Conversion to 209 primers.

[koehn,jim]

Has anyone used the conversion from percussion caps to a 209 primer is it worth it. I am considering it partly because it is easier to get the primers than the caps.

[johnson1942]

if your talking sidelocks, yes many of us uses 209 conversion nipples. mag spark at warren outdoors or if it is american thread pedersoli 209 conversion nipple. i have both and they both are good. never a misfire.

[Swede44mag]

I haven't tried any on my TC Hawken 50cal percussion yet.
I have a conversion unit for my Knight MK85 I would rather use the percussion caps.
I bought a SS CVA Accura that is made to use 209 primers on sale for about $230.00 new after BP season last year.

It all depends on what BP rifle/pistol you have.

[koehn,jim]

I plan to put it on a TC Seneca. The caps are harder to get around here and a lot more expensive than shotgun primers.

[koehlerrk]

I purchased a Mag-Spark for my TC Hawkin 50 a couple years ago when #11 caps were un-possible to locate here in NY, but 209 primers were easy to find.

The Mag-Spark works just fine, but my accuracy suffered. Lots of asking and reading resulted in me finding out it was due to the large volume of gases generated by the 209 primer was un-seating the bullet before the powder could ignite, giving erratic shots. I can only imagine this getting worse with the smaller bore on your Seneca. You might need to use the muzzle-loader specific (read low-power and high price) 209 primers in your rifle.

Since #11 caps became available here again last year, I pulled the Mag-Spark off, cleaned it up, and put it away. I'll keep it in case I need it, but hope I don't.

Now, a buddy of mine has one of the conversion nipples that uses small rifle primers and he loves it, says he won't go back to #11 caps. Having shot his gun, it works great, but I don't think you can get those small primer adapters anymore.

Best of luck, keep us posted.

[Nobade]

You won't find one for a Seneca. They use much smaller threads than normal and there's not enough room around the threads for a mag-spark to fit. Have to stick to caps for that one.

-Nobade

[oldracer]

The rifle I bought that came with the 209 setup has a very small vent in the powder area that is to release some of that pressure mentioned earlier. The other item that is slightly different is the striking area of the cock (hammer) is flat instead of the concave design of all my others. I tried the conversion on several other of my muzzle loaders and that all worked fine and since I rarely shoot round balls to any distance over 100 yards there was no accuracy change.

The top or striker of the adapter does stick up much higher than a regular nipple and #11 cap so there has to be plenty of clearance to make them work.

[waksupi]

Generally speaking, the 209 primers will not give as good accuracy as a #11.

[johnson1942]

how come my several side locks shoot very very accurate with the magspark nipple? according to what? according to the bumblebee groups i get with them. round ball guns included. they may not be 1840 traditional but they sure were around in the 1870/s. never ever have seen accracy suffer with them but i dont own and shoot every muzzle loader in america. shoot what you want, im sticking with the 209 primer ignition.

[fouronesix]

Well, koehlerrk relayed exactly the theory: "The Mag-Spark works just fine, but my accuracy suffered. Lots of asking and reading resulted in me finding out it was due to the large volume of gases generated by the 209 primer was un-seating the bullet before the powder could ignite, giving erratic shots."

Similar feelings are common amongst many of the BPCR shoorters. Likewise with the serious bench rest Jbullet shooters. Many in both groups shy away from "mag" type primers for the same reason- consistency and accuracy.

I have no problem getting equal or better accuracy using standard primers or caps in various non-mag high power Jbullet rifles, BPCRs and muzzleloaders I shoot.

A few exceptions are obvious where more primer or cap "power" is called for: Lighting slow smokeless powders in large capacity cases, especially ball powders and/or for some cold weather conditions. Blowing through accumulated fouling in the flash channel of guns like muskets when shooting long shot strings without cleaning. Lighting notoriously hard to light BP sub powders.

[mooman76]

Has anyone used the conversion from percussion caps to a 209 primer is it worth it. I am considering it partly because it is easier to get the primers than the caps.


Ever get to Vegas? We have allot(#11) here. Not cheap but not that bad either since they are more plentiful.

[Rick Hodges]

Then they make the WW 777 and Muzzleloader 209 primers with a weaker charge in them tailored to the finicky shooters who think the standard 209's are too powerful. They are also priced higher...lol around here a buck or more a hundred more than #11's. You pay your money and take your choice, what ever works for you. I use the WW's in my inlines and #11's for my RB guns and the TC Scout. I can say that the inlines with the 209's are my most accurate.

[koehlerrk]

A few exceptions are obvious where more primer or cap "power" is called for: Lighting slow smokeless powders in large capacity cases, especially ball powders and/or for some cold weather conditions. Blowing through accumulated fouling in the flash channel of guns like muskets when shooting long shot strings without cleaning. Lighting notoriously hard to light BP sub powders.

You do bring up a good point... when using the Mag-Spark, I never had a misfire, it lit every single time. May not have put the projectile exactly where I intended it to go, but it always fired. And for the record, I bought one box of those low-power high-cost muzzle loader 209 primers. They worked, grouped better than any other 209 primer, but still not as good as a good old #11 cap. Add in the extra fussing with having to unscrew the cap from the Mag-Spark, dig out the old primer, drop in the new one, screw the cap back on, and for pity's sake don't drop it! So when #11's became available at my LGS again, I bought a 1K sleeve... should be good for a while.

[Geezer in NH]

Cap??, Primer?? Huh

[koehlerrk]

Cap??, Primer?? Huh

Let me guess... you're a flint guy.

[725]

Sometimes you can just thread a musket cap nipple into the same threads. They are hotter than #11's and might be found easier than your #11's.

[oldracer]

There are a couple items to consider if going to try the 209 primers and adapters. First is the top of the adapter might stand taller than the nipple and percussion cap so there might not be enough room to half or full cock the hammer. Next is the type of hammer, if it is a "dolphin" type that has the cast in depression to prevent the cap from flying off the nipple, there might not be enough throw for the hammer to strike the adapter and fire the 209. The rifle I got that was made for the 209 primers had a flat surface so it hit the adapter's striker well. It also had plenty of hammer throw so I can half and full cock fine.

[Bphunter]

Generally speaking, the 209 primers will not give as good accuracy as a #11.

I agree with this. My groups go from 1.5 to 3 inches at 100 yds. I use BP, so ignition was never a problem. Some powders work better with 209's, so it really depends the powder.

[Whiterabbit]

gotta find the weakest 209 you can get your hands on.