Let's talk primers
 

I have been using the blue box Federal 210's. I still have a few hundred of them. I also had one box of Federal 210M's. I had 30 empty cases to load up so I did 15 in 210's and 15 in 210M's. Will I notice any difference?

Has anyone noticed much of a difference going from Federal to CCI, or something else? More consistent velocity? Different powder charge? Consistently better group sizes?

Let's talk primers
 

Just a couple of weeks ago I fired the exact same loads through my chrony to check velocity difference between Winchester and CCI primers as I have always used Winchester.
There was an average of 12.5 fps more velocity from the Winchester but my groups tightened up with the CCI. I have now switched to CCI. This may not be the same for your rifle and caliber but it was an interesting test for my rifle.

Lakelander 375
22" Heavy barrel 6.5x55
140 gr Nosler Custom Competition
39 gr. IMR 4350
OAL 3.11"

Win. Primers 2477 fps
CCI primers 2464.5 fps

A lot depends on the powder you're using at any particular temperature.
For the most part I find that with powder charges <60-65 gr, the CCI 200 ignition works well with most powders, including ball powder . Much over 65 gr and at lower temps( below freezing) I switch to 250's. I've never had an issue with any CCI primer and use them exclusively.

They are all different. I cannot find it right now, but there is a site that shows the crosponding flashes of all primers. I typically build my loads off of rem 9.5 and then find what primer the load likes best. I have expanded or reduced 5 shot groups by up to 3/8ths of an inch with different primers

Primers can make a huge difference in accuracy. My custom 7LRM went from 1-1/2” groups with fed 215’s to less than 1/2” with Rem 9.5. Same with my 300wm, I could not get a decent group with fed 215’s. As soon as I switched to Rem 9.5 they tightened right up.

I totally agree that primers can make a difference. The same difference,with almost any cartridge, can be made with a powder change, with load density or with COAL. Change any one and the results will differ... some by a lot and others not so much. Thats why I found it best to stay with one brand of primer, then search for the best powder and load density etc to work with that primer, cartridge and bullet weight. Really, it's six of one and a half dozen of the other but I strongly feel there is only one "magic" combination of all components for any particular rifle,cartridge and bulletweight. The brand of primer I found to make the least difference of all, but that's just me.

I agree with most of your post but I did find primers make an accuracy difference in small cases eg: .204 or smaller from inch groups to 3/8" but like others have stated in most larger cartridges with bigger powder charges they are the last thing I change. CCI has always treated me well.

I rarely find it necessary to change primers, I typically use federal 215s in the large capacity magnums, 210s in the medium capacity cartridges, and 205s for small rifle primers. I do switch to Remington for the very small capacity cases like the Hornets. I use the M series primers when I can find them, but in all honesty, I don't see much difference with the match primers.

I use CCI BR in all non magnum calibers and Winchester Magnum primers in a magnum calibers WSMs and regular ones.
I tried others before but settled on those and it works for me pretty good.

S12

Primers can make a difference in a very small percentage of rifles.

Care to share some testing with that? Velocities, ES, SD, etc? I'm looking for the technical data to back up the claims.

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/...232#5821030232

I found this interesting.
I hope the link and pics work even if you are not a member.

You are not getting it from me. But in my experience loading for 100’s of rifles very seldom do I find a great reason to switch primers.

If you are concerned enough, start doing your own data collection.

I am going to.be starting to do just that, collecting my own data. I said that in the very first post.

There has already been good reason enough given here in this thread already to make amguybwantnto experiment. Is a 6fps gain or drop enough to switch primers? Probably not for most. But shrinking your SD numbers might well be a good reason to, depending on what it is you are looking for. And tracking that data, that you are choosing not to share and only give opinion, is what helps with that.

Sorry Chuck, I am not wanting to start an argument here in this thread, I wanted facts, not opinion, that can be backed up by people doing exactly what I am going to be doing.

Very interesting read. Thank you

I use CCI 250 in all hunting loads using 65 grains or less of powder. All cartridges that use more than 65 grains get Fed 215 (developed specifically for Weatherby for use in the 378 and 460 mags) or Winchester mag primers because I have had issues with CCI 250s not igniting large loads (Partial ignition causing clumping and part burn of the powder but not enough to set it off) or giving click booms (delayed ignition by enough you can hear the primer go off then the main charge). I have tried a few different batches of CCI and it is a consistent pattern, especially as it gets colder out.

That said, just using the hottest primer is not always the best answer either. Primers will make a very large difference in accuracy in some loads. The 22 Hornet with SR primers shoots 2" but with Fed small pistol it will shoot 1/2'. This is however not universal as I have seen primer changes make virtually no difference in accuracy in the same load.

Only way to know for sure is to develop a good shooting load and then try switching just the primers and nothing else, just like the excellent test Deerhunter posted.

My experience as well, other than with the very small cases, I generally have no reason to try other primers.

No one here will have any clue (including Saeed) what a change in primer will do for loads in your rifle. We can’t help you with that. The only way to really know is to try it.

Tornets.
 

The .22 hornet, .17 hornet and .17 fireball are the only cases, were I found either an accuracy, or speed difference between, primers,
Same as poster above, I found a big difference, between pistol, and rifle primers, in the .22 hornet, and between Remington and 6.5 and 7.5, CCI 400 in the .17 Hornet

It won't necessarily show on 100/200 meter paper, but I've seen a primer switch cut ES/SD by 70% or more, which is definitely noticeable the further out you get.

That said, it's likely that similar improvement could have been realized by tweaking charge weights.

If you happen to find a particular Federal primer that works significantly better,buy a bunch and stock up.
Federal will be changing to their new Catalyst primers over the next few years.
Another opportunity to test and collect more data.

I agree . For my .20 Tac I switch to CCI BR 4. I have never had a hint of an issue with CCI primers. Thats not to say another brand wouldn't do slightly better with any particular load combination, but for simplicity sake I choose to stay with CCI for all cartridges.

I've seen a difference in smaller cartridges in switching brands occasionally. I have found that for me, say in the Bee and the 223 and the 32-30 an 32-40, Remington 6-1/2 seemed to work out the best, for me. For whatever reason, the milder primer tightened things up. The 40-50gr cartridges seem to not care too much between CCI200 and F210, unless using ball powders which seem to respond better with 250's and 215's. I use 215's or 250's in anything 55gr and up, or a large cartridge, reduced load like the 450/400. And I too have had weird issue with 250's not igniting a charge properly, where the 215 worked without issues,with faster burning powders, like AA5744.

Yes, I've seen a difference. I only load small caliber/varmint stuff these days but I remember load testing and running out of CCI BR4 primers. I picked-up some CCI 400 primers reluctantly, loaded only a few..and found the results changed a bit. I don't remember it being an accuracy change so much, rather, a POI change. I stopped using them, and just tried harder to find BR4s...and stocked-up when I did.

Anecdotal...but that's my experience.

Want to be successful fishing, go to the spots others are catching fish and use the same lures. Simple. The same principle applies to primers. So, if you google the equipment lists of top ranked competition shooters and find that most of them are using the Federal “M” (Match) series or the CCI - BR (bench rest) series ... you can have confidence those are producing the most consistent results.
I use CCI-BR series and have no reason to doubt their consistency. Yes, they are more expensive than some of the more commonly used primers, but given the savings realized by not chasing unexplained fliers which can use up the more expensive components (bullets/powder)...I consider them the most cost efficient alternative.

A good friend of mines father is a chemical engineer (rocket scientist) for CCI. He shoots standard CCI primers.

But I agree. Federal and CCI are all I shoot anymore.

Friend of mine swears by CCI BR primers..in 99.9% of my big game rifles I never noticed a difference....IN my target guns they are all I use.

I have a five gallon pail in the corner of my reloading room. Whenever I’ve found primers on sale I just buy them and dump them in there - doesn’t matter what kind - Winchester, Federal, whatever... When I’m ready to prime some cases I just give that pail a good shake and grab a handful of primers and stuff them in. Good to go.

If your point is that you don't load or shoot tight enough to ever see a difference in primers, nor are you worried about pressure excursions, then you are making a point others may agree with. I trust however the description of the bucket is hyperbole for the sake of illustration. If not, then your method of storing primers leaves a great deal to be desired. They are packed in their individually separated holes within their containers for a very good reason. Throwing a few thousand in a bucket is a REALLY BAD idea. Individually primers are not very dangerous, a few thousand going up at once would be another matter entirely.

I mean. No.200 thus far. I did just have two duds with them through last weekend with my No.4.