Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 Send TopicPrint
 10 Magnum Primer - not the results I expected (Read 7954 times)
Keith Herrington
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 117
Location: Palmyra, VA
Joined: Sep 20th, 2012
Gender: Male
Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Sep 14th, 2015 at 11:45pm
Print Post  
I've been regaling you all with tales of my quest to produce truly match grade ammo for the 30-40 Krag.  To quickly recap:
a.  Match grade collet bushing resizing die with .332" collet (.002" neck tension)
b.  Brass trimmed to uniform length
c.  Primer hole reamed
d.  Necks cleaned inside and brass tumbled
e.  Brass full length resized with no more than .002" runout
f.  Powder charges all weighed to exactly 40 grains of IMR 4350
g.  Hornady 220 grain JRN seated to uniform length with final runout between 0 and .004".  By far the best results achieved to date.

I loaded 50 rounds of test ammo with 5 different primers:
a. Federal Large Rifle
b. Federal Large Rifle Magnum
c. Winchester Large Rifle
d. Winchester Large Rifle Magnum
e. CCI Large Rifle Magnum (250)

The results at 200 yards were startling:
a.  All the Magnum primers shot considerably higher on the target, about 12" higher, than the standard primer loads.
b.  Magnum primer groups were vertically strung as much as 10-12"
c.  Standard primer loads were approximately 3-4" in size and fairly concentric.  Using a 6 o'clock hold and a 300 yard setting the standard primer loads were clustered consistently around the X/10/9 rings.

The recoil of the Magnum primer loads was noticeably stiffer than with standard primers.

Based on the above I've decided to fore go any further testing of Magnum primers in my gun.  They undoubtedly work for those that recommended I try them, but for me they are not the answer.

The next test loads will be 20 each of the Winchester Large Rifle primer, the CCI 200, CCI BR-2 and the Federal GM Match primer.  20 rounds each should give me sufficient data to make a solid choice or two for testing a larger sample.
« Last Edit: Sep 16th, 2015 at 12:15am by Keith Herrington »  

Keith E. Herrington
410-693-9265
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
psteinmayer
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 2391
Location: Ypsilanti, Michgan
Joined: Aug 30th, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #1 - Sep 15th, 2015 at 10:52am
Print Post  
I couldn't speak to Federal primers in Krags, as there is no floating firing pin, and therefore no chance of slam-fire... but I have read about people having serious troubles using Federal primers in their Garand Rifle loads. 

This year, I've obtained 2000 CCI 34 military-grade primers for loading my Garand ammo.  I'm curious as to their comparison to CCI 200 and CCI 250 primers (I've been told that they are somewhere in between).  I may switch to these in my Krag loads also. 

Incidentally, the reason for my use of magnum primers with the IMR-4350 is purely from a burn prospective...  being that 4350 is a slower burning powder and somewhat harder to ignite than say 4895 or 4064... and the hotter flame from the magnum ensures a complete burn with the 4350.  That said, based on your results, I may revert to the standard CCI 200 for future matches if the military grade 34s don't pan out.  With the shoulder problems I'm currently experiencing, it ain't gonna hurt any to reduce the recoil some!
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
RichWIS
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 56
Location: Corbin KY
Joined: Jan 9th, 2015
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #2 - Sep 15th, 2015 at 2:17pm
Print Post  
Although your load is not a hot load remember that magnum primers can boost pressure.  I don't know why you need them with 4350, it is not a hard powder to light and the Krag case is not a big case.  I use magnum primers in my Garand with WIN 748, as there was an occasional noticeable delay with standard primers, but it is a ball powder. I have never had the problem with IMR series powder in any rifle, even in extremely cold weather. The CC! #34 from what I have gleaned from the CMP forum is a magnum power primer, as military ammo is loaded with either ball or extruded powder and it works even in extreme cold with either powder.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Parashooter
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Kragmudgeon

Posts: 514
Location: Connecticut
Joined: Feb 4th, 2010
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #3 - Sep 15th, 2015 at 10:12pm
Print Post  
It may be worthwhile to understand that slow tubular powders achieve their burn rate mostly by kernel size and geometry - while slow spherical powders have to rely primarily on deterrent coatings. That's basically why most tubular numbers are relatively easy to ignite compared to "ball" powders of similar rate.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
psteinmayer
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 2391
Location: Ypsilanti, Michgan
Joined: Aug 30th, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #4 - Sep 15th, 2015 at 10:54pm
Print Post  
Well, that makes pretty good sense to me.  I do know that the CCI #34 is the military standard primer, and it has a slightly thicker primer cup which helps to prevent the slam-fire issue.  That said, I may just switch back to using a standard CCI 200 for my Krag loads.  We'll see....  I have all winter to contemplate this, as I'm out of commission for a few months (surgery to my shoulders).
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Parashooter
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Kragmudgeon

Posts: 514
Location: Connecticut
Joined: Feb 4th, 2010
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #5 - Sep 16th, 2015 at 1:40am
Print Post  
The "thick cup" business circulated about the CCC #34 is apparently another bit of widespread misinformation. According to the manufacturer, a shorter anvil is the dimensional difference between the #34 and the #200, #250, and BR-2. Cup dimensions are virtually same for all.

(You need to Login to view media files and links)

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
psteinmayer
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 2391
Location: Ypsilanti, Michgan
Joined: Aug 30th, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #6 - Sep 16th, 2015 at 10:48am
Print Post  
Ahhhh... Maybe that's it.  The debate on thicker cups arose from discussions about slam fire in Garand Rifles due in part to the floating firing pin slamming against an overly sensitive primer with a thinner cup... as I recall - the discussion was that the Federal primers were the most susceptible to this, and the CCI primers were the safest.  I might have mistaken or miss-quoted this... but that's how I recall it anyway.  Either way, I'll be using the 34s in my Garand loads from here on out.
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Keith Herrington
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 117
Location: Palmyra, VA
Joined: Sep 20th, 2012
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #7 - Sep 16th, 2015 at 10:17pm
Print Post  
Did a followup 100 yard range session today to shoot up the rest of my test ammo.  Shot ammo with WLR primers, Federal LR Magnum and CCI 250 magnum.  As with this weekend, the Federal magnum load vertically strung the shots at 100 yards, but the CCI 250 primers did not.  In fact, this load shot the tightest 5 shot group I've gotten to date.

(You need to Login to view media files and links)

Previously, the target below had been my best using the CCI 250 primer.

(You need to Login to view media files and links)

And the one below is the best to date with the CCI 200.

(You need to Login to view media files and links)

Now, 5 rounds does not a favorite load make.  But what this tells me is the work that I did on the brass to make it more consistent and concentric, may well be paying off.

  

Keith E. Herrington
410-693-9265
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
psteinmayer
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 2391
Location: Ypsilanti, Michgan
Joined: Aug 30th, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #8 - Sep 17th, 2015 at 11:14am
Print Post  
So maybe I should hold off on dismissing my use of the CCI 250...  I might just stick with it.  To be honest, it has been working for me so far...

Keep at it Keith - your work is good for all of us, and your data will be invaluable!!!

Paul
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Keith Herrington
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 117
Location: Palmyra, VA
Joined: Sep 20th, 2012
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #9 - Sep 17th, 2015 at 1:08pm
Print Post  
psteinmayer wrote on Sep 17th, 2015 at 11:14am:
So maybe I should hold off on dismissing my use of the CCI 250...  I might just stick with it.  To be honest, it has been working for me so far...

Keep at it Keith - your work is good for all of us, and your data will be invaluable!!!

Paul


Paul,
Keep in mind my barrel is a CMP tube with a .308" bore.  I think an original Krag bore (which is often larger than that) may be (and here I'm guessing) less sensitive  to the pressure spikes of magnum primers.  I've already decided that magnum primers don't work well for me AT 200 YARDS.  These tests confirm in my mind that loads that look good at 100 often don't translate well at 200.  My next test will be with WLR, CCI BR-2, CCI 200 and GM210M.  I'm not testing Remington or Russian primers simply because I don't have any and don't intend to buy any.  From my research these four primers are all similar (though not identical) to each other in terms of heat and pressure, and most important will not string my groups vertically the way the magnum primers do.

What these latest test confirm most for me that match prepping the brass pays dividends.  My efforts there were not wasted.
  

Keith E. Herrington
410-693-9265
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
psteinmayer
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 2391
Location: Ypsilanti, Michgan
Joined: Aug 30th, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #10 - Sep 17th, 2015 at 4:56pm
Print Post  
My 1898's barrel slugs out at .308 and is in relatively good shape too.  Before I got a hold of it, it spent a couple decades in my dad's gun closet and was rarely (if ever) fired.  Before that, it spent 50 years under the bed of the man who brought it home from France, so I imagine that it's not had too much use in the last 90+ years.  Anyway, I think she shoots great!

That said, this spring, I may spend a little time at a 200 yard range and do a little testing of rounds with both the 200s and 250s... and figure out how my Krag responds to both off the bench.  Once I get that sorted out, I'll create my match ammo for the years matches and I should be good to go.  It's important to remember that not all Krags "Like" the same foods... so what works in your Krag may not work so well in mine... or in others.

Still, as I said before, your work will be invaluable for all of us to follow!   Cheesy
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
madsenshooter
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 1079
Joined: Sep 10th, 2009
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #11 - Sep 17th, 2015 at 8:15pm
Print Post  
How did the flatness of the Federals compare to the other primers?  With equal loads mine were a bit flatter than CCIs.  In my case both were magnum primers.  My use of magnums has been pretty much limited to either small doses of RL19 or large doses of 50BMG powder.  In those cases, with cast, it had the opposite effect you're seeing and tightened my groups.  Maybe because the hotter primer got the powder burning in a more efficient manner.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Keith Herrington
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 117
Location: Palmyra, VA
Joined: Sep 20th, 2012
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #12 - Sep 17th, 2015 at 8:59pm
Print Post  
madsenshooter wrote on Sep 17th, 2015 at 8:15pm:
How did the flatness of the Federals compare to the other primers?  With equal loads mine were a bit flatter than CCIs.  In my case both were magnum primers.  My use of magnums has been pretty much limited to either small doses of RL19 or large doses of 50BMG powder.  In those cases, with cast, it had the opposite effect you're seeing and tightened my groups.  Maybe because the hotter primer got the powder burning in a more efficient manner.


In my experiment, the Federal 215 magnum primer was the one that gave me the most vertical spread, and printed the highest on the target.  Based on recoil, velocity was increased.  But since I'm using the same powder charge in all my tests, I can't really comment on your loads.

I called Sierra Tech Line today in an attempt to gain some clarity on what my tests revealed.  According to them:
a. I don't need magnum primers.  using them will only increase ES and SD.  The vertical stringing I saw and the printing higher on the target are both signs I'm using "too much primer." 
b. The Federal 215 magnum primer is in fact the worst offender in this regard.  It was designed specifically to ignite Weatherby cartridges and is the only magnum primer that Sierra states should not be exchanged for other primers, but loads with it worked up carefully.  That same caution is not attached to any other brand large rifle magnum primer.

There are a lot of good studies on line comparing different primers to one another.  Two of the best are from Accurate Loading ( (You need to Login to view media files and links)) and Accurate Shooter ( (You need to Login to view media files and links)).
  

Keith E. Herrington
410-693-9265
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
S.B.
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline



Posts: 65
Location: Central Illinois
Joined: May 4th, 2003
Gender: Male
Re: Magnum Primer - not the results I expected
Reply #13 - Sep 20th, 2015 at 2:21pm
Print Post  
Great read, thanks guys! By the way, I've had trouble locating any CCI 250s but did secure some WW LR mags.
Steve
  

The Original Point and Click Interface was a Smith & Wesson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send TopicPrint