Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Large Rifle Magnum Primers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Large Rifle Magnum Primers

    Been awhile since I've posted. Working up a new for my new 30-06 and using the new Win. Staball 6.5. Noticed that while cleaning rifle after testing that the swabs are very black/dirty. Also after a few rounds the groups start to get bigger - up to 2 inches. From Build up?
    Read on other posts about when using ball powders like the Winchester powders it is better to use Magnum Primers for a cleaner burn. Is this true?

  • #2
    I haven't personally tried Staball 6.5 yet, but according to Hodgdon loading pages they're using standard primers, which tells me magnum primers would be just fine.

    What you may be experiencing is inadequate pressures, which could be responsible for an inefficient burn.

    It would be very helpful if you would provide us with the specifics of the load you're currently using, including bullet weight, powder charge weight, and the primer you are using.

    HBC

    Comment


    • #3
      If I didn't have so many standard LR primers around, I'd load nothing but magnum primers.
      Like HighBC says, we need more details to answer more better

      The primer used in Hodgdon's Data is a Winchester LR. At one time, that was the only LR primer Win marketed, having no "magnum" primer. Rumor has it the WIN LR primer pretty much is a magnum force primer.

      Regardless, lots of handloaders recommend "magnum" primers whenever loading spherical (aka, Ball) powder. I've one load using StaBALL 6.5, a near max charge for 270WIN using a 140gr bullet and Wolf LR Magnum primer. Very good results, and it should work very well in 30-06 above 150gr bullets.
      It's not that Democrats are so damned ignorant. Their problem is that everything they know is wrong.

      Wimachtendienk, Wingolauchsik, Witahemui

      He who knows not and knows not that he knows not, is a fool.
      He who knows not and knows he knows not, is wise.

      Comment


      • #4
        So when did magnum primers hit the market?
        I imagine back in the late 50’s when all the magnums started to appear you didn’t just type in powdervalleyinc.com into the ‘ol Smith Carona and have em FedEx’d? What were they using?
        Endeavor to persevere.

        Call sign: Limp Wrist

        Comment


        • #5
          Always forget something.
          Win. StaBall 6.5 - Got up to 61 Grains with no bad signs with Barnes ttxs 150gr.
          Used sierra 165gr Gamekings last test with with 56 grains of powder.
          Win. primers - WLR and Winchester brass (new first time shot after sizing and measuring)

          Googled - "best primers for Barnes Bullets" - and one result brought up an article that says Barnes recommends Magnum primers with there bullets but can't find that on there website

          Tcodd6

          Comment


          • #6
            I've not had a fouling problem, but then again I've not shot alot of StaBALL yet.

            I don't know where you got your data for the 150gr TTSX bullet and StaBall, but you might work up slowly until pressure signs begin to show. See if the fouling goes away. BTW, how many is "a few rounds". A few usually means around 3, while several means 7 or more.

            I wouldn't think Barnes would specify such ("and one result brought up an article that says Barnes recommends Magnum primers with there bullets but can't find that on there website"), when in fact the data is obtained using a Federal 210 LR primer, not 215 LRM, for the 30-06 data on their site. Just more internet BS.
            It's not that Democrats are so damned ignorant. Their problem is that everything they know is wrong.

            Wimachtendienk, Wingolauchsik, Witahemui

            He who knows not and knows not that he knows not, is a fool.
            He who knows not and knows he knows not, is wise.

            Comment


            • #7
              I guess I didn't dig deep enough to locate data for the 150 gr. Barnes.

              I did find data for the 165 jacketed, and although it isn't specifically for the Sierra GK, it's jacketed none the less. That data shows that your 56 gr charge is just slightly above the published start charge of 55.4 hrs.. More specifically, the 56 gr charge is only @ 12.5% of the available load range, so IMO I would work that one up until performance improves, while monitoring pressure signs of course.

              FYI, if you should decide to step up to a magnum primer be sure to do so at the beginning of the development process, this so you don't inadvertently miss the accuracy node, and to avoid experiencing any pressure issues.

              HBC

              Comment


              • #8
                Before I got my RCBS Chargemaster 1500, I used ball powders almost exclusively. I got tired of messing with the log type powders like 4350 and 4831. I never bothered to use magnum primers with the ball powders. I never saw the need.
                Back in the day there was a very short article by a man named Bob Klein. He was working up loads at the range for a 7MM Rem. Mag. IIRC and ran out of primers. He sent his wife into town go get some more and when she came back she'd gotten the wrong type. She got standard primers rather than the requested magnum type. He figured why not try them and ended up with slightly more velocity and tighter groups. Who'd a thunk? Not sure what powder he was using but my guess would the old milsurp H4831.
                I knew Bob. In fact he sold me my first chronograph many years age when he decided to upgrade. I haven't seen him in years. I learned he got a job transfer he couldn't refuse. Hell of a nice guy.
                Paul B.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by deaddog View Post
                  So when did magnum primers hit the market?
                  I imagine back in the late 50’s when all the magnums started to appear you didn’t just type in powdervalleyinc.com into the ‘ol Smith Carona and have em FedEx’d? What were they using?
                  Well, "Magnum" primers, for everyone else, hit the market long ago, probably the 1950's or 60's, Winchester did not start selling a magnum large rifle primer (the WLRM) until Y2K.
                  Prior to then, their WLR was marked, as OY noted, same as their WLP, "Suitable for standard and magnum loads".

                  There is no "standard" for primer brissance, or "power", so each maker makes what they want.
                  From whatever attempted "testing" for comparitive purposes I have seen on the WWW, the standard rifle primer's relative power seems to usually shake out like this:
                  Coldest/weakest are Remingtons (and if you find RWS primers, they are "cold" too).
                  Next are CCI, then Federals, Winchester's are hottest. To me this makes perfect sense considering Winchester was THE SOURCE of spherical powder (Olin corporation) from it's creation int he 1950's.
                  Settling on using primarily W748 powder in my .308 3 decades ago, and wondering which primers to use, this is why I still use Winchesters today, they have given me zero issues lighting piles of ball powder no matter the weather.
                  Also they have proven to light 60gr of H4831 with solid ease as well.

                  Now, supposedly the Winchesters are nearer the cold end of Magnums (only Remington being cooler/weaker), Federals the hottest, BUT, in the testing the Winchesters seemed to be the most consistent so other primers may have posted higher due to a few "very not" ones skewing the averages.
                  That still IMO supports my suspicion that the WLRM is nothing but a WLR put in Magnum packaging and offered to people who insist on a "Magnum" primer (attempt at market share), it doesn't PROVE my suspicion, but neither does it kill it.

                  http://castingstuff.com/primer_testing_reference.htm

                  https://gundigest.com/more/how-to/re...re-differences

                  http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/...-types-tested/

                  http://www.accuratereloading.com/primer.html

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I tend to agree with you Damannoyed, it certainly makes sense anyway.

                    HBC

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      NOW, All you have to do is find the damned things!!!!!

                      Comment


                      • #12

                        ​​​ Primer test
                        Tested 2 primers with 2 different powders to see which primer works best. Compared cci br2 against wlr. Got lucky and Bass Pro had the cci br-2 primers a couple of days ago, nothing else. Fired 5 rounds of each and cleaned after each load.
                        CCI with w760 was the cleanest(left in picture) then CCI with Staball (right side)was next cleanest. The wlr primers left more residue with either powder. I believe the wlr is not hot enough.
                        Got lucky again today and Bass Pro got in a brick of CCI-200,s, I now have them. Will try with re-doing the load with cci's and see. Decide later if I want to try Magnum Primers.

                        ​​​​​​​Tcodd6

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The only time I have resorted to using Winchester primers has been when I'm unable to find any CCI's. But it's been at least 20 years since I've needed to resort to the Winchester. I do use and have used W209s, I like them for my shot shells.

                          I've done a good deal of load comparisons with BR2 vs CCI 200's and the CCI BR2 has certainly shown to be some what more consistent regarding SD velocities, but not enough that I feel I can't live without them.

                          HBC

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            On the topic of primers what is the opinion of the CCI military #34? I use them due to the possibility of slam fire on my Garands. I bought the #41 for my AR but only because that was all that was available at the time. I have since come up with a brick of CCI SR primers for that.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Rickf1985 View Post
                              On the topic of primers what is the opinion of the CCI military #34? I use them due to the possibility of slam fire on my Garands. I bought the #41 for my AR but only because that was all that was available at the time. I have since come up with a brick of CCI SR primers for that.
                              The CCI small rifle "Military" is the #41.

                              The #41 "milspec" primer is, according to CCI (people who have phoned and asked), nothing but the CCI Small Rifle Magnum boxed to say "milspec" to sell to people working under the mistaken idea that they have to use a "milspec" primer in their AR's 'to avoid slam-fire'.

                              I fully expect the #34 to be the exact same thing, the Large Rifle Magnum boxed for people who think the same mistaken idea about AR10's/.308 AR's and M1As.

                              Marketing.

                              None of the "free-floating firing pin" rifles above have slam-fire problems.

                              They slam fire from users finger-chambering ammo and then dropping the bolt from full-stroke or from mis-seated (high) primers.
                              Hence, they slam from User Error.
                              They are not designed to be slammed shut with a free-running bolt, they are designed to "waste", to use up bolt energy peeling a round out from under the magazine lips.
                              The early, prototype, AR's had "slam-fire" issues, they were ended with lightened firing pins, which have been standard since the early 1960's.
                              Free-finger-chambering ammo, you ease the bolt 1/2 way or so down, THEN you drop it, less energy, no slam-fires.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X