The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 24, 2009, 01:59 PM   #1
Deer Slayer 270
Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2007
Posts: 49
Anybody uses WLR primers in WSM calibers?

I have been using WLRM (Winchester Large Rifle Magnum) primers in reloading all my WSM (Winchester Short Magnum) calibers. But I have noticed that most reloading charts call out regular large rifle primers or WLR (Winchester Large Rifle) if you use Winchester brand. I was wondering if anybody uses the regular larger rifle primers (WLR) on these WSM calibers and how is your experience, specially if you have used both type. I am having a hard time getting more magnum primers and was thinking about just using regular ones.
Deer Slayer 270 is offline  
Old April 24, 2009, 08:53 PM   #2
hoghunting
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 27, 2006
Posts: 1,559
When I was working up loads for my 300 WSM, I tried many different powders and primers. My most accurate loads use WLRM primers, so that is what I stick with. If you can get an accurate load in your rifle using WLR primers, then use it. Each rifle is different, just because my rifle likes magnum primers doesn't mean yours has to have them. Good luck.
hoghunting is offline  
Old April 29, 2009, 01:09 PM   #3
Major Dave (retired)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2008
Location: Between Dallas and Shreveport, LA
Posts: 569
Stick with loading manuals

Rather than go with (possible) self-styled experts posting on this forum, I would suggest following published data from reliable loading manuals.

Both Lyman 49th edition, and Hornady 7th edition say WLRM, Large Rifle Magnum primers - for .270 WSM.

Since the non-magnum primers are not as "hot" as the magnums, the pressure curve will be different, resulting in possibly erratic high/low pressure. Notice I said "different", not "lower". I don't know how much, or in what way "different", but different, for sure.

Publishers of loading manuals are liable for their info - posters on this forum ARE NOT!!
__________________
Artillery lends dignity to what would otherwise be but a vulgar brawl.

Last edited by Major Dave (retired); April 29, 2009 at 01:10 PM. Reason: Typo
Major Dave (retired) is offline  
Old April 29, 2009, 01:35 PM   #4
snuffy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 20, 2001
Location: Oshkosh wi.
Posts: 3,055
I've used nothing BUT wlr for loading my 300 WSM. Oh, except one load for 125 BT's that called for rem 9½ M primers.

The short-fat powder column that the WSM calibers all have, is easily ignited by standard primers. Also, since the powders normally called for are the mid to slow powders on the burn rate charts, they aren't that hard to ignite. That said, if the recipe in a manual says it was worked up using a mag primer, then use it.

The long, skinny powder column of the super mags use the slowest of the powders, so they always need a magnum primer.

When I started loading for my Browning, there wasn't hardly anything out there for loading data. Just a few loads with winchester 760, which I found wasn't any good for top velocity. I had to extrapolate loads up from 30-06 loads, to under 300 mag loads. The powder I choose was H-4831 SC. It still is my go-to powder for most of my loads.
__________________
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?
snuffy is offline  
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.05262 seconds with 8 queries