German Salazar Primer Test Photo's are amazing to see

[Webster]

Not if the shutter is left open, it will capture it all….. before it’s fired until long after if you desire
Wayne

Before it's fired and after is total darkness.

 

[bozo699]

Before it's fired and after is total darkness.

Correct
Wayne

 

[choprzrul]

Interesting. I remember seeing those pictures years ago.

No idea how old this is, but here is a link for primer power testing someone did.....it's been quite a while as I've had this page marked for a very long time: https://www.castingstuff.com/primer_testing_reference.htm

I'm also attaching a .pdf doc that I have archived.....article about primers. (well, I thought I was attaching it, but something isn't working as the attachment isn't showing up :-( )

 

[Steve Donlon]

Not if the shutter is left open, it will capture it all….. before it’s fired until long after if you desire
Wayne

Of coarse.

 

[RGRobinett]

Randolph Constatine did a similar test that was published in Precision Shooting back in the 90's. I don't remember the results tho. But it does seem some were surprising.

That may be the PRECISION SHOOTING article I recall: late 1980's, or, early 1990's. The info was quite
comprehensive, including not only comparative photos of the actual flashes, but also, oscilloscope graphs displaying time to peak, duration at peak, etc. I have never seen another such article. The flash variation(s) was just as dramatic then . . . as Pete observed, even within a brand, things may have changed. A good demonstration indicating how, depending upon powder, case capacity, etc., different primers may work better, or, vice-versa. RG

P.S. The article I'm recalling, via a 6PPC chambered rifle, also featured some group results.

 

[Ackman]

That may be the PRECISION SHOOTING article I recall: late 1980's, or, early 1990's. The info was quite
comprehensive, including not only comparative photos of the actual flashes, but also, oscilloscope graphs displaying time to peak, duration at peak, etc. I have never seen another such article. The flash variation(s) was just as dramatic then . . . as Pete observed, even within a brand, things may have changed. A good demonstration indicating how, depending upon powder, case capacity, etc., different primers may work better, or, vice-versa. RG

P.S. The article I'm recalling, via a 6PPC chambered rifle, also featured some group results.

I saw one in Precision Shooting back around that time. It was done by Steve Chernicky, using some very sophisticated - to me - equipment. He was also hired by Federal to develop a 17-22mag, which he did. He told me it needed to be 2700fps to be right, and with the lighter bullets he made.....would never be produced as he'd designed it. It wasn't until years later that a toned-down changed version of the cartridge actually came into production, not by Federal. Steve's the smartest person Ive ever been fortunate enough to know.

 

[Straightshooter1]

Those photos are pretty cool. I remember doing my own primer test, measuring not the flame, but the velocity differences in the same load (was a .223), using all the available small rifle and small rifle magnum primers I had. In Mr. Salazar's photos, the Russian PMC small rifle primer shows a very weak flame compared to the Rem. 7 1/2 primer which looks like a flame thrower in comparison. I don't know if the PMC Russian primers were made by Murom (who made Wolff and Tula), but I remember being very interested to see that my velocities with the Tula magnum primer were less than the Rem. 7 1/2. When I had previously thought all magnum primers were "hotter" than regular primers, my mind was changed after my tests. Those photos validate, in a way, what I had found in my velocity tests. I still wonder how he captured those photos.

Perhaps he used some type of high speed photography to get a single frame at their peak??? Smart phones can do that today. Like a few years ago during a lightning storm, with my phone, I was able to easily capture many pictures of lightning flashes.