One thing not addressed is the possibility of light strikes due to the Magnum primers being harder. Something to consider. Otherwise there's really no appreciable FPS or chamber pressure difference for standard handgun loads. Your FPS decrease is more likely due to the reduced charge than the primer change.
Thank you for the info. I didn't know that magnum primers are harder, so what you say makes sense. Similar to the risk of using small rifle primers for pistols loads.
@@salmonthomas Yeah I think it depends on the gun. For a SA/DA and striker fired gun there's a compromise with pull weight of the trigger and primer strike ability. A nice advantage of a SAO gun. Can run a stiffer hammer spring without needing train your trigger finger at the gym haha.
I didn't check accuracy or group size, since I was just shooting through a chronograph into a berm. I predict that there would be no difference, since pistol shooting is not a high-precision sport. Variability caused by the shooter himself is usually much greater than variability in the ammo. As someone pointed out in one of the other comments though, magnum primers have thicker cups, so with a pistol that has a weak firing pin strike, you might get a failure to fire.
Yes they can be used if it's all you can find but beware that the magnum primer is either thicker or harder and therefore requires a harder hammer/striker hit. You may find that some firearms will not set off the magnum primer and cause malfunctions. Only way to know if your firearm will work with them is to range test plenty of rounds, check the spent casings and see if the primers show signs of light strikes. The power factor of the primer itself is zero.
Great data! Thanks for this. I've been a bit apprehensive to load my Magnum primers for use in my striker fire pistol. Since you used a striker fire for your demo... it game me a lot more confidence. You should do another video using small rifle primers for 9mm. I have these as well, and the only issue I may run into, is the fact that rifle primers have a slightly thicker primer casing. With this said... I may have to strictly use these in my hammer fired 9mm. TBD... Thanks again!
Thank you for watching my video and for the comments. It’s good you understand the difference in wall thickness for rifle versus pistol primers. Which brings up a good point you’re probably aware of. Some primer substitutions might be acceptable but using any pistol primer in a rifle cartridge is potentially dangerous because of the thinner walls in pistol primers. That, combined with a more powerful firing pin and higher chamber pressures might lead to a punctured primer and high pressure gas going back toward the shooter.
Mate, I refill .308w, with magnum primers, for winter hunting -10Cº, because they have better lighting, I just lower the grains a little, like you have done. They work perfectly. Greetings from Argentina
Thank you for the insight. Wow, that sounds cold! I probably wouldn't last 30 minutes below freezing! By the way, I've been using Servicious Aventuras primers from Argentina. They work fine for my 1911, but some shooters with striker-fired pistols have occasional misfires, perhaps due to thicker primer walls.
@@oakleydefense5513 ,Your assessment is correct, those primers are thick-walled, they do not work well in pistols with a lightened hammer, IPSC shooters use "imaz" PRIMERS
It's over a year since I made this video and primers are still hard to find. I found and tried some Russian Murom small pistol primers and hope to post a video soon of how they performed. If possible I prefer to buy American, but if your choice is no primers versus Russian primers, that is, no ammo versus ammo, I'll buy the Murom primers.
I bought the same Murom primers. 1k Small pistol and 1k small rifle. Loaded 100 rounds of each and zero issues. I think they are slightly wider or the cup is a bit thicker as I did have a few issues seating the primers in some cases. Could have been the brass or the fact that I prime on the press so that may have been a factor. A little extra muscle and they went in fine. I've seen mixed reviews on these primers but I've had no issues thus far. Like you said, ammo vs no ammo I'll buy Murom all day until these American companies stop playing games or whatever is going on. I find it very hard to believe they are this far behind. Something ain't right. And a little over $200.00 for 2k including shipping and hazmat ain't bad. BTW these primers are made by the same company who makes Tula and Wolf so I'm assuming they are somewhat decent quality. Hopefully you won't have any issues.
@@pep729 Thank you for sharing your experience. I've shot several hundred of them and noticed the same thing. All performed just fine, but on a few occasions they were hard to seat using a hand-held primer. That happened, perhaps, 2 times per 1,000. Maybe their quality control is not as good as American company's, with regard to size consistency. But, like you said, if that's all I can get, I'll use them.
Commenter Sean Tu says it very well. The effects of using magnum primers is going to be highly dependent on the powder being used. Effects can range from barely noticeable to highly dangerous. Can it be done? Yes, under a "buyer beware" caution. You are introducing a variable into your reloading without being able to measure the actual pressures. Any manual or reloading company is going to say "absolutely not". Home experimenters will fall back on the old standard which says "with ANY change of components, ALWAYS reduce the load by 10% and work up slowly from there, looking very closely for any signs of pressure." That's the rule for home experimentation. In this example, while very little difference was noted in speed or handling, the videographer very kindly added where the brass was going. The change of angle for ejection is an indication of differences in slide speeds. That magnum primer is sending the slide back faster. A faster slide speed implies greater pressure (even though no other differences were found). Food for thought.
Loaded thousands of non magnum pistol rounds with magnum primers. About the only thing to consider is stop short of max powder charge, especially in pistols like the Glock in .40cal as they have unsuported chambers.
Very helpful. I am starting to find magnum small pistol primers and was considering this. (Backing off a half grain or so with Titegroup). I appreciate you taking the time to record and publish this.
Thank you for your comment. It's always good to play it safe and start at the middle or lower part of the powder range, then watch for signs of overpressure. A chronograph is very helpful to verify objectively where you stand. Reducing by half a grain might be more than necessary. Several people have told me, including some commenters, that they keep the powder charge the same or reduce it only slightly, like 0.2 grains or so.
We did this exact same test last week using 3.1gn Vihtavuori N320, 147gn RN Blue Bullets through a CZ 75 SP01 Shadow. The chrono showed ZERO difference in power factor (133). The shooter noticed no difference btw the two when shooting. No light primer strikes using a 14 lbs main spring. That may not be the case if using a 11-12 lbs spring which will ignite a Federal primer with no problem. Our testing showed no reason to change the powder load with magnum primers.
Thank you for the info. It seems that the consensus of opinion is that magnum primers do not necessarily require a lower powder charge, but can be treated as a substitute for standard small pistol primers.
Concur. I will say one thing that has been missed in the video is that some guns WILL experience light strikes with magnum primers. My Sig P320 X5 Legion would light strike about 5% of the rounds. I am running Cajun's 11.5# hammer spring and matching firing pin and spring in my Shadow 2, but I ONLY run Federal small pistol primers as they are known to be softer. Presumably with the heavier OEM hammer spring, light strikes are not an issue.
I appreciate your research. I’ve been using mag primers in 9mm for years and I also use small rifle primers in competition +p+ loads as they have a thicker cup and less chance of primer blowout
Thank you for the information on how it worked for you. I've received similar reports from others, so the consensus seems to be that magnum pistol primers are fine. Some recommend reducing the powder charge slightly, but others use the normal load data. I'm more reluctant to use rifle primers, but I appreciate hearing your experience.
@@rcairflr 10% and work up form there, shooting through a cronograph monitoring velocity deviations and pressure signs till I achieve my desired load, In my own personal experience no notable change in pressure or speed from one primer to the other. The rifle primer is thicker in the cup so less chance of primer blowout therefore I’m my opinion a safer primer to use in “hot” loads. But handguns with a reduced trigger pull AKA lighter striker springs. You run the chance of not detonating the primer, “Light primer strike” my guns typically have a heavy striker spring
@@salmonthomas Before you load 1000 rounds with rifle primers, load 10 and test it. Some pistols will not strike hard enough to ignite them, nothing worse than having unreliable ammo. I too once trusted internet and learned the hard lesson.
Thank you for the information it confirmed my own testing. Although you started by using 2 grains less that recommended, I began with the minimum recommended charge.
I've recently had a problem with light primer strikes using magnum primers. 9mm, 115gr FMJ, 4.4grs Win244, CCI550. 3 out of 10 failed on first attemp, all fired on second strike. Sig M17 pistol used. All firing pin indentations were noticably shallower than what Im used to seeing.
Yes, that's a potential problem with magnum primers, due to thick walls. It can also occur with standard primers from some manufacturers. For example, Servicios Aventuras small pistol primers (Argentina) can likewise fail in a gun with light springs, but with a strong firing pin, they fire consistently. If 100% reliability is required, we must first validate them with the specific pistol.
I'd be more concerned about pressure than velocity, and even then it's probably still fine. But I wouldn't do it in, say, a hundred year old Luger but would be less concerned with something like a ten year old CZ75.
I agree. What I really wanted to compare were chamber pressures. Unfortunately, I have no way to measure it, so I used velocity instead, which the best method available to me to compare relative pressures.
@@salmonthomas exactly. I can trust a manual all I want and I can trust the firearm all I want but ultimately it's up to me as a reloader to make sure the explosion I'm creating in my hands is safe, no matter what.
I think the only difference in primers is the wall thickness to compensate for the higher pressure associated with magnum powder. The priming compound should provide the same pressure curve regardless of magnum rating or not. Magnum may even have a bit less due to les internal volume
@@salmonthomas I always noticed the guage difference in primers. But it was a video on RU-vid where a guy had a pressure measurement device and had graphs plotted out. Rifle uses the same amount of primer but a different compound, so that does produce more pressure for a longer period. I'll try and find the video again
The “ magnum” moniker is misleading. The thickness of the primer metal is thicker, to offset harsher loads! Remington is honest about their primers, the higher the number, the thicker the metal. It has benefit when using slower burning powders and bolt face protection at maximum loads.
This is very dependent on the powder that you are using. A magnum primer is to light a heavier propellant charge, but, with the relatively light charge in a 9mm and the rapid burn rate of the Bullseye powder you are using, there really is not much of a difference between the standard and magnum, which is something you basically proved with your reduced charge and the drop in FPS. Now if you you repeat the test with something like HS-6 or Longshot, where the burn rate is slower and the powder charge greater, you will see that the magnum primer will light off more of the slower burning propellant when it goes off than a standard primer, and should see a slight increase in the pressure. Where you can run into problems is if you have a very light charge and the magnum manages to light most of it off at once. That being said, I have used magnum large pistol with 700-x (which burns a little faster than Bullseye) and noticed no difference, and have also used magnum small's with HS-6 and CFE Pistol with no problems, but have stayed closer to the recommended starting loads for the 9mm so it would be well under what the max pressure would be with a standard primer and a larger charge.
Thank you for the good input. Internal ballistics is more complicated than most shooters realize. I didn't think about burn rate as a consideration. I actually was using Titegroup rather than Bullseye, but it's also fast burning and takes a low powder charge. I wonder if small pistol magnum primers for 45 Auto would be a better way to conserve my standard small and large pistol primers? For 45 Auto I prefer slower burning powders, like those you mentioned, which also requires more powder than Titegroup.
@@salmonthomasI remember a long time ago finding some .45 auto that used small primers while picking up brass at a small backwoods "range". I loaded them up and they shot fine.
45 Auto can come with either large (more common) or small primers. The reloading process is the same for both, except the primer must match the primer pocket in the brass.
When I load 223 rem I use whichever small rifle primer I have available. I honestly do not notice a bit of difference using standard, magnum, or the military 5.56 primers. Maybe if I was loading to 5.56 spec there would be but in a general range load, about 2700fps, there is no difference in point of aim, rifle function, or brass ejection. With .357magnum I notice perhaps a scrap or two of unburned powder with small pistol vs magnum. Point of aim at 25 yds is the same though.
I recently ran out of standard small pistol primers and used some magnum primers in 9mm, 38 special, and 357 magnum. I haven't had a chance to try them out yet but I did not change my loads at all when loading the magnum primers. I'll let you know if I noticed any difference. I might make a video on this as well. it's good info to put out there.
People need to research how primers work before reloading. Magnum primers have no more power than standard primers. What makes them "magnum" is a thicker cup allowing them to handle more pressure from more powerful loads
My older Speer manual specifies magnum primers for all ball powders. H110 296,and blue dot in many pistol calibers . H110 in 38 special. My newer Hornaday manuals specify magnum primers for all 357,41,and 44 magnum loads.
Great video, huge help. I’m new to reloading ( 4000 +/- through my Dillon ) 9mm. I use 147gr projectile with 3.3grs of TiteGROUP, small p.p. Recently picked up a brick of small magnum p.p. and loaded up 100 rounds (3.3grs TiteGROUP) to test at the range. I felt no difference and my grouping at 25 yards was the same. Based on the amount of powder you seem to be using, should I bump up my powder a bit? At my last Steel Challenge a few weeks back, it seemed to take forever for the audible ping on the 35 yarder. I almost put another round to it because I thought I’d missed. I was taught to use the least amount of powder to get the most loads out of a tub. Would like to hear comments, thanks
Generally heavier bullets of the same caliber require LESS powder, so you might be just about right, but I"ll have to look up the data in my reference manuals. Can you give me some more data; namely, overall length, type of bullet (FMJ, HP, etc.), brand and barrel length? Hopefully I can look up the data tonight or tomorrow.By the way, one of the best ways to evaluate your loads is to chronography your bullets and compare your velocities to those in the reference books. If you reload, a chronograph is an invaluable tool.
@@oakleydefense5513 I use CamPro 147 full copper plating , round nose flat point. OAL is 1.0990 Barrel lengths are both 5” ( Glock 34 and Walther Q5 Match ) Yes, I would like to get a chronograph, one of my next adds to the tool box for sure. Thank you for your help 👍🏼
I checked the Hornady, Nosler, Sierra and Speer manuals, but none of them had data for Titegroup in 147g, so I checked the Hodgdon online site. They had data for just one bullet at that weight, the Hornady XTP, which is a HP. Their overall length was 1.100" (close to your's) and the ranges of powder charges they recommended was minimum of 3.2g and maximum of 3.6g. You can't exactly equate the reference bullet (Hornady XTP) to your's but their data can give you a ballpark feel for what should be reasonable. Based on that, your 3.3g seems like a good mid-range load. Even if you increased a few tenths of a grain, you wouldn't change velocity enough to notice. Every 0.1g would probably increase velocity only about 20 fps. I definitely wouldn't go above 3.6g, especially with magnum primers.
Only primers I can reliably find are Large Rifle Magnum. So I have been reloading my 500 S&W with them. I use the LRM primer and keep the powder about 1.5 (cant remember right now the numbers are recorded in my book) grains under maximum. With the 440 grain cast bullet and a very heavy crimp the recoil is substantial but the load is highly accurate.
I wouldn't have been so bold as to try that, but that caliber is so powerful that maybe a magnum rifle primer makes sense. I've read that rifle primers have thicker cups, so some pistol firing pins might not have enough power to ignite them. In that case, the main problem is just a misfire. I've heard that substituting pistol primers into rifles is a bad idea, since the thinner weaker pistol primer cups might puncture from the strong rifle firing pins. That might, in theory, allow high pressure gasses to escape out the breech, a dangerous situation!
@@oakleydefense5513 I'm going to assume you don't reload for 500 Smith (if you don't have one I recommend trying one out). In short the 500 S&W Magnum has a safe chamber pressure of 60,000 psi. Most manufactures keep loads to 50,000 psi because of difficulty extracting the cases from that extra 10k psi. Early on people found out that high pressure loads were deforming the large pistol primers the rounds were loaded with. Companies like Star Line decided to make the 500 pistol brass with a large rifle primer pocket and mark the headstamp with an R to make them distinguishable from the early cases. So I was just substituting a large rifle primer with a magnum. I don't know what my original chamber pressures were for mu particular load as the bullet maker sent me the load through e-mail. Matts Bullets is where I got the bullets and if you but his bullets he will tell you a load that works safe with them. I don't really know the difference between a LRP and a LMRP so I kept the load under maximum. I was using IMR 4227.
i was wondering the same thing what load do you use? i seen you have some extreme bullets are those the CPRN bullets 115 gr? be interested in seeing some of the loads you do! i have bullseye powder and number 5 pistol powder
Here's data for the loads used in this video. Standard load: CCI-500 small pistol primers, Titegroup 4.1g, The Blue Bullets (115g polymer coated round nose), OAL = 1.120. Magnum test load: CCI-550 magnum small pistol primers, same bullets, Titegroup 3.9g, OAL=same.
I am a fellow Okie in Choctaw and I have run out of standard small pistol primers but have one brick of magnum primers. As I understand it, magnum primers are slightly harder. Have you experienced any failure to fire when using striker fired pistols?
Nice to talk to a fellow Okie! BTW, these days I’m especially glad I live in OK. I know rifle primers are harder, but I didn’t know that about magnum primers. I haven’t used any more magnum primers apart from those I used for the video. I had no misfires, but that was a tiny sample. Sorry, but I can’t say beyond that.
Happy to see you got good results. I have used "standard" primers where the load data calls for "magnum" primers. I did not see a difference at all. Some re-loaders I knew advised against using magnum primers in standard loads because of the possibility of "detonation" of the propellant. I suppose a particular powder at a certain density, temperature, crimp, bullet weight, caliber, etc. might detonate instead of deflagrate. Good info & be well, Sir.
I recently bought some Winchester large pistol primers marked for use in both standard and magnum loads. So maybe there's not a huge difference between the two. Several expert reloaders told me the small pistol magnum for standard swap is not a big problem, though you need to reduce the powder charge a bit. Under normal circumstances, most people wouldn't even consider it, but now, some people may be facing the choice of either no ammo at all or less-than-ideal ammo.
@@FLCLnaota The magnum primers are slightly thicker to handle higher pressures from magnum loads. Thus that could be construed as "Harder". So in theory you could risk "Light primer strikes". Most stock pistols right out of the box will function fine with mag primers however unless you have changed springs or reduced your your firing pins striking force. I run mag primers all the time in 9mm. Never had a single problem ever.
I think there's a RU-vid video showing small rifle primers for 9mm Luger. I've heard primer cups are thicker for rifle primers, so there may be a risk of misfire (failure to fire). I've also heard people advise against pistol primers in rifle loads. If the more powerful rifle firing pin punctures the pistol primer cup, which is thinner, you could get dangerous pressure coming out the back.
My main purpose for reloading is that they cost less. Initially I started to reload to get better accuracy. I started out with every reloading manual I could find and every one was a little different. I prefer the Lyman manual over the rest because it contains more information and I have the last 3 produced manuals. Lyman manuals provide maximum and minimum loads as well as the most accurate load. They also provide the pressures for those loads. Every cartridge has a maximum allowable pressure for the caliber. There are some reloaders who load for maximum velocity and will exceed the recommended maximum load. If one of these reloaders decides to switch to a magnum primer just to see what happens he is not acting responsibly. You mentioned a shortage of components we have to deal with. There is a difference between 9mm lead cast bullets of the same weight produced by every manufacturer. Most are not pure lead. They mix other elements into the lead to make the bullet harder. Each formula being a little different from the others will provide more or less friction when going down the barrel. Also you must consider the shape of the bullet. Each shape provides more or less bearing surface on the barrel. And all this means more or less powder is needed in the load. There is no way that a reloading manual can provide information for each bullet design and composition. You can make some judgments from the provided data in your manual. However, you must proceed with caution and most important whenever you change a component you must work up a new load. I use Sigs hand guns and what I have learned about my 9mm is that it is most accurate at specific velocities. I use a chronograph when working up loads. So, no matter what powder I use if I can get the same velocity from each load it will be the most accurate for that powder. If I stay within the maximum recomend amount of powder each powder will max out at a different velocity and different shot groups. I use a bench rest when working up a load. As I mentioned that I load for accuracy. So I have tried a lot of different powders and a lot of different bullet weights and designs. In addition if you use 2 exact makes and models of the same gun the results will be different. Some times the velocities can vary up to 150 fps. Accuracy can also be different from a 1 inch group up to 6 inches. That is why you must work up loads for each and every gun. Above all keep records of what you do. Reloading is a hobby too.
@@danielswartz6818 Thank you. Much more good information. I don't have the Lyman manual. I wonder how it compares to the Hornady, Speer, Sierra and Nosler ones? I use them, in addition to online data from Hodgdon. I don't test groups with my pistol. For some reason, my shooting off sand bags seems less accurate than off-hand shooting, which doesn't make sense. All my shots go way too high off a rest or sand bags, but on average, are right on with my sights (factory set) when I shoot off hand. So I mainly evaluate my loads by mean velocity and standard deviations. I'm assuming standard deviation is an objective ay to evaluate precision.
@@salmonthomas what I did was buy as many manuals that were on the shelves. Some I did not buy because their information was lacking. I bought them whenever I saw them. They run about $30 each. A little bit about bench rest shooting. The method of bench rest shooting is to keep the gun as stable as possible when the round is fired. Then the only variable is the cartridge. So it does not matter where the bullet hits on the paper. The goal in reloading is to get 5 bullets in the same hole. Different loads will spread the shot group to perhaps 6 inches while some may be about an inch. Keep in mind that by securing the gun at the time the round is fired makes the only variable the bullet. Also don't worry about where the bullet hits the paper. In working up a load for my 9mm Sig I obtained a 5 shot group at 11 o'clock on the target. As the amount of powder increases the velocity changes. If you shoot about 7 or 8 different loads you will notice that they print at different points on the target. All the time you are looking for the smallest group. Once you have found the perfect load you can have the sights adjusted. Sometimes you have to settle for the second best group because it is closer to dead center. Lastly. You must be sure that you fire the groups exactly the same. Of course, sometimes freehand shooting groups can print a lot different than bench shooting. That could be the fault of the shooter. Primarily it could be triger control or moving the gun as you pull the trigger. Velocity effects where the bullets hit relative to where you aimed. As soon as the bullet leaves the barrel it starts to fall to the ground due to gravity. The higher the velocity the longer the bullet travels before it hits the ground. Even in hand guns. That is one reason your bullets hit the target at different heights. So, first you have to make sure that wherever your sights point to is where your bullet goes and consistently. That is why you reload. I use to work with a reloader and he gave me a lot of tips that helped me out a lot. Some of the guys I met at the range do not have the slightest idea of what they are doing. If their brains were dynamite they wouldn't have enough power to blow their nose.
Wow I was doing the same thing Use the minimum load Reduce 2 tents didn't have any problems I felt the same way you did when I 1st shot it didn't feel any difference It's on a 9 mmeter
@@MrJda868 I show data for my loads in a table at about 1:15 in the video. I used 115g bullets and my Titegroup charges were 4.1g for small pistol primers and 3.9 for the magnums. Overall length for both was 1.120. Note that I used Blue Bullets, which take a slightly different powder change than FMJ.
As a corporation, they have to stay within strict guidelines that allow no “wiggle-room” for or of misinterpretations. It is AMAZING the misconstrued and just whacked ideas that get “loose.”
I am testing magnum primer small pistol to see the results as with standards I got cycling issues of missing cartridge load on chamber resulting in block, the gunsmith suggest me to use CCI magnum primers ones instead of normal 500 use 550 magnum and observe if happens again: on glock 17 9mm x21 I hope solve it
It sounds like you're having failures to feed. That doesn't sound like a primer issue to me. I would think it might be more like a problem with the cartridge dimensions, such as incorrect bullet or case diameters, or maybe that overall cartridge length doesn't work well with your gun. Also, it might be an issue with a weak recoil spring that doesn't have enough power to push the cartridge in. Is the feed ramp smooth and clean?
@@salmonthomas it has been tested with the original GLOCK spring , cartridges dimensions are measured by digital caliber and are seating at its OAL 29,5 mm , high cartridge loads 5,4 grain Vjhyavouri N340 , the pistol has the trigger prepared by a real expert on its original base for optimize it’s performance. Another suggestion says to crimp more the bullet
Is your problem a failure to feed the cartridge into the chamber when the slide goes forward; that is, before you fire? Or is it a failure to extract or eject after you fire? If it's a failure to feed, does it happen when you load the first round from the magazine, before firing the first shot? Depending on when the malfunction occurs, you might be able to narrow down the cause. Your overall length sounds long, at least for 115 grain FMJ bullets. These commercial cartridges are usually about 1.155" (29.34mm). I load mine between 1.120" (28.45mm) to 1.135" (28.83mm). I don't have any references to know the correct charge for that powder (for 115 or 124g bullets), but 5.4 grains sounds like a lot. So you should have plenty of chamber pressure, and I don't think changing primers would have any effect. Generally people taper crimp 9mm. I use a light crimp. Are you setting your powder charge and overall all length based on a reference book? You should follow their specifications for both powder change AND overall length. Both affect chamber pressure, so you have to get both right. Overall length also affects feeding. If you follow the reference data, it should normally function fine.
I use 123 gr fmj following the loading data but 0,2 grains more to reach 350ms the no feeding issue happened at the second 8 shot group exercise so at magazine full at half, it is very strange issue.on single shot doesn’t happened, this happens On a very rapid fire sequence .is a cycling problems
@@salmonthomas I have just tested winchester large pistol primers against federal match grade magnum large pistol primers. 7 rounds of each, the federals were an average of 4 fps slower, but more consistent shot to shot. Also, the federal primers showed less signs of pressure, which baffles me because federal is known for softer primers.
Thank you for your video.I use Lee loadmaster, CCI Small Pistol Primer 500, 115gr Copper plated bullet with TiteGROUP powder. Selected My disk number: 40, 4.7gr powder, shot about 100 rounds with the Glock 19 at the range, feels good, I think it worked.I am a reloading new user.I don't know if this is right？Thank you.
I assume the cartridge is 9mm Luger. Are your bullets round nose (RN) or something else? What is your overall length (OAL)? Here's what my reloading manuals say for 9mm Luger 115g FMJ-RN: Hornady - Titegroup max 4.1gr, OAL 1.100"; Sierra - Titegroup max 3.6gr, OAL 1.100"; Speer - Titegroup max 4.5gr, OAL 1.135". You might be referring to the data on the Titegroup bottle, which is for a Speer (SPR) Gold Dot Hollow Point (GDHP) bullet loaded to an OAL of 1.135. If you're not using that bullet seated to that OAL, your powder charge is too much and could be dangerous. You should refer to at least two reloading manuals; more is better. If you're within driving distance of Tahlequah, Oklahoma, you're welcome to join one of my reloading classes. Here's a link: academics.nsuok.edu/continuingeducation/NRARiflePistolCartridgeReloading
Nowadays I'd probably buy anything I could find; regular, magnum, rifle, imported ... It's getting so bad that some people are considering reloading their own primers!
So I currently have Hodgdon hi-skor 700-x flake powder and only magnum primers due to the shortage I was given the primers. Should I deviate further from the load data than 2/10s? Does the powder matter very much. According to Winchester the powder I use is a very fast burning powder.
I'm not an expert, since I had never done the before, so take this with a grain of salt. From my experience and what other people have said, I would either subtract 0.2grains from whatever safe load you have for normal primers, or you could start at the recommended minimum powder charge range and work up from there, looking for signs of overpressure with each test load. Obviously you don't want to exceed the max, but you also don't want to go below min. Keep in mind that those loads go with a certain overall length. Changing overall length changes the pressures.
My theory on the lower velocity is: magnum primers are so powerful, they spit the bullet further out the bbl, leaving a greater volume of space for the burning powder to create pressure. I think-possibly switching to a faster powder might produce a more typical burn rate. Thats just my hypothesis. A Mag primer is very powerful, it alone will shoot a rubber practice bullet through a curtain- no, the curtain won't catch it, and continue clean THROUGH the window. Speaking for a friend. Lol.
Thank you for the info. Actually the entire process is quite complicated, due to considerations like case volume, burn rate, barrel length, and more, as you said.
I found this video that provides good information and data about using magnum and rifle primers for 9mm. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-NGVRGsoOr6k.html
Thank you. I had seen it some time ago, but it was good to see again. Most people don't have the equipment to measure chamber pressure, so that is unique and especially useful.
I've heard that rifle primer cups have slightly thicker walls. If so, they might or might not work with a particular pistol depending on how strong the striker/firing pin spring is. As for the charge, I wouldn't be surprised if they're all about the same. All primers have to do is ignite the powder. The powder then creates the huge chamber pressure, up around 30,000 PSI for 9mm. Any pressure contributed by the primer would be tiny in comparison.
Great video sir. With all this hard to find components I've been switching primers in experimenting for myself. I have used large rifle primers and small rifle primers in pistol calibers Also have experimented with using small pistol primers in AR-15 rifle. It's all about experimenting and doing stuff safe and working up with load development.
See Norman McNeal's comment from 3 weeks ago. He said the difference between magnum and standard primers is the thickness of the cups. I've heard the same for rifle versus pistol primers. I have yet to verify this, but if it's true, the problem with using "higher" level primers, ie, magnum over standard, rifle over pistol, is not so much excess pressure, but rather the risk of a misfire, that is, failure to ignite. If your firing pin spring creates enough momentum to ignite the primer, then, in theory, it should be fine. However using a firearm with stronger firing pin spring on a "lower" level primer, like a rifle on a pistol primer, runs the risk of piercing the primer, which could allow high pressure gasses out the back toward you!
@@salmonthomas it's all hype same thickness same size only difference is a tiny bit more compound if that. Large rifle and large pistol are the same large magnum same tiny bit more compound . small rifle small pistol the same small magnum tiny bit more compound. Talk to two different guys who have been to the plant and they use the same thickness of materials to make the cups and anvil to make primers . this is per the guys running the machines and making the primers when they asked that's is what they where told. I have used cci Remington tula and s&b Winchester primers I have not seen any difference but color of cups and packaging even when buying match primers same just cost more for a warm fuzzy feeling .
@@adamlong54 The SAAMI drawings show that small pistol and small rifle primers have the same dimensions, but large rifle primers are slightly larger than large pistol primers. Also, the primer pockets are slightly deeper for large rifle versus large pistol. Also, although bench rest/ match primers may be the same dimensions as the standard version, I heard they are inspected more closely and therefore have better consistency. I've tested standard large rifle primers across brands and with CCI bench rest primers, and indeed had a significantly smaller shot group with the bench rest primers. For most shooters that wouldn't be important, but if I'm going for optimal long distance precision, I use bench rest primers.
Magnum primers are hotter causing higher pressure. You can use them in place of the standard. However, you must work up a load to one find out if you will have any pressure issues. Second, to check your bench shot groups to see if you have better groups. All of this is based on the type of powder you are using. Magnum primers were designed to burn Hotter and consume larger amounts of powder burning all of it. Using magnum primers without working up a load is very dangerous especially if you are running hot loads. The mag primer will increase pressure and boom no fingers. Bullseye powder burns dirty and I found unburned powder in the chamber and on the outside of the breach. So, I tried mag primers and worked up the load. Result was that I use 2 tenths of a grain less powder and had the same velocity and better bench shot groups. If you are loading a maximum load, that 2 tenths of a grain could blow holes In your primers or force them out of the pocket. REMBER play it safe and work up s load. I've been reloading for over 55 years. That does not make me an expert but intelligentsia comes with age. Oh one last thing. There is a difference in velocities and pressures between different primer manufacturers. Lymon reloading manual compares the differences and gave the advice to work up a load if swiching to mag primers. Guys you have to read and not go off half cocked before doing some things. It is called a MAGNUM PRIMER for a reason Same as magnum bullets. Think, Think. Think. Not too smart fella.
Thank you. That's good advice and information. I also made clear, by quoting from the Hornady manual at the beginning and end, that swapping magnum for standard primers is NOT recommended. As you mentioned, I reduced my powder charge for the magnum primers 0.2g below my standard load, which turns out to the bottom of the range for 115g LRN (Hodgdon data; Blue Bullets behave like LRN). I also analyzed velocities, standard deviations, distance and angle of ejection, magnitude of recoil, sound, and looked for signs of overpressure. In theory, you should follow load data exactly as written, but it's often necessary to make minor substitutions. For example, the reference might call for Winchester primers, but you can only find CCI. Their data could be based on a 5" barrel, but you have a 4" barrel. They may use Hornady brass, but you have only Blazer brass, etc. Based on a knowledge of fundamental reloading principles, you may have to discern minor, low-risk substitutions versus others you would never do. For example, swapping powders is a VERY BAD IDEA. Another consideration is the current ammo shortage. Primers are essentially non-existent, and your choice could be, don't reload/don't shoot or try to work out an alternative that is safe and works.
For some shots, the smoke shooting out the barrel for the magnum loads seems a bit blacker than for the standard loads. The video frame rate is slow compared to the action of firing, so what you can see may depend on how the video sync'ed with the blast for each shot. But your theory might explain the subtle difference in the smoke; that is, the powder burn rate might be slighlty different for the two primers.
@@oakleydefense5513 a change of primers, load density, and bullet crimp,or distance to the lands in rifle cartridges will all change the burn 🔥rate of the propellant.
If you had used the same powder charge for both primers we could see the effect upon velocity that would occur (if any). Since each primer had a different powder charge this introduces a change in two variables: powder charge and primer type. Now we have no way to know what part of the change in velocity was caused by change in primer type. You would normally only change one variable at the time.
@@charlesphillips5906 Yes, I see your point. Ideally, from a scientific design perspective, you usually want to alter just one variable while holding the others constant. However, in order to provide a margin of safety, I reduced the magnum charge by 0.2g, and then compared the magnum versus standard primers. Scientists often perform pilot studies to refine their methods. This was a fast, simple, pilot study, which for my purposes, provided useful information; namely, that with this margin of safety, the magnum primer did not produce excessive chamber pressure. Thank you for the input.
@@oakleydefense5513 But it yielded no useful information. If you enjoyed doing it that’s great, but you didn’t tell me what happens if I substitute Magnum primers (which I have) for non Magnum primers (which I don’t have).
@@charlesphillips5906 I noticed that too. It would have more meaning if all variables were equal. I don't reduce my charge at all for magnum primers. If I were loading towards the top of the range in powder I might think about it. But I usually load around the middle of the recommended powder charge and never had a problem.
