Cold Weather Primer Test

Boomer

Boomer

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Uber Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Location
Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
With a temperature of -35 and a windchill of -56, I think today qualified as cold. Winter`s been slipping away, and while I'd have preferred a cold day with no wind, it wasn't to be, every time the temp dipped down near the -40 mark we had wind with it. Anyway, once I go through the data, I'll post a detailed report, but in general terms it looks like Bruce was right, there was no practical difference that I could determine between using standard and magnum primers, although the magnum primers on the surface appear to be slightly more consistent.

Here's a taste of what it was like . . .
 
Last edited:
What primers do your Canadian military load for their ammunition?

Also if you look at military testing data for cold and hot variations the chamber pressures must fall between certain points, our U.S. Military uses magnum "type" primers.

Remington primers are known as mini-flamethrowers, what primers did you test and how long did the cartridges cold soak before firing?

Remington_9_5_348_Cropped_zpse259f3e8.jpg

CCI_BR2_C16H_cropped_zpse5916a7f.jpg

5Remington75_zps2b532d7c.jpg

3CCIBR4_zpsa43a3c3a.jpg

1Federal205M_zpsa4b4dbfe.jpg
 
Last edited:
This one is tagged Boomer.

I've had hangfires at -25C with hard cupped BR2's in a rifle that has a fairly soft and slow firing pin strike. A switch to softer Fed. 215's did cure that glitch.
Have wondered ever since if a strong hard primer strike is what you really need when it's good and cold ?.

Looking forward to your report.

See you use the CF mukluks, .. love 'em, .. long as it doesn't get too warm and slushy out on the ice eh?.
They are getting hard to find in decent shape of late.
 
Last edited:
Interesting Big Ed.

In Canada, Remington primers are basically non existent and haven't been available in years. The odd store might have them but they are like the fish where I fish, there is a lot of water between them.

I use magnum primers all year round. I've checked out the 30-06, 223rem, 6.5x55, 308Win and a few others. I haven't noticed any pressure differences in any of them. Like the OP, the only difference between the standard primers and magnum primers was that the velocities and accuracy with the magnum primers was always more consistent.
 
So I'll start with the test parameters. What I was looking for was ignition problems, differences in average velocities, and differences in extreme spread. To ensure it would be the primers that resulted in velocity variations, I took the trouble to keep bullet and case weight to within a quarter a grain for each 5 round group. All of the cases were trimmed and chamfered, and the primer pockets were uniformed and the flash holes uniformed and de-burred. I wanted to test both ball and extruded powders, both fast and slow burning powder, in small, medium, and large capacity cartridges.

The test did not go without a few hitches. The first problem was that the Oehler P-35 didn't read the bullets fired from my SAKO .222 magnum, which was disappointing, so there is no .222 Magnum data to report. The Chronograph failed to read one of the magnum primer loads in the .30/06 and failed to read a magnum primer load in the .458. The .270 data showed lower velocities than I would have expected for a 130 gr bullet, running in the mid 2800s then the first 3 magnum round had little spread, but the last two increased the ES to 180 fps!!?? I hadn't worked up the load however, but Bruce wanted me to have the test include 60 grs of H-4831 under a 130, so that's what I put together.

Here are the results minus the .222 Magnum . . .

.270 Winchester
Ruger Hawkeye 22 inch barrel
Winchester brass
Winchester PP bullets
60.0 gr H-4831SC

CCI LR BR-2 Primers....................Remington 9.5M LR Primers
2837..........................................2841
2830..........................................2840
2833..........................................2842
2793..........................................2953
2814..........................................2772
Average 2821, ES 44...................Average 2849, ES 181


.30/30 Winchester
Winchester 94 NWT Commemorative 24"
Winchester brass
170 gr bullets, unknown make
30.0 grs IMR 3031

CCI LR BR-2 Primers....................Remington 9.5M LR Primers
2070..........................................2026
2065..........................................2052
2021..........................................2028
2044..........................................2087
2071..........................................2052
Average 2054 ES 50....................Average 2049 ES 61


.30/06 Springfield
Brno ZG-47 24" barrel
Remington brass
180 gr Sierra BT
58.0 grs H-100|V

CCI LR BR-2 Primers....................Remington 9.5M LR Primers
2775..........................................2768
2756..........................................2783
2827..........................................2773
2758..........................................2764
2727..........................................0000
Average 2768 ES 100..................Average 2772 ES 19


.375 Ultramag
Brno 602 22" barrel
Remington brass
270 gr Hornady Interlock
92.0 grs H-100V

CCI LR BR-2 Primers....................Remington 9.5M LR Primers
2948..........................................3015
2967..........................................2991
2973..........................................2976
2923..........................................2983
3012..........................................2963
Average 2964 ES 89...................Average 2986 ES 52


.458 Winchester
Winchester M-70 Express 21" barrel
Winchester brass
500 gr Matrix
76.0 grs H-335

CCI LR BR-2 Primers................... Remington 9.5M LR Primers
2059..........................................2003
2097..........................................2066
2113..........................................2067
2054..........................................2074
2091..........................................0000
Average 2082 ES 59...................Average 2052 ES 71


So that's it. Some of the readings such as the last two magnum primer velocities in the .270 make me wonder if a combination of the low morning light and the atmosphere full of ice crystals didn't produce some false readings. Perhaps that was the reason for the lack of readings with the .222 magnum, and the missing reading in the .30/06 and the .458. Anyway, its interesting stuff, and I think it shows that although I still prefer to use magnum primers, there is no practical ballistic advantage in doing so. I was really surprised by the .458 results, as the combination of ball powder, a powder charge greater than 50 grs, and extreme cold should have made magnum primers a distinct advantage over standard primers. I did not observe any hang fires in the course of this test.
 
Last edited:
Primers - Large Rifle Primer Study
A Match Primer Study in the 30-06 Cartridge
By Germán A. Salazar
This article was originally published in the September, 2008 issue of Precision Shooting

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

Primers - Small Rifle Primer Study
A Match Primer Study in the 6BR Cartridge
By Germán A. Salazar
This article was originally published in the June, 2008 issue of Precision Shooting

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

Misfires
by Germán A. Salazar

http://riflemansjournal.########.com/2009/08/primers-misfires.html

IT DON’T GO BANG
By Mark Humphreville

http://riflemansjournal.########.com/2009/08/primers-it-dont-go-bang.html

Primers: Large Flash Hole vs. Small Flash Hole Test
by Germán A. Salazar

http://riflemansjournal.########.com/2011/03/primers-large-vs-small-flash-hole-test.html
 
Thanks a lot Boomer, that was an excellent test.
I have said so many times, there are countless unproven theories on the internet, but it is real world tests and experience that count.
Bruce
 
I didn't see it mentioned but how long was the ammo left outside in the cold? Do you know the temperature of the ammo? If the ammo went straight from your house to the firing line I doubt most of the ammo had a chance to actually "get cold."
Just a thought.
 
CanuckR said:
I didn't see it mentioned but how long was the ammo left outside in the cold? Do you know the temperature of the ammo? If the ammo went straight from your house to the firing line I doubt most of the ammo had a chance to actuahttp://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=9767660lly "get cold."
Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Oops, yup and I meant to. The ammo had been outside over night, so probably in the neighborhood of 18 hours before the first shot was fired.
 
So.
After a good ponder over your results Boomer, there appears no general trend or pattern showing up. No rule of thumb to be drawn.
Seems that each cal's. powder/primer spec gives unique results to that one particular cal. and load combo.

Did notice that the 4831, 3031, and surprisingly H335 powders show less ES. with the BR2's.
H-100v less with 9.5M's.

Interesting test, thanks for getting out there and doing it.
 
I'd start by tossing out the .270 results, there's something wonky there.

The 30-30, well whoever thought it needed magnum primers? Still the ES is close to a tie so no harm is done. Without accuracy results there's nothing else to compare.

The 30-06 and .375 RUM have the ES reduced by half on one and down to a fifth on the other. That's hard to ignore.

The .458s ES are close enough to a tie to call it one.

Conclusions? Its hard to make any, but for fun I'd say that the test shows that in half of the cases it made no meaningful difference and in the other half it was all in favor of the magnums.
 
Dogleg said:
I'd start by tossing out the .270 results, there's something wonky there.

The 30-30, well whoever thought it needed magnum primers? Still the ES is close to a tie so no harm is done. Without accuracy results there's nothing else to compare.

The 30-06 and .375 RUM have the ES reduced by half on one and down to a fifth on the other. That's hard to ignore.

The .458s ES are close enough to a tie to call it one.

Conclusions? Its hard to make any, but for fun I'd say that the test shows that in half of the cases it made no meaningful difference and in the other half it was all in favor of the magnums.
Click to expand...

I agree that something was off with the .270, I'm tempted to shoot it again, and give the .222 magnum another try if I get the right weather, but my hands took a pounding in the cold yesterday, and my knuckles are stiff this morning. The more I think about it, the more I think the ice crystals and low angle of the sun might have conspired to confound the chronograph. If the magnum primers made a difference it was with the .30/06 and the .375 Ultra, but even with them, the difference between magnum and standard primer wouldn't have been disastrous on a late winter hunt. But in the case of the .375 Ultra (.378 Weatherby, .416 Rigby .338 Lapua) who would ordinarily try to light up 90+ grs of powder with a standard primer?

Attempting to shoot for accuracy under these conditions would be extremely challenging. The heavy clothing interferes with your LOP and cheek weld, and when wearing a glove light enough to allow you to feel the trigger, you'd loose feeling in it long before 5 rounds were fired. At the start of the test I was single loading the rounds to ensure I wasn't pushing a bullet deeper into the case, by the time I only had the .375 and the .458 left to shoot, I was filling the magazine. Maybe next year I can compare accuracy if I can get one of those fancy Doppler radar chronographs that are supposedly coming on line. Yesterday I'd have been doing well to keep minute of Chevy.

Another issue I hadn't taken into account was the effect of the cold on the chronograph cables. The actual chrongraph and printer were inside the truck, but those long cables were exposed to the cold for nearly 3 hours, and the power source is only a 9 volt battery, which also runs the printer.
 
Last edited:
Boomer said:
I agree that something was off with the .270, I'm tempted to shoot it again, and give the .222 magnum another try if I get the right weather, but my hands took a pounding in the cold yesterday, and my knuckles are stiff this morning. The more I think about it, the more I think the ice crystals and low angle of the sun might have conspired to confound the chronograph. If the magnum primers made a difference it was with the .30/06 and the .375 Ultra, but even with them, the difference between magnum and standard primer wouldn't have been disastrous on a late winter hunt. But in the case of the .375 Ultra (.378 Weatherby, .416 Rigby .338 Lapua) who would ordinarily try to light up 90+ grs of powder with a standard primer?

Attempting to shoot for accuracy under these conditions would be extremely challenging. The heavy clothing interferes with your LOP and cheek weld, and when wearing a glove light enough to allow you to feel the trigger, you'd loose feeling in it long before 5 rounds were fired. At the start of the test I was single loading the rounds to ensure I wasn't pushing a bullet deeper into the case, by the time I only had the .375 and the .458 left to shoot, I was filling the magazine. Maybe next year I can compare accuracy if I can get one of those fancy Doppler radar chronographs that are supposedly coming on line. Yesterday I'd have been doing well to keep minute of Chevy.

Another issue I hadn't taken into account was the effect of the cold on the chronograph cables. The actual chrongraph and printer were inside the truck, but those long cables were exposed to the cold for nearly 3 hours, and the power source is only a 9 volt battery, which also runs the printer.[/QUOTE

You're having better luck with the chronograph in the cold than I do. I've been shooting all winter,i throw on the Canada goose parka and snowmobile pants and just bare hand the trigger. It's mostly been 20 -30 below when I get out but winter is when I develope most of my loads. An iinteresting one was the .264 with h1000 a couple days ago. I shot groups with 65, 66, 67, 68, 69 and 70 grains and everything was hovering around 1/2" mostly under. Weirdly, all were to the same POI too, which is quite a feat for a 6 grain charge variation. It was close to 30 below but not quite, high twenties.
Click to expand...
 
It looks like a lot of people missed the significance of your test.
That is, that even in the severe cold and even with ball powder, there is no appreciable difference between using a standard primer or a magnum primer.
I guess all the hand loaders who were reloading with every major type of smokeless powder for sixty years or so, before the magnum primers came on the market, and shooting in the most severest of weather, were not handicapped for lack of a better primer.
And the 30-30 type rifles that killed so many moose and elk in the years of the great depression, often in very severe cold, were just doing what they were designed to do.
Your test of the 30-30 I thought was quite significant, in that your load of 30 grains of 3031 powder is quite a light load, but still gave 2050 fps. A 30-30 was designed to give 2200 fps with 170 grain bullets and the older factory loads actually do give this velocity. An older du Pont reloading chart that I have, which is marked, "New Edition," shows 32 grains of 3031 for that velocity and that is close to what I got in summer weather. At one time the standard load for a 30-30 was considered to be 33 grains of 3031. I have used this load, but didn't test it over the chronograph. My point is that there must be little, if any, difference in 3031 powder, between summer and winter temperatures, judging by the good velocity you got with 30 grains in the 30-30.
I too, would like to see you test the 270 again.
What I really wish is that I could hand you some of my old war surplus H4831 to test. With my 24 inch Sako 270, 60 grains of that powder with 130 grain bullets, gives me 3078 fps, while their "newly" manufactured H4831 powder from the 1970s gave 2960 fps. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if their H4831 is now slower yet, giving lower velocities, which would correspond closely with the figures of most of your 270 readings.
By the way, the cold in no way should affect the lead in wires to your chronograph.
Bruce
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom