interesting reading

https://www.outdoorlife.com/cartridg...y-developments

Interesting indeed!

FED primers are a staple for many of us.
I wonder how our already established loads will be affected by the new Catalyst primers?

I wonder if the combination of Bismuth Oxide and Aluminum is adequately impact-sensitive? I can think of many unanswered questions. Seems similar to the classic Thermite reaction - Iron Oxide and Aluminum. As CCI is the sister company to Federal, I wonder if CCI will also switch?
See: http://www.ipo.waw.pl/wydawnictwa/ce...l/Klapotke.pdf for a discussion of Nanoscale Thermite Reactions.

This goes back to the late 1990s, but I remember a Navy presentation at a military small arms ammunition conference I attended at NSWC-Indian Head about the Navy doing some research work on a similar composition for explosive and primer use involving nanoscale Molybdenum Oxide and Aluminum mixtures. At the time it was considered to be far too expensive to be practical. There may have been a breakthrough.

As a fan of Federal primers this is very interesting. As a reloader we are always looking for an edge in the hobby. Thanks for the link.

Time to start the hoarding

__________________
-Matt

I can't immediately see any downside to the change, unless it results in significantly higher primer costs. And that has not been discussed.

The likely chemical reaction would result in a "cloud" of highly energetic molten bismuth to ignite the propellant charge, possibly somewhat more energetic than lead styphnate and DDNP (lead-free) formulations. I'd suspect that the Catalyst's performance characteristics have already been thoroughly determined by Federal. My major concerns would be shelf life and sensitivity characteristics at low temperatures. DDNP is a completely satisfactory impact-sensitive material for lead-free primer compositions, aside from the fact that ignition becomes unreliable at temperatures below about -20 deg. F. That is why the U. S. Army was not interested. I was in charge of developing lead-free training ammunition for the USAF, and went with DDNP primers. For training purposes, DDNP primers are completely satisfactory and have an indefinite shelf life.

And I thought that a primer was a simple little component that ought to be taken for granted!I now understand better how it works,what is its job and how the engineers think so as to make it work better.
The world of ballistics is indeed a wonderfull world!

Maybe people hoarded corrosive primers when the non corrosive type came out. If they can get the lead out, and still make a great primer. I'm all for it. I just hope that Federal really tests these before they hit the market. And sell them as an alternative at first rather than a substitute. That way if it flops they won't have to reintroduce the lead product, just stop making the new ones.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

I'm more concerned that it does work than how it works.

There is one more advantage to Bismuth in a lead-free primer - it does supply lubricity in the bore, as does lead in lead styphnate. Sort of a big deal for jacketed bullets at high velocity as it reduces bore wear. DDNP primers do not provide any lubrication, and generally smokeless powders for use with them contain some incorporated Bismuth for that purpose.

BTW, DDNP = Diazodinitrophenol. It has been around for a long time, and was even used in some WWII primers.

I was just going to ask what happens to the bismuth but you beat me to it!
Stuff like "what does it do to the cartridge and bore?"
Thanks.
Lead in organic compounds and in the air is one of my biggest shooting phobias and the reason
I wear surgical gloves when cleaning guns and working with primers in any way.
That's so much of a habit now I probably won't give it up but it'll be nice to know that
lead poisoning isn't a big threat anymore, at least from the primers.
I get my blood lead level tested every few years and it's normal or even below so that reinforces my glove habit.
(Or maybe I don't shoot enough).

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

Here is hoping that the new improved primer comes out in a ..................
new, improved smaller box !!

Primer changes were put forth in the 90s but proved to have shorter shelf life. Hopefully the new "improved" primer has at least a 20y shelf life. Many of us stock up, a 5yr reserve is prudent. So if this goes more public, I would expe t a run on the current priners in stock.

__________________
NRA Cert. Inst. IDPA CSO

I doubt that a changeover to Catalyst primers on Federal's part will be copied by Remington, Winchester, or the foreign brands anytime soon. CCI could, as CCI and Federal are both Alliant companies. I tried to find a Federal patent on the Catalyst, didn't find any, maybe I was using the wrong words to search. I think lead styphnate primers will be around a very long time, barring future legislative action banning them for safety and health reasons. Example - I just saw that EPA has just banned paint strippers containing methylene chloride. And almost all paint strippers now contain it.

Actually very few paint removers contain methyl chloride anymore

Just like .22 ammo! Let's get those nutty, unfounded conspiracy theories started!

Attached Images

1extra.jpg (36.9 KB, 6 views)

But it's not so far fetched.

The "one year shelf life" rumor started the big Clinton primer shortage in 93 or 94. That was a serious PITA for us volume reloaders. I spent every Saturday driving from gunshop to gunshop to try and scrounge 100 primers here and a 100 primers there. That's what taught me about stocking up on components, and is why I've been sitting pretty through all the Obama shortage drama.

Exactly. After the bj & chief, my reserve went to 5k per size. Then pre Trump, it went to 10k reserve per size. Right now I shoot 9-10k rds a year, so I should probabley increase that a bit.

__________________
NRA Cert. Inst. IDPA CSO

Coincidentally, I was re checking my Lee manual on Winchester small pistol primers last week having found a carton in my storage, and was checking whether they were recommended for use in the Lee Auto Prime tool. I noticed again that Federal primers pistol or rifle were forbidden for use in the tool. Wonder if that is another reason for the change.

Gee, I guess it's a miracle the ammo I loaded 20+ years ago still works, (but it does). My main concern would be the bullet impact on long range rifle loads such as my 22-250 Prairie Dog loads. I'd hate to have to re-develop my loads all over.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

That is going to put the "I use only Federal primers" crowd into a real funk.....

Randy