The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading Reloading Federal 215 versus all the restGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Federal 215 versus all the rest | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
I have been messing with big bores, 458 Lott and 416 Rigby for the last year or so. I had some Federal 215 large rifle magnum primers I was using for these loads. With the Federal 215s I had no problems, no hangfires (click-bang) and no fizzles (click, no bang). Then I ran out of the Federal 215s. I began using some CCI250 large rifle magnum primers I had. I started getting hangfires with loads that had no hangfires with the 215s. I ran out of CCI250s and bought some Tula Large Rifle Magnums. Now I'm getting worse hangfires and even two complete fizzles i.e. click, no bang, didn't even move the bullet. I then was able to buy 1000 new Federal 215s. I went back and duplicated some of the troublesome loads except with the Federal primers and they worked perfectly. That is bang every time, not click-bang and not click. I know and I think everyone knows that the Federal 215 is the hottest, most powerful primer made. I know that because I have always known that and of course everyone knows that. But I don't have any firm proof, numbers, tests, expert opinions or any of that to back up my "knowledge" about Federal 215 primers. Do any of you have any numbers, tests, expert opinions or the like to justify the idea that Federal 215 primers are "hotter" or "more powerful" than other LRM primers? Suwannee Tim | ||
|
| One of Us |
From Chuck Hawks: "......Primers affect the pressure generated by the cartridge. Changing from standard to magnum primers may substantially raise the maximum average pressure of the cartridge and indiscriminate changes are not recommended. The A-Square Company conducted pressure tests involving six different primers. These tests used the 7mm Remington Magnum cartridge with a 160 grain Sierra BT bullet and 66.0 grains of H4831 powder and the results were reported in the A-Square reloading manual Any Shot You Want. A-Square used CCI 200 and 250, Federal 215, Remington 9 1/2M, and Winchester WLRM and WLR primers in these tests. They revealed a total spread in pressure of 12,800 psi from the mildest standard (the CCI 200) to the hottest magnum (WLRM) primer tested. Changing brands but using the same type of primer will also usually result in pressure changes, but ordinarily these will be less drastic. In the A-Square tests the pressure spread between the CCI 200 and the hottest standard primer (the WLR) was 9600 psi. The spread between the mildest magnum primer (the Rem. 9 1/2M) and the hottest magnum primer (WLRM) was 8300 psi. These are significant pressure variations that cannot safely be disregarded. Incidentally, these same tests revealed that the Federal 215 and CCI 250 large rifle magnum primers produced nearly identical pressures. The difference between these two primers was only 100 psi. A-Square also reported that, while they had not tested these two primers in all possible cartridges, this result was typical of their experience with these two primers.........." This contrary to my experience which is obviously much less extensive that A-Square. Suwannee Tim | |||
|
one of us |
Federal 215 primers are the only primer I use in my 470, 416 Rem Mag and 300 Win Mag. Never a hint of any issues. Jim "Bwana Umfundi" NRA | |||
|
one of us |
I used to use 215's but switched to WLRM's due to availability at the time. My results were good enough I've not gone looking since and am still happy with them. I avoid CCI's for big game cartridges. | |||
|
| One of Us |
According to A-Square as reported by Hawks the WLRM is even hotter than the Fed 215. Why do you avoid the CCI for big cartridges, experience, something you heard or read? When you say "CCI's" I assume you mean the 250 LRM primers not 200 large rifle standard. Suwannee Tim | |||
|
| One of Us |
Why would you believe Chuck Hawks? He is not a lab. | |||
|
| One of Us |
As I wrote above, Chuck Hawks reported what A-Square wrote and A-Square is (was) a lab. The information did not originate from Hawks, he reported it, I have since confirmed his quote is accurate. Do you have a gripe with Hawks? While we are off topic, why do you have this silly animated avatar? When four or five of those are going all at once I can't hardly read because of the distraction. I found an extention to disable them: Stop Animations extention Suwannee Tim | |||
|
One of Us |
I use them essentially because they were designed for the 378 Wby based cartridges which is what I shoot. That stated, I've heard it said their cup is somewhat softer which might produce better ignition results. I have no personal experience to confirm this however. Ken.... "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so. " - Ronald Reagan | |||
|
| One of Us |
The shooting press led us to believe that the Fed 215 was developed for the large capacity Weatherby cases. That is what we were always "told". I've used them, but the cases have always been small enough that my other magnum primers worked too (assuming there is even a difference). | |||
|
| one of us |
Your failure to ignite (or delayed ignition) is very likely related not to the relative energy of the various primers, but to the hardness or thickness of their cups. It is probable that your firing pin fall is on the weak side and it happens that the Federal 215's either have a slightly softer cup or are manufactured in a way that makes them more pressure-sensitive. I own a couple of (in this instance much smaller) rifles which exhibit the same hangfire/non-fire tendencies with CCI primers, but are very consistent with certain other brands which have softer cups. The primers in this instance are all "standard" primers, not magnums, but the principle is exactly the same. It is a symptom of weak firing pin fall, or sometimes, lack of sufficient firing pin protrusion. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Wow you are so easy to flip out. Chuck Hawks quoted someone else that is out of business. That data came from a dead end. When you have a problem that no one else seems to have you should analyze your own contribution (variables) to the process. Is the problem occurring with more than one rifle? Does it occur with just ball powders? Hint Hint Does it occur with full pressure loads? Low pressure loads too? Loads that do not fill the case? Hint Hint How old is your powder? In general primers are about the most dependable component you load with so you might consider what is happening in your rifles with your powders may be confined to only you.
| |||
|
one of us |
Yep, my initial thoughts, too, when reading the original post. Graybird "Make no mistake, it's not revenge he's after ... it's the reckoning." | |||
|
| one of us |
I think Stonecreek is probably correct based on the original post. Especially in relation to the Tula primers. Remember that in the Russian world, "magnum" means harder primer cup, NOT more flame, or more intense flame. Larry "Peace is that brief glorious moment in history, when everybody stands around reloading" -- Thomas Jefferson | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yeah but Tim has not explained anything about his loads or his rifles. A bad combination of ball powder and weak or light striker/firing pin might contributing to this.
| |||
|
| one of us |
To answer the Question directed at me... I reloaded some ammo for a 7mm Rem Mag with CCI mag primers and got two fail to fires in one box of 50. One was at a decent buck, one a coyote. In checking things out I read in several sources and then heard it from my gunsmith that the cups were quite a bit harder. I have never had a miss-fire with Fed 215's or WLRM's. I accepted that WLR's are actually as hot as 9 1/2M's, CCI 250's, and nearly as hot as Fed 215's. Based on "data" I discovered while checking into my problem. I have not looked into this since as I have had no problems after switching. Of interest on this topic, the Lyman #49 I was looking at last night states that load development for the .300WM was done with standard WLR primers, and if you do use WLRM's one should stay a full grain below max published data. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Roy Weatherby had federal to make the 215 primer for .378wm according to norma. Norma recomends win lr magnum for 378w. | |||
|
one of us |
A lot has changed recently in primer characteristics, especially as lead-free compounds are being integrated into the chemistry. By recently I mean the last 5-7 years. The old rules of thumb don't necessariily apply to current production. So if you have an article that rates primers from the late 80s or 1990s, the information may be bad by now. I don't recall a recent primer comparison project and even a current one may be obsolete in 5 more years. Not much to do but stock up on what you like now or be prepared to experiment as supplies are replaced. "Experience" is the only class you take where the exam comes before the lesson. | |||
|
| One of Us |
my primers all seem to go off, mangalum or not | |||
|
| One of Us |
I don't think this has anything to do with the rifles, both CZ 550 American Safari Magnums, both recent manufacture. I have no reason to suspect light firing pin strikes. I have fired a couple of hundred rounds of 500gr bullet, 87gr Win 748 (a ball powder), Fed215 loads from the 458, not one hangfire, not one misfire with that load. In my experience light firing pin strikes results in a complete misfire. I have shot many thousands of rounds of 5.45X39mm out of ARs with standard hammer springs which are marginal for igniting the Soviet military primer. I have had a hundred or two hundred, I haven't actually kept count, a good many, misfire, never once have I had a hangfire from this 5.45mm and AR combination. Not once. Every misfire, every single one with 5.45mm, the cartridge has fired after I hit it a second time. Both misfired 416 cartridges showed evidence of scorched and clumped powder and the primer was burned. I had hangfires with a Ruger M77 300 Win mag using H870 powder, it was not the firing pin or spring as the rifle was perfectly reliable through thousands of rounds of other loads. In my experience light firing pin strikes cause misfires, not hangfires. Here are some of the loads that gave trouble, 10 rounds of each load with CCI and Tula primers, 20 rounds each load with Fed 215 primers: 416 Rigby, 400 grain bullets: 96.2, 98.4, 100.6, 102.8, 105.0, grains RLR19 84.6, 86.4, 88.2, 90.0 gr. IMR4007 SSC 458 Lott, 405 grain bullets: 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76 grains RLR7 All of the above hangfired with CCI 250 LRM and Tula LRM primers except two of the 416s, one from each powder failed to fire at all, both Tula primers. None hangfired with Federal 215 primers.
I wouldn't call it "flipped out" SR. You impugned the credibility of Chuck Hawks, I asked you why and you won't say. If Chuck Hawks is not credible please tell me about it. Whether A-Square is out of business or not, changed hands or not, the data was shot with a pressure gun. I don't see any reason the A-Square data would not be credible. Do you? Suwannee Tim | |||
|
| one of us |
Nothing in the information you present is counterindicative of either light firing pin strike or inadequate firing pin protrusion. If you'll check those issues on your CZ's you might find that CCI's and other primers are a "whole lot hotter" than you thought they were. This is not to impugn the quality of the CZ action -- one of the rifles I own which exhibits misfires with "hard" primers is a Kimber of Oregon which is a very high-quality rifle in every way. The finest of rifles can inadvertently have a weak spring or misadjusted firing pin protrusion. Another cause of light firing pin strike which could mimic "weak" primers is for the cartridges to have somewhat loose headspace in the chamber, thus allowing there to effectively be some bit of gap between the bolt face and the cartridge head (and therefore the anvil of the primer). This results in the same thing as inadequate firing pin protrusion. Both of the cartridges in question could easily be something of a loose fit in the chamber and thus exhibit this phenomenon. These variables have to be ruled out before any conclusion as to how a particular primer might or might not be igniting the powder charge can be reached. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I'll check the protrusion on both rifles. I don't think light springs are a real possibility on two different rifles. The firing pins certainly make a convincing "thunk" when I dry fire for what that's worth. If they were puny I think they would sound puny. They don't sound puny, they sound anything but puny. Headspace is not an issue, I'm neck sizing the 416 and the cartridges are snug. The 458, I don't have any reason to suspect a headspace issue. Again, in my experience, light firing pin strikes cause misfires, not hangfires. I have had experience with hangfires in 454 Casull and 450 Bushmaster, both caused by inadequate ignition. Changing to another powder cured the problem with both guns. Another experience, I have seen two instances of ARs having broken hammer springs, one leg broken leaving a half power hammer spring. The effect was misfires not hangfires. I have never seen a hangfire I could attribute to an inadequate firing pin spring or inadequate protrusion and I have seen quite a few hangfires. Inadequate ignition = hangfires, light strikes or inadequate protrusion = misfires, this is consistent in all my experience.
I'm going to have to get me some of those mangalum primers.  Suwannee Tim | |||
|
| one of us |
It would be easy enough to prime a couple of dozen of whatever offending brand of primer in resized cases and test fire them without bullet or charge. If one or more fails to fire or hang-fires, then you have identified the problem as failure the gun to properly to ignite the primer, not failure of the primer to properly ignite the charge. If none fail to fire (or to hangfire), then you have additional evidence that there is a difference in the way one primer ignites (or fails to ignite) the charge versus another. Be sure that you use a large enough sample of primed-only cases to reasonbly match the number of rounds in which you found some number that mis/hang-fired as loaded rounds in order to make your test reasonably valid. This is a low-cost and low-effort test which can be carried out in your garage (if necessary). Regardless of your findings, I would in no way suggest that you switch from Fed 215's since they work for you. While I know that the problem with my Kimber is in its firing mechanism, it shoots quite dependably with a particular brand of primers I use so I see no point in installing a stronger spring or increasing the pin protrusion -- I just use the primers which work. Of course, it's not chambered in dangerous game caliber and I'm yet to be threatened by a wounded prairie dog or charging armadillo . . . | |||
|
| one of us |
Federal 215 Hotter WLRM CCI 250 Rem 9-1/2 M WLR Fed 210 CCI BR2 CCI 200 Rem 9-1/2 Cooler | |||
|
| One of Us |
Sorry Tim but you seem to be a newbie that might believe anything on the net. Chuck Hawks may not know what he is quoting is accurate. He was only quoting. You might search for Art Alphin's current legal status and report back here. Back to your primer problems. Based on loading for many many different rifles, hand guns and shotguns, primers are the last thing that I would suspect. If your 458 Lott does not go off you must be using a very hard to ignite powder. The same goes for the Rigby except it has the potential, with the powder charge settled forward against the bullet, for a lot of airspace in front of the primer. You need to find proven data with the primers of your choice. Speer data shows the CCI250 in rounds up to the .416 Remington. Hornady's data shows Federal 215s in most of the humongous Weatherby rounds. A weak firing pin can cause you a lot of grief. It is interesting you are having the problem in 2 rifles of the same make. I had an old military rifle blow primers with a starting load of AA2495. The bolt body had a lot of cosmoline packed into the firing pin assembly. Why do I know this was the specific cause of the problem? I was shooting the same loads through an identical rifle with no problem. I even switched the bolts and the problem went away. I cleaned the cosmoline out of the bolt and never had that issue again. The final load was 3 grains heavier than the starting load that blew the primers. You might want to be careful if you are getting FTF like that. You might get a start stop start with are round and the bullet will act like an obstruction on the second start of the ignition.
| |||
|
| One of Us |
That's a good idea Stonecreek, I'll try just that. I am very suspicious of these Tula primers. I may do a couple of hundred of them which is no big deal on the Dillon.
I am sorry to report that I have nothing to report. I couldn't find anything on Col. Alphin's legal status. I know his company had financial problems and he sold out and some customers lost their deposits. That sort of thing happens. I am pretty new to this internet thing. I have only been doing it since 1980 when it was first introduced at Columbia University. Suwannee Tim | |||
|
Moderator |
after hang fires in 577 ne and 500 jeffe with other primers (wlrm and cci mag) i use nothing else in 90+ grains of powder... 215 or 215m opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club Information on Ammoguide about the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR. 476AR, http://www.weaponsmith.com | |||
|
| one of us |
Tim, you will find the ignore feature works well here. I only have a couple people on it. SR makes the short list. Stonecreek gave some good advice. You will find the cups on the Tula primers harder than CCI. Larry "Peace is that brief glorious moment in history, when everybody stands around reloading" -- Thomas Jefferson | |||
|
| One of Us |
Thanks Larry.
I have come to the same conclusion jeffe. With big cases, use the 215. I won't run out of Federal 215s again. Suwannee Tim | |||
|
| One of Us |
I tend to prefer Federal. Never had one hang fire on one of them. Had problems with hang fire on CCI400 and CCI450 in my Marlin .357Magnum rifle. | |||
|
one of us |
Luckily for me - I have a pretty good stash of 215's. Enuff to last another 3 or 4 hunting seasons.  | |||
|
| one of us |
In a case as small as the .357, and using powders as relatively fast as the .357 does, hangfires or misfires are almost certainly a problem with the gun's ignition of the primer, not of the primer's ignition of the powder charge. However, if using Federal primers dependably solves that problem, then that is certainly one way to address it. | |||
|
One of Us |
Just goes to show that until you load your rifle and fire it, all the tests, opinions and articles mean squat. | |||
|
| one of us |
I use Fed. 215 in all magnum calibers and Fed 210 in the non belted rounds. Have for years..I use Fed. 215s in all big bore double rifle calibers..It keeps life simple and don't have to get et up with technical hooooopla... Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
Today I was on the range shooting a 300 Winchester magnum, 150 grain bullet, Tula LRM primer, two powders. 5 rounds each of H414, 71, 69, 67 and 65 grains and 5 rounds each of IMR 4064, 66, 64, 62, 60 grains. Every single round of the H414 loads hangfired. Not one round of the IMR 4064 hangfired. These hangfires are NOT due to a weak firing pin strike. These hangfires are due to inadequate ignition of the powder which is a function of the potency of the primer and the flame resistance of the powder. Several years ago I sought to burn 10 pounds of H870 after having one can deteriorate. I burned it in the same 300 Win mag, a Ruger M77. I loaded them with the maximum amount of powder I could get in the case, 88 grains, 150 grain Remington bullet and Federal 215 primers. I cant's say that every one of these almost a thousand rounds of 300 magnum hangfired, I don't remember for sure, they reliably hangfired and hangfired for quite a long time too, longer than any other hangfire I have ever experienced. Same rifle, other loads, no hangfires. None of these hangfires were a result of inadequate firing pin strike.
I have a lot more standard primers than I do Federal 215s, sad to say. I have 1100 Fed 215s, a lot more than that of other kinds. The 215s are hard to get and expensive right now as you all know. Suwannee Tim | |||
|
| One of Us |
Tim Have you recognized that the spherical powders are most often associated with the hangfires? I would suggest that H-414 is a bit fast for the 300 Win Mag and you may have too much air space too. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading Reloading Federal 215 versus all the rest
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia