Hard primers?

[mainegrw]

I’m still not sure what happened with my loads, and haven’t had the time to load more. I have however fired three more complete boxes of factory loaded 38 Special (one box American Eagle, two boxes Speer Lawman) through my Model 10 without a single light strike in either SA or DA, so I’m officially ruling the gun out of the equation at least...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AveragEd]

I find this to be a topic that is subjected to a lot of personal opinion. For example, CCI primers being harder than others. I've used almost nothing but CCI and Remington primers and can honestly say that in over 40 years of handloading, I've had only one primer fail to ignite its shell's powder and that was a Remington 209P shotshell primer. This took place at the Grand American World Trapshooting Championships and a Remington rep took my shell for evaluation and gave me 100 primers for my trouble. A letter that came two weeks later told me that the primer's anvil was found to be tilted.

The owner of the small local gun shop I patronize will not stock Remington primers because they are "too hard." Because he only stocks the least costly brand of most products, in this case imported primers, I took that with a grain of salt because Remington primers cost more than his preferred brands.

Based upon the quantity of primers and wads that I bought each year for my handloaded trap shells, I shot about 10,000 rounds of handloads sparked by 209P primers a year for 16 years and I can't guess how many handgun and rifle primers I've used over those 40 years. If every product we use enjoyed the minuscule numbers of failures that primers do, wouldn't life be grand?

Ed

 

[TomkinsSP]

FWIW, I use the RCBS hand primer with the cast aluminum handle, and "pincers" that grip anything from .32a*p to .45a*p. It does a surpurb job of fully seating primers. Much better than press mounted versions, at least for me.

 

[Sevens]

Well...
Perhaps we can agree to call it an opinion that CCI makes hard cup, harder to ignite primers and Federal makes the most easy to ignite primers... but these are the opinions of long, LONG time and very established folks, perhaps even experts. Anyone who reads posts on a forum has learned (or will learn) to separate the wheat from the chaff. If you elect to not buy in to the above opinion... fine. Your loss. Revisit the opinion after you've done your own testing.

On the subject of primer seating, read post #18 above. I often suggest to new handloaders or anyone who is struggling to seat primers properly to take a towel, the size of a small bath towel and fold it over and cover the piece of brass that you are attempting to prime. With your safety glasses on AND the towel as an extra barrier, now you should slowly and willfully attempt to CRUSH the primer fit.

This exercise isn't to suggest that you should be damaging primers or stressing your equipment -- the exercise is to show you hands-on evidence that your equipment AND especially that your primers CAN withstand being properly seated fully, hopefully showing that many new handloaders are over-cautious... which is typically why we have these "problem" discussions.

 

[Drm50]

I had this problem once. I had a M19 that had aftermarket spring
Kit. Came scoped, the guy that had it was never interested in
DA mode. I'm not interested in scoped handguns or DA myself.
Anyway the gun " shot" lousy. After checking all the normal
things, I found that the after market spring had been thinned
causing light strike even on SA with strain screw seated. No
amount of shims helped. I put in factory main spring and had
no further problems and groups tightened up. I will also add that
I quit using CCI primers in S&Ws. They are hard and I use them
up in SAs. Now use only Win. primers when possible.

 

[dave201]

Well...
Perhaps we can agree to call it an opinion that CCI makes hard cup, harder to ignite primers and Federal makes the most easy to ignite primers... but these are the opinions of long, LONG time and very established folks, perhaps even experts. Anyone who reads posts on a forum has learned (or will learn) to separate the wheat from the chaff. If you elect to not buy in to the above opinion... fine. Your loss. Revisit the opinion after you've done your own testing.

On the subject of primer seating, read post #18 above. I often suggest to new handloaders or anyone who is struggling to seat primers properly to take a towel, the size of a small bath towel and fold it over and cover the piece of brass that you are attempting to prime. With your safety glasses on AND the towel as an extra barrier, now you should slowly and willfully attempt to CRUSH the primer fit.

This exercise isn't to suggest that you should be damaging primers or stressing your equipment -- the exercise is to show you hands-on evidence that your equipment AND especially that your primers CAN withstand being properly seated fully, hopefully showing that many new handloaders are over-cautious... which is typically why we have these "problem" discussions.

I agree. During the shortage I bought Wolf. They seated hard but did there job. I use Federal match on everything cause it's a matter of preference
I suppose if one does reloading with less than adequate equipment...Then who knows
I'm sure the people that have reloaded for awhile have had powder flakes get on the primer seater. The powder will actually dent the primer.
Dillon will seat anything, and it will be all the way in.[Below level]
There has to be some kindda answer to this dilemma of one of the easiest part of the process
Don't think we will ever figure it out

 

[TomkinsSP]

JMOpinion/Observation, the CCI primers are harder than Remingtons or Olins. During the drought I tried S&B.s., those were harder than CCIs. BUT properly seated, they all go bang just fine.

 

[DWalt]

As I have stated previously, I would love for someone to provide strong documented and quantitative scientific evidence that there is a significant difference in primer "hardness" (really "impact sensitivity") among different brands of the same primer type. So far I have seen none - just countless and worthless anecdotal tales.

 

[Kiwi cop]

I used to use Federal SRP in .38 special loads usin H4227/AR2205 for more reliable ignition in my 686. Worked well for many years but then the last batch started misfiring at least 1 time in 6.

Replaced the Wollf standard ribbed main spring and same problem so switched to SPP and Tightgroup.

With my competition .45 ACP loads I was using Winchester primers, which were a bit harder to seat than Federal with my hand primer, as I was getting better chrono results with them and was getting misfires. My coach/mentor looked at my loads and said the primers were a bit high, so I got a press mounted primer die. Now all my competition loads get hand primed and then run through the press mounted die to ensure proper seating. No more misfires.

The last batch of CCI SPP I got were misfiring in my 686, Victory 38 S&W and Tanfoglio 9mm. I have just loaded some more 9mm with the CCI primers to see how they work in my Kimber 1911. But no matter the result tense will be practice not competition loads as I’m just not willing toriska misfire on the clock.

 

[jimmyj]

I had a similar issue.
I cleaned the primer pockets before reloading the same cases and the issue disappeared

 

[Electric Head]

As I have stated previously, I would love for someone to provide strong documented and quantitative scientific evidence that there is a significant difference in primer "hardness" (really "impact sensitivity") among different brands of the same primer type. So far I have seen none - just countless and worthless anecdotal tales.

For me I do my own testing and have no need to record the results. My experiences are my results, for me, and I just shared that. If anyone feels the need to do formal testing they should! But they can do it for themselves. "Evidence" can be made up, so I tend to value it (from another source) about the same as experiences, until I verify the results myself.

 

[VNK971]

I have a 10-6 from about 1966 that had DA light strike issues from the first time I shot it. Appears to have been a PD turn-in. I tried hand seated primers, new standard main spring, etc. The final solution was a Power Custom extended hammer nose from Brownells.

 

[mainegrw]

FWIW, I use the RCBS hand primer with the cast aluminum handle, and "pincers" that grip anything from .32a*p to .45a*p. It does a surpurb job of fully seating primers. Much better than press mounted versions, at least for me.

I have long considered picking up one of these actually. I thought, if anything, that it may make the job of priming a little less tedious and time consuming, and you’re not the only person to mention that it’s a better solution than the standard press mounted solution.

As for my current primer seating situation, I took some time yesterday afternoon and loaded 150 rounds of 38 Special, and really put some muscle into seating the primers. Enough muscle in fact that I was flexing my 1.5” thick bench top. The primers now definitely seated fully. I used new reclaimed brass for these loads (the brass from the Speer Lawman ammo I’ve shot recently), and with this brass and seating method, the primers are now recessed into the back of the cartridge, rather than flush as had been the case with my previous loads in other brands of brass. I’m not sure if this is an indication that I had not been seating the primers fully before, or if I’ve deformed them from excessive pressure.

I’m going to visit the range in the next couple days, and I’ll report back what happens...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Regaj]

You don't want to crush the anvil. But you do want to stress it. The benefit of hand priming is you can feel when that happens.

Thirty-some years of handloading, a bajillion rounds - a high percentage of those using CCI primers. Never had a failure to ignite.

For years I used the cheap Lee hand priming tool. Works great. But the pot-metal mechanism will wear and eventually you have to replace it.

Nowadays I use this: Stainless Steel Priming Tool. Pricey, for sure. Even more so when you consider you're gonna have to buy their proprietary shell holders. But it works like nobody's business.

 

[scooter123]

I have a model 19-3 that was nearly unfired when I picked it up at a gun show in 2015. First trip to the range I found the reason it had seen so little use, it would not fire with any reliability in double action. Tried the old primer cup over the strain screw trick and it still wasn't reliable in double action even with the DA trigger weight shimmed to 11 lbs 8 ounces. That led to further examination that revealed a Short Hammer Nose, protrusion through the recoil shield was only about 1/32 inch. Note the Dime thickness that is standard for the older revolvers, not even close.

Good news was that a Power Custom hammer nose purchased from Brownells provided a solution. Note, this is an extended hammer nose and the length should be file fit until you see the dimple in hte primer looking normal, not the Grand Canyon. You may have a similar issue and based on my experience this hammer nose will fit revolvers made from 1972 or later. Note, it will likely work with earlier revolvers but my oldest revolver is my 1972 vintage 19-3.

PS; I will also tell you that if you ever come across a 2 1/2 inch model 19 or 66 SNAP IT UP. Holy Cow these are fun to shoot and the front sight fills the rear notch so completely that it's not that difficult to ring a 12 inch gong at 50 yards with every shot. Yeah, I was cheating a bit and shot in singe action.

 

[Sevens]

As I have stated previously, I would love for someone to provide strong documented and quantitative scientific evidence that there is a significant difference in primer "hardness" (really "impact sensitivity") among different brands of the same primer type. So far I have seen none - just countless and worthless anecdotal tales.

Bet my wallet that these "worthless anecdotal tales" are infinitely more valuable than this quoted post. ^^

I have custom revolvers built by legends that will light off a thousand Federal SP without failure (and drop HBWC in to the 10 ring) but will fail to fire 15-20% of any/all loads built with CCI-SP. Double action, custom revolvers.

Convincing you was never on the agenda for Bill Davis or Travis Strahan, the men who built my revolvers and recommended that they be fed Federal small pistol primers.

 

[AveragEd]

That's interesting and good to know. I have a Model 686-3 National Match, which was a 1 of 500 item from Bill Davis, and it has functioned perfectly with both CCI and Remington primers but if the FTF problem ever surfaces, I'll try Federal primers.

Ed

 

[Rule3]

As I have stated previously, I would love for someone to provide strong documented and quantitative scientific evidence that there is a significant difference in primer "hardness" (really "impact sensitivity") among different brands of the same primer type. So far I have seen none - just countless and worthless anecdotal tales.

It is really easy to "test" on your own. It may not be "statistically valid" For me, I do not really mind one or the other primer. Heck I even use Wolf. I have some custom guns that have problems with the Wolf.

Load up a batch of ammo with different brands of primers.

Then start adjusting the strain screw. (loosen) it up until you get fail to ignite on say CCI or Winchester, then try Federal or whatever. Record the results and see if there is a difference.

Not say there is one way or another.

 

[old&slow]

Convincing you was never on the agenda for Bill Davis or Travis Strahan, the men who built my revolvers and recommended that they be fed Federal small pistol primers.

Travis Strahan, there's a name I haven't seen or heard for quite awhile. Only had him do one gun for me, a High Standard Victor. ( probably back in the late 70's or early 80's )

One of the best triggers I ever had.
Went totally stupid one time and traded it for a Gold Cup.

 

[DWalt]

It is really easy to "test" on your own. It may not be "statistically valid" For me, I do not really mind one or the other primer. Heck I even use Wolf. I have some custom guns that have problems with the Wolf.

Load up a batch of ammo with different brands of primers.

Then start adjusting the strain screw. (loosen) it up until you get fail to ignite on say CCI or Winchester, then try Federal or whatever. Record the results and see if there is a difference.

Not say there is one way or another.

There is nothing reliable, controllable, or quantitative about such a test, and it would only produce more anecdotal tales. And that any one would believe why Bill Davis or Travis Strahan (I suppose they are gunsmiths) would have even the the slightest engineering and scientific credentials to professionally address primer sensitivity measurement is beyond my understanding.

In any event, unless some of the primer manufacturers ever see fit to publish quantitative data established under laboratory conditions by using standard test methods and procedures to compare primer sensitivities of different types and brands, it will remain pointless to discuss the issue. Sort of like the old theological adage about arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Everyone has an opinion but no one has any facts.