The difference is that the magnum primers are supposed to give a hotter and/or larger flash.
The brand of magnum primer that is usually held to be the hottest or strongest in the Federal 215.
Unless you really need a magnum primer because you are not getting sufficient ignition with a regular one, I do not think magnum primers give any advantage, and they are sometimes less accurate than regular ones.
Saeed has done primer tests. A good place to start is to look at his results.
His report is in the Accuratereloading FAQs section and is entitled "The Effects Of Different Primers On The Load." It is found at:
Some powders do better with magnum primers, especially some ball powders. When in doubt, test both over a chronograph and compare the standard deviation for at least 10 rounds.
Posts: 1095 | Location: Idaho | Registered: 04 January 2005
I use GM210M for most everything, though I have a few 9.3x62 loads that use the CCI250.
I use 9-1/2 primers in my 6.5x57 because they seem to be ever so slightly smaller in diameter, so they fit the semi-tight primer pockets of the RWS brass I like to use.
Many of the slower magnum rifle powders and ball/spherical powders require more energy to ignite. A magnum primer is cheap insuance against mis-fires and hang-fires in these instances.
John Barsness reported a year or two ago that in his testing with Charlie Sisk they found that the Winchester WLRM was indeed hotter than the Federal 215.
Posts: 1244 | Location: Golden, CO | Registered: 05 April 2001
A magnum primer was designed for magnum rifles,for they have a slow burnling powder and more of it. One can use successfully a magnum primer in a standard rifle cartridge with great results. The rule of thumb is reduce your load startilng out by 10% of the owder with a mag. primer. But i find that not really necessary myself. IL use mag prlimers lin all of my loads. van
Posts: 442 | Location: Idaho | Registered: 16 December 2005
A few years back, I was contemplating reducing my inventory by standardizing on magnum large rifle primers and giving up the standard ones. Since I load for .300 Weatherby and 7mm Remington Magnums with very slow surplus ball powders and often use ball powders in smaller cases (like .45-70), it was going to have to be the magnum if I standardized. I'd recently started loading for the .22-250, a rather small case for the large rifle primer, and that was the one that stopped me from switching. With the load I was using (of a Dupont IMR powder), I got a noticeable velocity reduction and poor accuracy when I substituted CCI 250 primers for the CCI 200. I hypothesized that the hotter primers might start the bullets out of the case necks faster, before the powder had time to ignite properly. Whatever the reason, it didn't work well there. For bench rest shooting, the trend seems to be to use the weakest primers, and special cases have been made using small rifle primers in case sizes that would usually use a large rifle primer, reduced size flash holes and such. A larger-than-necessary primer flash doesn't seem to be an advantage. But as Saeed's frozen round tests show, you've got to have enough primer if you're going to get reliable ignition under adverse conditions. His conclusion to continue to use standard primers in cases up to .30-06 size and magnum primers in bigger ones seems perfectly reasonable.
"A cheerful heart is good medicine."
Posts: 1325 | Location: Bristol, Tennessee, USA | Registered: 24 December 2003
The only misfires I've had have been related to improper loading technique, i.e., crushing the primer while seating it with my Lyman press' primer seating arm, or else not having it quite firmly seated. Switching over to a Lee hand priming tool stopped that. I've used CCI primers nearly exclusively for over 30 years with no complaints.
"A cheerful heart is good medicine."
Posts: 1325 | Location: Bristol, Tennessee, USA | Registered: 24 December 2003
I have used all the primers that have been sold in this country, until I started to notice that the Federal primers were what I usually found on my targets with the best groups. Now I use only 215M, 210M or 205 Federal primers. I have shot 3000 plus rounds per year for several years without one misfire because of a primer. Good shooting.
phurley
Posts: 2367 | Location: KY | Registered: 22 September 2004
Magnum primers may be required if any or all of the following conditions are present. Large capasity cases, Ball powders and cold temperatures. I use like WLRM primers in my 458 win. mag. & WLR in my 270 win. If I was hunting muskox with my 270 I would switch to a WLRM primer (low temps. conditions).
Posts: 157 | Location: Kenosha, WI | Registered: 25 February 2005
When l started to work up a load for my .243 a friend gave me half a box of Mag' primers to try to see if there was much improvement with the ignition of the powder l intended to use. He also gave me the warning that l should use the Mag' primers as an equivelant to 1 full grain of powder in a standard case, where there would be no significant increase in power from the standard L/R primers
Originally posted by stubblejumper: I now use only federal primers after having two missfires with cci primers.
Weak firing pin
Not always the case though. I've had one misfire at an animal with my 7mag and it was with CCI primers. My brother in law had a misfire while I was with him, he was aiming at a beautiful Bull Elk. His load was with CCI primers. I have switched to Win and Fed primers and have had no misfires since.
I know that for all the primers burned a couple of misfires isn't bad but missing that one elk because of a misfire is hard to get over! Nate
I missed out on a deer a few years back because of a squib...CCI primer too. Only thing I can figure was the primer...
Federal does not make the "hottest"(highest brisance) mag primers BTW. Recent test info I've seen indicates that honor goes to Winchester. I do think Federal makes the best primers available however, very consistent I'd say...this based only on ES data from many loads in many chamberings. Sometimes though you will achieve lower SD with LR primers than magnum, or even better than magnum match primers. Saw that in a .338 Win. once. That was a queer day though, ES of 5 with Fed 210s, up into the low teens with 215s, the best groupage going to the 215s...
Given any option at all I always reach for Federals. The use of mag primers is conditional on several issues. Ball powders benefit sometimes but not always. Long powder column almost always benefit regardless of powder type...and cold day ammo does too...just don't develope your loads in February to max levels then shoot them in the spring and summer. You Will get a surprise from that nearly every time.
If yuro'e corseseyd and dsyelixc can you siltl raed oaky?
No chance of that.My rifles actually have the stiffer firing pin springs installed.After thousands of rounds fired,the only two misfires ever were with cci 250 primers.I have also used remington and winchester with no problems,but I have had the best accuracy with federal. If you read all the posts on this thread you will see three misfires mentioned,all with cci primers.
Posts: 3104 | Location: alberta,canada | Registered: 28 January 2002
Sorry to here about your CCI problem. I haven't had a failure of a CCI in 35 yrs. I used some WLRMs for a little while this year but they were a little too hot so I swtiched back to CCI. I guess everybody has had something go wrong at some point. I have read a lot of good comments about Federals but have no need to switch. Good Luck
Posts: 1159 | Location: Florida | Registered: 16 December 2004
I've been reloading for 25 yrs. I did a lot of experimenting the first 15. I now shoot nothing but Fed primers. I do shoot pretty much all magnums though.
I tried regular CCI primers in my 300 Weatherby to compare them to Federal 215. Accuracy was about the same but the POI at 100 yards was 2 inches lower.
I use CCI 200's for the 7mag and have not encountered any problems. That includes pretty substantial temperature ranges that we have here in Montana. My last deer this year was the Saturday morning after Thanksgiving, the temp was well below zero.
Posts: 322 | Location: Three Forks, Montana | Registered: 02 June 2005
Looking at Saeed's data, I see no significant differences in performance between any of the primers under any of the conditions or calibers.
The only significant difference was in getting less velocity (ie., ~80 fps on average) between ammo at freezing temperatures vs. higher ambient temp (~room temp).
Originally posted by Ackley Improved User: Looking at Saeed's data,Why bother with magnum primers?
When you are trying to ignite more than 92 grains of powder with a WLR and get more than one Snap bang and you change to WLRMs and the delayed ignition disapears what would be your anaylsis. Magnum primers do play more that one roll. roger
Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
Posts: 10226 | Location: Temple City CA | Registered: 29 April 2003
in a copy of the handloader, high primers are the number 1 cause of missfires. and some powders work better with non mag primers- like 2400. and the artical goes on to say that w296 and h110 give all around better performance with mag primers especially in cold climates. according to the artical h110 an w296 produced rather erratic velocitys in cold weather with a non mag primer. hs7 an lil-gun generally prefer a mag primer when used in a big bore revolver case. a great general rule is to consult the powder manufacturer to determine the recomended primer for the powder.
I haven't been able to see a lot of difference in performance with primers.. the only thing I have noted is that Federal must have been having a run of poor quality control on their primers last year, based on the frequency of duds I was experiencing...
Anything under 300 or 338 Mags, I don't see where I have needed a magnum primer....I don't even use them for the 300 and 338 Mags.. unless that is all I have at the moment...
cheers seafire
Posts: 16144 | Location: Southern Oregon USA | Registered: 04 January 2005