Are Small Pistol Magnum & Small Rifle Primers Safe in 9mm?

[Larry Gibson]

That was the general consensus and it's what I had also thought. Then I ran this test; http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...the-357-Magnum

Note in the test of 10 different primers [5 with SP primers and 5 with SR primers] there is only 17 fps difference in the average velocity of the 10 different primer tests with the same load. That is well within the test to test variation of the same load with the same primer!

It is the variation of the measured psi that tells the tale. All of the SP magnum and SR primers with the same load produced higher psi measurements, some considerably higher. Simply chronographing may or may not give and indication of the higher pressures as we see from the test results it did not.

[onelight]

I have no idea of how your results are shown on your equipment .
Can you tell if the higher pressure generated by the magnum primers is of shorter duration (is it a spike in the curve ) than the pressure generated by the standard primers ? If so does that make a difference on what a gun can take , as relates to maximum pressure ?
I hope the question makes sense

[44MAG#1]

The best thing to do it to accept the fact that small rifle primers cannot be used in the 9MM in any safe way.
The reason is handloaders/reloaders cannot judge safe pressures by using any method that most use.
Play it safe and don't do it.

[robertbank]

Based upon these results I am not so sure there is much risk. I do know that powder position plays a large part in the velocities you will get. On one recorded test I did in 45Colt the difference was 140FPS between an up barrel position vs down. I assume you were consistent with the positioning of the powder for your tests. Just using the two examples where we can compare each manufacturers primers for SPP and SRP there does not appear to be a significant difference in pressures or velocities. What am I missing?

CC! 500 SPP 1178 Avg Pressure 25500
CC! 400 SRP 1188 Avg Pressure 29200

Win SPP 1175 Avg Pressure 26300
Win SRP 1173 Avg Pressure 27600

[Larry Gibson]

robertbank

Easy enough to pick and choose what SR primers would be a safe substitution for SP primers after the test is done....

But since 99.99999999999999999% +/- of reloaders won't know which combination of SP and SR primers are safe in a given load because they won't know the pressures of similar velocities with the different primers in a small handgun cartridge with a given load.

BTW; you should double check those figures if you're quoting from my test. You psted;

CC! 500 SPP 1178 Avg Pressure 29200
CC! 400 SRP 1188 Avg Pressure 28000

Win SPP 1175 Avg Pressure 26300
Win SRP 1173 Avg Pressure 27600

Actual average PSIs as per my test for the CCI primers was;


CC! 500 SPP 1178 Avg Pressure 25,700 psi
CC! 400 SRP 1188 Avg Pressure 29,200 psi

Almost 2,000 psi difference plus the CCI 400 SR primer had 5 of the ten shots exceeding 30,000 psi where the CCI 500 SP primer had none of it's ten shots exceeding 29,200 psi.

The Winchester WSP and WSR primers appeared to be the same but then you wouldn't have known that had I not tested would you?

Best to head 44mag#1s last advise (post #63);

"The best thing to do it to accept the fact that small rifle primers cannot be used in the 9MM in any safe way.
The reason is handloaders/reloaders cannot judge safe pressures by using any method that most use.
Play it safe and don't do it."

[Conditor22]

Listen to Larry or this could be you

[44MAG#1]

[Best to head 44mag#1s last advise (post #63);

"The best thing to do it to accept the fact that small rifle primers cannot be used in the 9MM in any safe way.
The reason is handloaders/reloaders cannot judge safe pressures by using any method that most use.
Play it safe and don't do it."[/QUOTE]
Very good advice Mr. Gibson. My standard answer anymore to anyone that asks a question of me about reloading/handloading at the Gunstore, shooting range, Church or any where else I may be called upon is "I don't know" .
Then I will instruct them to buy several reloading manuals to study, scrutinize and go by, and, that will answer all their questions with answers given by the professionals.
But I will continue to do things as I have for many years but will keep my minor knowledge to myself.
I agree that it is better to do that than take a chance on whom I am talking with.

[44MAG#1]

Listen to Larry or this could be you

Did a rifle primer cause that? If so what load and the primer brand?

[robertbank]

robertbank

Easy enough to pick and choose what SR primers would be a safe substitution for SP primers after the test is done....

But since 99.99999999999999999% +/- of reloaders won't know which combination of SP and SR primers are safe in a given load because they won't know the pressures of similar velocities with the different primers in a small handgun cartridge with a given load.

BTW; you should double check those figures if you're quoting from my test. You psted;

CC! 500 SPP 1178 Avg Pressure 29200
CC! 400 SRP 1188 Avg Pressure 28000

Win SPP 1175 Avg Pressure 26300
Win SRP 1173 Avg Pressure 27600

Actual average PSIs as per my test for the CCI primers was;


CC! 500 SPP 1178 Avg Pressure 25,700 psi
CC! 400 SRP 1188 Avg Pressure 29,200 psi

Almost 2,000 psi difference plus the CCI 400 SR primer had 5 of the ten shots exceeding 30,000 psi where the CCI 500 SP primer had none of it's ten shots exceeding 29,200 psi.

The Winchester WSP and WSR primers appeared to be the same but then you wouldn't have known that had I not tested would you?

Best to head 44mag#1s last advise (post #63);

"The best thing to do it to accept the fact that small rifle primers cannot be used in the 9MM in any safe way.
The reason is handloaders/reloaders cannot judge safe pressures by using any method that most use.
Play it safe and don't do it."

Listen didn't intend to get your feathers up lad and I apologise for the error in my number transfers but what I saud remains true and I did not cherry pick the stats. Neither example suggests there is a significant difference to worry about. Sometimes we look for data to justify our conclusions . Your tests were interesting though. Did you consider powder position while doing the tests? You didn't say. What powder was used or is that not relevant. I don't know if it makes much difference. I have no way of testing pressure like you do and I suspect few have. The higher pressure noted for SRP may well be the manufacturers recognizing the need to maintain pressure over the longer barreled rifles vs pistols. In short barreled pistols it would seem from the velocities reported the effect is lostwhen SRP are shot out of pistols. Just a guess but it would seem logical. The increase in pressure though may not be a concern for nid range or lower loads, something you did recognize in your report.

With the present shortages of primers in some areas I can see where active shooters are going to use SRP in their handguns if they want to continue shooting. I'll leave that decision to the shooters. We are all big boys and can decide for ourselves.

Take Care

Bob

[dtknowles]

.....With the present shortages of primers in some areas I can see where active shooters are going to use SRP in their handguns if they want to continue shooting. I'll leave that decision to the shooters. We are all big boys and can decide for ourselves.

Take Care

Bob

People come here for advice and the answers should not be figure it out for yourself. I have seen what I think is good advice here and some not so good advice. Yes, everyone is ultimately responsible for their choices but if someone provides bad advice they bear some responsibility as well. Fortunately because the consequences of failure can be severe there is a lot of margin in most guns and ammo combinations. I have seen many a brain fart and totally stupid stunts that hurt nobody. I have seen reports of blown up guns that did not hurt anyone and some stupidity that killed people. I have a friend who had a ricochet off 100 yard steel plate come back and embed in his arm.

Sometimes you can get away with bad choices or pushing the limits. If you are going to load outside the lines it helps to be as informed as possible. I know we almost never follow the cookbook to the letter. In this thread there is much valuable information and some discussion about how to use it. Anyone who is going to load pistol ammo with rifle primers should at least read it.

Tim

[44MAG#1]

Still it is good to cover oneself. I have learned I know very, very, very, very little it seems.
So I am going to be very, very, very, very careful.
In this day and time it is better to do that.

[robertbank]

Still it is good to cover oneself. I have learned I know very, very, very, very little it seems.
So I am going to be very, very, very, very careful.
In this day and time it is better to do that.

Good to be careful for certain. A quick peak at my Lyman Manual the max, reported pressure quoted was 33,000 psi which should be a guide for anyone's concerns. This was a load using 700X and the 356402 bullet. I use 4.1 gr of 231 using that bullet. Lyman's max recommended load for that powder/bullet combination is 4.4 gr at a reported 28,300 psi. I don't chase upper end velocities for any of my reloaded handgun ammunition. By doing so I have never concerned myself about blowing past safety limits for the cartridge. With the 9MM there is very little wiggle room so it pays to be careful. The good news it is virtually impossible to double charge the relatively small case. 8.2 gr of 231 has powder overflowing on your bench with no room for the bullet.

Take Care

Bob

[charlie b]

Based upon these results I am not so sure there is much risk. I do know that powder position plays a large part in the velocities you will get. On one recorded test I did in 45Colt the difference was 140FPS between an up barrel position vs down....

The reason that happens is the relatively large case and low powder density in the .45LC.

The 9mm is just the opposite and frequently loads are compressed so powder position is not an issue. That is why the primer thing is an issue here. Just varying a load by 0.1 or 0.2gn can put you over max. Loading a bullet to slightly shorter OAL can also increase the pressure dramatically in such a small case.

The real problem is unless you can measure pressures you really have no idea what pressure your load is running. Relying on muzzle velocity, flattened primers, sticky extraction or measuring expanded cases is haphazard at best.

[Larry Gibson]

Bob

First of all I want to thank you for the kind word, this 73 year old man (soon to be 74) hasn't been called "lad" in probably 65 years +/-.....just warms my heart.

Now to the point, let me answer a few of your questions or .....

Listen didn't intend to get your feathers up lad and I apologise for the error in my number transfers but what I saud remains true and I did not cherry pick the stats. Neither example suggests there is a significant difference to worry about. Sometimes we look for data to justify our conclusions .

Unfortunately what you said ("Based upon these results I am not so sure there is much risk.") does not remain true. If you look at only the data as it relates to that one load in the 357 Magnum perhaps there isn't much "risk". However, you missed the point. The question was one of substituting SR primers for SP primers was it safe in the 9mm. No mention of a particular load. Thus what the test shows is the probable increase in psi if SR primers were used with a given load in a small cartridge in lieu of SP primers. If one had a max level 9mm load pressure wise with SP primers and substituted a SR primer then the pressures would probably be above the acceptable maximum. And in doing so one could end up with that in the pictures recently posted.

Additionally, perhaps you missed the part in the test article where i said " I selected a load to use with all the primers that was a mid-range 357 magnum load [based on previous chronographing] which should give a bit of “fudge” room if the psi’s did get too high with any primer." You see, this lad, has been pressure testing long enough (14+ years and over 30,000 rounds tested) to have learned a few things. I also value my equipment and my old hide. Thus I picked a moderate load of which I knew the psi which was well below the SAAMI MAP which gave a "fudge" factor if pressures were to rise to much. I did not "look for the data". The data is what actually was measured, all of it. Actually I was expecting my previous hypothesis [if using a SP primer and you want to use a SR primer drop down and work back up chronographing the increases. When the velocity is the same with the SR primer as it was with the SP primer then the psi should be the same.] What the data showed is I was wrong. Using chronographed velocity as a comparison did not indicate there was an actual increase in psi. I may be and old "lad" but I'm still capable of learning......

"Your tests were interesting though. Did you consider powder position while doing the tests? You didn't say. What powder was used or is that not relevant. I don't know if it makes much difference."

Yes, I did consider "powder positioning". The load used in the much smaller 357 magnum case as compared to a similar load used in the 45 Colt, as in your noted up/down velocity test, is less affected by powder positioning because the load density is greater in the 357 magnum. FYI: which would give the higher psi....with a given low load density load would powder positioned at the front or powder positioned at the rear? Most are going to say "at the rear' as I would have. However, when pressure testing such in numerous cartridges I've found just the opposite to often occur. When a low density load is position in the front up next to the bullet most often give the higher psi. One thing I've learned for certain the last 14 years pressure testing many different loads is what we think or thought was happening....isn't.

I have tried to follow SAAMI test procedure where possible. That includes doing the "SAAMI twist" with each cartridge before it is inserted into the test firearm to uniform as much as possible the "position" of the powder in the case in the chamber. That's easy and simple to do with a rifle when it is solidly rested on a rest and rear bag. However, with the Contender action it is not possible because the action is "snapped" shut. Thus after shutting the Contender action the forend is laid on the rest and the weapon rocked back and forth sideways the before each shot. That way the powder is "positioned" as uniformly as possible for each shot. The velocity SD and ESs are pretty normal for 10 shot tests, actually quite good compared to the same SD and ES of the load out of a revolver. The average velocities were also quite comparable. Neither the average velocities or the SD and ESs gave any indication of the higher average psi's along with attendant larger pressure SD and ESs than would be expected.

As to the powder I used....I did say. Perhaps you just missed this part in the report; "The load I selected to use was 6 gr of Alliant Unique under a 358156 cast of COWWs + 2% tin, sized .358, Hornady GCs crimped on and lubed with BAC. The bullets were seated, and roll crimped in the front crimp groove giving the loaded OAL at 1.597”. "

"I have no way of testing pressure like you do and I suspect few have."

No you don't. Very, very few do. That is the point. That's why I offer much of the information here, free of charge. Many times the factual data goes against many preconceived ideas (including many of my own that I had) and many do not want to accept the data, or "science" I guess they call it these days because it goes against accepted myths, old wives tales and suppositions made by the old time "expert" gun writer we all read and respected, including me. Sometimes it just goes against what we "think" is logical for what is happening. But, the truth is the truth and it's hard for some to accept.

"The higher pressure noted for SRP may well be the manufacturers recognizing the need to maintain pressure over the longer barreled rifles vs pistols. In short barreled pistols it would seem from the velocities reported the effect is lost when SRP are shot out of pistols. Just a guess but it would seem logical."

Another thing I've learned is not to assume or second guess what the manufacturers do or the reasons why. What can seem logical many times isn't...... they have their ways.....

"The increase in pressure though may not be a concern for nid range or lower loads, something you did recognize in your report."

Again you apparently missed this part in my report; " I selected a load to use with all the primers that was a mid-range 357 magnum load [based on previous chronographing] which should give a bit of “fudge” room if the psi’s did get too high with any primer."

Perhaps you missed this; "This SP magnum primer showed no increase in velocity or in psi averages. However, obviously the internal psi created with what was supposed to be a “mild” 357 magnum load of Unique demonstrates something is amiss here given the somewhat erratic internal ballistics. Two the tested psi’s were above 30,000 with one exceeding the SAAMI MAP for the 357 magnum"

And apparently you also missed the last sentence of the report; "In the 9mm P with its much smaller case capacity? I would not use any other primer than a standard SP primer with other than a "starting load".

Pretty much "recognized" the "concern" there.

"With the present shortages of primers in some areas I can see where active shooters are going to use SRP in their handguns if they want to continue shooting. I'll leave that decision to the shooters. We are all big boys and can decide for ourselves."

Yes, there is a growing interest in the substitution of SR primers for use where SP primers are normally used. I've not said the use of SR primers in small capacity pistol cases shouldn't or couldn't be done safely. I've said what I would do if i had to. I've also shown that working up to higher velocities or perceived maximum loads using a chronograph can give a false indication of what is 'safe". I also recommend not doing it at all as 44Mag#1 recommends because unless you can measure the psi as I can and a few others you just won't know.

BTW; Because I can measure the pressure I have just the last few days completed a report on a test of SR primers in a smaller case than the 9mm with much slower burning powders not normally used in either the tested cartridge or the 9mm. The idea for the use of the SR primer was it would ignite the slower burning better not that we "had to use them". The same results appeared along with another ugly unforeseen potential problem. The first sign of potential SEE appeared. Additional testing will be done with the use of SP primers instead to determine if the SEE problem continues. That is "to be continued"......

Well thanks again Bob for the kind words. Hopefully I've answered your questions? If not, no problem, be glad to answer more questions if I can.

[Larry Gibson]

"A quick peak at my Lyman Manual the max, reported pressure quoted was 33,000 psi which should be a guide for anyone's concerns. This was a load using 700X and the 356402 bullet. I use 4.1 gr of 231 using that bullet. Lyman's max recommended load for that powder/bullet combination is 4.4 gr at a reported 28,300 psi."

Hey Bob, a question for you. As my test results are in psi and I'm always liking to compare psi data I'm wondering which Lyman manual you found "psi" figures for with the 358402 cast bullet. My Lyman #3 , #4 CBHs and 50th Edition only list CUP pressures. What am I missing?

[robertbank]

Larry I wrote a long response to you then hit the wrong key and lost it. To be short. I am 76 so at 73 you are a young lad. I say that with a grin as I had a pretty good idea how old you are. Your test fell short of the max psi allowed for in 357mag of around 45,000. From my experience, I have been at the reloading game about as long as you have. I have witnessed some exciting results due to over charging cartridges. The 9MM has one advantage over the large =r caliber cases in that it really is hard if not impossible to double charge the case. I know from experience 8.2 grains of 231 makes a mess of the press as the powder overflows the case. You can exceed or come close to exceeding SAMMI spec by loading the cases long without crushing the case with a bullet. The IPSC Open boys using 9MM cases make major using 120 gr bullets at >1333 fps. the 9MM open guns must have longer chambers to allow for the bullet to just rest inside the case under copious amounts of Viviatorri (sP) powder. The barrels seem to hold together and I am darn sure they are running higher pressures than SAMMI suggests.

In any event I apologize for miss reading your data which at the very lest confirmed to me that using SPP vs SRP in the 9MM case was safe enough at the loads I use.

To the individual who asked about the Glock picture above. The gun is appears to be a Gen 1 Glock. I suspect it is a 40cal model. Back in the day there were copious amounts of threads concerning the Glock 40 that earned, for some, a well deserved reputation for going kaboom when they should have gone bang. Some blamed use of lead bullets and leading, others poor maintenance etc. For the Officers who experienced the Kabooms I don't suppose it mattered much. The Gen 1 and Gen 2 barrels did not support the 9MM/40cal cases particularly well. Glock never acknowledged the problem IIRC but by the time the Gen 3 came out the barrels supported the cases significantly better. For those who have mastered this forums search function there are threads on this forum speaking to the issue. I do recall that picture and others like it. There were lots floating around back in the day. It wasn't from using SRP that is for certain.

Take Care

Bob

[Larry Gibson]

Bob (or can I call you "gramps" )

The SAAMI MAP for the 357 magnum is 35,000 psi and the MPSM is 37,500 psi. That is nowhere near your stated 45,000 in either psi or CUP. As mentioned in my report and my later post to you I deliberately chose a known medium pressure load to give a "fudge" factor in case the pressures turned out radically high. As also mentioned I value my equipment and my skin. Had I used a load normally giving max map at 35,000 psi with standard SP primers using some of the SR primers would have put the psi well over 40,000 psi.....not good.

How do I know this? That's exactly what happened in the 44 magnum test. A maximum load using LP primers over 2400 and a mid range psi load of H110 were used. When the same loads were used with LR primers the psi skyrocketed with both loads. The 2400 loads went well over 40,000 psi.....again, not good given the SAAMI MAP is 36,000 psi.

This thread is not about double charging the 9mm case. It is about substituting SR primers for SP primers and is it "safe". That has nothing to do with double charging as that is a whole other topic.

Your short dissertation on the Glock ka-boom is basically well done. However, there are many, if not most, 9mm semi-auto handguns out there with no more chamber support than the first gen Glocks, most 45 ACPs etc. The solution was found during IPSC matches when the 38 Super and 9mm were loaded to very high psi's such as 40,000 psi. In normal ramped guns many a case head blew out. Fortunately, most of the shooters that happened to sustained minimal injury if any as the competition guns had steel frames not the polymer plastic ones of todays popular handguns. The solution to the blow cases was the integral ramp on the barrel which increased the chamber support at the web of the case. In such "ramped" barrels using 9mm+P, 40 S&W, 38 Super and the 357 sig loaded to 35 - 40,000 psi is common. However, taking one of those loads and substituting a SR primer for the SP primer will , no doubt, raise the psi....probably well beyond what is "safe" even in an integral ramped barrel.

Understand the damage done to the Glock pictured above and that done to many other guns is not the result of simply using a SR primer in lieu of a SP primer. The damage is a result of pressure regardless of what caused the pressure. Excessive pressure being released where it should not be did the damage. That is the point; substituting or even using SR primers in lieu of SP primers does raise the pressure and, depending on the load, can raise it to excess. That is a proven fact. It remains to be seen if, in any instance, doing so is too much pressure and, ergo, is not "safe". Frankly, I've seen the damage to much pressure can cause to guns and people. I prefer not to see it anymore, particularly in my handguns and to my hands......

[robertbank]

Sorry Kid I just googled the info and you are right about the 35,000 limit on the 357mag.

This thread is about the 9MM not the 357mag nor the 44 magnum. Test the 9MM cartridge using SPP and SRP and tell us the variance in pressure. You have the equipment. To provide some practicality to your test can I ask you to use Win231/HP38 with 4.1 gr of powder under a 124/125 gr lead bullet. It is a mid range load, toi use your phrasing. What you have published to date indicates to me at lest the practice in the 9MM is completely safe. Over a Chrony the load runs just under 1100 fps sufficient to meet IPSC and IDPA PF for competition. I shot a season of IDPA using SRPm due to your fears of an Obama Presidency, in my M&P Pro using 225 grain plated bullets and lead bullets. Over the Chrony the velocities were not much different than using SPP with variances no different than one would expect using mixed cases under different temperature conditions.

Over the past 30 years I have shot and owned at least 30 9MM pistols ranging from FN and Inglis Hi-Powers to Norinco copies of the venerable 1911 and nioe ever had the unsupported configuration of the Gen 1 Glocks. Old Gaston wanted his pistols to shoot everything under the worst conditions and his dance hall chambers I guess worked well in that regard. Although miost of the issues involved the 40cal guns the blow outs at the six o'clock position found on the cases were not uncommon as you may remember. The Portland Oregon Police Dept. is the one case that sticks in my memory. Glock replaced their 40cal pistols with 9MM Gen 2 guns which wasn't much of a step forward IMHO but there you are.

Have a great week-end. We are above 0C here right now but it cools off next week.

Take Care
Bob

[Larry Gibson]

Looks like Bob is just going to do what Bob wants to do.

I don't have any "124/235" gr cast bullets for the 9mm as I shoot Lee 120 TCs almost exclusively. I'll assume Bob meant 135 gr bullets given all the other typo's as a 235 gr cast bullet in the 9mm would be a bit out of proportion.....

"What you have published to date indicates to me at lest the practice in the 9MM is completely safe. Over a Chrony the load runs just under 1100 fps sufficient to meet IPSC and IDPA PF for competition. I shot a season of IDPA using SRPm due to your fears of an Obama Presidency, in my M&P Pro using 225 grain plated bullets and lead bullets. Over the Chrony the velocities were not much different than using SPP with variances no different than one would expect using mixed cases under different temperature conditions."

I suspect you have no idea of the pressure difference but are simply relying on chronographed velocity which we have demonstrated not to be reliable. If that was a 9mm load (with a reasonable weight cast bullet) given 1100 fps it may have been within the 35 - 37,800 psi acceptable psi range for the 9mm. But neither you nor I know that. If it was a 40 S&W then it very well could have been within the same psi range. But then neither you nor I know that. If not, as previously mentioned by another, it means you simply got away with something unsafe. Also it may have been safe up there in BC but down here in AZ with temps at 100 - 120 degrees perhaps not so safe.


But, alas, I've none of 135, 235 or 225 gr 9mm cast bullets either. I also don't have any 231 or HP38 as I use Bullseye in my cast bullet 9 mm loads (4.0 gr). Given the current state of affairs of reloading supplies I doubt I'll fined any of the cast bullets or either powder to test.

I might get around to testing SR primers in a max load of 4.2 gr Bullseye for the 9mm as compared to SP primers with the same load. Understanding "trends" as in what happens in one cartridge tends to happen in other cartridges under similar load conditions I doubt we'll see any difference. Other test irons in the fire now though.

[robertbank]

Settle down, I corrected the typo 125 gr bullets. all your 357 data and references to 44 mag don't deal with the 9MM. The 44 mag uses LPP which are not the same size as LPP. SPP's are the same size as SRP. Do some testing and see how close you get to the max pressure set for the 9MM. I suspect your results will not demonstrate significant differences in pressure results or velocities. If you don't have 124/125 gr 9MM bullets PM me your address and I will send you down some FMJ and lead bullets for testing.

Take Care

Bob