Primer question...

[HumphreyDaBear]

I know the “read credible lost data” rule is there for a reason, but... I’ve looked on powder manufacturers sites and referenced my Lee loader manual on this question. However, I still have a question on proper size for primers, and could use recommendations from experienced loaders.

I have experience loading .38 Spcls., .357 magnums and 45ACP’s. But I’ve recently acquired dies for .44 magnums. I also have numerous powders for different loads, as well as numerous types of primers. So I am not new to loading, but...

On the load dart charts I’ve noticed the primer call out for .44 magnum Is large pistol primers. However, my primary powders will be H110 & Enforcer. Will large pistol primers be sufficient for both of these powders(especially H110), or would it be more prudent to use large pistol magnum primers. And is there a specific burn rate that would dictate which primer to use for the different powders. I believe the load data said True Blue is also a viable powder but will need to review the charts for verification. If there is a formula for burn rate/primer type that would be nice to know,

Thank you for your opinion in advance.

 

[JAYDAWG]

Will large pistol primers be sufficient for both of these powders(especially H110), or would it be more prudent to use large pistol magnum primers.

I use standard large pistol primers with H110 for my 44mag loads and they work flawlessly.

A few years back when primers were hard to find, I even used Rifle primers (small & large) in my hand gun loads, BUT only for revolvers. The striker fired semi auto's 9mm's didn't always ignite the thicker Rifle primers.......revolvers no problem.

Cheers,
JaydaWg

 

[Pál_K]

For .44 magnum, I've used CCI 300 large pistol (not magnum) primers with AA #9 powder. I've used them for 35+ years, no issues whatsoever.

If I were to use the magnum primers, I'd reduce my load a bit.

 

[contender]

Welcome to the Forum!

I always preach that when reloading,, follow the info in the manuals to closely duplicate their tested reports.

That said,, any deviation from published & tested data,, always start at the beginning loads & work up.

But the burn rates for primers isn't published because they give different results when combined with different powders. Add in the bullet seating depth, the amount of crimp, & other factors,, all sorts of variables pop up!

I have used primers that say; "Large Pistol," "Large Pistol Magnum," and "Winchester Large Pistol" that say they are for both.
So,, yes,, you can use the your primers & start low & work up.

If you have a Chronograph,, that would be a good assistant for real data.

 

[GasGuzzler]

Gall Lee ... the advice to follow manuals isn't dumb, the manuals ARE dumb because they all have different advice so don't listen to "follow the manuals". See?

I have no use for the .429 "magnum" but H110 with any published data is fine. Follow the manual.

There is very little difference functionally between magnum and "un-magnum" in pistols but there are examples where one should be used and not the other. Why are you asking here? Follow the manual LOL.

 

[Mobuck]

"If you have a Chronograph,, that would be a good assistant for real data."
^^^THIS^^^
I found that a chronograph is my most valuable reloading tool after a good powder scale. One can learn many important and valuable things by use of the chronograph.

 

[rotor]

Winchester large pistol primers are for magnum or non magnum.

 

[DeletedMember275]

Some slow-burning pistol powders can exhibit ignition problems in low temperatures unless loaded with magnum primers. H-110 is one of those powders. If you live someplace that's always warmer than, say freezing, I wouldn't worry about it. Any place that has an actual winter, with snow, I would opt for magnum primers.

 

[kmoore]

I have been reloading rifle, handgun and shotgun ammo since about 1978. I just follow the manual that I am using for that load. I keep enough primers on hand to load what the manual says. I have changed up one brand of primers for another. Example if load called for CCI small rifle, I have substituted Fed small rifle, as others stated. I started over at the min. load and worked up again.
If I had your question, I would contact LEE and ask them WHY and if that would be ok. Bottom line no one on here knows all of the whys that LEE put into their load testing. Just one of the whys is in the last post.

 

[Sam Summey]

I have been reloading rifle, handgun and shotgun ammo since about 1978. I just follow the manual that I am using for that load. I keep enough primers on hand to load what the manual says. I have changed up one brand of primers for another. Example if load called for CCI small rifle, I have substituted Fed small rifle, as others stated. I started over at the min. load and worked up again.
If I had your question, I would contact LEE and ask them WHY and if that would be ok. Bottom line no one on here knows all of the whys that LEE put into their load testing. Just one of the whys is in the last post.

Once upon time 45 years ago I experienced hang fires using CCI LR primers and BLc2 ball powder. With a little research I determined that all Winchester powders were "ball powder" which is notoriously hard to ignite. In order to avoid issues Winchester primers are hotter or burn longer than all other manufacturers primers. I switched to Winchester primers and never looked back, no "hang fires" since. Recently I was given some CCI LR primers and have used them last winter in my M1 with no ill results. Maybe CCI changed the formulation of their priming mixture since Vista Outdoors bought CCI ten or so years ago. I suspect there is some similarity in the primer chemistry. Federal primers have always been considered "hot".

 

[HumphreyDaBear]

Gall Lee ... the advice to follow manuals isn't dumb, the manuals ARE dumb because they all have different advice so don't listen to "follow the manuals". See?

I have no use for the .429 "magnum" but H110 with any published data is fine. Follow the manual.

There is very little difference functionally between magnum and "un-magnum" in pistols but there are examples where one should be used and not the other. Why are you asking here? Follow the manual LOL.

“un-magnum” never heard of those type of primers.

You stated ‘There is very little difference functionally between magnum and “un-magnum” in pistols but there are examples where one should be used and not the other’. It’s these ‘examples‘ I’m interested in. The reason I asked in the Factory Ammunition & Reloading forum is that some of the members might have hands on experience with this inquiry, especially in regards to H110 powder in .44 Magnum, and not in an unrelated forum. I don’t ask a Plumber about HVAC questions. I have experience with H110 in .357 magnums, but not .44 magnum, others here may. It doesn’t mean any information I get here is gospel, rather more data to be reviewed and utilized. I have referenced both my Lee manual and Hodgdon’s site and have contacted both companies in regards primarily, to see if there is actually any different powder behavior in extreme temperature differences, that may qualify the use Large Pistol Magnum primers over Large Pistol primers. I’m waiting for their response.

If you ask no questions, you’ll gain no knowledge.

“un-magnum”...

Have a good day.

 

[HumphreyDaBear]

"If you have a Chronograph,, that would be a good assistant for real data."
^^^THIS^^^
I found that a chronograph is my most valuable reloading tool after a good powder scale. One can learn many important and valuable things by use of the chronograph.

I have had to borrow a chrono from a friend in the past due to unavailability of them. They’re back in stock so I think I’ll pick up a Caldwell Ballistic, any opinion on this brand?

 

[chui]

I believe the new Garmin chronograph will make all others obsolete.
(Yes I do have one)

 

[contender]

"I have had to borrow a chrono from a friend in the past due to unavailability of them. They're back in stock so I think I'll pick up a Caldwell Ballistic, any opinion on this brand?"

Just a few weeks ago,, a good friend brought out his Caldwell chrono to my range. It was brand new. We set his up,, and I also put out my new Garmin Xero chrono.

We were testing about 9-10 different loads in his gun. I was doing the shooting,, he was scribbling down the velocities as I'd fire a shot. Near the end of our testing,, his Caldwell just stopped working. We tried a re-set. & a few other easy to try things. Nada.
But my Garmin,, just kept on going. AND,, afterwards,, I downloaded all his info, and printed him a much more detailed info sheet than what he'd written down.

BUY a Garmin.

It may cost more,, but it'll be well worth it. And I also own a Ohler 35P chrono. The Garmin is just so much easier to use & set up.

 

[HumphreyDaBear]

chui & contender,

Thank you both for the chrono suggestion. Is the Xero C1 Pro W/ Bluetooth the Garmin chrono you’re recommending? I just love buying new toys that are educational ...

If you what to learn, ya just gotta ask questions, right?

Like I said earlier, when I was looking for Chronos, none were available. Now a better one is...Fate and purpose.

Thank you both again.

 

[Mobuck]

I've gone through at least three 'CHRONY' speed-o-meters either due to simple failure of the widget or in one case failure of the shooter. Not 'lab quality' but certainly capable of reading velocity consistently AND easy to use. My current working Chrony has it's own dedicated tripod and sits next to the range bucket of sandbags, toolkit, and ear pro.

 

[contender]

Check out my thread here in this section on my new Garmin. Yes,, that Garmin Xero C1 Pro is the one. I am what I call "computer stupid" and even I was able to figure out how to work this new fangled chrono. It's actually very easy.

I've paired it with my IPhone,, (you do have to download the app) and it simply works. You then export the data to an email, and then print the results.

Long, long ago,, I scraped up the money to buy the (then) top of the line Ohler 35P. Never regretted it. Spent time a few years later talking with Ken Ohler. Learned a lot. It has never failed me & was considered the best out there. Expensive to make & sell. Along came a few companies with their less expensive chrono's,,, and Ohler experienced a decline in sales. They stopped making them for a while. then due to demands,, they returned to building them. (I recall seeing an ad asking to buy one with a standing offer of $1500.00.)
My Ohler is still top quality. And I plan on doing a side by side comparison soon. The one thing I have truly enjoyed is the SUPER easy set-up of the Garmin. It takes me 20-30 minutes to assemble & align & all my Ohler. the Garmin, turn on, punch a few buttons, set down, and shoot.

 

[GasGuzzler]

Humphrey, you missed the point.

 

[HumphreyDaBear]

I do now wonder, per GG, what point did I miss?

 

[HumphreyDaBear]

GG, you have the podium…

 

[sandspider500]

From handloader 279, I think a western powder ballistician tested some enforcer powder loads for some Ruger only 45 colt loads using the same powder charge and bullet, then switched primers. Enforcer in a 45 colt seems to be a bit sensitive.

Not sure if you can see that. It's a 310gr bullet loaded with 21gr of enforcer shot from a 7 1/4" non-vented test barrel, these loads are only for large framed rugers or equivalent.

CCI 350 primers=35,950 psi
Remington 2 1/2=23,990 psi
Winchester LP=22,490 psi
Federal 155=27,870

That's quite a difference in pressure just by switching the primer. I think all of the 45 colt "Ruger" loads from western powder 8 use Remington primers for the data. Pretty interesting.

 

[GasGuzzler]

With enough searching, there can almost always be an exception found.

 

[contender]

True enough GasGuzzler.

I appreciate sandspider500 posting this chart.

I may have to look up that article,, to see all the test perimeters. The chart above is very interesting. But as with any test,, it has to be as identical as possible with only one variable to get truer results.
Examples;
Cases. Were they trimmed to exact dimensions, weighed to be the exact same weight, to be as identical as possible.
Powder. Was it individually weighed for each loading. All the same lot number?
Bullets. Were they all individually weighed, measured etc to be identical?
Loading. Were they all loaded at the same time, under strict conditions, using the same equipment?
Primers. Were each brand weighed to get identical weights? Were the all seated AND mic'ed to check seating depth?

How many test rounds of each one were used?
Was the test tried 2-3 more times using identical settings?
Did they try & change primer lot numbers & re-test?
Did they try & change powder lot numbers & re-test?
Was it done in a universal receiver,, or an actual firearm?
Was the gun or receiver cleaned after EACH shot?

My point to this is there are MANY variables,, and most often,, it's not only very hard to be as identical as you can, but time consuming, and expensive.

I find it very interesting that the other 3 brands were very close together,, while just one was noticeable different. It would cause me to want to truly find out why.

 

[sandspider500]

I think it has to do with the amount of aluminum powder or whatever is used in the primer compound. If different primers were loaded into an empty case, so no bullet, no powder and fired from a 5" test barrel and a video or pictures were taken you would see a difference is obvious. So with some cartridges and powder combinations, you would have a difference as the above example I gave. Some cartridge and powder combinations will have little go no difference.

Here's another example, from Larry Gibson @castboolits,

"From a test I conducted sometime back with the 44 Magnum having primer pockets reamed for LR primers.

RCBS 44-250-K cast of WWs + 2 %tin with a BHN of 16, sized .430 and lubed with Javelina
WW Super 44 Magnum cases (new) with primer pockets reamed for LR primers
WW Super 44 Magnum cases (new) with standard primer pockets with control loads
OAL; 1.711"
Powders; Alliant 2400 (21 gr) & H110 (23 gr)
Results listed as; primer/average velocity (fps)/SD/ES/average PSI (M43)/SD/ES

H110 load;
Control load;
WLP/1400/24/78/21,700/1,200/3,600

LR primer loads;
Rem 9 1/2/1466/47/112/25,200/3,500/8,500
CCI 200/1390/49/141/22,100/1,500/4,200
CCI #34/1507/35/107/28,300/3,000/9,000
WLR/1506/26/85/28,500/2,300/6,000
Fed 215/1544/12/36/31,600/1,500/4,100

Here we see all the psi's within SAAMI proscribed MAP. We find the control load with WLP primers to be relatively mild. The hotter Fed 215 magnum LR primer produced the most consistent internal ballistics and the highest psi with the highest velocity with H110. No pressure problems observed with using the LR primers in this load with H110 powder.

Alliant 2400 load;
Control load;
Fed 150/1542/18/51/30,800/1,000/2,700

LR primer loads;
Rem 9 1/2/1603/13/37/34,700/500/1,200
CCI 200/1589/20/46/33,000/1,800/5,000
CCI #34/1634/10/27/37,900/1,900/5,500
WLR/1633/8/22/37,600/1,000/2,600
Fed 215/1641/13/29/41,200/1,900/4,100

Here we see some LR primers (the "soft" 9 ½ & 200) are OK with this load keeping the psi under the SAAMI MAP/. However, when magnum level LR primers are used we see the psi going Over the MAP and the Fed 215 psi going over the MPSM. Note the very good internal ballistics with this load of 2400 with all the primers tested. Obviously, this load is burning very efficiently in the 30K to 41K psi range."


So, a cartridge like a 9mm or 45 ACP, you may not see a difference through your chronograph or if you had pressure test equipment, no matter what primer you use. Even a larger case like a 45 colt or 44 magnum loaded with a faster powder, or even a certain slow powder, no difference.

 

[gjgalligan]

I found that a chronograph is my most valuable reloading tool after a good powder scale. One can learn many important and valuable things by use of the chronograph.

I'm a rookie at reloading, only started about 12 years ago. When I reload I am looking for reliability of ignition, point of impact, & grouping. If loading semi-auto auto I also look for proper cycling in the firearm.
I have never used a chronograph as I see no need to know the speed if my concerns are met.
What am I missing? I have an open mind.

 

[Pál_K]

I'm a rookie at reloading, only started about 12 years ago. When I reload I am looking for reliability of ignition, point of impact, & grouping. If loading semi-auto auto I also look for proper cycling in the firearm.
I have never used a chronograph as I see no need to know the speed if my concerns are met.
What am I missing? I have an open mind.

If you're using a steady rest to check your groups, that may be all you need.

But one valuable thing would be knowing the spread of velocities from, for example, 10 rounds. If the spread is 150fps from lowest to highest velocity, you're not likely to get a very good group from that load. If the spread is 25fps and you're not getting a good group, that would indicate your load is very good but perhaps some other factor than your powder and load is opening up your groups.

 

[contender]

A chronograph gives you info that you can use to assist in developing safe loads,, and efficient loads. Plus,, if you happen to want to shoot USPSA competition,, you'll need to know the velocities so you can make your power factor.

The loading manuals give you an APPROXIMATE velocity of a given combo using the very same components as they used to develop them. Only by testing will you actually see what you get in your gun(s).

Reliable ignition is important,, but that can depend upon the primers OR the gun. Point of impact is very important because you you want accurate ammo. And grouping is a part of accuracy so yes,, it too is important.

Knowing what your ammo is actually clocking at can assist in accuracy, efficiency, and SAFETY! When you chrono ammo, and get an average,, you can compare it to the safe levels in the manuals. And the Standard Deviation can show you if your load is efficient,, and that too is an aid towards accuracy.

Next,, many folks are now using suppressors,, so to get a sub-sonic load a chrono can show you exactly what you are getting to be sub-sonic.

I got my first chrono decades ago,, and it expanded my knowledge of just what my ammo was doing,, and I wasn't "guessing" about it any longer.

 

[larry8]

wow, you guys seem to make the reloading process very complicated. But that is not my question, as I have 4 Lee classic reloaders to help me reload some of my cartridges.
Ok the question is My friend up in Ohio is an experienced reloader and he told me that he puts a smokeless powder in the cartridges with just a little bit of regular gunpowder added to shoot at night that will show a fire ring when he uses these cartridges. I never heard of this so I ask if any of you guys have done this?

 

[NikA]

@larry8, look up duplex loading. I'm aware it's done, wouldn't want to do it for any serious near maximum loads.

 

[Skeet 028]

Been loading 44M since 62. The regular primer usually works just fine with the normal 231 unique Herco and other loads...If you load the ball powders it truly is best to load mag primers o at the least Winchesters. A few other powders work better with mag primers Blue Dot is one HS6/540 also AA9 and if you find surplus WC 820...296 and H110 are the same powders and have been since Winchester changed the formulation of their ball powders in the early 70s or so. Notice Hodgdon data uses Mag primers for everything called magnum in handgun loads...Not really necessary with most non ball powders.. I even use 'mags with Alcan 8