Mike,never a slow ignition?Never a zero ignition?
Does anyone see a difference using different primers?
- Thread starter Lee7588
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
This has generally been my experience, I bought a brick of 210 and 215 because of talk about how accurate they were and the bigger ignition flash. Struggled to get good groups. Switched to cci200 and just like this. Traded the rest of federal to my father for more CCI. I use Remington and CCI now and sometimes Winchester. I have 2 loads for my 7rm, one uses rem9.5m and the other uses cci250, same powder, different cases (fc & r-p).
Now there is some feed back that I can sink my teeth into. Thanks for sharing.
I originally said I rarely saw any real differences by switching primers. The one exception to that is large capacity cases. 7 RUM, 300 RUM, 375 Ruger, 460 Bee and 338-378 etc. I have had a lot of click-Booms with CCI 250. Have also had them fail to go off at all. The powder inside the case had been ignited and was caked and hard, but not hot enough to set the charge off. This was in 60F weather, it gets WAY worse as it gets colder.
That is why I use Win mags in any case over 75 grains and Fed 215 in any case over 90 grains. I save the CCI 250 for all hunting loads from 40-75 grains. I have not loaded a non-magnum primers in hunting loads in over 40 years. I have always been able to get into the .5 or better range with this method. My best shooting hunting rifles will consistently do .25 for 3 shots a 100 yards, and hold that MOA out to 800, which is my self imposed limit on live game..
That is why I use Win mags in any case over 75 grains and Fed 215 in any case over 90 grains. I save the CCI 250 for all hunting loads from 40-75 grains. I have not loaded a non-magnum primers in hunting loads in over 40 years. I have always been able to get into the .5 or better range with this method. My best shooting hunting rifles will consistently do .25 for 3 shots a 100 yards, and hold that MOA out to 800, which is my self imposed limit on live game..
xsn10s
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2016
- Messages
- 7,626
I favor Federal primers. But I see many people have good luck with CCI's. Obviously your rifle favors them.
I notice the same thing!So it is our rifles that have a preference!I favor Federal primers. But I see many people have good luck with CCI's. Obviously your rifle favors them.
Make's sense to me!
Randy Tidwell
Well-Known Member
I would like to share a funny story about primers, but first, IMHO primers will make a difference when you are shooting precision targets. They will all shoot when the load is tailored for that primer. I don't interchange primers with out working up a load for that primer. That is with a target load, don't think it makes tid bit of difference for a hunting load. I've never seen a drastic change in a load because of a different brand.
These days, my go to primers for target work are Fed, Winchester for hunting loads. I've never had allot of success with Remington primers or their brass.
Back in the early 80's I went to one of our local gun stores to pick up some Winchester Large Rifle primers. I actually managed this shop in the 70's and we always carried them. I asked the young man behind the counter for a brick of Win 120's and was told they don't carry them, huh? He offered me some CCI primers. I said no thanks.
He had a puzzled look his face and asked why I didn't want them. I explained to him that they were not accurate enough for what I was doing.
His chest puffed out and said "I use CCI in my rifle and I will out shoot anything you have!" Oh boy, this is going to be good.
I asked him what he had in mind to prove it? He wanted to bet $50.00 for a 5 shot group at 100 yards at our local range. Your on!
I went out to my truck to grab my photo album that had photos of some of the guns I've built and played with.
I laid it down and said "Under no circumstance will I back out of this bet, but I'm curious about what I will be shooting against?"
With is chest still puffed out "I have a Weatherby Vanguard 7mm Mag!" Took all my will power to not laugh.
Before I opened the notebook to show him what he would be shooting against, I offered to change the bet to his 3 shots at 50 yards vs my 10 shots at 100 yards with my 308.
He had puzzled look on his face as I opened the album up to a photo of my first rail gun with 2" diameter barrel. Of course I got the deer in the head lights look and he asked what is that?
I explained it was an unlimited Bench Rest rifle that weighed over 100# with 6 different barrels from 222 to 308 and it would prove that Winchester primers are more accurate than CCI.
Then he said "Man, I got to get some of those primers!"
When I asked what time he wanted to meet at the range Saturday, all I got was a stammer and boat load of excuses, LOL.
Talk about opening your mouth and inserting your foot. Don't think he will ever forget that.
These days, my go to primers for target work are Fed, Winchester for hunting loads. I've never had allot of success with Remington primers or their brass.
Back in the early 80's I went to one of our local gun stores to pick up some Winchester Large Rifle primers. I actually managed this shop in the 70's and we always carried them. I asked the young man behind the counter for a brick of Win 120's and was told they don't carry them, huh? He offered me some CCI primers. I said no thanks.
He had a puzzled look his face and asked why I didn't want them. I explained to him that they were not accurate enough for what I was doing.
His chest puffed out and said "I use CCI in my rifle and I will out shoot anything you have!" Oh boy, this is going to be good.
I asked him what he had in mind to prove it? He wanted to bet $50.00 for a 5 shot group at 100 yards at our local range. Your on!
I went out to my truck to grab my photo album that had photos of some of the guns I've built and played with.
I laid it down and said "Under no circumstance will I back out of this bet, but I'm curious about what I will be shooting against?"
With is chest still puffed out "I have a Weatherby Vanguard 7mm Mag!" Took all my will power to not laugh.
Before I opened the notebook to show him what he would be shooting against, I offered to change the bet to his 3 shots at 50 yards vs my 10 shots at 100 yards with my 308.
He had puzzled look on his face as I opened the album up to a photo of my first rail gun with 2" diameter barrel. Of course I got the deer in the head lights look and he asked what is that?
I explained it was an unlimited Bench Rest rifle that weighed over 100# with 6 different barrels from 222 to 308 and it would prove that Winchester primers are more accurate than CCI.
Then he said "Man, I got to get some of those primers!"
When I asked what time he wanted to meet at the range Saturday, all I got was a stammer and boat load of excuses, LOL.
Talk about opening your mouth and inserting your foot. Don't think he will ever forget that.
Attachments
I have done some primer "testing" if you want to call it that in a few different cartridges. After having some CCI 200's not go bang one day at the range, I started testing some. So far I've ran CCI, Federal and Winchester against each other in 6.5 CM, .30-06, and CCI and Federal in .223 and 6.5 Grendel. Change in accuracy was minimal, velocity had a very small swing, and noticeable changes in ES and SD. This is very minimal, so no way would I say it's scientific proof there are differences, but to my simpleton mind there is.
Going to test loads tomorrow in my 6.5 Grendel Howa Mini using Fiocchi primers and CCI 450's.
Going to test loads tomorrow in my 6.5 Grendel Howa Mini using Fiocchi primers and CCI 450's.
From pictures my friend took and published in Precision Shooting magazine some years ago, it is obvious that they are very, very different.
From coolest to hottest
9 1/2 M
CCI 250
Fed 215
Win Magnum
There is one heck of a difference in all of these primers.
I do not even rate a 9 1/2M as a magnum primer, but have loads where the 9 1/2M sure dumps the bullets in a hole vs other primers.
From coolest to hottest
9 1/2 M
CCI 250
Fed 215
Win Magnum
There is one heck of a difference in all of these primers.
I do not even rate a 9 1/2M as a magnum primer, but have loads where the 9 1/2M sure dumps the bullets in a hole vs other primers.
I have to agree, for those were my, and many others, experiences also with my BR rifles and some hunting/varmint rifles. Not only can group size and consistency be potentially impacted, velocities and SD may change.
Last edited:
birddog 68
Well-Known Member
I've always used federal 210's but I ran out and had to purchase CCI 200 and WLR.
2 loads in the 7-08 showed no difference in group size with different primers. 280 AI had 1 load with no difference in group size but a second load just wouldn't group even after adjusting powder charge up and down.
My limited experience tells me that sometimes the primers makes a difference and sometimes not.
2 loads in the 7-08 showed no difference in group size with different primers. 280 AI had 1 load with no difference in group size but a second load just wouldn't group even after adjusting powder charge up and down.
My limited experience tells me that sometimes the primers makes a difference and sometimes not.
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
I do primer swap testing while fire forming brass, looking for lowest ES. This, with CCIs at 4thou crush, everything else at 2thou.
I have a theory that this is about local striking (rather than the primer itself).
I believe that a striking system could be optimized for a given primer, but it's not as easy as simple trial & error primer swapping.
The reason it's not easy is because we have no striking or primer standards, and the striking system is not externally adjustable.
I was forced to do this testing once and found a gain in accuracy that would not have been possible otherwise, with any amount of load development. My firing pin was slipping in it's cocking piece(intermittently), and I did not know where to set it back. So I ran tests similar to full seating testing. Discovered grouping opening/closing/opening just like seating testing. I set the pin at tested optimum -huge difference (1/8moa better than MY best at 3/8moa). That was from my best load (including chosen primer), and wasn't about ES so much as tune consistency.
But with a new gun I have to start somewhere, so I start with swapping for comparatively low ES.
I have a theory that this is about local striking (rather than the primer itself).
I believe that a striking system could be optimized for a given primer, but it's not as easy as simple trial & error primer swapping.
The reason it's not easy is because we have no striking or primer standards, and the striking system is not externally adjustable.
I was forced to do this testing once and found a gain in accuracy that would not have been possible otherwise, with any amount of load development. My firing pin was slipping in it's cocking piece(intermittently), and I did not know where to set it back. So I ran tests similar to full seating testing. Discovered grouping opening/closing/opening just like seating testing. I set the pin at tested optimum -huge difference (1/8moa better than MY best at 3/8moa). That was from my best load (including chosen primer), and wasn't about ES so much as tune consistency.
But with a new gun I have to start somewhere, so I start with swapping for comparatively low ES.
