|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 2, 2007, 08:00 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Posts: 16
|
Primers - Class A, B, or C?
I was reading an article on primers and that there are three different classes of primers. The author stated that each class differed in things like intensity, length of burn, etc. He even gave a couple of examples for each class. BUT, he did not spell out the characteristics which defined each class. Has anybody else heard anything like this before, or have any knowledge of it? Here's the link:
http://www.gunnersden.com/index.htm....g-primers.html |
March 2, 2007, 08:55 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 11, 2006
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 3,403
|
That's a new one on me
Small pistol primers, large, small rifle, large, standard and magnums, shotshell primers. But class A, B, C? Never heard of them, and I've been reloading for ~30 years. Maybe I missed something along the line.
|
March 2, 2007, 09:54 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 11, 2002
Location: high up in the rockies
Posts: 2,289
|
I would write to him and ask for definitions. If he is an industry "insider" he may be using language that is common in the industrym but unknown to the general public. Or, he may just be full of Krap.
__________________
If you think a mighty military force is expensive, wait 'til you see what a weak one costs. |
March 2, 2007, 11:38 PM | #4 |
Staff
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 21,022
|
I never heard of that classification, either. I know a few years ago the benchresters were all in a tizzy to hoard a batch of RWS small rifle primers that had turned out to be especially timid. Apparently they found letting the powder be responsible for all the pressure was most accurate under BR conditions. Would these be A- primers?
The author made a glaring error, so if he's an industry insider, he isn't a very completely informed one. A primer is not normally what starts a bullet moving, unless you forget to put powder in the case. Some work at HP White labs years ago showed that bullets don't normally start going until case pressure is up around 10,000 PSI. No primer can get you there without powder. Sure, if you leave powder out and give the pressures time to equilibrate toward static conditions, the primer's pressure will dislodge the bullet and maybe even stick it in the bore. Sub-10,000 PSI target loads still shoot, too, of course. But when there is a full compliment of powder present, there isn't time for that to come about. It did occur to me the military might have such a classification system? Be worth a look, anyway.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle |
March 4, 2007, 01:00 PM | #5 |
Junior member
Join Date: December 10, 2006
Location: MANNING SC
Posts: 837
|
primers
I went to that site it seems as its commercial site.what they said was more about manufacturers products listed different brands as being more or less powerful. by 6% + or -.most of us know brands are slightly differant.nothing changing,we also know primers in military cart are harder so they dont go off in autos when breach closes.
|
March 7, 2007, 11:48 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 28, 1999
Posts: 201
|
Some years back I read an article about a bullet company that spent much time and money in researching which primers were the "hottest", and they ranked them from "coldest" to the "hottest" for lack of better words. Brisance I believe is what they call this but that is another subject.
In the test WLRM and Federal 215 were right near or at the top in the large rifle category. They were about to publish the results and then they decided to test again with new lot numbers of primers. This time the whole order changed and believe it or not CCI standard #200 primers were the "hottest". The study was never published and the project abandoned. The lesson learned is that different lot #'s of primers and powders have somewhat different characteristics each and every time a run is made of them. If you like a particular component and you can find more of the same lot number, Buy Them! |
March 11, 2007, 06:52 PM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 10, 2007
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 216
|
Quote:
He is just classifying the primers this way, nothing official
__________________
Born pre-war and proud of it! |
|
March 11, 2007, 09:46 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 20, 2001
Location: Oshkosh wi.
Posts: 3,055
|
I think cheygriz hit it on the head! He's full o' Krap!
Here's his about us on the main page; Quote:
Be carefull what you believe on the internet or anywhere else for that matter. A check on the background may reveal it's no more than one individual's opinion.
__________________
The more people I meet, the more I love my dog They're going to get their butts kicked over there this election. How come people can't spell and use words correctly? |
|
March 12, 2007, 07:43 AM | #9 |
Member
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Posts: 16
|
Thanks, guys. I guess what I was kinda wondering was if a load was showing signs of pressure before you think that it should, would a different "class" of primer (milder one?) lessen the signs and enable a tad bit more powder? In other words, do certain primers allow for more powder with the same pressure? Not that this has happened, I just ran across that article and it got me to thinking.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|