Armory Sponsor
Posted: 2/13/2015 2:24:52 PM EDT
|
SR Primer Study LR Primer Study ETA: Now I know why my long range, 68grn Hornady/TAC .223 loads perform so consistently; I use Remington 7½ primers in them and the SR study primer pictures show me why they ignite so well.  |
|
The article basically said the "softer" the primer (less hot), the more repeatable/accurate the results. So the Fed 205M and 210M were the "softest" followed by the CCI BR2 & BR4 primers. Both are very commonly known as the best "bench rest" primers.
I also think this is why some people have reported great accuracy results with the Wolf/Tula primers that won't consistently ignite H335. They work great on stick powders due to their softness/weak flame, but are unreliable in the harder to ignite spherical powders. -ZA |
|
The Rem 7 1/2 small rifle bench rest primer had a huge flame in that study, but they've been pretty consistent for me. They're all I use in my match service rifle ... very accurate loads.
Maybe I should try the Tulas. I bought a few cases when they were silly cheap. |
|
Quoted: The article basically said the "softer" the primer (less hot), the more repeatable/accurate the results. So the Fed 205M and 210M were the "softest" followed by the CCI BR2 & BR4 primers. Both are very commonly known as the best "bench rest" primers. I also think this is why some people have reported great accuracy results with the Wolf/Tula primers that won't consistently ignite H335. They work great on stick powders due to their softness/weak flame, but are unreliable in the harder to ignite spherical powders. -ZA 20's and modern primers perform differently than some of those older ones and their primer ignition photos proves that point out too. |
|
Quoted:
I agree that the article said that, however, like gasdoc09 stated above, I use Remington 7½ for my 500yd, 68grn Hornady HPBT loads with TAC and they give me sub MOA accuracy shooting apples so I'm not sure I agree completely with their assertion. As to using Tulas, I've found that their LRM primers give me better results (higher velocities and lower SDs and ES than their LR primers in my 168grn .308 loads at longer distances. And the article does mention that primer technology has changed since the 20's and modern primers perform differently than some of those older ones and their primer ignition photos proves that point out too. Quoted:
Quoted:
The article basically said the "softer" the primer (less hot), the more repeatable/accurate the results. So the Fed 205M and 210M were the "softest" followed by the CCI BR2 & BR4 primers. Both are very commonly known as the best "bench rest" primers. I also think this is why some people have reported great accuracy results with the Wolf/Tula primers that won't consistently ignite H335. They work great on stick powders due to their softness/weak flame, but are unreliable in the harder to ignite spherical powders. -ZA What I take away from the article is... Use "soft" primers with stick powders and "hard/hot" primers with spherical powders for best results. In a nutshell. I use Rem 7-1/2, CCI 41 and Wolf SRP in my accuracy loads... I'm not sure I'm good enough to tell the difference. 
ZA |
|
The point of the primer selection is to try and get the best one to match the rest of the recipe, so in some ways the answer is yes, however...
In other ways, if the primer is sticking up too high or too low, or if the headspace places the primer in the wrong place or a variable place, then that isn't really the fault of the primer. We have a very complicated system with multiple variables all contributing to performance at the same time. The key is that it isn't smart to just try and minimize the variation on everything all at once, cause that becomes a waste. Knowing exactly how to rank the variables for their contribution to the performance and exactly how to set those particular level limits to get the performance you want, all without wasting time fretting over ones that accomplish nothing, this is the holy grail of reloading, gunsmithing, and marksmanship. We don't have easy ways to independently test primer performance, so we tend to stick with what has worked before... The danger is that primers are made by human beings to a much larger degree than people suspect, and as such they are subject to risks. We just have to place our faith in them as hobbyists and keep trying to minimize ignition variation. |
Armory Sponsor