BR 4 vs small rifle magnum primers ?
- Thread starter rebs
- Start date
jepp2
Gold $$ Contributor
I have compared Rem 7 1/2, CCI BR-4, and CCI 450 (and CCI 41) often. Even thrown some Federal GM205M primers in some of the time. While I expected the BR-4 to come out on top, the Rem's normally provide better ES & SD and slightly smaller groups. The 450's/41's normally give about 25 fps more velocity, but I have seen as much as 100 fps increase.
In your rifle, who knows?
searcher
Gold $$ Contributor
Depends on the load. Half of my target ammo in different guns uses Federal - the other half CCI - and some Russian thrown in on occasion.
I did my own little science experiment a few years back (2016). The comparison was between CCI 400, CCI 450, CCI BR4 and CCI #41 primers. The loads were each hand weighed for 26.1 grains of H335 powder below a Sierra 53 grain HP Match #1400 bullet. All the cases were LC11 brass and all trimmed and sized identical. I tried for as much uniformity as I could get. The CCI 450 and CCI #41 are Magnum primers and the CCI 400 and BR4 are standard primers.
My focus was more on the chronograph and not shooting it. The chronograph was my old Oehler 35P and the rifle a Remington action I custom built years ago. All were 10 shot groups at 100 yards and the ammunition temperature was a stable 73 degrees F.
Here's how things played out:
The CCI #41 and CCI 450 use the same magnum primer mix. The main difference is the less sensitive CCI #41 uses a different angle on the primer anvil. That's how they achieve less sensitivity. Actually the CCI 450, BR4 and #41 all have a primer thickness of about 0.025". That is their goal anyway. I have always gotten very good email responses when I asked CCI for information and the same is true of phone conversations.
While not trying for best groups the CCI #41 gave best group where I would have looked to the CCI BR4 primers to be more consistent. Go figure?
Ron
My focus was more on the chronograph and not shooting it. The chronograph was my old Oehler 35P and the rifle a Remington action I custom built years ago. All were 10 shot groups at 100 yards and the ammunition temperature was a stable 73 degrees F.
Here's how things played out:
The CCI #41 and CCI 450 use the same magnum primer mix. The main difference is the less sensitive CCI #41 uses a different angle on the primer anvil. That's how they achieve less sensitivity. Actually the CCI 450, BR4 and #41 all have a primer thickness of about 0.025". That is their goal anyway. I have always gotten very good email responses when I asked CCI for information and the same is true of phone conversations.
While not trying for best groups the CCI #41 gave best group where I would have looked to the CCI BR4 primers to be more consistent. Go figure?
Ron
Hi Rebs,
The 450s are my go-to primer for 308 palma brass. I think the extra energy provided by the magnum primer is very useful for the larger case, especially in cold weather. I've had ignition problems with the milder Wolf primers in the past.
As mentioned above, all the primers can perform well for you and there is nothing special about the BR-4s. I would not call them "better," nor would I call them "worse." That is for your rifle to decide.
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
Different brands of primers exhibit different brisance. Different types of primers from the same manufacturer exhibit different brisance. Even different Lots of the exact same type of primer from a single manufacturer can exhibit different brisance. Although it may be possible to make some kind of an educated guess based on past experience which brand/type/Lot of primer might work best with a given load, the best way to know for sure is to actually test different primers in your specific setup.
Here's an anecdotal story of how this kind of testing can shake out. A friend was working up an F-TR load with Berger's 200.20X bullet over Varget in Palma brass. This is a very common load used by a large number F-TR shooters. In my hands with several different rifles, a tuned load almost always ends up very close to 2650 fps from a 30" barrel, with the 200.20Xs seated at .012" off the lands, using a Fed 205 primer. My friend tested rigorously in wide windows around those figures using the exact same components. Unfortunately, he was never able to generate groups at 100 yds of any better than approximately .50 to .75 MOA, which is totally unacceptable for the setup he has. He was about to give and try a different bullet. On a whim, he threw some BR4s into the cases and loaded up the "best" loading he had achieved so far with the Fed 205s. In stark contrast to the load with Fed205s, the load with the BR4s shot one ragged hole. The difference from the Fed 205s was really night and day. I should also note that I have personally never had any issues whatsoever tuning 200.20X loads that shoot very tight with the Fed 205s. So Fed 205s work very well for me. However, different rifles, different preferences/requirements.
The bottom line is that there is a LOT going on during ignition, not only inside the primer (i.e. amount and type of priming compound), but with the diameter of flashhole, type of powder, length of the powder column, bullet weight, neck tension...the list goes on. As I stated above, it may be possible to make an educated guess which primer will work best based on past experience, but this is still only a guess. For most of us, it is much easier to empirically determine which primer works best with a given setup by simply testing a few different types of primers and letting the target and/or velocity data tell us which one works best. Trying to generalize which one works best prior to doing any testing is not likely to be fruitful due to the number of variables involved in the process, unless you have significant past experience with that specific Lot of primers in the cartridge you're testing. It's a lot easier and very straightforward to keep a few types on hand and simply test them directly to get your answer. This really needs to be done any time a loading component is changed to a new Lot, as a new Lot of powder may work better with a different primer than the previous Lot of the exact same powder. The bottom line: test it, then you'll know for sure.
Here's an anecdotal story of how this kind of testing can shake out. A friend was working up an F-TR load with Berger's 200.20X bullet over Varget in Palma brass. This is a very common load used by a large number F-TR shooters. In my hands with several different rifles, a tuned load almost always ends up very close to 2650 fps from a 30" barrel, with the 200.20Xs seated at .012" off the lands, using a Fed 205 primer. My friend tested rigorously in wide windows around those figures using the exact same components. Unfortunately, he was never able to generate groups at 100 yds of any better than approximately .50 to .75 MOA, which is totally unacceptable for the setup he has. He was about to give and try a different bullet. On a whim, he threw some BR4s into the cases and loaded up the "best" loading he had achieved so far with the Fed 205s. In stark contrast to the load with Fed205s, the load with the BR4s shot one ragged hole. The difference from the Fed 205s was really night and day. I should also note that I have personally never had any issues whatsoever tuning 200.20X loads that shoot very tight with the Fed 205s. So Fed 205s work very well for me. However, different rifles, different preferences/requirements.
The bottom line is that there is a LOT going on during ignition, not only inside the primer (i.e. amount and type of priming compound), but with the diameter of flashhole, type of powder, length of the powder column, bullet weight, neck tension...the list goes on. As I stated above, it may be possible to make an educated guess which primer will work best based on past experience, but this is still only a guess. For most of us, it is much easier to empirically determine which primer works best with a given setup by simply testing a few different types of primers and letting the target and/or velocity data tell us which one works best. Trying to generalize which one works best prior to doing any testing is not likely to be fruitful due to the number of variables involved in the process, unless you have significant past experience with that specific Lot of primers in the cartridge you're testing. It's a lot easier and very straightforward to keep a few types on hand and simply test them directly to get your answer. This really needs to be done any time a loading component is changed to a new Lot, as a new Lot of powder may work better with a different primer than the previous Lot of the exact same powder. The bottom line: test it, then you'll know for sure.
Last edited:
AckleymanII
Gold $$ Contributor
As long as I have been reloading, I am still humbled at how a different primer may improve my group...there are no absolutes.
Sandstorm
Gold $$ Contributor
Load development is a test in itself..Lol
Its work in process...Today 200-20x is tomorrows sorrow so to speak. Its an evolving game we are playing
and the rules they are not fixed in stone....( Weather..powder lot..primers..etc. )
Its good fun none the less and nothing id rather be doing.
Its work in process...Today 200-20x is tomorrows sorrow so to speak. Its an evolving game we are playing
and the rules they are not fixed in stone....( Weather..powder lot..primers..etc. )
Its good fun none the less and nothing id rather be doing.
BillC79
Gold $$ Contributor
I ran and attach results from a small test with 6BR target cartridges comparing CCI BR4 primers to CCI 450 and Federal 205 primers. Velocities were measured with a MagnetoSpeed unit. I used virgin Lapua brass, Hornady 105gr BTHP and H4895 powder. The rifle had a 28” 1:8 twist Bartlein 5R barrel. I didn’t see dramatic differences among the primers, although the BR4 primers gave the smallest velocity standard deviation value.
Attachments
I have found every load and every gun to be different with primers. What I do is get the load dialed in then try that load with all the primers and see what works best and keep that primer in that load.
okie
Gold $$ Contributor
thats pretty close and the small case should show more difference than larger ones...I did my own little science experiment a few years back (2016). The comparison was between CCI 400, CCI 450, CCI BR4 and CCI #41 primers. The loads were each hand weighed for 26.1 grains of H335 powder below a Sierra 53 grain HP Match #1400 bullet. All the cases were LC11 brass and all trimmed and sized identical. I tried for as much uniformity as I could get. The CCI 450 and CCI #41 are Magnum primers and the CCI 400 and BR4 are standard primers.
My focus was more on the chronograph and not shooting it. The chronograph was my old Oehler 35P and the rifle a Remington action I custom built years ago. All were 10 shot groups at 100 yards and the ammunition temperature was a stable 73 degrees F.
Here's how things played out:
The CCI #41 and CCI 450 use the same magnum primer mix. The main difference is the less sensitive CCI #41 uses a different angle on the primer anvil. That's how they achieve less sensitivity. Actually the CCI 450, BR4 and #41 all have a primer thickness of about 0.025". That is their goal anyway. I have always gotten very good email responses when I asked CCI for information and the same is true of phone conversations.
While not trying for best groups the CCI #41 gave best group where I would have looked to the CCI BR4 primers to be more consistent. Go figure?
Ron
AckleymanII
Gold $$ Contributor
You did not try a Rem 7 1/2...may have been a home run out of the park!!!!
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.