Shotgun primers

[cdoc42]

Although shotguns are third on my list of things to do for target practice, even at that, far more often they were used for hunting. I recently got back into Sporting Clays (for fun) and started handloading shotshells again.

In my inventory I had acquired several brands of primers from the spouse of a deceased friend and I wondered if anyone could offer advice about the differences or caution to be used:

1) Federal Classic 209A
2) Remington 97 (209)
3) Remington 57
4) CCI "Trap and Skeet" 209

5) Winchester-Western "Staynless" in a yellow box with red letter "W" 209
(Seems to be a pretty old box)

6) Winchester-Western 209 in a White Box with Red "W" but "Staynless" is printed only on the side of the box (newer version, I suspect)

7) Alcan G57F - distrbuted by Alcan out of Alton, Il but made in Italy by
Giulio Fiocchi Lecco

Are they all interchangeable for a 12-Ga load with low brass, AA cases, WAA12 wad and 17.5gr Clays with 1-1/8 oz of shot?

Thanks for any advice.

[Virginian]

57 and 209 are a different size.

[big al hunter]

Some are hotter, some are not. Match the load to tested data for that powder and primer. When I started loading for shotgun I studied up. I can't remember exact details of pressure and load, but a primer change was a significant difference with the same charge.

[cdoc42]

It's tough to find load recommendations that use "Staynless" WW or Italian Alcan primers.

I have seen some data where an increase in the powder charge produces a lower pressure with a different primer.

[Jim Watson]

First, any battery cup primer with a "57" in the label is a smaller size meant for Remington hulls way back when. I remember when they came out with the RXP to compete with AA and started using 209s and that was in the 1970s or early 1980s.


Shotshell reloading is pretty much recipe driven. Finding loads with some of those old stock primers might be hard and you might not be able to find the wads and hulls used at the time, either. "Working up" a shotshell load is not anything I ever tried.

[stuckinthe60s]

trash the 57's and alcans.
get some old loading data books on line.
any primer with A on the number means (magnesium alloy.) it burns hot for magnum loads.
209's are the current benchmark primer.
the 97 is not to be used with ball powders. it lacks a flash hole cover.

[kymasabe]

Way back when, when I shot trap a lot, used Remington green hulls and CCI primers, seemed to work best in my load.
Ditch anything that doesn't say 209 on it.

[cdoc42]

Thanks to all. Some of these are old, but I don't know how old. Especially the yellow box Winchester-Western with the term "Staynless" and Remington labeled "Kleenbore." Both of those are packaged in boxes with cardboard channels holding the primers rather than plastic containers with holes. The white box of WW has the plastic holders.

[cdoc42]

I ran a quick search for WW primers and found a source if info:https://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=178168

The Yellow WW Styanless box is from 1963; the white box is from 1974. I'll load a dummy shell and see if they fire.

[Kreyzhorse]

Primers will effect the overall load. Lots of online resources available and while they recommend specific recipes, it's not hard to work up your own low brass load based on powder type, grains, hull and wads.

[stuckinthe60s]

if they arent rusted....load em.

[44 AMP]

trash the 57's and alcans.

OR, sell/trade them. there are people who will want them and use them, you just need to find them, and don't expect the old primers to be worth their weight in gold, or even close.

[stuckinthe60s]

sell them to dog trainers who would use them as blanks in empty hulls to train dogs to react to the bang.

[FITASC]

When it comes times to actually load some ammo, remember to follow the recipe. Subbing primers (unlike metallic) can cause differing pressures that can lead to problems; same applies to hulls and wads. Both Alliant and Hodgdon online have up-to-date data

[SHR970]

7) Alcan G57F - distrbuted by Alcan out of Alton, Il but made in Italy by
Giulio Fiocchi Lecco

FWIW those "Alcan" / GFL are Fiocci. GFL translates to Giulio Fiocchi / Lecco Italy. Lecco is a town in Lombardy in Northern Italy.

[stuckinthe60s]

but even more important is the alcan number G57F, which means too small.

[cdoc42]

I have to add some info to this thread in light of FITASC's post above:

"When it comes times to actually load some ammo, remember to follow the recipe. Subbing primers (unlike metallic) can cause differing pressures that can lead to problems; same applies to hulls and wads. Both Alliant and Hodgdon online have up-to-date data"

I'm loading 16-20-12 Gauges and I did notice during a thorough review of data where pressures change where the only change is the primer. I found some where an increase in the charge (same powder)led to a reduction in pressure with a primer change. All however, were apparently acceptable as pressures didn't get any higher than 10,500 psi or a similar number in LUP, which I surmise is safe since these are recommended recipes.

Which leads to this story- no matter how long one handloads, there will always be a time for error to occur. I was loading 12-Ga Win AA hulls with 23.0gr of IMR/Hodgdon 800-X, Fed 209A primer and a CB 1118-12 wad. Data pressure is 6800 psi, velocity 1200 fps with 1-1/8oz #7.5 shot.

My wad bin in front of the MEC "single stage" press was empty so I dumped the white wads from the CB bag into it and started all over again. After the third box of rounds was finished I noticed the CB wad was not 1118-12, but a CB 1078-20!!! Only then did I reflect on my observation that it had somewhat difficult to insert the wads onto the delivery tube, and my need to check the weight of delivered shot more frequently. It would appear to be an overload but when weighed it always fell into the 1-1/8oz range of 492gr, give or take 2-3 gr. Since the final crimp was fine, I assumed the volume of 800-X was the issue until pressed down with crimping.

Now, however, recognizing I have 75 rounds made with the wrong wads -from a smaller gauge, the question is "What do I do?" I made the assumption that the smaller wad would more likely allow gas to escape around the wad base, causing nothing more than a reduction in pressure and velocity. So I took 2 rounds to the range and fired them off, and nothing remarkable happened.

One more new trick to an old dog, which is more of a reminder: pay attention when you reload.

[stuckinthe60s]

i know people who use 20ga wads in 16ga, but not 12ga.
you might want to take a hack saw to them and cut off the base where the plastic meets the brass. in doing so, you may be able to harvest the powder and pull out the wad with pliers. stick a screwdriver in the crimps and pry it open to dump out the lead.
take the cut off base and hold it under the deprime stage and press slightly to harvest the primer.
you may have been lucky with 2 rounds, but what if that wad cocks in the bore?
dont do it again.

[cdoc42]

Stuck, let me ask you, why would a 20Ga wad more likely cock in a larger 12Ga bore than in a 16? If the primer ignites all the powder, wouldn't that pressure punch everything out of the bore?

I'm not trying to make light of your recommendation; I appreciate it. But I'd like some detail on the thought. What's the likelihood of a smaller 20Ga wad getting stuck in a 12-Ga bore?

I started this post asking about old primers and their differences. I had two misfires with old CCIs- just "poof" - and the wads were stuck right where the choke begins. Either the primers were old or the powder wasn't ignited. I would think if the primers and powder ignited properly, all elements of the load would exit.

Does anyone have an experience that counters that thought?

[darkgael]

I am trying to wrap my head around why inserting a 20 gauge wad into a 12 ga. Tube would be more difficult (“observation that it had somewhat difficult to insert the wads onto the delivery tube”).
I wonder, as well, about the possibility of powder migration past the cup base of the wad. The other thought that occurs, should you choose to fire these, is that pressure is apt to be low due to the loose fit of the 20 wad in the 12 hull and powder needs pressure to ignite and burn properly.
Pete

[FITASC]

Stuck, let me ask you, why would a 20Ga wad more likely cock in a larger 12Ga bore than in a 16? If the primer ignites all the powder, wouldn't that pressure punch everything out of the bore?

I'm not trying to make light of your recommendation; I appreciate it. But I'd like some detail on the thought. What's the likelihood of a smaller 20Ga wad getting stuck in a 12-Ga bore?

I started this post asking about old primers and their differences. I had two misfires with old CCIs- just "poof" - and the wads were stuck right where the choke begins. Either the primers were old or the powder wasn't ignited. I would think if the primers and powder ignited properly, all elements of the load would exit.

Does anyone have an experience that counters that thought?

Bigger bore, more room for the wad to go sideways

I am trying to wrap my head around why inserting a 20 gauge wad into a 12 ga. Tube would be more difficult (“observation that it had somewhat difficult to insert the wads onto the delivery tube”).
I wonder, as well, about the possibility of powder migration past the cup base of the wad. The other thought that occurs, should you choose to fire these, is that pressure is apt to be low due to the loose fit of the 20 wad in the 12 hull and powder needs pressure to ignite and burn properly.

Because on a MEC loader, the ram tube for the wad is sized to the bore size of the loader, so trying fit a smaller wad onto the ram/drop tube would be more difficult. I think you are thinking about simply pushing a 20 ga wad into a 12 hull say. by using your fingers - that would go in easily.

[stuckinthe60s]

bingo..............

[stuckinthe60s]

cut em open, chalk it up to experience and live to shoot another day. hulls are cheap. ER bills arent.

[cdoc42]

All sage advice, gentlemen, and I will embark on the task of sawing them all apart.

Your opinions are supported by those with whom I was in communication - Clay Buster Wads company. At first the reply was somewhat noncommittal, stating no one in that facility had ever heard of anyone mistakenly inserting 20Ga wads into 12Ga hulls with the recommendation not to use them. I replied with thanks and recognition they could not make a reasonable explanation without subjecting themselves to potential liability, as things go these days. Subsequently I received another email exhibiting concern to the extent that the writer contacted the Hodgdon Corporation (i.e., 800-X powder) and was told there was a chance for the shot to trickle down along the hull wall into the powder which would create a dangerous pressure situation, followed by similar advice that they should not be fired. 'Nuff said.