To magnam or not to magnam primer?

[Savage99]

One 100 tray of WLR unplated primers that fit and measure undersize has a lot # of DNL 836G on it's back.

[Real Gun]

I don't know about complete burn (accuracy is what matters)... but the chronograph told the tale (96 ES vs 62 ES). I will use Magnum primers with HS-6 too going forward, although for the short range planned for the load (woods self defence) it isn't going to matter much.... As for 4227, again the chronograph told the tale. Back to back tests with .45 Colt, with 20g of 4227 under 255g SWC, ES was 138 with CCI-300 and 69 with magnum primer. On the other hand with .44 Special, the ES was closer, 65 for standard and 50 for Magnum. Still better but not significantly. In .357, I tested from 10.2 to 14.0g (with a magnum primer) but never marked any of the loads as accurate so I don't use 4227 for .357. But that's why we test and use a chronograph I suppose . YMMV of course.

An important note is that I found Hodgdon's own loads for IMR4227 are accompanied by use of Winchester Large Pistol primers, which pass for magnums. I never considered the powder for 357 (small primers) since Lyman's indicated best results with HS-6.

I don't know about complete burn (accuracy is what matters)...

Sorry, but unburned grains of powder all over is definitely a deal breaker.

[TimSr]

For the OPs original question powder determines whether magnum primer is a better choice. Alliant states that none of their pistol powders benefit from a magnum primer.

CCI small rifle primers. Five shots.

304.5
318.2
332.3
384.2
299.9

Winchester small pistol primers.

363.3
280.6
369.7
275.9
351.9

Federal Magnum small pistol primers.

142.0
167.4
239.6
173.6
170.6

Go figure

The take away, a primer is a primer is a primer....not!
Don't assume standard primers are less powerful than magnum primers.

Primers aren't rated for their propulsion or power capabilites, but rather for how hot they burn, and the duration, (along with cup thickness). This data certainly demonstrates more inconsistancy between them than most people would expect. I did find this data very interesting, and may have some bearing on why it is so difficult for me to get consistant velocities from my 25 acp rounds, where the primer drives the bullet as much or more than the tiny powder charge.

It would be neat to explore primer constancy, not only between types, but also brands even further and tehir effect on small charge loads liek 23 and 32 acp that some reload.

[rclark]

Sorry, but unburned grains of powder all over is definitely a deal breaker.

You must not shoot any Black Powder then . Each to their own though. Respect that.

t I found Hodgdon's own loads for IMR4227 are accompanied by use of Winchester Large Pistol primers, which pass for magnums

In a back to back test, WLP did come out closer to the CCI-350. Ie, the velocity was nearer the CCI-350 load, than the CCI-300 load. It's a between primer .

[Real Gun]

You must not shoot any Black Powder then . Each to their own though. Respect that.

This is tedious. You could have assumed I meant for myself. Can you quote anything that was explicitly disrespectful, or do I have to take responsibility for every inference by an unlimited number of people.

A smokeless powder load with significant amounts of unburned powder is simply a bad load, that's all. Adding magnum primers to HS-6 to help with that was not my idea.