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

[El Greco]

This question has been asked numerous times.
The video below will answer many questions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGVRGsoOr6k&t=324s

[Joel Chavez]

Good stuff!

[Conditor22]

A knowledgeable member on this forum who does a lot of testing told me there was/is a flaw in the testing process/test and the results. I tend to agree with him.

I've tried exchanging spm for some of my favorite sp loads and the results were nowhere near as good. I'm not saying you can't get good groups/loads with spm in 9mm, I did a lot of testing in 357 and came up with good spm loads.

IF substituting spm or sr for sp I would start at the beginning load and work your way up watching pressure signs.

[Larry Gibson]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?417830-Comparison-of-various-SP-and-SR-primers-in-the-357-Magnum

Based on the test in that thread I would say it is not "safe' to substitute or use SP magnum or SR primers in the 9mm P cartridge.

But to each his own.

[Flailguy]

I've been using small rifle primers in 9mm for an ar using "start" load data. I hope this is safe...

[Sailormilan2]

9x23 Win cases, and ammo, come from the Winchester factory with small rifle primers. I often use small rifle primers in my hot 38 Super loads.

[Larry Gibson]

If the load was worked up, as it should have been, and the velocity does not exceed that of the same load with standard SP primers it might be "safe" and not exceeding at least the SAAMI MPSM. Yes, some do use SP magnum primers and SR primers w/o apparent pressure problems. But how do they know? Also some handgun cartridges are designed and made to use SR or LR primers but then those are used in cases and firearms designed for the psi they generate.

The problem is one of just substituting a SP magnum or SR primer in a "load" as was done in the video and implied to be safe. The video does not tell us what the load was. If one is using a maximum load developed with a standard SP primer and substitute a SP magnum or SR primer that is shown to increase psi then user beware is all I can say. We are all free to make our own choices (at least so far for the most part) and all I can say is substituting a SP magnum or SR primer in any of the 3 different 9mm P loads I use is not something I would do.

[Larry Gibson]

9x23 Win cases, and ammo, come from the Winchester factory with small rifle primers. I often use small rifle primers in my hot 38 Super loads.

You can bet your buppy Winchester didn't just substitute a WSR for a WSP in a given load w/o thorough testing.

I can pressure test those "hot 38 Super loads"?

[rancher1913]

keep in mind some powders are not substitution friendly while others tolerate it, does he say what powder was used.

[dtknowles]

From what I have gathered, the test in the video only proves that maybe you could get away with it in some cases. What Larry's test indicates is that there are probably cases where it would be a bad idea.

Anyone reloading who is not following closely loads listed in a manual is taking some risk. Even some manuals can't always be trusted, especially older ones as sometimes components change but keep the same names.

Tim

[Lloyd Smale]

for the most part load data in loading manuals these day are dummied down for liability reasons. If you doubt it look at a loading manual from 40 years ago. Ive shot mag pistol and small rifle in 9s and 40s. Never even saw a flattened primer using book loads. Only down side to it is i wish i had some of those small rifle primers back today. Now that said when i do it i start with the middle of the road load. Not the starting load and not the max. If i dont get pressure signs i slowly work up but usually stay right there because in all reality 50-100 fps isnt buying you much anyway. Most of my 9 shooting is cast bullet plinking. Its has kind of replaced 22lr in my house. Not going to war or self defense. for that i buy a box of factory (or did 20 years ago) and have a loaded mag in a defense gun. bottom line is if a mag primer makes your load so hot it blows a primer or ruptures a case or anything else unsafe your allready loading way above safe limits.

[JoeJames]

I am not hurting yet, for spp's, but I may load a few 38 Special standard loads - 3.8 grains Bullseye - 158 gr. Speer swaged swc, and in my S&W Model 67 they average 773 fps. That is of course with standard small pistol primers. And substitute CCI small rifle primers, and see how they run. I'd rather know now than later on and way on down the road.

[44MAG#1]

What Mr Smale said. If one drops back sufficiently from near max, watches pressure signs on the cases and works up like one should there should be no safety problem. Now if one is like a bull on a rampage and slaps a Mag or SR primer in just any load, I would say that person is, well, I will say it like this, something is wrong with their judgment.

[charlie b]

If you work back up how do you know you are not exceeding the pressure limits?

Remember that the primer cups for rifle and sometimes for magnum pistol are harder/thicker than standard pistol. Making a rifle primer flat means you are at rifle pressures, not something I would want in my pistol. I know I have not had a Rem 7 1/2 primer flatten in my .223. I'd hate to think of that much pressure in my 9mm.

Yes, I know I can get away with it sometimes. Modern pistols are made with better metals and can withstand a lot higher pressures, but.....

[Lloyd Smale]

If you work back up how do you know you are not exceeding the pressure limits?

Remember that the primer cups for rifle and sometimes for magnum pistol are harder/thicker than standard pistol. Making a rifle primer flat means you are at rifle pressures, not something I would want in my pistol. I know I have not had a Rem 7 1/2 primer flatten in my .223. I'd hate to think of that much pressure in my 9mm.

Yes, I know I can get away with it sometimes. Modern pistols are made with better metals and can withstand a lot higher pressures, but.....

like was said if your one that already pushes the limit on plus p handloads then its not for you. Most of us shoot cast and dont push to max levels anyway and like i said even if you do the books are giving you lawyer level loads anyway. All i can say is ive loaded THOUSANDS of 9s with small rifle and sm pistol mag primers and have yet to have even a flattened primer. Best get used to doing things like this because if you dont you might as well put your guns in the safe and lock it for the next 4 years at least. Bottom line is if you hurt a gun doing this then either your gun is a piece of crap or your not using a newer loading manual to find your loads. Id bet theres not a handloader here thats been doing it for more then 20 years that hasnt snuck past max loads listed in a manual at one time or another. Guns are usually proofed at 50 to a 100 percent above max listed pressures. So to blow one up you have to do something pretty stupid and theres no cure for stupid.

[44MAG#1]

If you work back up how do you know you are not exceeding the pressure limits?

Remember that the primer cups for rifle and sometimes for magnum pistol are harder/thicker than standard pistol. Making a rifle primer flat means you are at rifle pressures, not something I would want in my pistol. I know I have not had a Rem 7 1/2 primer flatten in my .223. I'd hate to think of that much pressure in my 9mm.

Yes, I know I can get away with it sometimes. Modern pistols are made with better metals and can withstand a lot higher pressures, but.....

If you look at the CASE as a pressure sign, how they resize compared to a "normal load" whatever that is and chrono the loads as you go up you can tell a safe load. The KEY is to work up and WATCH. If you work up 3 different lots of the same powder with everything else being the same the pressure won't be the same even with the same charge weights. Throw in the difference in different lots of the same primer too, plus some using range pick up brass and what could you have. It is the "Swallowing a Camel and gagging at a Gnat " complex as it were.
I do the same thing at times. After all we are just human.

[Larry Gibson]

for the most part load data in loading manuals these day are dummied down for liability reasons.

An erroneous assumption and a myth.

Many loads in manuals have lowered the loads in some cartridges simply because we have much better and more accurate methods of measuring not only peak pressure [that's all C.U.P. method measures] but the entire internal ballistics when the cartridge is fired. The additional older methods used such as case head expansion, flatness of primers, sticky extraction, etc. proved not to be really good indicators of the actual pressure. Additionally many "blow ups" of firearms are not caused by excessive pressure the firearm itself could not handle. Many were caused by the cartridge case rupturing from pressures it could not handle. In the case of the 9mm P in semi-auto handguns the case is definitely the weak link. Interestingly to note also that, because of the better pressure testing methods some cartridges actually have improved/increased increased loads. Because of the much better pressure testing equipment we also have several new cartridges, both handgun and rifle, that give much higher performance at higher pressure than before. The better methods of pressure measurement have led to better designs, stronger firearms and better powders to contain the higher pressures. But let us understand; the 9mm P is a 100+ year old design with many cartridge cases, handguns of design and steel not designed nor intended to take excessive pressures. We should remain aware of that fact.

Many semi autos leave a portion of the case unsupported [surrounded by steel if you will] in the area of the case head/web not supported by the feed ramp area. It is there that excessive high pressure most often causes the unsupported area of the cartridge case to rupture. Many times the frame, grips and magazines are damaged/destroyed along with injury to the shooters hand. That is the probable and potential problem with using SR primers in loads that develop higher excessive pressures in the 9mm P used in those handguns. If your loads using SR primers do not develop excessive pressure then there should be no problem in their use. However, unless you can actually measure the pressure of such loads how do you know?

[jsizemore]

for the most part load data in loading manuals these day are dummied down for liability reasons. If you doubt it look at a loading manual from 40 years ago. Ive shot mag pistol and small rifle in 9s and 40s. Never even saw a flattened primer using book loads. Only down side to it is i wish i had some of those small rifle primers back today. Now that said when i do it i start with the middle of the road load. Not the starting load and not the max. If i dont get pressure signs i slowly work up but usually stay right there because in all reality 50-100 fps isnt buying you much anyway. Most of my 9 shooting is cast bullet plinking. Its has kind of replaced 22lr in my house. Not going to war or self defense. for that i buy a box of factory (or did 20 years ago) and have a loaded mag in a defense gun. bottom line is if a mag primer makes your load so hot it blows a primer or ruptures a case or anything else unsafe your allready loading way above safe limits.

Please go to this site and discover the manufacturing changes that have happened over time.

http://www.ilrc.ucf.edu/powders/search.php

Alliant Bullseye for instance has 7 different samples. Test data shows their difference. I didn't even count the "Bullseye" produced by Hercules. Things change and the market demands product. You or I don't have the lab to test exactly the differences between old and new components. I'm sure legalities come into play in any decision. We do live in the USA. Doing the right thing and keeping the wolf at bay can go hand in hand. I appreciate keeping my parts and pieces.

[44MAG#1]

One can tell if the load is safe (relative term) even if one doesn't know the EXACT pressure which is sure to change with a different lot of powder and different lots of primers. Not to mention different brands of primers. So pressure are not EXACT but still an ever changing thing . Period. Most don't have pressure measuring equipment. So the old Gray Matter must kick in combined with a chrono. Pressures of loads changes. No loads stay the same.

[kevin c]

Small rifle primers are used in the major power factor loads of some USPSA competitors, which often are high pressure. Here, though, it's not the primer making the load hot, but the powder charge.

Not saying it's a good idea, just that it's done.

[Larry Gibson]

44MAG#1

I am not saying, nor have I said in another thread, to not use SR primers. I have only said what I would and wouldn't do if I had to use SR primers in any small handgun cartridge. That is based now on actual pressure testing of such not on what i have gotten away with in the past.

I have been involved in several firearm, shall we say, mishaps in past years "going where no man has gone before" [or so I thought]......I don't intend to go there again. As I said previously my advise and only my advise is: If you must use SR primers in a small handgun cartridge intended for use with standard SP primers then use the start load and just go with that. If you work up a load above the start load, unless you can measure the psi as I have, you will not know what the level of psi is even if chronographing. The use of SR primers in such cases intended for SP primer use does, in fact, raise pressures....sometimes substantially.

We are all free to do as we please.

[44MAG#1]

Larry Gibson.

No where have I said there wasn't any danger. But there is danger in not being careful doing anything concerning reloading. I advocate safety first and foremost. Concerning a chronograph, if one does start using rifle primers and the start load and velocities were close to full power loads, with my limited knowledge, I would surmize pressures more than likely would be pretty upwards for the load. That is the reason I would start slightly lower than starting loads, ( slightly now) and start there. Run some over the chrono and see what the results are.
Caution is the key word.
I know some don't have the word caution in their vocabulary so to play it safe one has to play it safe with advice to them

[44MAG#1]

I will add this too. Each do what they want to do. Just be careful in doing it. Reloading, driving, boating, swimming, working out, drinking, etc. Each has a risk.
Just be aware, very aware.

[CraigOK]

I wish the conclusion of the test was different, but I have faith in his method, sample size, and Larrys experience. With different powders, cartridges, etc you would likely get varying results but unless you have the means to test pressure its all a guess. I wonder what the difference in mawp vs pressure that causes failure is in brass and barrels. That again would be a case by case basis but there is room over saami specs and barrel ratings before kaboom. Play with caution

[44MAG#1]

CraigOK

You hit the nail on the head. Play with caution.

[Larry Gibson]

Exactly

[SSGOldfart]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?417830-Comparison-of-various-SP-and-SR-primers-in-the-357-Magnum

Based on the test in that thread I would say it is not "safe' to substitute or use SP magnum or SR primers in the 9mm P cartridge.

But to each his own.

I agree with Larry and if you must at least read the posted link,and start over working up your load.
Simper-Fi

[JoeJames]

for the most part load data in loading manuals these day are dummied down for liability reasons. If you doubt it look at a loading manual from 40 years ago. Ive shot mag pistol and small rifle in 9s and 40s. Never even saw a flattened primer using book loads. Only down side to it is i wish i had some of those small rifle primers back today. Now that said when i do it i start with the middle of the road load. Not the starting load and not the max. If i dont get pressure signs i slowly work up but usually stay right there because in all reality 50-100 fps isnt buying you much anyway. Most of my 9 shooting is cast bullet plinking. Its has kind of replaced 22lr in my house. Not going to war or self defense. for that i buy a box of factory (or did 20 years ago) and have a loaded mag in a defense gun. bottom line is if a mag primer makes your load so hot it blows a primer or ruptures a case or anything else unsafe your allready loading way above safe limits.Once again, I agree with Lloyd, and I am not fixing to branch over into 9mm's. But in straight wall revolver cartridges like 38 Special, with what I consider moderate loads and in a modern K frame Smith, I see no harm in trying them, say with 2.7 grains of Bullseye with a 148 grain DEWC, or 3.8 grains of Bullseye with a soft 160 grain Speer SWC.

[dtknowles]

for the most part load data in loading manuals these day are dummied down for liability reasons. If you doubt it look at a loading manual from 40 years ago. Ive shot mag pistol and small rifle in 9s and 40s. Never even saw a flattened primer using book loads. Only down side to it is i wish i had some of those small rifle primers back today. Now that said when i do it i start with the middle of the road load. Not the starting load and not the max. If i dont get pressure signs i slowly work up but usually stay right there because in all reality 50-100 fps isnt buying you much anyway. Most of my 9 shooting is cast bullet plinking. Its has kind of replaced 22lr in my house. Not going to war or self defense. for that i buy a box of factory (or did 20 years ago) and have a loaded mag in a defense gun. bottom line is if a mag primer makes your load so hot it blows a primer or ruptures a case or anything else unsafe your allready loading way above safe limits.

What pressure sign are you looking for, you will blow out a case in 9mm or 40 S&W before you see a flattened small rifle primer. I have run small rifle primers in loads in the more than 60 Ksi range without flattening the primer.

Tim

[dtknowles]

I have become more skeptical of published load data that does not include pressure data. Along with that I almost never truly match the hand book. Either bullet diameter, primer, case, or bullet weigh and hardness are not a match for the book. My chronograph does not agree with the book either. Every handload is a new experiment. Usually you have to screw up pretty bad to blow up a gun. How close are your to screwing up pretty bad? Do you even pause and take a second thought before you pull the trigger?

Tim

[P Flados]

I will say that huge fraction of the people that load a lot substitute some component on a load more often than not.

When you do this, do you have any tools that really tell you you are ok?. If your gun is rated for 55 ksi, flat primers may be a good indicator. If your gun is not rated this high, looking at primers may just be giving you a false sense of security. Sticky extraction is another "traditional" indicator. But what does it mean in your gun. If you have a revolver with a very hard steel cylinder, it may mean you are approaching the point of damage / failure.

I feel that I have gotten better at using tools that I have to evaluate what I am doing and not just "hope for the best". If you have a chronograph and your load data matches your gun pretty good, you have a tool that really should keep you safe. However, if the load data was from a 6" unvented test barrel and you have a 4" revolver with a 0.006" cylinder gap, you would need to do some significant "fudging" to figure out what velocity you should be getting.

If you are loading mid range in the pressure spectrum for a 357, you have little to worry about.

If you are loading a 357 to something you think is full power for your GP-100 or your TC Contender, you probably have nothing to worry about.

If you are loading a 357 to something you think is full power and your gun is one of those that the maker "does not recommend regular use of full power" loads, you could very well have something to worry about.

Now most automatic pistols do give you an easy option that is pretty good for "knowing you are ok". They have an operating range of pressures between just enough to function normally at the low end up to full power at the high end. You can just start low and work up to find the point where the gun will just function normally (typically lock back on the last round). Then increase the charge just a little bit to get to the middle of the normal operating range. This should be fine until you need to swap some component (bullet, primer, case) or use a new batch of powder. Then you need to drop down and work your way back up again. Unless you do very careful development using tools like a chrono, you really are better off not pushing handloads in these guns any harder than needed for good function.

Generally speaking, I like it when I have lots of margin between the pressures I think I am loading to and the pressure I think will hurt my gun. If I want more power, I would rather get a more powerful gun (either bigger cartridge or gun known to have ample margin), than take my chances pushing things close to the limits. It is just too easy to have some minor glitch that can cause an excursion (pressure significantly higher than expected). In my 45 years of reloading, I have had enough "excursions" on my guns that have lots of margins. These events would most likely have been much worse if the gun had not been stronger than the minimum required for the cartridge.

[44MAG#1]

I for one thinks that Lloyd Smale is far, far, far smart enough to know what he is doing.
Probably more than most on most shooting forums.
I posted a load a few years ago that was recommended to me by John Linebaugh and was soundly thrashed by a few on here.
Of course I have used Federal 215 Mag primers in the 44 Magnum. So there it goes.

[Lloyd Smale]

I for one thinks that Lloyd Smale is far, far, far smart enough to know what he is doing.
Probably more than most on most shooting forums.
I posted a load a few years ago that was recommended to me by John Linebaugh and was soundly thrashed by a few on here.
Of course I have used Federal 215 Mag primers in the 44 Magnum. So there it goes.

yup pretty amazing how a lee starter kit and the internet can make a guy an expert these days. This place used to be a place where very experienced handloaders and casters were like a family. Then came the know it alls. Been there and done that?? They dont even know where it is or what needs to be done! Tell you one thing. I know John personally. There isnt ONE OUNCE of bs in him. If he says it youd best listen. NOBODY that ever lived knows more about revolvers and gun strength then that man. If he says X gun will take X loads its because hes shot 50-100k of them through his own guns. About the same thing with guys like you and I. If i say it will work it wasnt just pulled out of my but or gotten from in internet search or some advice from a guy on you tube making money. Its because IVE SHOT THEM. Sad thing is that seems to intimidate some. The ones that really raise my blood pressure are the idiots that ask a question and when you answer it start arguing with you.

[44MAG#1]

I'm with you on this. Some assumes that everyone is ignorant except them. I'm not smart but I do know a couple of things regardless of what my lovely wife says.


yup pretty amazing how a lee starter kit and the internet can make a guy an expert these days. This place used to be a place where very experienced handloaders and casters were like a family. Then came the know it alls. Been there and done that?? They dont even know where it is or what needs to be done! Tell you one thing. I know John personally. There isnt ONE OUNCE of bs in him. If he says it youd best listen. NOBODY that ever lived knows more about revolvers and gun strength then that man. If he says X gun will take X loads its because hes shot 50-100k of them through his own guns. About the same thing with guys like you and I. If i say it will work it wasnt just pulled out of my but or gotten from in internet search or some advice from a guy on you tube making money. Its because IVE SHOT THEM. Sad thing is that seems to intimidate some. The ones that really raise my blood pressure are the idiots that ask a question and when you answer it start arguing with you.

[Lloyd Smale]

known you long enough to know thats fact

[Larry Gibson]

I see this thread has degenerated from a discussion of facts based on actual tested data and experience obtained by considerably more than a "Lee Loader and the internet" to personal attacks. Thus I'm off this thread.

Have a good day and try to be safe.

FYI; having actually pressure tested the Federal 215 LRM primer in comparison to a Winchester WLP primer in the 44 magnum with 2400 (21 gr) and H110 (23 gr) under an RCBS 44-250-KT cast bullet I can tell the use of the Federal 215 primer raises the psi 10,000+ over the Winchester WLP primer with 2400 and 15,000+ psi with H110. Don't know what the load was that Linebaugh suggested but if you're already using a maximum SAAMI MAP psi level load developed with a standard or magnum LP primer and you switch to the Federal 215 LR primer you are in proof level psi's. One of Linebaugh's revolvers would probably hold up to that level of psi as they are made for that. However, there are many 44 magnums that will not take that much psi for very long. Again, not "thrashing" anyone by any means, just stating facts based on actual pressure test results instead of internet opinion.

[44MAG#1]

Nowhere did I say that Linebaugh recommended the Federal 215 mag primer. That was another gentleman.
Linebaugh recommended a load that got me thrashed on here after I posted it.
You were assuming that Linebaugh recommended the Fed 215.
Linebaugh actually recommended the WLP.
Plus the load was for the 45 Colt not the 44 Magnum that got me thrashed.





I see this thread has degenerated from a discussion of facts based on actual tested data and experience obtained by considerably more than a "Lee Loader and the internet" to personal attacks. Thus I'm off this thread.

Have a good day and try to be safe.

FYI; having actually pressure tested the Federal 215 LRM primer in comparison to a Winchester WLP primer in the 44 magnum with 2400 (21 gr) and H110 (23 gr) under an RCBS 44-250-KT cast bullet I can tell the use of the Federal 215 primer raises the psi 10,000+ over the Winchester WLP primer with 2400 and 15,000+ psi with H110. Don't know what the load was that Linebaugh suggested but if you're already using a maximum SAAMI MAP psi level load developed with a standard or magnum LP primer and you switch to the Federal 215 LR primer you are in proof level psi's. One of Linebaugh's revolvers would probably hold up to that level of psi as they are made for that. However, there are many 44 magnums that will not take that much psi for very long. Again, not "thrashing" anyone by any means, just stating facts based on actual pressure test results instead of internet opinion.

[Larry Gibson]

What you said in post #32 was;

"I posted a load a few years ago that was recommended to me by John Linebaugh and was soundly thrashed by a few on here.
Of course I have used Federal 215 Mag primers in the 44 Magnum."

Seems pretty clear you're insinuating the use of Fed 215s was recommended and no mention of WLPs.

No sense arguing this anymore. You will do what you will.

[44MAG#1]

You quoted me alright but you didn't see where I said Linebaugh recommended the Federal 215's
They were recommended but not by Linebaugh. Still an assumption.
We all assume at times even the best.
Sorry I led you down the wrong path.


What you said in post #32 was;

"I posted a load a few years ago that was recommended to me by John Linebaugh and was soundly thrashed by a few on here.
Of course I have used Federal 215 Mag primers in the 44 Magnum."

Seems pretty clear you're insinuating the use of Fed 215s was recommended and no mention of WLPs.

No sense arguing this anymore. You will do what you will.

[Larry Gibson]

Whatever.....

[onelight]

Thank you again Larry , you go above and beyond in providing us with great information .
Good Job.

[Lloyd Smale]

What you said in post #32 was;

"I posted a load a few years ago that was recommended to me by John Linebaugh and was soundly thrashed by a few on here.
Of course I have used Federal 215 Mag primers in the 44 Magnum."

Seems pretty clear you're insinuating the use of Fed 215s was recommended and no mention of WLPs.

No sense arguing this anymore. You will do what you will.

that is because ww no longer makes a large pistol std primer. there primers are the old magnums in a box marked mag and standard.

[Lloyd Smale]

I see this thread has degenerated from a discussion of facts based on actual tested data and experience obtained by considerably more than a "Lee Loader and the internet" to personal attacks. Thus I'm off this thread.

Have a good day and try to be safe.

FYI; having actually pressure tested the Federal 215 LRM primer in comparison to a Winchester WLP primer in the 44 magnum with 2400 (21 gr) and H110 (23 gr) under an RCBS 44-250-KT cast bullet I can tell the use of the Federal 215 primer raises the psi 10,000+ over the Winchester WLP primer with 2400 and 15,000+ psi with H110. Don't know what the load was that Linebaugh suggested but if you're already using a maximum SAAMI MAP psi level load developed with a standard or magnum LP primer and you switch to the Federal 215 LR primer you are in proof level psi's. One of Linebaugh's revolvers would probably hold up to that level of psi as they are made for that. However, there are many 44 magnums that will not take that much psi for very long. Again, not "thrashing" anyone by any means, just stating facts based on actual pressure test results instead of internet opinion.

Johns 45 colt loads are shot in a smith 25. he runs them at 35000 and has shot THOUSANDS OF THEM IN MANY GUNS. As have I. What is not being addressed here is the gun. Im not going to stand on some imported 300 dollar 44 mag. But a blackhawk is a very stout gun and a redhawk will take near 454 pressures. John Taffin, another guy thats forgot more then we know even has published data for it. i cant argue the pressure numbers with you larry because i sure dont have the equiptment to test them. Dont know where you would have seen 44 mags tested unless it was at an ammo factory. There are a PILE of guys that push 45 colts in strong guns WAY above factory rated pressures. All i will tell you is ive shoot MANY MANY lbs of 2400 in all kinds of guns and ran it at full pressure and in some cases beyond book loads and have done it with mag primers and stand primers. Ive yet to see a SANE load that changing to a mag primer even showed pressure signs. Might be because most of us that fooled with those specialty 44 mag and 45 colt loads used mag primers working them up.

But bottom line is if replacing a std primer with a mag primer bulges a cylinder or blows a primer or even flattens a primer your already way over book level loads. Id bet there isnt a load listed ANYWHERE in ANY loading manual that would be unsafe swapping a mag primer for the standard. You say youve actually used a 44 mag pressure barrel and tested them so ill give you that. But guys like John Linebaugh who builds guns that are in a different universe then the 44 mag in power and has shot probably more then a million rounds out of them and John Taffin who has shot more in a year them most of us even avid shooters have in our life know guns better then some college educated engineer running a pressure barrel.

This whole argument is silly. ANYONE thats been loading for 20 years knows loading manuals today are on the lame side. Even compared to loading manuals from back 50 years ago when i started loading. They are like that because of liability issues that the bullet and powder manufactures dont want to deal with. Theres absolutely no way there going to post a max load thats right on the verge of blowing up a gun and all it takes to do that is swapping out a primer. All that said i dont think any knowledgeable handgun loader would use a 215 for anything. There the exception because there much stouter then even other large rifle mag primers. I dont even fool with them unless im loading my 300 wby 7stw or ultra mags or when using something like 870. ive found them hot enough that they can even cause accuracy problems in smaller rifle cases.

[onelight]

There are people here that are loading for the first time . All the way to people that have decades of experience.
All I saw in Larry's post was a very well put together comparison of different primers in the same loads and the pressure results he got in those tests and how those results would influence his choices and this test was at the request of other members here.
Lloyd you have a huge amount of knowledge and experience to bring to the table but your rude rants , and discourteous , approach and lack of an ability to accept any other opinions kills threads .
It's a shame we all loose because or it.
And that's my opinion it's worth exactly what it cost.

[Larry Gibson]

Lloyd

The question of this thread is; "Are Small Pistol Magnum & Small Rifle Primers Safe in 9mm?"

99.999999% of reloaded 9mm's are shot in recoil or blow back operated semi autos....not large frame revolvers. Yes, it "is the gun" and the smaller framed, smaller barrel diameter recoil operated handguns won't take the psi you are talking safely.....period.

As to the use of Federal 215 LR primers used in larger cases in heavy frame revolvers; standard 44 magnum or 45 Colt case primer pockets have to be altered to use them or any LR primer. It is not a simple substitution. The use of LR primers or even WLPs in large cases used in large frame revolvers is not relevant to the use of SR primers being safe to use in 9mm cases.

I've never stated SR primers should never be used in 9mm cases. To the contrary, I've stated what I would do if I had to use them. I have also presented factual test data that demonstrates the use of SR primers in the 9mm case could be unsafe under circumstances where the use of a SP primer is used safely. I have answered the OP's question, that is all.

[dtknowles]

Johns 45 colt loads are shot in a smith 25. he runs them at 35000 and has shot THOUSANDS OF THEM IN MANY GUNS. As have I. What is not being addressed here is the gun. Im not going to stand on some imported 300 dollar 44 mag. But a blackhawk is a very stout gun and a redhawk will take near 454 pressures. John Taffin, another guy thats forgot more then we know even has published data for it. i cant argue the pressure numbers with you larry because i sure dont have the equiptment to test them. Dont know where you would have seen 44 mags tested unless it was at an ammo factory. There are a PILE of guys that push 45 colts in strong guns WAY above factory rated pressures. All i will tell you is ive shoot MANY MANY lbs of 2400 in all kinds of guns and ran it at full pressure and in some cases beyond book loads and have done it with mag primers and stand primers. Ive yet to see a SANE load that changing to a mag primer even showed pressure signs. Might be because most of us that fooled with those specialty 44 mag and 45 colt loads used mag primers working them up.

But bottom line is if replacing a std primer with a mag primer bulges a cylinder or blows a primer or even flattens a primer your already way over book level loads. Id bet there isnt a load listed ANYWHERE in ANY loading manual that would be unsafe swapping a mag primer for the standard. You say youve actually used a 44 mag pressure barrel and tested them so ill give you that. But guys like John Linebaugh who builds guns that are in a different universe then the 44 mag in power and has shot probably more then a million rounds out of them and John Taffin who has shot more in a year them most of us even avid shooters have in our life know guns better then some college educated engineer running a pressure barrel.

This whole argument is silly. ANYONE thats been loading for 20 years knows loading manuals today are on the lame side. Even compared to loading manuals from back 50 years ago when i started loading. They are like that because of liability issues that the bullet and powder manufactures dont want to deal with. Theres absolutely no way there going to post a max load thats right on the verge of blowing up a gun and all it takes to do that is swapping out a primer. All that said i dont think any knowledgeable handgun loader would use a 215 for anything. There the exception because there much stouter then even other large rifle mag primers. I dont even fool with them unless im loading my 300 wby 7stw or ultra mags or when using something like 870. ive found them hot enough that they can even cause accuracy problems in smaller rifle cases.

I am looking at the Hodgdon 2016 Annual Manual. I don't see anything lame about this manual. Do you think that 300 WSM load with a reported pressure of 63,900 psi is a wimpy lame load that was reduced from what could be because lawyers were afraid the company might get sued or do you think it is the highest reasonable load the team doing load development could agree on. Every load has pressure data many of the max. loads recommended match or exceed factory ammo performance. I think substituting a small rifle or magnum small pistol primer in some of the small pistol loads could put you on the verge of blowing up a gun. You can probably get away with it but that means that you are diminishing the margins of safety built into an engineered product. If you buy a 1 ton rated lifting strap do you use it to lift ton and a half loads because you know that it was designed with a lot of margin and was proof tested with a ton and a half load? Do you know how many times you can proof load that strap before it fails?

Regarding "Johns 45 colt loads are shot in a smith 25. he runs them at 35000" Is that CUP or PSI? How does he know they are 35,000 whatevers? A steady diet of 44 mag. loads at those pressure levels caused a lot of Model 29's to have they timing get messed up. I would think the same thing would happen to a Model 25 at those pressures. Yeah, they don't blow up but they are damaged. Same deal with full power loads in Model 19's

Tim

[44MAG#1]

"Regarding "Johns 45 colt loads are shot in a smith 25. he runs them at 35000" Is that CUP or PSI? How does he know they are 35,000 whatevers? A steady diet of 44 mag. loads at those pressure levels caused a lot of Model 29's to have they timing get messed up. I would think the same thing would happen to a Model 25 at those pressures. Yeah, they don't blow up but they are damaged. Same deal with full power loads in Model 19's

Tim"

Linebaugh has his loads tested.
Easy to find out. His phone number is listed on his site. I have talked with him a couple times about an hour each time.
There is more than one knowledgeable person out there.
BTW, ask him what load he uses in a 1903 Colt SAA

[Larry Gibson]

44Mag#1

That's all well and fine.

What does "John" (assuming you are inferring Linebaugh?) use in his 9mm carry pistol?

[44MAG#1]

44Mag#1

That's all well and fine.

What does "John" (assuming you are inferring Linebaugh?) use in his 9mm carry pistol?

Call him and ask. I didn't care anything about a 9 MM at the time. He may have one. Do you? I don't but did have 3 or 4

[Lloyd Smale]

There are people here that are loading for the first time . All the way to people that have decades of experience.
All I saw in Larry's post was a very well put together comparison of different primers in the same loads and the pressure results he got in those tests and how those results would influence his choices and this test was at the request of other members here.
Lloyd you have a huge amount of knowledge and experience to bring to the table but your rude rants , and discourteous , approach and lack of an ability to accept any other opinions kills threads .
It's a shame we all loose because or it.
And that's my opinion it's worth exactly what it cost.

you mean youd rather have fluff and pats on the back then real world truth. Sorry, you have the wrong guy.

[Lloyd Smale]

what we seem to have here is some experts that quote pressures that dont have any access to equiptment that costs 1000s of dollars. Guys that can be experts with just an internet search. It why Frank (i wont give his last name) from mt baldy bullets left this site. Anyone that will argue against guys like John Linebaugh are a joke to me. Hes forgot more then all of you together know. As to real world experience with loading ive got 50 years of it and dare say ive loaded more then any of you and loaded for more different calibers and have owned more different guns then any of you. Odd thing is in those 100s of 1000s rounds ive never blown a single gun up. AMAZING HEY! But then i still pay attention when someone that has more knowledge then me speaks up. Bottom line is there is no experts in this thread. Not even close. Tell you what. You load what you want and ill load what i want. When your out of primers and cant go out with your 100 rounds of ammo you shoot a month ill still be hauling 9s by the coffee can out every week to blast up and if i have to use mag primers ill use them. But there i go again posting fact and being discourteous;) instead of patting people on the back that NEED that. ME? i could give a rip what you think of me. Takes more then a cheap shot and words to bother me. Im out of here. have a nice day:lol: Before i leave though how many 19s and 29s you shot loose tim? Think we all know the answer to that.

[Electrod47]

Wow, I think that CastBoolits is the premium site for all things lead bullets. I have been reloading rifle and pistol ( all single actions made by Ruger) for 45ish years. Starting with a Lee Loader, plastic mallet etc. Which I firmly believe all people getting into reloading should start with.
The discussion above is what I like about this site. Its when a question is raised its almost like a trial is taking place because you get so many knowledgeable people either for or against. No way am I qualified to be a member of the jury. But, as someone sitting in the court I can draw my own conclusions. During this drought Just like many other guys this drought I too find myself short on SP primers and knee deep in SPM primers for some-odd reason. This is an important discussion. I Thank you all

[Lloyd Smale]

44mag your mail box is full. I did change that post though.

[Larry Gibson]

Call him and ask. I didn't care anything about a 9 MM at the time. He may have one. Do you? I don't but did have 3 or 4

Yes I do have two 9mm's, a CZ 75 and a S&W. I've had 9mm pistols of one sort or another since '69. Been casting and loading for them since '70. Had access to numerous 9mm handguns and sub machine guns of all sorts in the Army, as an LEO and as a contractor. Have literally shot thousands of rounds through them.

[Larry Gibson]

LLoyd

I lay no claim to being an "expert". However, in the last 14 years I have become quite knowledgeable in measuring pressures of cartridges in firearms. I have "equipment that costs 1000s of dollars" to measure pressure of 30+ cartridges in numerous different test firearms. In the last 14 years I have pressure tested 30,000+ cartridges. Doesn't make me an "expert" but then I don't "quote pressures with just an internet search". What amazes me is how some on the internet want to argue with actual measured pressure data......

On another subject; I think it was you I got a 4 cavity Lyman 429421 mould from a year or so ago(?). If so then just want to say after a bit of clean up and mould prep that mould is cast some very nice 429421's. Weight and measurements are the same on bullets dropped from any of the 4 cavities. Thanks again if I didn't thank you before.

[dtknowles]

.........: Before i leave though how many 19s and 29s you shot loose tim? Think we all know the answer to that.

Yes, not a one because I shoot Ruger and Dan Wesson revolvers and antique S&W top break revolvers. Never owned a 19 or 29 because they are weak for the cartridges they are chamber for. I have only been reloading for 46 years so I might have a thing or two to learn but I have also learned a thing or two as well. I bet I have reloaded cartridges you have not. Actually I know I have loaded cartridges you have not because I have the only gun chambered for one and one of the others is pretty rare revolver round.

Tim

[dougader]

Nowhere has John Linebaugh ever said he fires 35,000 psi loads in S&W 25-5 revolvers. Those loads are for Blackhawk revolvers. His S&W 25 loads are ABSOLUTE MAX loaded to 32,000 psi and most of his loads are held to 25,000 psi.

http://www.reinfjord.net/art/Gun%20Notes%20John%20Linebaugh.pdf


Notes on the Smith & Wesson

The load data printed at the beginning of this article is considered MAXIMUM safe loads
with listed bullets for RUGER BLACKHAWKS ONLY - (and, if you must shoot them,
Contenders).
The Smith & Wesson Model 25-5 chambered for the .45 Colt is a fine gun and one I pack
daily myself. The problem with the Smith &Wesson guns in general is not so much a strength
factor but rather a design factor. Before you S&W people beat up on me please listen. It has
long been evident that the Model 29 in .44 Magnum very quickly beats itself apart with fullpower loads. This is not technically a "strength" problem as much as a design problem and the
assemblage of several small parts that are not as rugged as the Single Action design. In the
course of time if all the little parts wear a tiny bit this soon adds up to a lot of play in the
overall fit and lock-up of the gun. This in turn allows the gun to get a further "run" at itself
under discharge and thus hastens the battering process.
In reality the Model 25-5 is about 80% as strong as the Model 29 in the cylinder area. The
frames are the same and are designed for a 40,000 psi load level even though we know this is
a bit more than they are happy with. It's too bad S&W built a 40,00 psi cylinder and installed
it in a 30,000 psi frame, so to speak. (note: since this writing S&W has worked on the
problem of the cylinder unlatching and rolling back under recoil after it gets a bit worn) The
25-5 in .45 Colt is safe to 80% of the 40,000 psi of the .44 Magnum Model 29. This allows a
load of 32,000 psi in this frame. I have shot hundreds of the 32,000 psi class loads listed at the
beginning of this article in several Model 25-5's. Recoil is heavy due to the S&W "hump" on
the grip, but I do not see these loads as being dangerous in this fine gun. I do consider 32,000
to be ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM for this gun and prefer to hold my personal loads to 5% under
those listed loads for approximately 25,000 psi. I carry a S&W 4" in .45 Colt daily and shoot
a 260 gr. Keith at 900 fps for general duty. When I saddle up and go into the hills I pack the
same gun with a 310 gr. NEI Keith over 23 gr. H-110. This gives me about 1080 fps and all
the punch I need for anything on our mountain. As with any gun and load data, work up
carefully. I assume responsibility only for the ammo I myself assemble

[Forrest r]

Odd, s&b sells these primers that are for rifle, pistol & revolvers. Been using them 10+/- years now in the 223rem's, 9mm's, 38spl's,357's.

https://i.imgur.com/psC0I4B.jpg

[dougader]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?417830-Comparison-of-various-SP-and-SR-primers-in-the-357-Magnum

Based on the test in that thread I would say it is not "safe' to substitute or use SP magnum or SR primers in the 9mm P cartridge.

But to each his own.

I would have to agree.

The main thing is, whenever you substitute any component common best practice is to reduce your load and work up slowly. I've heard it said and read it in print since the mid-1980's.

One small example I have is in 357 magnum with the 140 grain Sierra JHC, Hercules Blue Dot and CCI 500 standard SPP's. I worked up a load that worked well in my 686 and a Ruger GP100.

One day I inadvertently substituted CCI 550 magnum SPP's without even really thinking about it.... i recall my mind thinking "I'm loading 357 magnum" as I picked up the little box of magnum primers.

The next time I went shooting, I took my 686 and those magnum loads. They shot the same as my prior loads... big boom, recoil, muzzle blast. But when I went to dump those first 6 rounds, I found severely flattened primers and sticky case extraction. That was just a switch from standard to magnum SPP's. And my powder was loaded below book maximum in both Speer and Sierra loading manuals.

[robertbank]

Would a valid test be 10 rds over a Crony using the same powder weight/bullet combo be of any use here. Say 4.1 gr. of 231 using a 356402 bullet. If there is a noticeable difference in pressure it should result in a higher vel from a Win SRP vs a Win SPP would it not?

I shoot with a close friend who uses the same load of 231/bullet as I do but uses SRP vs my use of SPP;s. Let me know and I can arrange such a test.

Take Care

Bob

[Larry Gibson]

That was the general consensus and it's what I had also thought. Then I ran this test; http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?417830-Comparison-of-various-SP-and-SR-primers-in-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

https://i.imgur.com/sfomhPQ.jpg

[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."[/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

https://i.imgur.com/sfomhPQ.jpg

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 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......

"[I]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" :drinks:)

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

[Larry Gibson]

Look Bob, there's no need for me to "settle down" as I am not concerned in the least. You want to take the risk you go right ahead. As I've previously said numerous times we are, or at least should be, free to make our own choices.

Also no need to be condescending. You criticize my use of 357 and 44 magnum test data in lieu of 9mm data yet use the 40 S&W (? because you sure didn't use a 235 gr bullet in the 9mm) as an example. You want to walk everything back then walk it. I don't care.

An honest question was asked by the OP and I answered with actual test data pointing out there could be a pressure problem. I did not tell the OP something I have gotten away with whether I really knew it could be hazardous or not as you are doing. I also told the OP what I would do if I had to use SR primers in the 9mm. I don't as I have a good supply of both primers for my own shooting needs.

I have explained everything to you in detail. If you want to understand it then you will. If you don't you won't. If you want to accept it you will, if you don't you won't. It's up to you, so, again, do as you will.

If you have any other questions the answers have already been given in my initial report and in answers to subsequent questions you ask because you obviously fail to read what I've written. Thus, I guess in todays jargon; "I'll have to circle back to you".......

[44MAG#1]

357 Magnum
Hodgdon H4227 0.357"1.580" 14.5 1,402 34,600 CUP 16.0 1,520 42,600 CUP

[Jniedbalski]

Odd, s&b sells these primers that are for rifle, pistol & revolvers. Been using them 10+/- years now in the 223rem's, 9mm's, 38spl's,357's.

https://i.imgur.com/psC0I4B.jpg. Me and the local gun shop went round and round on this same thing. It says for rifle pistole or revolver on the package but they have a sp or sr on the package. Also if you look up on there sight look up the number on the carton. For the sp one it says for small pistole. The number on the carton with the sr says small rifle use. Why they label it this way I don’t know but there are two different boxes with two different numbers

[Jniedbalski]

I have used this primer for five years or so. My local gun shop always had them and where 5 to $6 $ cheeper. I bought thousands of them. I have boxes with sp, sr, and lp, lr, on them. Both the sp , and sr ones both have for rifle pistole or revolver use . I tried once a few light loads in 38 special with the sr ones and all seemed ok. This is after the gun shop told me they where the same. They told me see it says so on the box. After I shot them I looked up the number on the box on there web site. The number on the box with sp comes up with small pistole use. The sr number on the box comes up with small rifle. Now I only use sp for pistole only

[Lloyd Smale]

Listen to Larry or this could be you

https://i.imgur.com/sfomhPQ.jpg

geez i can post this picture and say dont burn premium gas in your car too.

[Lloyd Smale]

ill say this. Like ive said ive done it for years. Shot almost the entire year during the last shortage using cci mag pistol primers in all my small pistol primered handguns and in my ar15s. Had no choice. its what i had and it was that or lock the safe up and stop shooting. I did back my loads off to middle ground loads in the loading manuals and didnt try going a grain or two about book levels. Heck i dont do that anymore anyway. Never saw where a 100 fps made a difference in any gun. But as to me giving my opinion on here and saying im responsible for someone stupid enough to swap out a std primer for a mag and load 3 grains over book and blow there hand off ill say this. Im not your mommy and i sure cant fix stupid. if your that type of an idiot then the internet is where you should come to for advice.


Maybe do a search for home dentistry too and fill your own cavity. The carrnage that pictured glock shows sure as heck wasnt caused by a book load with just a mag primer swapped in. Ive seen to glocks that were destroyed by overloads. Both 357 sigs. Neither came apart. Matter of fact the guy that owned the first one said the slide spread open a bit and he took a hammer smacked it and it worked fine. Still sent it into glock and they replaced it. the other one had spread slide and a slight crack in the plastic right by the slide release. To blow a gun up like that takes ALOT of pressure. Like a case full of bullseye pressure.

ME? I tell it like i see it. I dont pass on internet advice or post math equations or theory. I gave my real world experience. Been doing it on here longer then probably anyone in this discussion and havent got a single person hurt and have to think my opinions have respect here. Betcha lots of guys told old elmer he was nuts when he was loading 44 specials up to mag levels or told John Linebaugh he was nuts for standing on 45 colts. Or Bob baker for comming out with revolvers that operated at rifle pressures. Funny thing is there all still alive (except for elmer) and they never lost as much as a finger nail. Why? Probably part of the reason was there was no internet! Second is God put something between there ears called a brain. They had the sense to work up to where they got slowly. Elmer even destroyed a few guns getting there. Mostly shot them loose. Was he stupid or crazy in your opinion??

Like i said i gave you my opinion. Take it or leave it thats your prerogative. But dont be so stupid as to think that i would post it if i hadnt actually done it and done it alot and knew it wouldnt hurt you. Ive seen a few others on here that say theyve done it too and not a single guy that said hes even damaged a gun doing it let alone hurt himself. So If you want a pat on the back or someone to say your answer is the only right one then maybe go visit your mom. Because I dont give pats on the back and am intellegent enough to take ANYONES INTERNET ADVICE WITH CAUTION. Please do the same with my advice.

Let me close by asking this. then im out of here. How many preaching you cant swap out a mag primer with common sense loading havent loaded with there 06 or 270 on day and swapped out a speer bullet for a sierra in the same weight and design? Did you use the data in the speer manual for that speer bullet and then go to a sierra manual for the sierra bullet? Bottom line is swapping bullets can raise pressures as much as a primer. What about your cast bullet loads?? ive never seen a single source for loading data that singles out a specific cast bullet other then lymans for there molds. How can you possibly load in the blind like that without blowing your hand off:kidding: How many times have i seen keith level 44 special loads posted here? Heavy bullet 45 loads that are closer to 454s then 45 colt saa loads. 45/70 loads!!!! Nope you do it too. Just like i do. So dont throw rocks in a glass house.

[charlie b]

.....Elmer even destroyed a few guns getting there. Mostly shot them loose

So, even if someone has a brain and works up loads carefully they may destroy their gun. Good to know.

[Larry Gibson]

And Bob says I should settle down........:groner:

[Forrest r]

. Me and the local gun shop went round and round on this same thing. It says for rifle pistole or revolver on the package but they have a sp or sr on the package. Also if you look up on there sight look up the number on the carton. For the sp one it says for small pistole. The number on the carton with the sr says small rifle use. Why they label it this way I don’t know but there are two different boxes with two different numbers

I understand, the one's I use/buy say small rifle on the side. I use them in 38spl, 9mm & 223rem cases.

38spl:
I use the s&b 4.4 sr primers in the 38spl cases when I make p+ loads/hot loads using power pistol or 2400. The is no real difference in velocity but a huge difference in the es's of those loads. These primers also take a lot of the pistol up/powder up vs pistol down/powder down out of play.

9mm:
I use the s&b sr primers for my 9mm target loads. The powder /load I use is 100% case capacity with the bullet/oal combo that I use. Targets don't lie, the 10-shot groups shrank 1/2"+ @ 50ft when I switched from the federal sp primers to the s&b 4.4 sr primers.

357's:
I use the s&b sr primers when I use mp-300, h110 or 269 power. I don't use starting loads with any of these powders, hot/heavy loads are the norm.

I'm not telling anyone to either use or not use sr primers, mag primers or any primer at all.

I will say that I use the s&b sr primers for specific applications.

[44MAG#1]

And Bob says I should settle down........:groner:
Great. Once one learns to accept most on here,
including the most learned on here, will do as they want, frees one to move on and let it go.
It also helps one to move forward to other endeavors.
I for one am greatful for the info. But I still will do as I have done in the past.
We all do that in our lives with a lot of things we are given advice on.
Eg, driving down or up an unfamiliar highway whose speed limit is 55 MPH, up comes a yellow sign indicating caution a curve is coming up and a "SUGGESTED" safe speed limit of 40 MPH, do you really drop down to 40 MPH?
You may slow down some be cause if the normal speed limit is 55 I am sure you will be going over it. Or do we stay 55 MPH simply because someone says 55 MPH even on the open highway which is deemed safe by someone somewhere just as the 45 MPH is on the yellow sign.
Not much if a good example of all this but maybe the idea may be noticed.

[Forrest r]

I've been following this thread & I just shake my head. Why anyone would compare a IMHO poor/weak 357 load to a 9mm case/load is beyond me.

That 357 load (6.0gr of unique) is a weak/barely above a starting load to begin with. Everyone knows how well unique/starting loads perform. Then you add hot/higher pressure primers into the mix & "TTTTAAAAADDDDAAAA". For some odd reason the results show erratic pressure spikes.

Gee I wonder why??? Perhaps there would be the same results with 7.5gr of hs-6???

It's just a hunch but I don't think the results would be the same if that 357 pressure test was done with 15.5gr of H110 or full house loads of WW296.

Perhaps it's because the 6gr of unique only 40% of the case capacity of the 357 case. 40% capacity of a 9mm case would be 3.2gr of unique.

A 357 case holds 15gr of unique
A 9mm case holds 8gr of unique

[onelight]

I've been following this thread & I just shake my head. Why anyone would compare a IMHO poor/weak 357 load to a 9mm case/load is beyond me.

That 357 load (6.0gr of unique) is a weak/barely above a starting load to begin with. Everyone knows how well unique/starting loads perform. Then you add hot/higher pressure primers into the mix & "TTTTAAAAADDDDAAAA". For some odd reason the results show erratic pressure spikes.

Gee I wonder why??? Perhaps there would be the same results with 7.5gr of hs-6???

It's just a hunch but I don't think the results would be the same if that 357 pressure test was done with 15.5gr of H110 or full house loads of WW296.

Perhaps it's because the 6gr of unique only 40% of the case capacity of the 357 case. 40% capacity of a 9mm case would be 3.2gr of unique.

A 357 case holds 15gr of unique
A 9mm case holds 8gr of unique
I asked Larry a similar question in a thread that parallels this one. And he posted a test he conducted with 2400 in .357 go to post 13 to see the results he had.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?417830-Comparison-of-various-SP-and-SR-primers-in-the-357-Magnum

[Forrest r]

I asked Larry a similar question in a thread that parallels this one. And he posted a test he conducted with 2400 in .357 go to post 13 to see the results he had.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?417830-Comparison-of-various-SP-and-SR-primers-in-the-357-Magnum

OK, what does 2400 have to do with H110 or WW296???

[onelight]

OK, what does 2400 have to do with H110 or WW296???

Only that it is close to a full case in .357 and 2400 has loads recommended for both standard and mag primers.
I have not seen any loads for 296 or 110 that recommend non magnum primers .

[blackthorn]

From post #89: "9mm:
I use the s&b sr primers for my 9mm target loads. The powder /load I use is 100% case capacity with the bullet/oal combo that I use. Targets don't lie, the 10-shot groups shrank 1/2"+ @ 50ft when I switched from the federal sp primers to the s&b 4.4 sr primers."

The above quote refers to interchanging Federal SP to S&B SR primers. As I understand, an earlier statement was made that S&B 4.4 SP and SR primers were identified as interchangeable. Maybe I missed it but I am left to wonder if those specific S&B (SP?SR) primers were tested in the same firearm to see if indeed there were any variation in performance when switched??

[Jniedbalski]

277080Here is a picture of the page on S&b web site.it has different numbers for sp and sr. [ATTACH=CONFIG]277080[/ATTAC[ATTACH=CONFIG]277080[/ATTACH

[Jniedbalski]

277081My S&b large pistole and large rifle primer boxes also say for rifle pistole revolver

[Larry Gibson]

277081My S&b large pistole and large rifle primer boxes also say for rifle pistole revolver

All S&B primer boxes say the same thing. S&B lists different product numbers for different primers and recommended use. My take on that is S&B is simply saying S&B makes primers for loading rifle, pistole and revolver cartridges. Perhaps in Europe they expect the user to use the correct product with the correct cartridge?

[Larry Gibson]

44Mag#1

Your choice to do as you've done in the past. I'm not telling anyone not to. I've said numerous times what i would do. All I've done is present factual test data. How anyone chooses to use it is up to them.

[Jniedbalski]

Larry that’s what I thought also. It just means for use in rifle pistole and revolvers as a general use. You still have to pick the correct box. I have used small rifle S&b in the past but don’t now. I used them in low speed 38 special loads just to try. I might have to use the sr primers if the shortage keeps going for awhile. But would rather not.

[44MAG#1]

44Mag#1

Your choice to do as you've done in the past. I'm not telling anyone not to. I've said numerous times what i would do. All I've done is present factual test data. How anyone chooses to use it is up to them.

That is correct.. Do as you wish. Right or wrong do as you wish.

[swheeler]

This question has been asked numerous times.
The video below will answer many questions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGVRGsoOr6k&t=324s

Thank you for posting that, very informative!

[john.k]

Whatever happened to start the load low and work up ?...Swapping from one primer to another with a max pressure load is dumb no matter what.......I would expect pistol primers to have softer /more easily deformed cases ,to fire reliably with the slight blow of a small hammer of a revolver....with the low pressure loads I use now,Im sure either type would be suitable for me,provided they fired reliably.

[Larry Gibson]

Forrest r

"I've been following this thread & I just shake my head. Why anyone would compare a IMHO poor/weak 357 load to a 9mm case/load is beyond me."

Perhaps if you stopped shaking your head and read more carefully you'd see I never made any comparison between the test 357 magnum results and any load in the 9mm. However, contrary to your belief we know that what happens in one case [talking small pistol cartridges here] more than likely will happen is another. That's how an "inference" can be made. If you don't agree then so be it.

"That 357 load (6.0gr of unique) is a weak/barely above a starting load to begin with. Everyone knows how well unique/starting loads perform. Then you add hot/higher pressure primers into the mix & "TTTTAAAAADDDDAAAA". For some odd reason the results show erratic pressure spikes." Gee I wonder why???

Not sure what loading manual data you're referring to for Unique under a 160 gr cast bullet in the 357 Magnum? The 6 gr load of Unique under my 162 gr 358156 is not a "weak" load but is a mid- range load that is equal in pressure (with standard SP primers) and velocity to a lot of factory 357 magnum ammunition. Also, should you read the data from the test you'll see the load gave very good and uniform internal ballistics. Having tested that load before I knew it performed very well. Pressure testing 7 gr of Unique under the same bullet with all else the same jumped the psi average above the SAAMI MAP. That is why I recommend 6.8 gr Unique as a maximum load in the 357 magnum under a 158 - 162 gr cast bullet. Perhaps you've some actual test data of 6 gr Unique under a 162 gr cast bullet in the 357 magnum showing it does not perform well?

Perhaps there would be the same results with 7.5gr of hs-6???"

Send me a pound of HS6 and a hundred each of the primers I used and I'll find out for you?

"It's just a hunch but I don't think the results would be the same if that 357 pressure test was done with 15.5gr of H110 or full house loads of WW296."

Wanna put some money on that "hunch"?

"Perhaps it's because the 6gr of unique only 40% of the case capacity of the 357 case. 40% capacity of a 9mm case would be 3.2gr of unique.

A 357 case holds 15gr of unique
A 9mm case holds 8gr of unique"

Nice try but every one knows it's not case capacity to the case mouth that is meaningful. It is case capacity to the base of the bullet. The 162 gr 358156 will seat 2 - 3 times as deep into the 357 case as will any cast 115 0 125 gr in the 9 mm case. Besides......is it now you who is the one making a comparison between the 9mm and the 357 cases?

Further more, have you noticed the price of powder and primers these days....if you can get them? A commercial reloader just told me this morning he is paying 20 cents a pop for SP primers or $1,000 a case......if he can get them. Powder has gone through the roof too.

Anyways, like I just told 44Mag#1, you are free to do as you please.

[44MAG#1]

That is what he told me, yes it is.

[Forrest r]

Forrest r

"I've been following this thread & I just shake my head. Why anyone would compare a IMHO poor/weak 357 load to a 9mm case/load is beyond me."

Perhaps if you stopped shaking your head and read more carefully you'd see I never made any comparison between the test 357 magnum results and any load in the 9mm. However, contrary to your belief we know that what happens in one case [talking small pistol cartridges here] more than likely will happen is another. That's how an "inference" can be made. If you don't agree then so be it.

"That 357 load (6.0gr of unique) is a weak/barely above a starting load to begin with. Everyone knows how well unique/starting loads perform. Then you add hot/higher pressure primers into the mix & "TTTTAAAAADDDDAAAA". For some odd reason the results show erratic pressure spikes." Gee I wonder why???

Not sure what loading manual data you're referring to for Unique under a 160 gr cast bullet in the 357 Magnum? The 6 gr load of Unique under my 162 gr 358156 is not a "weak" load but is a mid- range load that is equal in pressure (with standard SP primers) and velocity to a lot of factory 357 magnum ammunition. Also, should you read the data from the test you'll see the load gave very good and uniform internal ballistics. Having tested that load before I knew it performed very well. Pressure testing 7 gr of Unique under the same bullet with all else the same jumped the psi average above the SAAMI MAP. That is why I recommend 6.8 gr Unique as a maximum load in the 357 magnum under a 158 - 162 gr cast bullet. Perhaps you've some actual test data of 6 gr Unique under a 162 gr cast bullet in the 357 magnum showing it does not perform well?

Perhaps there would be the same results with 7.5gr of hs-6???"

Send me a pound of HS6 and a hundred each of the primers I used and I'll find out for you?

"It's just a hunch but I don't think the results would be the same if that 357 pressure test was done with 15.5gr of H110 or full house loads of WW296."

Wanna put some money on that "hunch"?

"Perhaps it's because the 6gr of unique only 40% of the case capacity of the 357 case. 40% capacity of a 9mm case would be 3.2gr of unique.

A 357 case holds 15gr of unique
A 9mm case holds 8gr of unique"

Nice try but every one knows it's not case capacity to the case mouth that is meaningful. It is case capacity to the base of the bullet. The 162 gr 358156 will seat 2 - 3 times as deep into the 357 case as will any cast 115 0 125 gr in the 9 mm case. Besides......is it now you who is the one making a comparison between the 9mm and the 357 cases?

Further more, have you noticed the price of powder and primers these days....if you can get them? A commercial reloader just told me this morning he is paying 20 cents a pop for SP primers or $1,000 a case......if he can get them. Powder has gone through the roof too.

Anyways, like I just told 44Mag#1, you are free to do as you please.


Merely pointing out you're playing around with a +/- 25,000psi load in the 357mag with a powder that's know to have issues with lite loads. Good for you if you think that that 6gr load is "mild". IMHO it's "weak", heck 5.4gr of unique and that same bullet in a 38spl case is what's known as a 38spl p+ load.

I absolutely will do as I please, as I already stated been using those s&b small rifle primers for 10 years now in 38spl, 9mm, 357mag's & 223rem loads. Has nothing to do with a primer shortage and everything to do with performance and what the targets say.

[charlie b]

Folks are free to do as they want.

As long as you realize you may be using loads that are well over the SAAMI pressure limits for your cartridge. There are no reliable ways to measure that unless you instrument a barrel.

I always 'cringe' when I see someone 'work up' a load and declare it safe when they see no 'pressure signs'. This is especially true with primers. The .223 generates over 50k psi and primers are 'clean'. If you use one in a 9mm it means the gun will be over 50k psi before you see the 'pressure sign' of a flattened primer. Yes, the case will probably stick in the chamber before that, but, at what pressure?

[Larry Gibson]

Forrest r

As I said, do as you please. If it works for you go for it.

FYI;

Factory 357 Magnum pressures as measured in the same test barrel as the 6 gr Unique/162 gr cast load;

S&W 158 LSWC; 29,200 psi
Federal 158 LSWC; 28,500 psi
Remington 158 LSWC; 25,100 psi
Remington 125 JHP; 24,400 psi
Winchester 125 JHP; 28,200 psi
Winchester 158 Lubaloy; 30,200 psi
Federal 110 JHP; 23,400 psi

Tested 6 gr/162 gr cast with standard SP primers;
CCI 500; 25,700
Federal 100; 27,900
Winchester WSP; 26,300

Average psi for those 7 factory 357 magnum loads; 27,000 psi
Average psi for those 3 tested 357 magnum loads; 26,700 psi

Compared to factory 357 Magnum pressures the 6 gr Unique load's pressure is neither "weak" nor "mild" but actually is quite comparable. But then you probably think of factory loads as "weak" also. I consider them as "mid-range" which is what i referred to them as in the test. My own standard magnum level load is the same 358156 bullet over 14 gr Alliant 2400 with WSP primers. That runs 34,500 psi +/- as tested in the same test barrel. Using CCI 500 SP primers the psi remains close to the SAAMI MAP of 35,000. Using a Federal 100 SP primer the psi climbed to 38,400 psi. Then switching to Federal 200 magnum SP and CCI 550 SP primers pushed the psi up to 38,900 and 39,000 psi. Using Winchester SP magnum primers the pressure jumped up to 41, 600 psi.

Yes, my Ruger Security Six or a BH will take that 41,600 psi w/o too much problem other than sticky extraction. However, my M19 will not, at least for long before she would rattle apart.

Also, I would like too ask why your continued reference to the 6 gr load of Unique under the 162 gr cast bullet in the 357 magnum as being "weak" and/or "lite" and, ergo, would be known to have "issues". It does not as it ignites and burns efficiently and is an excellent load. I have shot hundreds if not thousands of them with complete satisfaction and never a single "issue". Could you provide some evidence of such an "issue" with that load?

[Screwbolts]

@ Larry G , Thank you for doing all the testing and postings you have done!

Thank you also for being a very patient individual.

I do believe that many people simply post things, make a post, just to get their post count up.

Ken H.

[dtknowles]

What we have here is two different kinds of arguments. A couple based on data and a bunch based on anecdotes. It is nice to have both if people can keep they attitudes civil. If and when push comes to shove data will carry more weight but anecdotally it seems we can risk over pressuring and get away with it, sometimes maybe most times, even sometimes double charges. I had a 9mm case blowout. I have it on my bench as a reminder. I don't know what caused it, the rest of that batch of ammo was fine. Fortunately it was fired in a Highpoint carbine. No damage not even to the magazine.

Tim

[Larry Gibson]

@ Larry G , Thank you for doing all the testing and postings you have done!

Thank you also for being a very patient individual.

I do believe that many people simply post things, make a post, just to get their post count up.

Ken H.

Thank you, much appreciated.

[Larry Gibson]

dtknowles

Yes, too many times "anecdotes" are taken off the top of our heads w/o thinking about them or at least researching the facts ["vetting" in todays jargon]. Let me help Forrest r with another one of his. He seems to think the load I chose (6 gr Unique in the 357 magnum) is somehow "weak" as compared to the example as he stated in "IMHO it's "weak", heck 5.4gr of unique and that same bullet in a 38spl case is what's known as a 38spl p+ load." Had he thought or at least researched he would find the 38 +P load he mentions runs less than 20,000 psi, the SAAMI MAP for 38 SPL +P. A 358477 under 5.5 gr Unique runs 19,300 psi out of my test barrel. That is considerably less than the psi of the load I chose to use. Perhaps he thinks the +P in the 38 SPL means it is a 357 magnum level load?

Yes, Unique can have problems with efficient burning with really light loads as every powder has it's own psi range where it will begin burning efficiently. However, for Unique that minimal psi range is well below the psi range of even the 18,000 psi MAP of standard 38 SPL cartridges. The 6 gr Unique load I tested was well above the minimal psi range which is why it performed so well with standard SP primers in that tested load.

BTW; Numerous tests of Winchester 158 LSWCHP [the "FBI" load} run 17,500 - 18,000 psi.

All the above is no anecdote but fact. I appreciate your input, always a pleasure discussing topics with you.

[44MAG#1]

Data from ANYONE is an ever changing thing.
If people would look at data collected by reputable sources one would realize it.
There is NO ONE immune from that.
Not Lyman, not Speer, Not Hornady, not Sierra, not Hodgdon, not Larry Gibson.
I have many reloading books. I have looked.
Do yourselves a favor and look at it. It is only good for the components used at the time and in the test firearm they are tested in.
Nothing is written in stone.

[44MAG#1]

Here's one for the anti anecdotes people, how many say H110/W296 don't suppose to be downloaded? Maybe someone ought to tell Hornady and Sierra.
They do it, is it safe or not?

[Larry Gibson]

In some cartridges down loading H110/296 can indeed cause problems if not be hazardous. However, either can in numerous cartridges, be used in a reduced load safely. Thus it is not a blanket rule of thumb or a rule written in stone. Rather it is a caution used by some manuals for some cartridges as a CYA measure.

[44MAG#1]

"Thus it is not a blanket rule of thumb or a rule written in stone. Rather it is a caution used by some manuals for some cartridges as a CYA measure."

This statement should accompany every article of reloading data.
Probably the truest statement made in a long time concerning data from any source.

[robertbank]

I have used this primer for five years or so. My local gun shop always had them and where 5 to $6 $ cheeper. I bought thousands of them. I have boxes with sp, sr, and lp, lr, on them. Both the sp , and sr ones both have for rifle pistole or revolver use . I tried once a few light loads in 38 special with the sr ones and all seemed ok. This is after the gun shop told me they where the same. They told me see it says so on the box. After I shot them I looked up the number on the box on there web site. The number on the box with sp comes up with small pistole use. The sr number on the box comes up with small rifle. Now I only use sp for pistole only

Exactly. To the OP using SRP in the 9MM has been done in IPSC and IDPA circles for years. I got started back in 2008 when you guys went nuts over Obama and we had a primer shortage up here. Over the Chrony I saw no difference in velocities using SPP vs SRP and no pressure signs. Mind I seldom load to maximum so I do have some wiggle room. You would think with the number of rounds shot using SRP in the 9MM issues would have arisen by now. In 2009 I know I went through over 10K of them with no issues and I am sure others shot that and more.

Post#84 makes a lot of sense. I suspect they are the same primer, just marked differently. A call to CCI or Federal would settle the matter. On the to do list for tomorrow,.

Take Care

Bob

[swheeler]

Bob it's good to see you back posting here, seems like it's been a while. Always nice to see/hear of first hand experience, 10k rounds is a pretty good test sample. ;-)

[farmbif]

I have a bit of a different take, someone previously said that active or avid shooters will be using small rifle primers in pistol loads so they can keep on shooting.
I don't think so it will the inexperienced and careless that will be making all types of substitutions so they can go to the range and blast away as fast as they can pull the trigger, that's just what I've seen at public ranges.
avid and competitive shooters will most likely have plenty of supplies put away to do whatever shooting they will want to do and continue to reload, shoot and hunt in a responsible manner.

[dtknowles]

Exactly. To the OP using SRP in the 9MM has been done in IPSC and IDPA circles for years. I got started back in 2008 when you guys went nuts over Obama and we had a primer shortage up here. Over the Chrony I saw no difference in velocities using SPP vs SRP and no pressure signs. Mind I seldom load to maximum so I do have some wiggle room. You would think with the number of rounds shot using SRP in the 9MM issues would have arisen by now. In 2009 I know I went through over 10K of them with no issues and I am sure others shot that and more.

Post#84 makes a lot of sense. I suspect they are the same primer, just marked differently. A call to CCI or Federal would settle the matter. On the to do list for tomorrow,.

Take Care

Bob

Which SRP's did you use? I think it makes a difference. Some SRP's are much hotter than SPP's and some are not.

It seems your practice is not much different than Larry's suggestion of using only starting loads if using SRP's. I know you did not stick with starting loads but "mind I seldom load to maximum so I do have some wiggle room." A load with thousands of rounds fired is likely a safe load in that gun. What guns did you use it in? Can you tell us the powder even if you don't want to share the charge weight?

Tim

[dtknowles]

I have a bit of a different take, someone previously said that active or avid shooters will be using small rifle primers in pistol loads so they can keep on shooting.
I don't think so it will the inexperienced and careless that will be making all types of substitutions so they can go to the range and blast away as fast as they can pull the trigger, that's just what I've seen at public ranges.
avid and competitive shooters will most likely have plenty of supplies put away to do whatever shooting they will want to do and continue to reload, shoot and hunt in a responsible manner.

Yes, I expect that you are right for the most part unless this drought goes on for years. I wonder what will be safe loads with home made primers?

Tim

[charlie b]

Won't know unless someone tests them with an instrumented system.

[robertbank]

Which SRP's did you use? I think it makes a difference. Some SRP's are much hotter than SPP's and some are not.

It seems your practice is not much different than Larry's suggestion of using only starting loads if using SRP's. I know you did not stick with starting loads but "mind I seldom load to maximum so I do have some wiggle room." A load with thousands of rounds fired is likely a safe load in that gun. What guns did you use it in? Can you tell us the powder even if you don't want to share the charge weight?

Tim

I have used CCI, Win, Fed, Rem & Tula SRP and have found no significant difference in velocity or performance from one brand to another. When they are available Tula primers often are a dollar cheaper per hundred and they work just as well. I don't play with my guns much and leave the trigger pull the way the factory set them. Guys who do, chase Federal primers. My go to load using 356402 lead bullets is 4.1gr of Win 231/HP38.. I want to get to 130 - 135 Pf and that load is there. I use 4 gr of Titegroup or 5Gr of CFE Pistol when using plated or FMJ bullets. I have found no significant difference using SRP over SPP using these loads. I have used SRP in a lot of 38spl cases with the same observations.

Farmbif - I think most guys who shoot competitively buy in bilk. I try to buy 5K - 10k of primers over the winter depending on how many primers I go into winter with. Finding primers at a decent price right now is not easy with most of my usual sources out. Happens just about every time you folks elect a Democrat President. LOL. In any event I don;t expect to have to go to SRP this year. I load for a friend though and he uses SRP exclusively. They generally are more available up here and often at a lower price.,

Take Care

Bob