Winchester Primer Failure

bgcameron

bgcameron

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
167   0   0
Location
Victoria, BC
I think I might have a bad batch of primers. They are blowing out pin holes on the edges. About 7 rounds out of 40 did this in my 303 (headspace is good), which etched the bolt head pretty deeply.

The load is a 150gr Hornady SP with 42-43 grains of IMR 4320. Velocities were right around 2400 fps.

Has anyone ever experienced this? The lot number is DHL768G
 
Last edited:
I took the firing pin out of my 223 using WSR primers. I ran my test loads at about 20deg C and blew 6 primers out on my most accurate load on a 35deg C day. To bad I did not notice until it cratered the firing pin tip.

Not sure if it was the primers or the temp change but that day I switched to Remington BR primers because they were available. Also I switched my theory, if I have a fast load and a slow load with the same precision, I will use the slow load.
 
Sounds like excessively weak primer cups. I'm assuming you are using a load that hasn't given you issues before of course. Perhaps take an unfired primer, remove the anvil and compound, and measure the thickness of the metal and compare it with a good one?. Could be a bad alloy/weak metal though if it's the normal thickness. Contacting Winchester may help as well.

Personally I hate Winchester primers. All of my failure to fires and hang fires have been with Winchester primers. Haven't had any issue with CCI, Federal, or Remington though my main brand is CCI (except when they are sold out and I need primers asap).
 
I have been using Winchester primers since the LR ones were designated 8½-120 [a long time ago, lol]
Never had a FTF, hangfire, nor a blown out edge with them.
However, I have seen the phenomenon you describe, it is a thin area in the primer cup.
Probably a result of the orininal cup "drawing" process.
Take note of the lot number, and send Winchester a note on it.
Regards, Eagleye.
 
I always use Winchester primers and have never had an issue with them. Something must have happened with your production lot. Concidering how many each company makes at a time, there are always chances that things went wrong somewhere. Like EAGLEYE suggested, send them an email with your number, maybe there is a bigger problem and they might do a recall.
 
I have also never had a problem with Winchester primers, or any primer I installed. Have you tried them in any other cartridges? I would send Winchester an email with lot # so they can look into it.
 
never had issues with winchester primers,,UNTIL I started reloading a 40gr v-max and a hefty load h4895 out of my savage mdl25 204ruger,,particularly in the hotter weather,I was getting an occassional pierced primer..I then switched to cci br4 primers,,and pierced primer issue dissappeared....I know winchester primer cups are thinner then CCI br4 primers.
hence,,,I still use winchester primers in 223,243,22-250 and no real issues,,and obviously no issues with the cci in the other calibers
 
It seems that the folks at winchester ammunition dont like to communicate. My emails and phone messages have gone unanswered. I think my easiest course of action is to switch to CCI.
 
I've not experienced that problem however, I bought some WLR primers for some 30-06 rounds and about 1 in 10 failed to fire. I was told that it was likely due to improperly seated primers, but I loaded more and ensured that all primers were properly seated, but that made no difference. Not sure if it was a bad batch, as it seems some have had no issues with them, but I don't know what else could be the cause. I will be picking up some CCI primers to try out on the next batch.

[
 
Lately there has been a few threads on Winchester primer issues on other forums, THR for one, and 24hourcampfire. It sounds like it was a single bad run of primers and others have had great luck with Winchester making it right.

If these topics are true about bad primers from Winchester, it is the first time I have ever heard a bad thing about them, and it seems Winchester has been great about making it right. I would not expect to see this issue pop up again anytime in the near future. All companies have a glitch from time to time.
 
lot # DDL667G
I googled the lot number and found nothing.....checked a few sites as well for recalled lots, but found nothing down that road either.
 
Well this is why I have to think it was just a bad lot.
Many people have used them for years with no issues.
I loaded up some and made absolute sure that they were fully seated and still had some fail to fire.
I bought 200 at lebarons in Ottawa in the spring and have not used the second tray, but will not bother to either.
I may buy another 100(from a different supplier) just to see if I have a different result).\
The rifle was a winchester model 70 and the brass was both R.P. and winchester
 
Like some others i have used a lot of win. primers with no problem. Mine are 10 years old thou as when i buy, i buy a bunch so`s i don`t run out in the middle of something important. Some call it hoarding i call it being ready.
 
Im extremely annoyed, i switched from cci to winchester also. Loaded a bunch up to re-tune my load, primer cups began bursting i belive 4 grains below my cci load. Gas cut the bolt face which meant i had to buy a replacement.
I loaded a dozen more, a half grain below the previous bursting threshhold and 2 of 3 shots burst once again and ruind bolt face #2. 4.5 bloody grains below what cci was able to contain. JFC!
 
I find it very strange that 40.7 grains is listed as a max load. The load data I used lists above 44 as max. A military 303 round makes a heavier bullet go faster.

The hodgdon load data website does not show 4320, but it shows 4895 (a faster burning powder) with a max load of 44.2 grains.

I'm certain my loads arent too hot.
 
Some rifles will hit WAY higher pressures sooner than the next in the same chambering, even by the same maker in the same model. The book maximums are NOT an absolute, that is why you start low and work up. It is VERY possible you are over pressure with an above published maximum load. And comparing 4320 to 4895 just by published burn rates is like comparing apples and rain drops, it can not be done. Everything from case capacity to primer to seating depth to charge volume to.... well that throws all assumptions out the window, don't try and use 4895 data and assume that you would be safe with 4320 just because it is listed as a slower burn rate!

More often than not I reach max pressures sooner than expected due to tight chambers, short or no freebore/throat, etc...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom