CCI NATO primers

KyleM

KyleM

Regular
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Location
Alberta
Are these things worth the extra $$$ to use them instead of a standard small rifle primer for use in an AR?

I am thinking of trying some, but only if there is a real benefit to them. I remember someone saying that they are harder to reduce the chances of a slamfire, but is there any other reason to use them?

Cheers!
 
Slamfires are a good reason to use Milspec primers:


:D :D


fb8b6f0e.jpg
 
"...worth the extra $$$..." Nope. They're likely just regular primes with a slick marketing name.
Slam fires are caused by poorly loaded ammo. If the primer is high, it won't matter what name is on the box.
 
sunray said:
Slam fires are caused by poorly loaded ammo.
Click to expand...

Not always.

With an uncaptured firing pin and a soft primer, you can get slamfires. I've done doubles with Federal primers. Winchester and CCI's seem fine. But the milspecs would in theory have harder cups with a greater safety margin.
 
sunray said:
"...worth the extra $$$..." Nope. They're likely just regular primes with a slick marketing name.
Slam fires are caused by poorly loaded ammo. If the primer is high, it won't matter what name is on the box.
Click to expand...

Not even close to being correct.
 
I assume that these milspec primers are simply just primers with a harder shell. If that is true I guess they would help a fair bit in firearsm prone to slam fires or out of breach ignitions.

Saying that slam fires are due to poorly loaded ammo is nonsense. I own two rifles that may very well slam or multi-fire when I use the softer federal primers.
 
Loaded 10000 + rounds of 223 for AR's and have never had a slamfire and I have used non Mil spec primers ( mainly CCI BR4s , Winchesters ) for most of it. I have used the CCI No41 ( small rifle military ) as well

Having said that if you think that there is no difference requirements in military arms you would be wrong

A AR15 / M16s firing pin does not have a spring to keep it in place withing the bold / bolt carrier ( like most other firearms ) as the bolt goes back and forth

If you chamber a round in the AR you can see a tiny dimple in the primer ! ( because the interia of the firing pin as the bolt comes into battery ) So you can see why the military has a desire of having specifications for primer sensitivity. Its rather alarming at first if you are not familiar with ARs

You can chamber a round numerous times in a Browing BAR ( sporter )

As far as cost, the added cost of the Nato sensitivity primers are about $4 per thousand. If anyone is worried about the extra cost you should find another hobby.

If you load only for an AR it certainly doesn't hurt . Take a loaded round ( do it in a safe place obviously ) and press the bolt release to chamber the round. If you extract the round you can often see a little dimple. Then you decide if you want Nato sensitivity primers

Also the Nato #34s and #41 are "optimized for ball powders...ie hotter" which can be harder to light. This is why these primers should be treated as magnum primers so be aware when looking up recipies. If you look in the Speer manual you can see the many of the loads that use ball powders with a astrix denoting magnum primer was used for that recipe

The only reason I don't use the #41s all the time is to keep my primer types down I use mainly the BR / Match type anyways.

I'll post a picture of a dimpled 223 primer chambered in a AR when i have time
 
cci34

can't recall where i saw it posted but the jist was that cci 34 and cci magnum primers shared an identical cup. however it didn't adress the sensitivity of the actual priming compound.
cueball
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom