Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Small vs. Large Rifle primers 6.5 Creedmoor

I see that Lapua has chosen to use small rifle primers for their 6.5 Creedmoor brass. I read what Lapua says, but what are the implications, good or bad, for using small primers in a hunting application?

I am curious too.....especially in cold temperature hunting applications.

I have had hang fires with standard SR primers in the 6.5-47 using ball powders.And VV 540
Running CCI-450 SR mag primers i've been down to 25 degrees with no issues.
IF your hunting.
Run the large primer version.
IF your running BR.
SR primers are the ticket.
IF your stuck on the small primer version for hunting.
Test it before you trust it.

dave

I would not foresee any problems. Most if all loads under 40grs. If Lapua designed it, it must be good. Powder choice could be a factor but not a certainty. Their brass is so good, I would try it.

Beings CCI 450's are about as hot as Federal 210s I think it would be a same same type of thing. The problem would arise if using a weaker Small rifle primer, mixed with a slower hard to ignite powder
, in cold weather......

I like the large rifle primers in my Savage

I'm using large rifle primers in the Hornady brass (obviously), and that works great. The debate is whether the quality of Lapua brass is worth any questions regarding hunting in the cold. As mentioned, that is my only concern. Also, any change in velocity vs. large rifle?

I have a pair of 6.5CM for hunting and I am using Hornady brass now and really don't have any complaints. I will keep using it going forward.

I also have a 6.5CM being built for f-class/playing around and I am going to start with the Lapua small primer brass. I expect to shoot H4350 and won't be shooting in the cold, so hopefully I will get even better case life than I do with the Hornady.

6.5 Creedmore is a fun round!!

Someone would have to show me data, not conclusions but data, before I bought into the notion that an SR primer was 'better' in the Creedmoor than an LR primer. A gimmick for sure, but better? Even merely 'no worse across any and all hunting and general-use conditions?' Show me the data.

I too am a big fan of data. I would the BR crowd would have some. But observations have their place too.

I have a feeling this is one of those things that may show an advantage to target or match shooters over the long haul and thousands of rounds; but would be statistically irrelevant in hunting rifles. This is like a lot of what is recommended today in hunting rifles that won't matter a hoot in terms of hunting success.

But in a hunting context, reliable ammo and rifles that go "bang" under all (cold) conditions are far more important than the minor gains in accuracy. I would not ne interested in the stuff for any hunting I'd do with the Creedmoor.

My rifle already shoots less than MOA with standard Hornady brass.

I have the cousin in the 6.5X47 Lapua case. I have seen no issues with cold weather and ignition.

Lapua brass is better than Hornady...enough to justify cost? That is up to you.

There should be more potential for more velocity as the SRP brass typically can be leaned on a bit more.

Bringing this back up. Any new insights?

I was looking at a box of Lapua Brass on the shelf debating whether I "needed" it.

This per Lane Pearce with Shooting Times:
Altogether, I tested 16 batches of test loads and discerned a definite "better" performance bias with most of the small rifle primers. With a couple of exceptions, there was very little difference in average velocities, but the small rifle primers almost always delivered reduced standard deviations and improved accuracy. I consulted Dave Emary, Hornady's chief ballistic and originator of the 6.5 Creedmoor, to share the good news. He promptly poured cold water on my results. He goes on to say basically that Emary says typical 6.5 Creedmoor powder charges are too large to reliably ignite with small rifle primers under all conditions. Then Pearce goes on to say he con suited with Hodgdon Powder on this and their rep agreed. For even more confirmation, he was told the potential rewards from using the small primer in 6.5 Creedmoor were out weighed by the risks, especially when trying double based powders to achieve higher velocities.
Wordy, yes, but it tells me all I need to know. I am plenty happy with Hornady 6.5 Creedmoor brass and (although I did try Lapua SP brass) I will b e sticking with it.

Thanks! Good info. Gives me plenty of reason to stick with what I have.

If you feel like the cci 450 is not hot enough, then the Tula small rifle magnum primer will end all doubts as it is hotter than the 450.

I have played with the small and large primers in the 6 XC. The 308 palma brass with the small primer is really tough compared to the norma large rifle. I shot the 107s at an accuracy node of 3270 fps in a long barrel

On his website David Tubb says: “A detailed study of large and small rifle primers showed that large rifle primers worked best when the propellant charge exceeds 35 grains as is the case with the 6XC.” I would consider Tubb the last word on the 6XC.

Since the 6.5 Creedmoor normally uses more than 35 grains of powder, I haven't bothered with the small-primer Lapua cases, partly because I've had such great results with Hornady brass.

I’ve had no issues with Hornady brass, the Lapua brass was just a consideration for a new Fieldcraft in 6.5 Creedmoor I’m waiting to arrive. If the stars align, I’ll have one load of 139 Scenars being pushed by RL16 or 26 for both hunting and long range plinking.

I agree with you. I have also had such good results with the Hornady brass that there's no need to play around with gimmicks. I've encountered so many people (on the rifle team, at some serious national matches, or even higher profile folks) who don't even know _how_ to analyze data, nevermind whether they actually _do_ try to analyze data, that I don't pay any attention when someone says they 'discerned' a lower SD.