Federal Primers 100 decent for IPSC?
- Thread starter cokelon
- Start date
One of the most common primers from one of the biggest brands, yeah I'd say it's fine. Fed primers are known for being a bit softer and I might save mine for older hammer fired revolvers if I had different ones to choose from.
Some reloading equipment will advise not to use their products with federal because they are softer as one consideration.
Some reloading equipment will advise not to use their products with federal because they are softer as one consideration.
Any primer that gaurnetee's relability is fine for ipsc.
If you have failure to fire with a primer strike once, and you've concluded your firing pin, hammer/striker springs are all good/replaced witbin 5k rounds then the obvious conclusion is ammo related.
Ginex are fine, I know members who have burned 10k the last 3 months with no failures.
The only time a softer primer is better is if you want to tune your trigger weight so low that it begins to effect your hammer weight.
Ipsc has rules that doesn't allow excessively light pulls except in classic/open, and 1911/2011 are well designed to handle a light trigger without effecting hammer weights dramatically - which means soft primers will never be needed.
This is also why revolver shooters want soft primers. The trigger design requires a soft hammer strke for a softer trigger pull.
In short. If it goes bang 100%
You'll not be at a disadvantage.
Once you get to that point, it doesn't make 'you' any better.
If you have failure to fire with a primer strike once, and you've concluded your firing pin, hammer/striker springs are all good/replaced witbin 5k rounds then the obvious conclusion is ammo related.
Ginex are fine, I know members who have burned 10k the last 3 months with no failures.
The only time a softer primer is better is if you want to tune your trigger weight so low that it begins to effect your hammer weight.
Ipsc has rules that doesn't allow excessively light pulls except in classic/open, and 1911/2011 are well designed to handle a light trigger without effecting hammer weights dramatically - which means soft primers will never be needed.
This is also why revolver shooters want soft primers. The trigger design requires a soft hammer strke for a softer trigger pull.
In short. If it goes bang 100%
You'll not be at a disadvantage.
Once you get to that point, it doesn't make 'you' any better.
Primers are funky little devils. It does seem that most shooters are most interested in their binary function, IOW will they go bang or will they fail to fire.
However, the brisance and compatibility with the powder type and amount are important considerations or factors as well. It's well publicized in shotshell loading manuals, yet I see very little hard data for pistol primers. The same pressure and velocity variations are present, but the variation is a bit less critical because handguns are a bit more tolerant to those variations.
For IPSC, the loads are near max, so for a primer swap a quick velocity check to ensure power factor is being maintained is probably all that is required. That's my guess, my discipline is Cowboy, and for the small charges of powder and low velocities, the differences between primers is or can be rather dramatic.
I use a chronograph for load development as a rule. Because the load density is low, powder position is a real factor, and just as some powders are or tend to be position sensitive, some primers do a better job of mitigating that powder position sensitivity.
You did not tell us what your load is now. The kind of powder and amount are important, as is the caliber you are shooting. What primer are you presently using? What bullet (type and weight) are you shooting? And what velocity is your load?
Case in point: I had a 45 S&W load that gave very decent numbers and shot decently enough. I started to notice a bit of unburnt powder in the case and I was missing the odd target even though the hold and aim seemed good. Therefore I sent a few rounds over the chronograph. The good load I had was no longer good. I'd lost about 100 fps and the Es and Sd numbers were bad.
I really wanted to know why and after a bit of testing I believe I found the answer. I had made a small change in the primer. I was using a current lot of primers and had run out. A local dealer had some available so I bought them. They were not current production, about 10 years old, and they were not doing the job. Fortunately when I had developed the load another primer had given me good numbers as well. In an attempt to get better numbers I had increased the powder charge as well. Because of the primer swap I was able to lower the charge as well. I ended up a bit higher in charge, with the original powder, as a bit more velocity helped the load shoot to the sights. That's the 10,000 ft view, the details are bit convoluted, but bottom line, primers have an analog side to them, it is not as simple as bang or no bang.
Federal primers have a thinner cup than other pistol primers, they can tolerate a light hammer spring, but they are not the lowest in brisance. I think lock time is more important than super light hammer pull, so the softer cup is not as critical to my load development. But that being said, I do on occasion use a Federal primer because it gives me consistent velocities and good accuracy.
My load utilized a long ago discontinued powder, WW 452AA, and the original primer was a CCI 300 LP. My original charge was 3.7 grains and I increased that to 4.0 grains and changed to a WW LP primer. My velocity with a 230 grain (LEE 452-228-RN) bullet is around 650 fps and the Es and Sd are acceptable, (not single digit Sd but very close). My revolver is an open top 1871/72 Uberti, in 45 S&W, so not an IPSC gun.
However, the brisance and compatibility with the powder type and amount are important considerations or factors as well. It's well publicized in shotshell loading manuals, yet I see very little hard data for pistol primers. The same pressure and velocity variations are present, but the variation is a bit less critical because handguns are a bit more tolerant to those variations.
For IPSC, the loads are near max, so for a primer swap a quick velocity check to ensure power factor is being maintained is probably all that is required. That's my guess, my discipline is Cowboy, and for the small charges of powder and low velocities, the differences between primers is or can be rather dramatic.
I use a chronograph for load development as a rule. Because the load density is low, powder position is a real factor, and just as some powders are or tend to be position sensitive, some primers do a better job of mitigating that powder position sensitivity.
You did not tell us what your load is now. The kind of powder and amount are important, as is the caliber you are shooting. What primer are you presently using? What bullet (type and weight) are you shooting? And what velocity is your load?
Case in point: I had a 45 S&W load that gave very decent numbers and shot decently enough. I started to notice a bit of unburnt powder in the case and I was missing the odd target even though the hold and aim seemed good. Therefore I sent a few rounds over the chronograph. The good load I had was no longer good. I'd lost about 100 fps and the Es and Sd numbers were bad.
I really wanted to know why and after a bit of testing I believe I found the answer. I had made a small change in the primer. I was using a current lot of primers and had run out. A local dealer had some available so I bought them. They were not current production, about 10 years old, and they were not doing the job. Fortunately when I had developed the load another primer had given me good numbers as well. In an attempt to get better numbers I had increased the powder charge as well. Because of the primer swap I was able to lower the charge as well. I ended up a bit higher in charge, with the original powder, as a bit more velocity helped the load shoot to the sights. That's the 10,000 ft view, the details are bit convoluted, but bottom line, primers have an analog side to them, it is not as simple as bang or no bang.
Federal primers have a thinner cup than other pistol primers, they can tolerate a light hammer spring, but they are not the lowest in brisance. I think lock time is more important than super light hammer pull, so the softer cup is not as critical to my load development. But that being said, I do on occasion use a Federal primer because it gives me consistent velocities and good accuracy.
My load utilized a long ago discontinued powder, WW 452AA, and the original primer was a CCI 300 LP. My original charge was 3.7 grains and I increased that to 4.0 grains and changed to a WW LP primer. My velocity with a 230 grain (LEE 452-228-RN) bullet is around 650 fps and the Es and Sd are acceptable, (not single digit Sd but very close). My revolver is an open top 1871/72 Uberti, in 45 S&W, so not an IPSC gun.
Thanks to everyone for the input.. I have a batch of Genix and a batch of federals, it sounds like for practice genix are the way to go and feds for comp since they are softer. Or at least that's how I'll start until we get more primers in CA lol...
The cups on Federal.primers are not actually softer. I once saw an article where someone tested the hardness of different brands of primer cups. Federal had some of the harder ones. The priming compound is more sensitive and easier to set off than the other brands. That's why their packaging is so much bulkier. There was a story years ago a truck load detonated when it was involved in an accident and the new packaging was introduced shortly after.
Auggie D.
Auggie D.
.30/06 FTW
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Thunder Bay, Ontario
That is my understanding as well, they're just more sensitive. My experience has been that Ginex are actually the softest and are more likely to deform going in than Federal. I'll use Ginex for practice ammo and when you're seating them they have no "feel". Pretty much any other brand you know when they're in and the Ginexs you're not sure if they are. On my Square Deal probably about 10% of the rounds I need to go back and seat the primers deeper.
Do your research right..Federal primer cup are thinner than other brand and softer for this reason.
They are more sensitive because of the thinner cup. That all.
red magnum
CGN Regular
- Location
- Sundre, Alberta
Source?
When I was shooting IPSC Revoler with a 625 with major PF I had the hammer spring tunned down so light that only Federal primers would go off consisstently. I just assumed they were softer, either way it takes less of a hit to set them off.
Federal primers feel much softer when I accidentally crush them in my progressive than cci. And also, the imperfections in the priming ram show themselves in the bottom of my federal primers where they don't with others, there is no doubt in my mind the cup material is thinner or softer than others.
Last edited:
