I have 3 cans of imr 4350 I kind of forgot about. Also, found an older nosler manual I forgot I had. It lists a decently fast load with imr4350 and 50 grainers in a .220 swift. Would magnum primers be of any benefit to help speed or efficiency? A different thread this morning got me thinking. Thanks, Rob.
what benefits would a magnum primer have for a standard case?
- Thread starter cath8r
- Start date
Magnum primers are about the powder used. They're made to ignite hard to light powders and extreme cold weather shooting. IMR4350 doesn't need 'em. Won't hurt anything or make anything better though
There's very little about the .220 Swift that isn't fast. The data in my old Lyman book shows a 50 grain jacketed starts at 3309 fps(39.0 to 43.0c). Odd that Hodgdon didn't test it for their current on-line data.
There's very little about the .220 Swift that isn't fast. The data in my old Lyman book shows a 50 grain jacketed starts at 3309 fps(39.0 to 43.0c). Odd that Hodgdon didn't test it for their current on-line data.
I year or so ago, I contacted Boomer on here, since he lives in a very cold area of Canada, to see if he would do a cold weather test on primers, to see if a magnum primer made a difference in velocity, and if they were required to ignite ball powder in the cold.
Here are the results of that test by Boomer, at Churchill, Man.
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
Here are the results of that test by Boomer, at Churchill, Man.
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
Look at the flash photos of the primers in the links below, of note are the Remington 7 1/2 and 9 1/2 primers. Remington ran our American Lake City Army Ammunition Plant from 1941 until 1982. Remington formulated their primers to light off harder to ignite Winchester ball powders used at Lake City for military ammunition. These Remington primers are called "baby flame throwers" BUT are not considered a magnum primer.
And the 5.56 and 7.62 military ammunition loaded at Lake City requires a HOTTER primer when using ball powders. And the CCI No. 34 and No. 41 primers now used at Lake City are magnum primers. (even in the .223/5.56 cartridge)
A Match Primer Study in the 6BR Cartridge
By Germán A. Salazar
http://riflemansjournal.########.com/2009/06/primers-small-rifle-primer-study.html
A Match Primer Study in the 30-06 Cartridge
By Germán A. Salazar
http://riflemansjournal.########.com/2009/06/primers-large-rifle-primer-study.html
All my .223/5.56 ammunition loaded with ball powder uses Remington 7 1/2 primers. Why argue with what the military uses to light off their ammunition.
NOTE, a magnum primer either burns longer or hotter than a standard primer to insure better ignition.
And the 5.56 and 7.62 military ammunition loaded at Lake City requires a HOTTER primer when using ball powders. And the CCI No. 34 and No. 41 primers now used at Lake City are magnum primers. (even in the .223/5.56 cartridge)
A Match Primer Study in the 6BR Cartridge
By Germán A. Salazar
http://riflemansjournal.########.com/2009/06/primers-small-rifle-primer-study.html
A Match Primer Study in the 30-06 Cartridge
By Germán A. Salazar
http://riflemansjournal.########.com/2009/06/primers-large-rifle-primer-study.html
All my .223/5.56 ammunition loaded with ball powder uses Remington 7 1/2 primers. Why argue with what the military uses to light off their ammunition.
NOTE, a magnum primer either burns longer or hotter than a standard primer to insure better ignition.
H4831
1. No offence but I will go with the long and elaborate tests conducted by our military and the primers our military uses.
2. I'm answering the OP question and NONE of what you posted has anything to do with the military's decision to use magnum primers.
3. This is the internet and everyone has their own opinion BUT a single brief test conducted by someone without the same lab equipment and test facilities the U.S. Military used in testing doesn't carry any weight in my book.
The comments made above are not meant to be insulting to you H4831 and you have made your comments about primers made known many times. But you and boomer didn't make the decision our American military did after years of exhaustive testing and using magnum primers.
If you don't like answers given here then you should think about a new hobby................one mans opinion means nothing. And your opinion isn't going to change the fact the military uses magnum primers.
Below is what CCI has to say about the military primers used at Lake City Army Ammunition Plant U.S.A.
•Mil-spec sensitivity
•Initiator mix optimized for ball/spherical propellants
•Available in large (No.34) and small (No. 41) rifle
•Use the same data as CCI Magnum primers
http://www.cci-ammunition.com/products/primers/primers.aspx?id=30
So therefore H4831 we will agree to disagree and I'm going with the U.S. Military.
Magnum primers are used with double base powders because of the deterrent coatings make these powder harder to ignite. These coating are used to lower the peak burn rate temperature to about the same as single base powders. If you look in older reloading manuals you will see the recommended use of these magnum primers with double base ball powders. Magnum primers are also used with large capacity cases of slow burning powders single or double base.
Last edited:
Did the cartridges have time to cool off outdoors for a couple hours before shooting?
Having lived and hunted in Saskatchewan and Alberta for over 40 years, in way below zero temperatures, I have never had an issue with standard powders not providing proper ignition in the cartridges that I used them in. I use magnum primers only in my large capacity cases, I don't bother with magnum primers with any cartridge using 60gr or less of powder.
from some tests I did years ago it SEEMED to me that BR2's were hotter than cc1200's and gave similar results to the 250's. If that is the case boomer may have been comparing a hotter than normal primer from one manufacturer with another magnum primer.
Maybe a test with cci200s against 250's and or Rem 91/2 vs 91/2M would be more revealing. If you ever feel the urge to duplicate tests I can donate standard & mag primers from 4 manufacturers.Depending on calibers I may have bullets too.
Neilm
Maybe a test with cci200s against 250's and or Rem 91/2 vs 91/2M would be more revealing. If you ever feel the urge to duplicate tests I can donate standard & mag primers from 4 manufacturers.Depending on calibers I may have bullets too.
Neilm
The technicians at Remington when developing the 7 1/2 primer were listening to the Doors song "Light My Fire". 
And the 7 1/2 primer isn't labeled a magnum primer.
Now guess which primer I use in my AR15 with ball powders.
And the 7 1/2 primer isn't labeled a magnum primer.
Now guess which primer I use in my AR15 with ball powders.
Mysteries And Misconceptions Of The All-Important Primer
http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammo/ammunition_st_mamotaip_200909/
"Magnum Primers: Use As Directed
Most primer makers offer a standard and a Magnum primer in each size and application. The Magnum primer offers more power for challenging ignition scenarios. A large-capacity case, a heavily deterred propellant, or extremely cold weather (less than 20 degrees Fahrenheit) typically makes the Magnum primer desirable.
There are two ways to make a Magnum primer—either use more of the standard chemical mix to provide a longer-burning flame or change the mix to one with more aggressive burn characteristics. Prior to 1989, CCI used the first option in Magnum Rifle primers. After that, we switched to a mix optimized for spherical propellants that produced a 24-percent increase in flame temperature and a 16-percent boost in gas volume.
Literature from some propellant manufactures often says that their products do not require Magnum primers. This is perceived as a good thing because Magnum primers are made in smaller quantities and require more chemicals; therefore, they are more expensive. However, I had to take a different view, one based on real-world issues.
We tested loads at both maximum normal pressures and at the starting loads (some labs calculate start loads—we shot them). Standard primers caused no ignition issues at the max load but posted higher extreme variations in pressure and velocity in the lower pressure regimes of the start loads. In extreme cases, the start loads produced short delayed firings—probably in the range of 20 to 40 milliseconds but detectible to an experienced ballistician. Switching that propellant to a Magnum primer smoothed out the performance across the useful range of charge weights and completely eliminated the delays."
http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammo/ammunition_st_mamotaip_200909/
"Magnum Primers: Use As Directed
Most primer makers offer a standard and a Magnum primer in each size and application. The Magnum primer offers more power for challenging ignition scenarios. A large-capacity case, a heavily deterred propellant, or extremely cold weather (less than 20 degrees Fahrenheit) typically makes the Magnum primer desirable.
There are two ways to make a Magnum primer—either use more of the standard chemical mix to provide a longer-burning flame or change the mix to one with more aggressive burn characteristics. Prior to 1989, CCI used the first option in Magnum Rifle primers. After that, we switched to a mix optimized for spherical propellants that produced a 24-percent increase in flame temperature and a 16-percent boost in gas volume.
Literature from some propellant manufactures often says that their products do not require Magnum primers. This is perceived as a good thing because Magnum primers are made in smaller quantities and require more chemicals; therefore, they are more expensive. However, I had to take a different view, one based on real-world issues.
We tested loads at both maximum normal pressures and at the starting loads (some labs calculate start loads—we shot them). Standard primers caused no ignition issues at the max load but posted higher extreme variations in pressure and velocity in the lower pressure regimes of the start loads. In extreme cases, the start loads produced short delayed firings—probably in the range of 20 to 40 milliseconds but detectible to an experienced ballistician. Switching that propellant to a Magnum primer smoothed out the performance across the useful range of charge weights and completely eliminated the delays."
5.56 vs .223 – What You Know May Be Wrong
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/5-56-vs-223/
The link "Mysteries And Misconceptions Of The All-Important Primer" talked about how some standard primers were causing variations in the pressure curve. As an example a pressure spike when the bullet contacts the rifling or further down the bore.
Below the American 5.56 NATO M885 ammunition using "magnum" primers with double base ball powders in a AR15 rifle.
Below Russian "Silver Bear" .223 Remington ammunition fired in a military 5.56 chamber with its longer throat, and pressure spikes.
Bottom line and again no offence to H4831 and Boomer about magnum primers. "BUT" the average person does not have the test equipment needed to "FULLY" test primers in the field.
Now read the link above and look at the pressure charts and the variations in pressures. The military M885 5.56 ammunition above has been "tuned" with ball powders and a magnum primer "with" its chamber and throat. (and its a small cartridge)
And I'm not an expert, I'm retired with too much time on my hands and do a lot of reading on subjects I'm interested in.
"All the information in the world is written in books and all you have to do is read".
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/5-56-vs-223/
The link "Mysteries And Misconceptions Of The All-Important Primer" talked about how some standard primers were causing variations in the pressure curve. As an example a pressure spike when the bullet contacts the rifling or further down the bore.
Below the American 5.56 NATO M885 ammunition using "magnum" primers with double base ball powders in a AR15 rifle.
Below Russian "Silver Bear" .223 Remington ammunition fired in a military 5.56 chamber with its longer throat, and pressure spikes.
Bottom line and again no offence to H4831 and Boomer about magnum primers. "BUT" the average person does not have the test equipment needed to "FULLY" test primers in the field.
Now read the link above and look at the pressure charts and the variations in pressures. The military M885 5.56 ammunition above has been "tuned" with ball powders and a magnum primer "with" its chamber and throat. (and its a small cartridge)
And I'm not an expert, I'm retired with too much time on my hands and do a lot of reading on subjects I'm interested in.
"All the information in the world is written in books and all you have to do is read".
Last edited:
