanks!

[Golddollar]

Probably CCI Blazer, because I've always heard talk about CCI primers in handloads being too hard for PPC guns to set off.

[Rastoff]

Just use the rounds you intend to carry. If it works with those, who cares about anything else?

I'm not convinced that "hard" primers really exist. I'm sure that some might be harder than others, that's the nature of materials, but not to an extent that it significantly impacts the function of a gun.

I hear people complain about them all the time. Especially in the shotgun universe. Yet, it's always one or two rounds that's an issue, never the whole case.

[Jessie]

One or two rounds at the wrong time is a problem.
I would feel much better knowing that it will ignite the worst as well as any other round I'd use.
Maybe it is an old wives tale, I don't know?
It will probably be asked ...why did you change the springs?
I did it because the factory trigger was terrible. Click Clunk Bang.
That's gone now and I just want to be sure it's reliable.

[susieqz]

hard primers exist, at least in rim fire.
bot a case of aguila, my light springs would seldom ignite them.
i tested all 10 bricks.
my other brands functioned fine.
i had to use factory springs with aguila.
hard primers.

[WR Moore]

I always kind of snickered at the idea of "hard" primers. Then last fall I was building a project revolver and ran myself out of WW & Federal primers and had to use CCI 500s. They needed 8-10 oz more spring tension for reliable ignition in long shooting sessions (50+ rounds). A trial batch of 9mm with the same primers run through a stock semi had no issues.

Now, admittedly part of it might have been finger fatigue, but the issue didn't exist with the other brands of primers.

The question is, since the same outfit owns CCI, Federal and Speer, what primers are in what ammo? One sort of expects Federal in Federal but CCI & Speer?

Rastoff's got the right approach, see if your favorite carry ammo is reliable. But, shoot some long strings. After some exercise springs will let down slightly. FWIW, the long term practice with J frames has been to stick to stock hammer springs. They should reliably produce 50+ oz of hammer tension.

[rockquarry]

If you're serious about this, try several ammos. Guns that are mechanically unmolested should fire any appropriate ammo with 100% reliability.

[Rastoff]

Is it hard primers or weak springs?

I've been doing some practice with my revolver. I didn't like the weight of the double action trigger pull so, I put in a different hammer spring. Then I did some shooting and had a couple light strikes; never had those before. So, I installed a slightly heavier spring, but still lighter than stock. No more light strikes.

Unless you're reloading, just get the ammo you want to carry and go shoot. My standard is 500 rounds without a malfunction or I won't carry it. 500 rounds is enough to validate that particular round to the 95% confidence level. Nothing will ever be 100% because something can always fail.

[WR Moore]

Rastoff, you raise a valid point. OTOH, there can be variations in the material used in primer cups (and bullet cores) that aren't exactly the ideal choice.

Every manufacturer runs into the situation where the available supply of right stuff/ideal stuff (RS/IS) material for the purpose isn't enough to supply needs. Now if the manufacturer is a quality first outfit, the first thing done in this situation is to fire whoever is in charge of inventory/production scheduling.

What most outfits do in that situation is get as much RS/IS material as possible and using material specifications (there's probably an app for this now), find something that's pretty darn close (PDC). The real issue comes in when PDC is also short and they have to go to close enough for government work choices. If the bean counters have anything to do with procurement (and they do), they'll always be on the look out for the folks who sing the "Just as Good as ____________, but Cheaper" song. Sometimes it works, sometimes the results are less than ideal.

The situation gets more complicated if the manufacturer also provides widgets for military application that might have slightly different specs than the same widget made for civilian markets. There it might make sense to buy materials that meet the mil-spec needs and let the other folks just deal with it. Then there's the case when the stock room personnel send the wrong stuff to the production line.

You do have the right answer though, you don't necessarily need the biggest hammer on the rack to whack a primer. You do need one heavy enough to do the job under all of your conditions.

[DWalt]

I really hate to make any more comments on this extremely tired topic which comes up far too often. First it seems like "Hard" regarding primers is being used as a synonym for "less impact sensitive." If so, why not just say it? Second, I have never seen any reliable documented laboratory primer sensitivity data (not the same as anecdotal stories from shooters) establishing that there are any significant sensitivity differences among various primers of the same type from different manufacturers. And I don't think anyone else has either. Until such data emerges, all opinions concerning primer sensitivity are meaningless guesswork.

[BC38]

Originally Posted by DWalt

I really hate to make any more comments on this extremely tired topic which comes up far too often. First it seems like "Hard" regarding primers is being used as a synonym for "less impact sensitive." If so, why not just say it?

Maybe because it is easier to type one 4 character word than to type four words totaling 21 characters (including spaces)? Especially since EVERYONE knows exactly what people mean when they say "hard" primers - including you apparently.

Originally Posted by DWalt

Second, I have never seen any reliable documented laboratory primer sensitivity data (not the same as anecdotal stories from shooters) establishing that there are any significant sensitivity differences among various primers of the same type from different manufacturers. And I don't think anyone else has either. Until such data emerges, all opinions concerning primer sensitivity are meaningless guesswork.

There may not be any documentation from accredited labs that you are willing to accept, but there has been plenty of testing done by regular folks (reloaders) that substantiates that some primers are LESS IMPACT SENSITIVE than others.

One other thing that would certainly seem to substantiate it (IMO) is packaging. A brick of Federal brand primers is the size of a quart Mason jar, whereas a brick of CCI primers will fit into a small soup can. From what I've read (from multiple sources that I consider credible) the larger packaging was necessary in order for Federal primers to meet the DOT packaging requirements for safety - precisely because they are MORE impact sensitive.

For my money I don't need to see a scientific study to believe that some brands of primers take a HARDER impact to ignite than some others. The experience of a couple of generations of competitive shooters who have lightened their actions and found that Federal primers are the only ones that they could count on to reliably ignite with the weakened power springs is convincing enough evidence for me.

But maybe I'm just more gullible.

[nachogrande]

"LIGHT HAMMER STRIKES" equaled primers not seated deep enough, OR too much monkeying around with the hammer/springs. IMO many alterations come with a cost.

[BC38]

Originally Posted by nachogrande

"LIGHT HAMMER STRIKES" equaled primers not seated deep enough, OR too much monkeying around with the hammer/springs. IMO many alterations come with a cost.

Yeppers, and the latter is exactly what I was referring to.

Competitive shooters have been known to lighten the mainsprings of their comp guns to the point that they HAVE to use Federal primers in order to get reliable ignition. This phenomenon has been documented by numerous people with numerous guns. In these highly modified guns CCI or other primers known to be "harder" have proven unreliable, while the Federal primers ignite every time.

Proof enough for me. If it were one or two anecdotal incidents I would be more skeptical, but having read the same experience related by half a dozen or more competitive shooters/reloaders, I have to conclude that it isn't just some kind of conspiracy to discredit other primer manufacturers products.

BTW, I don't modify my guns that way. I'm not a competitive shooter or even a good enough marksman for it to make a difference to lighten the trigger pull to be as light as possible. I'm more interested in 100% reliability than the lightest possible trigger pull.

[Loyaljeeper]

I have a Colt that would occasionally have a weak primer strike. The only ammo that was 100% was Speer Gold Dots and probably with a 100/100 record. Winchester was probably the worst with a weak strike about 1 out of every 12. I also experienced some Federals that were about 1 out of ever 20.