found some powders

[skizzums]

i went to my local reload shop today, and to my suprise, they finally got a shipment that included pistol powders. so i grabbed a pound of my usual titegroup, 3lbs of HP-38 and 1lb of HS-6. the hp38 was 20$ a pound, i didnt realize the w231 was the same thing, i should have gotten it instead because it was 90$ for 8lbs., whatever, no biggie. as some know, i have only been able to find titegroup since i started(no complaints, its been good) but i am excited to tryout some new things. so heres what i'm planning on working up, let me know if you have any suggestions or if i am totally wrong on my workup.

9mm 125gr Penn RoundNose .356 [4.1gr HP38] [1.120 oal]

sound good? i am not going to play with the HS-6 until i get a heavier bullet to play with.

thanks

<----------------SENIOR MEMBER!!!! that was fast

[skizzums]

second question that i know nothing about. i have several different brands of primers. i have cci#500, federal champ small pistol and winchester small pistol. i just buy whatever i see in stock. i have only used the cci#500, but am about to switch to the federals. are there any signifigant difference in these? will they affect my powder amounts or oal? anything i need to know about different primers? and why the cost differences? the federals being the cheapest and the cci being the priciest.

[BigD_in_FL]

Go to the powder maker's website and see how it looks from their data - their data is always up-to-date, compared to printed material

[Nick_C_S]

The primers are pretty much interchangeable.

You're on the right track with your loadings. And yes, shy away from using HP38 (W231) with 9mm bullets heavier than 125g. The HS6 is good for heavier bullets. I use 5.0g HS6 for my 147g bullets (this is for lead - I'd go a little hotter for jacketed). It's a good combo.

[BigJimP]

Federal primers are soft....way softer than CCI....so you have to be really careful as you're seating them ( or they might, reportedly, detonate )....not that you should "ram" a primer in place anyway ....but be especially with Federal primers.

Federal small primers are ( # 100) are the same as CCI # 500 ...but if you have 100M's or 200M's they're different.../ and you'd have to do some research on whether you can substitute a 100M for a 100 or not...

Look at a primer chart ....like on handloads.com or other places....and figure out the other options for small pistol primers, large pistol primers, etc.....personally, I have no problem using and interchanging CCI # 500's,
Remington 1 1/2's or Winchester WSP's .../ but I won't risk using any Federal primers ( because they're so soft )....

.....traditionally competition shooters liked using Federal primers because they wanted to adjust their springs, etc for the lightest possible primer strike - and still get consistent ignition...and maximize their speed between shots...( while I understand it ....I never thought it was a great idea )...

[Unclenick]

Actually, the primers are not the same. CCI uses lead styphnate sensitizer and Federal uses the hydroxide of lead styphnate (aka basic lead styphnate) which is generally felt to be a little more sensitive. Other additives for fuel and spark (like aluminum powder) may also be different. A general rule of thumb I use is to reduce a known maximum load by at least 5% when changing primers. As Alan Jones explains in this article, primer makers change their formulations more frequently than people realize and never announce it, so I run a couple of low loads with each new primer lot number I buy just to be sure.

I suggest the 5% number just because the most difference I've seen changing primer make was equivalent to about 4% difference in powder charge. There's no simple pattern. As Hartmut Broemel points out, you can find examples where magnum primers actually made less pressure than a standard primer. It's a complicated interaction between how much primer gas is produced and how hot it is.

[skizzums]

thank you bigj and unclenick, i have heard that they were soft and to save them for the military brass because they will seat easier. so from what you are saying, does that mean that i may have better reliability from the federal primers since they are considered more "sensitive". i have noticed with my cci#500, i may get 1 out of 100 that doesnt fire or my need two hits, especially when using a DAO pistol.

[BigJimP]

Needing 2 primer strikes to fire a cartridge...usually means you are not setting your primers deep enough / and the first strike just seats it a little deeper...and then the 2nd strike fires the cartridge.

In my opinion, the Federals are not more reliable...

Review your primer seating issues / make sure they're seated properly and not "proud" of the base at all....compare your primer depths to some factory shells..or maybe your buddies reloads ....

I don't know about the military brass issue / but some of it has tapered primer pockets...and trying to seat a primer into a tapered opening ( if its a really soft primer - like Federal ) .....I think your risk of detonating a primer in the press just goes up .../ I would just get rid of the military brass cases...if it were me / trade the Federal primers for some CCI or Win or Remington primers if you can find someone that wants the Federals....
------------
Being a soft primer doesn't make it seat easier....it makes it more risky to seat in a case ...if it gets crushed ...it might detonate ( and we should all wear safety glasses when we load - for this - and other reasons )!

[skizzums]

well i just loaded 600 rounds with the federals tonight, they were definetly soft, but i didnt have any issues even with the military. i never had issues with the cci going in the military's either, just a little harder push. i see what your saying with it detoneating in the press, i'm sure it can happen, but i didnt have any issues thus far.

p.s. THROW AWAY BRASS!?!?!? shoot, i just paid 60$ for a thousand rounds of military. jk.....but i never had any problems with it. its pretty easy to seat the 9mm, maybe the rifle rounds have a greater taper, but i cant tell much of a diff between the milsurp and factory luger. but seriously, i hate to say it, but i'm more cheap than safe.

[Real Gun]

BigD_in_FL - Go to the powder maker's website and see how it looks from their data - their data is always up-to-date, compared to printed material

I like online docs, because they can be dynamic and corrected. However, that does not mean the powder formulations are changing, and loads being revised.

[skizzums]

okay, i did a bunch of loads this morning. im going to do a range report tomorrow morning the most scientific way i know how. i will post pics with load data and groups tomorrow. doing TG with diff primers and bullets and HP38 with different primers and bullets. we will see who my winers are.

[frankgh22]

Hey Skizzums just noticed you're from D'ville, I am from Duluth, GA. I used to pass by there on my way to GA Arms (back when they had ammo). Anyway, I never thought about the primers until I started loading 147 gr subsonics and it does make a difference. Enough difference to push a load just on the edge of subsonic over. I use mostly Winc. SP and Titegroup for all my 9mm, 45, 38, and 40. I have had good luck with HP38 and 231 in the past.

Unclenick - thanks for the link to Alan's article. Though not for the same reason as the "myth-conception" he refers to, CCIs do seat harder than any others in my 550

[LSU]

Please post a range report.

If you're dealing with Alliant powders the guy to email is: Mr. Ben Amonette,

[email protected]

He has been very helpful and responsive to me.

[Unclenick]

Skizzums,

Using Federal pistol primers is something a lot of guys used to do when they had a tuned DA revolver whose springs had been lightened just a tad over optimum. The Federals improved their ignition reliability.

The issue with CCI (and now, TulAmmo and Wolf, even more so) always was about them being harder to seat than Federal or Winchester or Remington. My Dillon Square Deal, for example, couldn't seat them reliably in .45 Auto when I first got it. Then CCI revised their process to clean up burrs on the lips of their cups and after that the Square Deal could seat them, but they still seemed to need a little bit harder shove of the handle than the Federals do, as Frankgh22 suggests. It's just not truly hard like once was the case.

I don't really know how much of the improved ignition using Federal primers is greater sensitivity and how much is just that they are more likely to be fully seated. What I can tell you for certain is that there are manufacturing tolerances in primer pockets. For that reason, when I have snug fit issues, even if the brass isn't crimped military brass, I run the tight brass through my Dillon Super Swage, and then primers seat reasonably.

In general, you want to set the bridge, as the Alan Jones article says, by pressing the primers in 0.002"-0.006" past the point the anvil feet touch the primer pocket. That's an old recommendation from both Remington and Olin (Winchester) to the military. Federal told Dick Wright to use 0.002" for small rifle and 0.003" for large rifle primers in their brand, but it wasn't clear whether that was minimum, optimum or what. I've not done the experiments I need to explore that point with them.

One strategy that has been effective is to stick to a fixed depth below flush. The Forster Co-ax press uses a fixed -0.005" (below flush) with their primer seating ram, though 0.004" is also mentioned in their literature and you often see a little spring back after using their tool anyway, so that they land close to -0.004". (Note that the Forster Co-ax bench priming tool does not do this, but just relies on feel.) The Dillon 1050 press also uses fixed depth, but it is fixed with respect to deck height, so if your rims aren't the same thickness your results will vary. The Sinclair hand priming tool can be adjusted to fixed depth going.

The K&M Primer/Gauge tool is the only one I know that actually zeros a dial indicator to the depth of the individual case primer pocket and the height of the individual primer that will be seated into it, so that you can measure the setting of the primer bridge (aka, consolidation of the primer) on the dial indicator directly in thousandths. It's a nifty experimentation tool, but this is slower going than any other priming tool I am aware of, as the primer and case have to go into the tool in one configuration for zeroing and another for seating. That said, you could find the average for sample cases and primers from your lots, then use just one value on the tool's dial to achieve an average consolidation rather than individually measuring it. Not quite as precise, but it gets you out of handling every primer and case more than once and that would make this tool no slower than any other one-at-a-time hand-held priming tool.

As a coarser average method, you can test typical brass for primer seating depth by cutting a narrow (about 1/16") strip of 16 lb paper (yellow legal pads I have are all 16 lb; nominally 3.2 thousandths thick) and checking that it can slide across the primer when a screwdriver blade is used to bridge the pocket perpendicular to the lie of the paper strip. If the paper gets trapped by the screwdriver, your primer is high. Eventually you can calibrate your finger by feeling the passed and failed primers you found by this method, so that your finger can tell right away when a primer is high. This isn't benchrest quality, but works fine for reliable ignition.

[skizzums]

i am sorry, i do not understand the insturction of using the paper and the flat-head. could you explain a little further?

[skizzums]

its cool that you go to Georgia arms, that is my dedicated reload shop, they have yet to gouge any prices. they have pistol and rifle powders and primers in stock nopw BTW. i did post a range report, i posted another thread for it.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=530619