Help on primer types please.

[Biggles]

Hi I've just started reloading for a 223 and am confused on what the difference is between primer types.
I've started out with CCI 400 SR but am getting flattened primers at even relatively low charges.
Looking into it I've seen advice that they are too soft for 223.
But what to use. Am I right in thinking there is 3 main groups of primer
Standard, bench rest/better quality controlled & Magnum.?
Can anyone point me in the direction of any info on primers please.
I'm trying to throw a 77gr SMK down a 1:7 barrel if that has an influence on the primer type.

[dromia]

Are the flattened primers giving you a problem?

[WelshShooter]

The CCI primers are on the harder/thicker side of the spectrum. Flattened primers alone aren't an indication of overpressure loads.

What is the load at which you are experiencing this? Please state powder brand, powder charge and overall length. Where did you get your load data from?

My recent 223 load is based on RS40 powder, shoulder bumped casing, 69gr Scenar's and I'm using data provided by Reload Swiss. I am 0.3gr below max load and overall length is slightly different from published data (its to magazine length) and I see my primers slightly cratering. I'm not concerned with this as this can sometimes happen with ever factory ammo.

Read this article:
https://www.primalrights.com/library/ar ... g-pressure

[Laurie]

The CCI-400 and Remington 6 1/2 standard SR primers have 20 thou' thick cups and were designed for the .22 Hornet and 43,000 psi loads in the 1930s. The old PMC copper colour SR primer (Murom KVB-223) appears to fall into the same category. Winchester WSRs used to be 'hard' ('silver colour ie nickel plated) but around 10 years ago Winchester changed the spec (brass colour now) and they are only 21 thou' thick and rather weak.

When the .222 Rem was introduced in 1950 with its 50,000 psi pressures, Remington deemed its 6 1/2 too physically weak for these pressures and introduced the 7 1/2 'magnum' primer with a 25 thou' thick cup. Although called an SR 'Magnum' it has the same insides as the standard model and it is about strength not brisance. The 223 Rem with 55,000 psi (62,000 under European CIP rules) should not be primed with the CCI-400, Rem 6 1/2 and KVB-223. The WSR may be OK, but not in AR-15 types nor in many factory actions with rather loose firing pin fits in the bolt-face or in some cases with large diameter pins. They will 'crater' leading to failure and in some cases 'blank' where a perfect round hole appears to have been punched into the primer cup around the pin indent, but actually sees the missing metal blown back into the bolt body with risk of damage to the bolt and trigger and of hang/misfires due to the metal disks affecting striker assembly reliability. The 7 1/2 appears to have been withdrawn and has been replaced by the 25 thou' cup Rem 7 1/2BR originally introduced for the .17 Remington and maybe a little 'warmer' than the 7 1/2.

The PMC / Murom SR Magnum (silver) KVB-5,56M IS 'tough' as is the Murom 'Small Primer 223 Rem' (KVB-223M) which is also slightly 'hotter' than the KVB-5,56M which is another example where standard and 'Magnum' have identical active components and brisance. American XTC AR competitors who use ball powders in progressive presses prefer the KVB-223M as it gives more reliable ignition for this type of powder.

Federal 205 and 205M (the latter match) are in-betweeners with 22.5 thou' cups but generally manage OK. They are said to be identical except the match version is packaged from selected superior lots off the production line.

The Brazilian Magtech 7 1/2 is another 'magnum' in name only, 25 thou' cup but not quite as hard as the CCI-450 and BR4. The 450 is a 'magnum' but not particularly 'hot' and the BR4 its match version. Individual production lots appear to produce greater performance variations than type differences Note that because this pair are very highly regarded on both sides of the Atlantic and that due to trade sanctions on Russia and the consequent disappearance of the Russian Murom primers (Wolf and Tula brands in the USA) which were much loved by AR handloaders, the demand for this pair has seen them become rare and VERY expensive - £92 / 1,000 is being quoted for CCI-BR2 (LR) and CCI-BR4 (SR) now and the 450 isn't much cheaper.

Others around are from Fiocchi, S&B and PPU which are simply labelled 'Small Rifle', but appear to be 'hard' enough and generally perform well especially the S&B and Fiocchi models.

So, for 223 Rem use the Rem 7 1/2BR, CCI-450 or BR4, CBC Magtech 7 1/2. either Federal 205, Murom SR Magnum or 223 Rem, S&B and Fiocchi models, maybe PPU too which seems hard enough. The Magtech 7 1/2 is a bargain and very good performer. Bradley Arms in London stocks them and Mark Bradley uses them happily in his 223 AR-15 straight-pulls that he builds and competes with in Civilian Service Rifle.

[WelshShooter]

Laurie, from your above post you say that CCI-400 is not suitable for the pressures generated in 223. However, a large majority of people I know use this primer, furthermore, a lot of local RFD's sick CCI as standard with the odd box of Federal. How come many RFD's haven't caught onto this and supply the more suitable primers for 223?

[Laurie]

Laurie, from your above post you say that CCI-400 is not suitable for the pressures generated in 223. However, a large majority of people I know use this primer, furthermore, a lot of local RFD's sick CCI as standard with the odd box of Federal. How come many RFD's haven't caught onto this and supply the more suitable primers for 223?

Basically because the manufacturers seem to say damn all on this issue. Remington used to put this in its literature and on its website for the same cup-strength Rem 6 1/2

Warning:
• Remington does not recommend this primer for use in the 17 Remington, 222 Remington, 223 Remington, 204 Ruger, 17 Remington Fireball. Use the 7-1/2 Small Rifle Bench Rest primer in these cartridges.
• This 6-1/2 Small Rifle primer is primarily designed for use in the 22 Hornet.

Those are Remington's own words but you won't find them anywhere in its literature. Midsouth Supplies the large US handloading tools and components supplier continues to use the warning though very commendably in my view.

I'm currently doing a three part test / review of SR primer performance in Target Shooter online with parts 1 and 2 published and the conclusions / results in part 3 going live in the next week or 10 days.

http://www.targetshooter.co.uk/?p=2613

http://www.targetshooter.co.uk/?p=2621

If you look at Part 2 you'll find a pic of some Rem 6 1/2s which have nearly failed in a 308 Win 'Palma' brass load which QuickLOAD estimates at around 58,000 psi - some 4,000 below SAAMI maximum. The CCI-400s produced examples that had cratered almost as badly. Other models either cratered slightly or showed no damage at all. These were fired in a rifle with a Stolle Atlas F-Class type action that will reduce metal stress through lack of cup support much better than many factory actions

[WelshShooter]

Thank you for the reply Laurie. Part 2 made for an interesting read! I knew that the CCI-450's were thicker than the standard 400's (I shoot 6.5x47 Lapua, so you know the reason how I know!) but I was under the impression that the 400's were already on the thicker side of things compared with other brands. With the 6.5x47 I am exclusively shooting the CCI magnum primers, which do crater slightly, whereas the standard CCI primers were piercing even on low starting loads using published load data. The only place local to me who stocked these magnum primers were Dauntsey Guns, who are a 4 hour round trip for me. I have 600 left in stock and won't be buying any more as I have sent my Remington 700 bolt off to Ian McKillop to bush the firing pin hole and to reduce the firing pin size. You highlighted this in your article for your 6.5x47 as a fix for the cratering and pierced primers before you rechambered to 260rem. Hopefully, with the improved firing pin size and smaller firing pin hole I will be able to use standard small rifle primers without issue.

I will also have to keep my eye out for other brands of primers based on your articles, both for the 6.5x47 and also for the 223. However, the CCI 400's do seem to work well with the 30 carbine, as you'd expect, due to the low pressure levels.

[Biggles]

Are the flattened primers giving you a problem?

Hi
Not that I know...but I've got some small amount of raised cratering around the firing pin dent which to me just doesn't feel right. I have no extraction issues, in fact they extract easier than the factory GGG I also use.
Someone said they also had issues using CCI400 's in a similar load and rifle and recommend going to federal.
I am new to reloading, know that I know sod all about it , and rather than just blunder on think I'd be wise to seek some advice.

[Biggles]

The CCI primers are on the harder/thicker side of the spectrum. Flattened primers alone aren't an indication of overpressure loads.

What is the load at which you are experiencing this? Please state powder brand, powder charge and overall length. Where did you get your load data from?

My recent 223 load is based on RS40 powder, shoulder bumped casing, 69gr Scenar's and I'm using data provided by Reload Swiss. I am 0.3gr below max load and overall length is slightly different from published data (its to magazine length) and I see my primers slightly cratering. I'm not concerned with this as this can sometimes happen with ever factory ammo.

Read this article:
https://www.primalrights.com/library/ar ... g-pressure

Hi
I'm using Sierra's data for AR 77gr SMK HPBT with 22.3 to 24.5 of N140 , GGG brass cut 7tho under max length, and mag length seated bullets.
I've also tried a 69gr SMK at mid powder load and it does the same.

Thanks for the link I'll take a read.

[Biggles]

The CCI-400 and Remington 6 1/2 standard SR primers have 20 thou' thick cups and were designed for the .22 Hornet and 43,000 psi loads in the 1930s. The old PMC copper colour SR primer (Murom KVB-223) appears to fall into the same category. Winchester WSRs used to be 'hard' ('silver colour ie nickel plated) but around 10 years ago Winchester changed the spec (brass colour now) and they are only 21 thou' thick and rather weak.

When the .222 Rem was introduced in 1950 with its 50,000 psi pressures, Remington deemed its 6 1/2 too physically weak for these pressures and introduced the 7 1/2 'magnum' primer with a 25 thou' thick cup. Although called an SR 'Magnum' it has the same insides as the standard model and it is about strength not brisance. The 223 Rem with 55,000 psi (62,000 under European CIP rules) should not be primed with the CCI-400, Rem 6 1/2 and KVB-223. The WSR may be OK, but not in AR-15 types nor in many factory actions with rather loose firing pin fits in the bolt-face or in some cases with large diameter pins. They will 'crater' leading to failure and in some cases 'blank' where a perfect round hole appears to have been punched into the primer cup around the pin indent, but actually sees the missing metal blown back into the bolt body with risk of damage to the bolt and trigger and of hang/misfires due to the metal disks affecting striker assembly reliability. The 7 1/2 appears to have been withdrawn and has been replaced by the 25 thou' cup Rem 7 1/2BR originally introduced for the .17 Remington and maybe a little 'warmer' than the 7 1/2.

The PMC / Murom SR Magnum (silver) KVB-5,56M IS 'tough' as is the Murom 'Small Primer 223 Rem' (KVB-223M) which is also slightly 'hotter' than the KVB-5,56M which is another example where standard and 'Magnum' have identical active components and brisance. American XTC AR competitors who use ball powders in progressive presses prefer the KVB-223M as it gives more reliable ignition for this type of powder.

Federal 205 and 205M (the latter match) are in-betweeners with 22.5 thou' cups but generally manage OK. They are said to be identical except the match version is packaged from selected superior lots off the production line.

The Brazilian Magtech 7 1/2 is another 'magnum' in name only, 25 thou' cup but not quite as hard as the CCI-450 and BR4. The 450 is a 'magnum' but not particularly 'hot' and the BR4 its match version. Individual production lots appear to produce greater performance variations than type differences Note that because this pair are very highly regarded on both sides of the Atlantic and that due to trade sanctions on Russia and the consequent disappearance of the Russian Murom primers (Wolf and Tula brands in the USA) which were much loved by AR handloaders, the demand for this pair has seen them become rare and VERY expensive - £92 / 1,000 is being quoted for CCI-BR2 (LR) and CCI-BR4 (SR) now and the 450 isn't much cheaper.

Others around are from Fiocchi, S&B and PPU which are simply labelled 'Small Rifle', but appear to be 'hard' enough and generally perform well especially the S&B and Fiocchi models.

So, for 223 Rem use the Rem 7 1/2BR, CCI-450 or BR4, CBC Magtech 7 1/2. either Federal 205, Murom SR Magnum or 223 Rem, S&B and Fiocchi models, maybe PPU too which seems hard enough. The Magtech 7 1/2 is a bargain and very good performer. Bradley Arms in London stocks them and Mark Bradley uses them happily in his 223 AR-15 straight-pulls that he builds and competes with in Civilian Service Rifle.

Wow... what an informative response, just what I was after. Thank you for taking the time to give such a detailed reply. I'll give Mark a shout and see if I can get some Magtech 7 1/2 off him next time I see him.