Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters magnum vs standard primers for 300 win mag

Well gemby that's a new one on me as well; maybe it's true but, shooting below 20 degrees F is a pretty routine matter for me since I shoot more in winter than summer, and about every year I will see below those temps in the east or west during hunting seasons..... my biggest Canadian whitetail was killed at -25 F after I had been out in that stuff all day.

I like to set rifles up to work under any conceivable condition but I am sorta anal anyway.

It gets -20 below where you live, I'll stay in pa, good luck with that. I have 37 magnum rifles and not one magnum primer in the house. You relaying what I was told, don't kill the messenger

I would take a guess that standard vs mag is not as critical or varied in cases with larger bore vs capacity cases. The more overbore or what ever term you prefer also suits faster powders compared to the large capacity/smaller bore situations. Just a thought?

I've read all of this thread so far..

I haven't posted BECAUSE I haven't bought primers in a long time. ALL my testing is 80's vintage..so take that into consideration.



SAME HERE except I've not tried the 215s.

Bob - the last primer testing I did was AFTER WW brought out their LRMP. I tested/compared the older WW 8 1/2-120 against their WW LRMP******** there was NO DIFFERRENCE over the graph OR on paper. I have BOTH and use 'em.


NOW I don't have any idea what the NEWER primes are doing. I've noticed that WW primers are brass colored..ALL mine are silver.



Back in the 'olden' days of 70-80s I read more than once to use Mag primers with 'ball' powders OR charges 'over 60 grs.'

I heard this as well. I did quite a bit of testing this theory. I'm saddled with the fact most of my load development and testing is in our very moderate weather, except for heat. I carried my chronograph several times to both Montana and Wyoming prior to late season elk hunts. In ALL cases I had better accuracy and similar velocity with the use of 210M primers vs 215M's. This was mostly with 338 Win Mags, but also 300 Win Mag. In one series of tests with a 700STW not only was there slightly better accuracy with the 210M's, but I actually got a few more FPS out of them. Used Ramshot Magnum in the STW.

In fact, there truly was not that much difference in accuracy and if loads with 215's were all that was available, I'd never would have questioned the loads. I was also testing powders and I'd guess that could make a difference. I did lose considerable velocity with RL22 but with Ramshot Magnum in the STW and the Hodgdon powders in the 338's and 300's, no velocity loss. Very little loss with N160, which was better than N560 for holding velocity in the cold. The 'warmest' it was while testing was 12�. Most of the other times it was zero or below. Never a miss fire or hang fire.

Thnx Bob -

Good to hear results of more recent testing.

Again I'm re-thinking using R 22..

calikooknic: Sure....I would think there's a difference between igniting 65 or so grains of RL15 in a 338 WM,and igniting a charge of H1000 in a 7 Rem Mag or 264,cases with similar capacity but vastly different bore diameters. And I would think there is a difference in igniting those charges at -20F vs 70+F (except in PA.,where it never gets that cold ...and maybe that is the reason that lab technicians and ammo manufacturers (who have access to pressure testing equipment and manufacture ammo that will be used in a variety of rifles and conditions, virtually across the globe....in a word, "professionals") might have selected a standard primer over a magnum primer for that particular load.


And maybe why, in order to reliably ignite large doses of slow burning powder in ,say, a 300 Weatherby magnum at optimum speed, and in order to NOT lose velocity) Federal invented the Fed 215 primer.....and WW followed suit with their LRMP, and on it goes.

But I don't know....I am not a ballistician.....and as far as I know, neither is anyone who has posted an opinion here.

Could it be, they know something we don't?

But what could these people possibly know about such stuff?....they are just professionals and since the collective wisdom of the CF seems to be that there is no difference between standard primers and magnum primers....then why the hell did these companies make magnum primers for,in the first place?

I mean they should have logged in here to get the "real" scoop....after all, we have all the info, professional knowledge and equipment to make these determinations ourselves........right?

I couldn't qualify a single soul on here who has run all these exhaustive "tests" themselves as an expert on the matter in a courtroom...

Courts like the truth, and not backyard experiments,and self-ordained experts,which are the same value as home entertainment.

And, even though I did not shoot any messengers, merely expressed a viewpoint, all I can say is, if you own 37 magnum rifles....and not a single magnum primer....well....

No comment.

Bullet weight ?

178gr Hornady A-Max in a 300 wby

Here's an article written by Allan Jones of CCI. I've posted this elsewhere. He states that in 1989 CCI re-formulated the mixture for the 250 primer to burn hotter for use with ball powders. Previously the 250 merely used more of the same mixture used in that company's 200 primer.

http://www.shootingtimes.com/2011/01/04/ammunition_st_mamotaip_200909/

Good thing we cleared up that "professionals" bullsh!t stuff.

Never loaded a standard primer in my 300WB, but may have to give it a go and see what happens.
Maybe the collective here at the fire knows sumthin after all?

I didn't think it was the Win mag but thought maybe you were using real light bullets.

That certainly validates my experiences. One of my nest 375 H&H loads uses 76gr of H-414 and I get best results when using F-215 primers. In turn when I load 74gr of RL-15 I get better results with F-210s than with 215s...

JUST TO BE SPECIFIC or for clarity:

I was saying ONLY that there was no diff between the WW 8 1/2 and the NEWER WW LRMP.

such as:



You'll notice that BOTH primers at that time were silver colored.

I've noticed that the newer WW primers are brass colored. ?? don't know if that makes any diff.

How do ya like that price tag? $1.99 / 100 and they were cheaper by the brick.


**********************************

BACK in the 80s I decided to use ONLY Win primers > again based on MY testing.

I have another quote to post following this and another ??

THNX - That was AFTER I did my testing and I haven't used any other primers since.

Has anyone tested the newer CCI 250s vs 200s?

Has anyone tested the newer WW standard vs. magnum primers?

Jorge - I'm being polite and not critical.

IMO that does not validate your experience BECAUSE that was CCI primers. You are using Federal primers.

IMO that's apples -- oranges.

Just my thots.

IT validates the employment of magnum v non-magnum primers...

Nope 178grA-Max, they are smoking coming out of a 28" barrel

Again - IMO - it's only VALID with YOUR primers. It does not stand up as a rule across the board.

Why I say that is, I've tested WW, Rem, & CCI primers both standard - magnum and THEY ARE NOT PARRALLEL.

upper case for emphasis ONLY.

300 win mag 81 grains of H-1000 Federal 215 primer behind 180 grain TSX

300 yard five shot groups







I have failed to see a problem with the mag primers