Magnum primers in .223 F/TR???

[Ned Ludd]

I won't make any comments about the technical aspect of Brisance or hot ve cold but will make a comment based purely on my observation and I would love some feedback either way.
Simply because I have a decent supply of CCI 450 and CCI 41, I tried to see if I could start to alter my standard load that uses Federal 205MAR, in my 223 AI. That load is 25.5gr of Varget and a Hornady 88gr ELDM. The base load runs right at 2800 from a 28" Krieger as measured simultaneously with a magnetospeed and a lab radar. At 600yd the drop is pretty much spot on with the advertised G7 BC, so I have a decent amount of faith in the chrono numbers. Then on the "Test" load with the CCI 41, it shot up to 2920, and slammed the primer flat, whereas there are no pressure signs on the Federal "AR" primer. So that ended that test pretty fast. So from my observation I would conclude that the 41'a and 450's are indeed "Hotter".
That being said prior to lucking back into a little supply of varget, I really never noticed a difference on anothe albeit lighter load of 24.2 gr of Vit N140. Both types of primers shot pretty much the same and any deviations I saw I (maybe incorrectly) attributed to temperature changes.
Thoughts and comments welcome and appreciated
Thanks

In my hands, the difference in terms of pressure/velocity between different primers was most noticeable with .223 Rem loads using H4895 and heavy bullets; less so with my .308 Win loads. I'm generally assume that the relatively small .223 Rem case has something to do with that, but that probably isn't the sole explanation. I've recently started doing a lot more primer testing with CCI BR4s and 450s in addition to the Fed 205s I've always used. In my hands, the Fed 205s still seem to routinely provide the lowest ES/SDs with tuned loads, both in .223 Rem and .308 Win loads. Maybe it's just my rifle setups along with the cartridge/powder/bullet weight combinations I use are better suited to the Fed primers, I can't really say for sure.

The best news is that primers are a testable commodity, even if having a good supply of different primers can be a rather expensive prospect these days. Anyone can empirically determine for themselves which primer works best in their setup; i.e. which primer provides either the best absolute precision, or the best ES/SD values, or both, depending on the needs and intended use. As an F-Class shooter, I tend to look more closely at the ES/SD values due to the long strings of fire we shoot (20+ shots). I have not really observed that much of a difference in terms of precision between the different brands of primers, at least in that each could be tuned pretty much equally well with seating depth after settling on a defined charge weight. However, the ES/SDs with the Fed 205s has always been noticeably lower in my hands for reasons I can't explain with any certainty. The most important point is that in order to test different primers, you have to have the different primers to test. So it's probably a good idea to have at least a couple choices to try in the event one doesn't provide the results you're after. The downside of that is the extra cost involved, but as we all know, shooting sports can be a little pricey. Just another facet of the game, I guess.

 

[Drop Port]

To answer your initial question, yes, my 223 shot like crap until I stuck a CCI 450 in it. It wanted to shoot but stayed in the .4's then with a Mag CCI 450, it sucked in and hovered around, .300". This was with 77 SMK's and a max load of Varget.

 

[NZ_Fclass]

I have rarely found a cartridge that is so finicky on primers as the 223. My old Savage preferred BR2's my new Tikka based rifle, Federal Gold. Ordinary cooking primers - no way. With 75g Hornadys, 24.4 Varget and Federal Gold, this gun is under the half minute and has proved itself at 600yds.

 

[1911mag]

I have had 2 barrels like CCI450 1:7 Bartlien using N150 and H4350 shooting Lapua Brass and 90VLD's.
Barrel #3 is all about Fed Gold Match primers. Live and learn I switched up CCI450's on 22 rounds at a match in WI and the rifle came un glued (just so happened to be my wife's) I heard about that the whole way home.
Yes 223's are a challenge and there are a number of top shooters here with the heavies that figure out the right combination. I enjoy the challenge so I don't think I will never not have one to play with.

 

[rckendall]

This is the primer test I did recently in an AR pistol that I built. The velocity numbers tell the story. From there I adjusted the powder charge until groups were best.

 

[Jeff Porter]

As a side factor… if you are seeing worse stats and groups in colder weather or your rifle just shoots the random round out of the normal range … check your firing pin and springs. Inconsistent impacts have caused me some problems that improved when the bolt was cleaned up and a stronger firing pin spring was used. Also had an AR that the tip had been damaged by a pierced primer. I shot quite a few rounds before I figured it out and it went off the rails. All back to normal when the pin was replaced.

That said 205MAR or CCI 450’s have been best for me. The old Wolf magnums were great too.

 

[BP1]

I did a 5 shot test the other day in 40degree weather and tested CCI 450s,Rem. 7.5s and fed 205 match.The best were the 7.5 and then the 450s followed by the 205s.

 

[CharlieNC]

I did a 5 shot test the other day in 40degree weather and tested CCI 450s,Rem. 7.5s and fed 205 match.The best were the 7.5 and then the 450s followed by the 205s.

There is no statistical difference between the sd results. What about the targets?

 

[BP1]

There is no statistical difference between the sd results. What about the targets?

Not much I moved over to the target at 550yd and fired one shot 9 then dialed down 2 and right 2.. 4 of the 450s and 4 of 7.5 on the same target and then the 7 I had left of the 205s.. I just held center and fired.

 

[PracticalTactical]

Reading this thread, I'm left to ponder what other factors that influence performance might be responsible for the performance threshold that seems prevalent.

The thread topic is primer centric so we all start on that, but in my own testing, I've found that much of load development is a complete waste of time if the rifle does not meet the performance expectation.

So often we read other peoples advice and try it in frustration. One guy can shoot a quarter inch groups so we all want to. And we are quick to accept that we either cant shoot or don't have the load recipe.

I've been dancing around this camp fire for 40 years and have been lucky enough to shoot with some of the best shooters in the world for many of them. I have had many so so rifles and a few really great ones.

What I have learned in all this time is the chamber dictates the result even more than the barrel itself. Yes we need good barrels, but the bogies will be in the bag if the chamber is not done perfectly. If yours isn't done right, a half inch group is about the best your gonna get.

We obsess about indicating the barrel in straight on the lathe and many of us design our own reamers but in the end, still don't get ahead of the problem.

Some guys prefer the 6BR over just about anything, and some guys advocate for the 22BR... have you ever really thought about why?

We need to stop thinking of cartridge names in the context of the brand and start thinking of cartridges in the context of feature design, specifically in the throat.

I can recall finding a reamer print for a 22BR Pacnor... and forget the case for a sec... what was interesting was the throat. It had the exact same throat that I use on my 223 reamer. 0.190" free bore length, and guess what else... 0.2242 free bore diameter. Think about that. Go measure a few of your bullets to see what size they really are. 0.2244" according to my mic.

So why would such a chamber have a free bore diameter that is smaller than the actual bullet?

Answer: Because the reamer cuts over size.

If you understand machining, you will know that the engine lathes used by gun smiths are cheap junk. They are not the million dollar Mori Seiki CNC machines we use to machine turbines for jet engines. They are a few thousand dollars and they are not accurate,

Specifically the tail stock does not travel perfectly along the same axis as the spindle. That walks the reamer off axis and trumpet mouths the neck and free bore resulting in a slop show that does not serve to align your bullets well enough to get you under that magical 1/4 inch. The more he extends the quill, the farther off axis the error.

If you are lucky enough to know a gunsmith who understands what I posted here, and who has a strategy to compensate for such error you are blessed. I do but its too complicated to explain and I don't do contact work.

Bottom line is that if you do a chamber cast and find your free bore is larger than 0.225" just roll with it. They gun is never going to be one of the great ones. If your free bore is around 0.2245" or 0.2246", well you have a chance at single digit ES because the bullet will be guided into the rifling nice and straight every time. Chances are such a rifle does not know what a bad group looks like.

 

[Jsf1978]

I have a friend who shoots 223 in ftr. 7twist 90vld over N140 lit with cci 450s. It flat hammers.

 

[PracticalTactical]

I have compared the weight of CCI vs Federal GMM primers and found the Fed GMM primers to be much more consistent by weight than any of the CCI that I weighed.

Having said that, I have never gone so far as to weigh the difference both before and after firing, so I'm not sure how much of the variance is in the metal or the ignition compound.

I hope to do some more detailed evaluation of this in the spring.

I can tell you that the variance in weight that I found was too small to be detected with an FX120 scale or something in that range. You will need an analytical balance that weighs to 0.002 grains if you want to put forth such an effort.

 

[searcher]

In small rifle primers, "magnum" does not necessarily have anything to do with brisance. It typically means a harder cup to prevent slam fires in an AR, not necessarily a "hotter" primer. If your ES/SD values aren't where you'd like them to be, testing a few different primers that cover a range of brisance values may well be the answer, but that doesn't always mean hotter. In some cases a hotter primer may actually make the problem worse, whereas a primer with lower brisance may often do the job. It's all about burn rate/efficiency in the context of your specific setup and load characteristics and often the only way to know is to actually test them. Testing several different primers ranging from "cooler" to "hotter" should allow you determine whether changing primers will actually fix the issue. If that works, problem solved. If not, trying different powder/primer combinations may be necessary. Also, I'd want to make sure the seating depth was optimal for that bullet. Some people have success with them seated into the lands, whereas others find jumping them to work much better. In my hands, the 90 VLDs shoot much better at ~.015-.020" off the lands, which I wasn't anticipating when I first started doing load development with them. My initial load development groups seated ~.010 into the lands were much like you described, sometimes one ragged hole, sometimes half MOA or worse. Once I started testing them off the lands, I was easily able to dial in the consistency I was hoping for.

This is very true. I heard so much contrarian information on this topic - I did my own testing on a number of loads, using both magnum and non-magnum primers from various manufacturers. (All small rifle). Velocities were recorded on all shots. What I found was that almost all of the primers shot within a 40 fps range - regardless of whether they were magnum. More interesting to me (at the time), was that in a number of cases, the velocities of the magnum loads were less than the standard primers with the same load being equal in all other ways.

 

[rogina]

I have rarely found a cartridge that is so finicky on primers as the 223. My old Savage preferred BR2's my new Tikka based rifle, Federal Gold. Ordinary cooking primers - no way. With 75g Hornadys, 24.4 Varget and Federal Gold, this gun is under the half minute and has proved itself at 600yds.

Back in the early '80's I bought my primers from Goldsberry (?) in Minnesota. When I ordered small rifle primers he sent me 205 magnums. I shot them in all of my 223rem rifles and the accuracy was under one-half inch at 100 yards. And yes, they were $8.90 a brick delivered. No hazmat then.

 

[PracticalTactical]

Back in the early '80's I bought my primers from Goldsberry (?) in Minnesota. When I ordered small rifle primers he sent me 205 magnums. I shot them in all of my 223rem rifles and the accuracy was under one-half inch at 100 yards. And yes, they were $8.90 a brick delivered. No hazmat then.

How do you associate rifle accuracy at 100 yards to primer performance?

Primers would influence velocity spreads which would be measured on a chronograph, but the velocity spreads would have to be quite extreme to affect group size at 100 yards as that would be indicative of a barrel harmonic issue as a result of a significant velocity change.

If a certain primer results in a tight velocity spread, that velocity could then be tuned via powder charge to optimal barrel harmonic. Then you could measure accuracy but accuracy is a biproduct of all other possible variables.

 

[rogina]

How do you associate rifle accuracy at 100 yards to primer performance?

Primers would influence velocity spreads which would be measured on a chronograph, but the velocity spreads would have to be quite extreme to affect group size at 100 yards as that would be indicative of a barrel harmonic issue as a result of a significant velocity change.

If a certain primer results in a tight velocity spread, that velocity could then be tuned via powder charge to optimal barrel harmonic. Then you could measure accuracy but accuracy is a biproduct of all other possible variables.

All I was saying is that the groups were just as good with mag primers as they were with standard primers. The powder charges were not the same. At 100 yards, the small es is not that important for good groups.

 

[urbanrifleman]

I have observed so many of these threads...people say things that leave me shaking my head.

If a stranger would read them they would assume all shooting (and especially gunsmithing for shooting) is impossible and should simply never be attempted. Especially if you don't have a hand mic that you can read to one 10000 of an inch.

My suggestion would be to copy a reamer from a guy that has cut a lot of competition 223 rifles for ftr. Sayyyyyy...John Whidden or Gary Elisio and use the bullet they suggest for that reamer. I am going to go out on a limb and say freebore and donuts have way more effect than anything. Oh and bullets.

I suggest that most of this stuff has already been worked out... I would seek the recipe.

That's what I would do.

 

[Alaska Bush Man]

In the 223 especially if use the Varget and IMR 8208 and RL 15.5 the magnum primers perform the best for me near max loads with 77gr MK.

 

[manitou210]

TESTED PRIMERS AT 900 M WITH LAB RADAR BEST IS FEG GOLD MATCH
VARGET 90 VLD BERGERS, IN 5K, ,7 TWIST HV PALMA 30 IN