Remington's response to primer questions.

[parrott1969]

I have been involved in a fact finding mission with another member here (Stew) on Remington primers. I have Remington's offical response and thought I would share it with everyone.

Originally Posted by parrott1969
Subject
Remington components Customer (darryl parrott) 01/12/2011 10:57 PM
I am searching for clarity with remington primers. You make two types of small pistol primers a 1 1/2 and 5 1/2. They are both marked as small pistol. There is a warning on the 1 1/2 boxes saying not to use in 40 S&W and to use the 5 1/2 instead. I have been told that the only difference is 1 1/2 primers have a softer cup than the 5 1/2 and that they contain the same amount and type of priming compound. Is this correct? Can 5 1/2 be used safely in 9mm, 38 and 357?

Your response is eagerly awaited
Anthony Parrott



Discussion Thread
Response (Danny) 01/22/2011 11:28 AM
The 1 1/12 can be used in the 9 mm and 38. The higher pressure of the 40 and 357 require the 5 1/2. The 5 1/2 should work pretty well in all with a good solid firing pin strike.

This information also holds true with winchester and wolf i.e. magnum primers contain same amount and type of compound as standard. The difference being the hardness of the cup. CCI is a different animal, they have a harder cup and hotter priming mix.

[Charlie Two Tracks]

I had no idea about that. I thought that all magnum primers were hotter.

[Heavy lead]

Good to know,actually I've used nothing but 5.5's in everything small for some time, always worried a might about it though. They seem to work fine even in the K38.

[AZ-Stew]

I was told by the Remington rep on the phone, that the 7-1/2 (SR BR) and 5-1/2 (SP "magnum") primers have thicker cups than the 6-1/2 (SR) and 1-1/2 (SP) primers, respectively. Presumably, this is to contain the higher pressures of some cartridges. Remington still recommends referring to their on-line ballistics tables to find out which primers are recommended for each cartridge. I find this to be a bit of a problem, as some cartridges aren't listed in their ballistics tables. I suggested to them that they specify a maximum pressure for the thinner cups. The lady said she'd bring it up at the next meeting. Hard telling if we'll ever see anything come of it.

Regards,

Stew

[MT Gianni]

Great info guys, thanks for your work.
Charlie Two Tracks, I think Magnum Primers means what ever the maker wanted it to mean at the time. They just don't make it uniform in the industry or bother to let us know.

[lwknight]

Someone here wrote an post about the order of which primers are hotter or more brilliant.

I always thought that Winchester primers were hotter than Remington.

Now I wonder hoe the Federal Magmun LP primers fit in the scale of things.

[mooman76]

It's good to know. I have heard that but I have also heard that they are stronger so you don't really know who to believe unless you hear it from a credible source. It doesn't really matter that much too me because I always work up my loads and I almost always stay away from high end loads too. Still, it's nice to know.

[nicholst55]

Several years ago, CE Harris did a small rifle primer test for the American Rifleman; he cut some .223 brass off at the web, primed it, then attached a steel BB to the front end of the flash hole, although the details of how he attached the BB escape me. He then chambered the resulting 'round' of ammo, fired it and chronographed the BB. About all that I recall of the results is that Winchester SR primers generated the lowest velocity, and Harris concluded that this indicated that Win SR primers were what he wanted to work with to develop .223 Service Rifle loads. Harris concluded that the primer with the least amount of 'spark' was what he wanted for low ES and SD in his 'long-range' ammo. Not sure how well that would work out in low or extremely low (sub-zero) temperatures, either.

I don't know how relevant this info would be today, since Winchester changed the composition of the primer cups on their SR primers fairly recently. Still, I found it interesting at the time as I was doing a lot of work with J-words in .223.

[Charlie Two Tracks]

My, there is a lot of stuff with reloading and casting that is not black and white. I don't know if that is good or bad. It is fun though.

[pmeisel]

I must have missed that Harris article. Very interesting.

It would be interesting to see more comprehensive testing of primers, but it seems like a difficult thing to do.

[Trapaddict]

Wolf primers came on the scene a couple of years ago. They market their small rifle magnum primers to the AR 15/M-16 shooter or any other semi auto with a free floating firing pin. The magnum primers have the same amount of priming compound as the standard small rifle but have a thicker cup to help preventing slam fires. To the best of my knowledge, only Large Rifle and Pistol Magnum primers have a bit more priming compound to light off the increased powder charges of slow burning poders associated with magnum case capacities.

Jeff

[JudgeBAC]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_5_55/ai_n31480080/

http://www.castingstuff.com/primer_testing_reference.htm

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com/2009/06/primers-small-rifle-primer-study.html

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com/2009/06/primers-large-rifle-primer-study.html

[Rocky Raab]

I did my own primer test years ago, but limited it to small and large rifle primers - no handgun. I probably couldn't locate enough kinds to do a meaningful test these days, and the test was rather tedious so I don't plan to try.

For the record, I used particularly consistent bullet/powder combinations in 223 and 308 and changed only the primer. I judged primer brissance (not brilliance, BTW) by the resulting average velocities produced. That may not be a fully scientific way, but it seems to make sense from a reloader's viewpoint. I did not address cup thickness, but the results were as follows, with the "hottest" primer at the top:

LARGE RIFLE
F215
WLRM (near tie)
CCI250
R 9 ½ M
WLR
F210
CCIBR2/200
R 9 ½

SMALL RIFLE
F 205
R 7½
WSRM
F 200
WSR
CCI BR4/400
R 6½

[songdog53]

I have some older Winchester primers in Large Pistol that State they are for Regular or Magnum loads. I know Winchester has changed their primers now but always wondered why they made large pistol primers for both uses. I used them for years and still do with good results.

[Rocky Raab]

Those are actually a kind of intermediate strength. In general, Winchester primers are hotter than a goat's butt in a jalapeno field.

[ole 5 hole group]

WLP's are excellent primers and are no where near the CCI350 as to peak pressure. The CCI350 is a "hot" pistol primer.

John Linebaugh recommends the WLP in the various Linebaugh calibers, as the CCI was found to increase peak pressure by a significant amount in the pressure barrels used in his development testing.

I use the WLP in the 500 S&W as well as the Linebaugh calibers (as well as most other calibers calling for LP primers) and have found the only difference between the WLP and the CCI350 & standard rifle primers is a loss of 25 to 35fps in velocity on the "heavy calibers".

I thought a hotter primer was needed when using AA1680 powder, as I got inconsistent ignition as well as stuck bullets using the WLP primer in the Linebaugh Max - the AA powder tech advised me 1680 must be compressed when shot from the 500 Smith or Linebaugh calibers and that solved the ignition problem using WLP with 1680.