|
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 |
February 3, 2014, 09:19 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 19, 2007
Location: Fort Bragg, CA
Posts: 679
|
32% FTF with Wolf SP primers :(
Shocking failure rate. I ran out of CCI small pistol during loading .40 S&W using 180 grain rainier HP's, with 6.5 of Accurate no5 and started feeding in Wolf small pistol (not "magnum"). I realize I probably should have done another workup when slipping in a new component. Believe me I am regretting it, I loaded about 1000 (about half cci half wolf primers) before moving on to 9mm.
ZERO failures with CCI primers in the .40 batch, HUGE number of failures with Wolf primers. Just under 1/3 FTF in 9mm with 115gr rn pushed by 6.8 grains of no5 as well as same projectile ahead of 6.3 grains of power pistol. In .40 I got about 1 in 6 FTF's but all are Wolf, and once segregating, almost 1/3 failure rate. Percent failure stayed roughly the same fired in three pistols: 9mm Kahr, 9mm HK usp and Glock 22. Glock did *slightly* better though. Repeated strikes in Glock with empty (primer only) shell would fire off after a maximum of three hits with 2/3 popping on first strike, so I suspect it's not a contamination issue. I primed empty in .223 cases and got 100% fire rate with these primers in my Mini-14... Misboxed rifle primers maybe?
__________________
You only truly believe in freedom if you believe in the freedom of those you disagree. |
February 3, 2014, 10:33 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 28, 2013
Posts: 3,771
|
Are you using their lead-free primers?
-TL |
February 3, 2014, 10:46 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 19, 2007
Location: Fort Bragg, CA
Posts: 679
|
No, just regular ones. I'm going to strip down the 9mm using RCBS collet method, but collet won't work on the .40 rainiers, so I'm debating inertia puller hassle versus just getting a bunch of practice at the range and living with the vexing failure rate.
I have about 4000 of them left so I'm contemplating a cautious workup in .223 for them. I am really suspicious they got misboxed and are rifle primers.
__________________
You only truly believe in freedom if you believe in the freedom of those you disagree. |
February 4, 2014, 10:46 AM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: March 18, 2013
Posts: 43
|
You may want to check that you are fully seating the Wolf primers. I had a similar problem when I switched from CCI to Tula, and found that Tula took more effort to seat than CCI. If I didn't fully seat, then was more likely to have FTF.
|
February 4, 2014, 11:02 AM | #5 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 24, 2014
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8
|
I agree with Reload. I've loaded 5k Wolf small rifle primers (that should be harder than the SPP, but only paid $15.50 perK) in .40 S&W that fired in a number of weapons, mostly SIG and 1911 (226, 229, 2-STI a Trojan and Edge, and a Kimber with .40 bbl.) All seemed to function normally. I did notice that seating is a bit harder than with Winchester, Remington, or CCI. I suspect the Wolf are a bit oversized, but not enough to matter except in the effort it takes to seat them.
|
February 4, 2014, 11:22 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 10, 2009
Location: SW Idaho
Posts: 1,280
|
I third what Reload said. Especially if you are using crimped primer pocket brass.
|
February 4, 2014, 11:34 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 30, 2009
Location: dallas
Posts: 773
|
Agree with the last two posters for two reasons. I use a Lee Auto prime so my thumb can always tell when something is tight. In general I think Tula are a little tighter but it will still vary depending on how worn the primer pocket is. I reload pistol brass until I lose it or accidentally step on it. Secondly, I ran into a bad spell of FTF that really baffled me. I finally realized that the connecting rod between the handle and primer ram was worn down from years of usage. The large round end was so worn that it wasn't round anymore and I could squeeze the handle all the way and it would not push the primer far enough into the brass. Not really enough to note it visually but enough to cause a problem. New rod solved all my problems. Keep looking for other problems, it's always easy to blame the primer but not always correct.
|
February 4, 2014, 11:42 AM | #8 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
It's virtually guaranteed that if the round fires on subsequent attempts, the primer was not fully seated in the first place.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
February 4, 2014, 12:13 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 25, 2009
Location: Stuttgart, AR
Posts: 1,569
|
I'll guess that you loaded on a progressive press.
When I hand prime cases with Tula primers, I can definitely feel the difference between them and CCI. While the CCI require firm seating pressure, the Tula’s are even more difficult to seat properly. My guess is the Tula's are a tad larger diameter. I mash Tula primers and have yet to experience a failure to excite… …I mean ignite.
__________________
A lack of planning on your part does not necessarily constitute an emergency on my part. |
February 4, 2014, 12:23 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 19, 2007
Location: Fort Bragg, CA
Posts: 679
|
I will test this out. I thought my empty case test eliminated this possibility, but I'll be more scientific about it. The priming system used for the ammo was the auto prime on my loadmaster (yes, progressive), the test shells were loaded with the ram prime in my turret.
Very few military crimps were involved, this was mostly range brass or my own brass pickups. I did find a few military crimped 9mm's but there was no correlation to this failure- though I did squash a couple primers and set them aside. The .223 test shells were military ofb, but zero failures with them. If I can manually go through my loaded shells and push the primers in better for proper function, I will be quite the happy camper. It does make some sense since it's pretty hard to "feel" the primer insertion in a progressive. Thank you all for the input. Update: I went through and looked at fifty 9mm and fifty .40 in trays and couldn't really spot high primers, but when I started running them past the ram prime I felt about 5% seating further in .40 (about half were CCI) and about 10% seating further in 9mm. With this I am assuming that there were more I did not feel that seated further. The ram prime process uses a mechanical stop between the shell holder and the priming lever using the extractor groove as the fixed relation point, so it's pretty hard to screw up. Based on this I am going to take a trip to the range and shoot off 50 each to determine if I still have a problem. A note to anyone else who finds this thread in the future: The setting in my progressive was identical between CCI and Wolf, so clearly there is enough flex in the random components to allow the Wolf to fight a proper seat. I was operating under the assumption that the differences in seating force would not be able to inflict enough flex to seat at a different depth, and clearly I was mistaken.
__________________
You only truly believe in freedom if you believe in the freedom of those you disagree. Last edited by totalloser; February 4, 2014 at 06:55 PM. |
February 4, 2014, 12:47 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 7, 2009
Location: Southern Oregon!
Posts: 2,891
|
Quote:
__________________
My Anchor is holding fast! I've learned how to stand on my own two knees... |
|
February 8, 2014, 06:56 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 19, 2007
Location: Fort Bragg, CA
Posts: 679
|
Shot 50 each after running through ram prime. 100% function. I feel a little silly for not catching such a basic issue thanks folks.
__________________
You only truly believe in freedom if you believe in the freedom of those you disagree. |
February 8, 2014, 07:04 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
The old Wolf SP primers -- brass colored -- were great. When they "new and improved" them by nickel- or chrome-plating them, they got much harder to seat and take a harder hit to set them off even if they are fully seated.
But they should work if you stand on the handle when you seat them. Wolf and Tula LP and rifle primers always work just fine, and are a heck of a bargain. I'm not sure the SP's are worth the headache anymore -- unless they are all you can find. Just my humble opinion.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
February 8, 2014, 07:42 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 28, 2013
Posts: 3,771
|
Have been using tula primers quite a bit. They are a little harder to seat, but most certainly don't need to stand on the handle. I always prime with Lee auto primer. No problem other than tired hands (sometimes it does need to squeeze with both hands). The primers perform admirably as always, and they are much more reasonably priced.
-TL |
February 8, 2014, 09:10 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 11, 2012
Location: Braham, Minnesota
Posts: 1,314
|
I have a whole bunch of the Wolf/Tula small Pistol primers.
They work just fine in my Revolvers and my 32-20 rifle and my Rossi Lever gun. When I use them in my Taurus .380 and 9mm. Pull my hair out time. Light primer strikes galore. Had to switch to Federal sp primers for those two guns. |
February 10, 2014, 10:47 AM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 18, 2011
Location: SE VA.
Posts: 216
|
I have used about 30k Wolf primers of different sizes and have had only one failure. I believe that failure was my fault. If I had 32% failure rate. I would check my reloading process. A bad lot of primers is a possibility but a very small one. I believe Wolf/Tula primers are as good as any other brand available. Best wishes
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|