Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Testing Pistol Ammo Loaded With Small Rifle Primers vs Small Pistol Primers

Today I decided to test some 9mm ammo that was loaded with SRP's in lieu of SPP's. My science skills are minimal, but I did try to eliminate as many variables as possible.

I started with a batch of once-fired, matching headstamp brass (CCI Blazer). Next I weighed my projectiles (Berry's 115gr Hollow Base Round Nose) until I collected 50 that weighed almost exactly 115 grains. For primers, I used Winchester Small Pistol and Winchester Small Rifle. They were purchased in the same trip to Cabela's a few years ago and have been stored in the same cupboard ever since. I loaded 50 rounds (25 with a SPP and 25 with a SRP) on my single stage press, weighing each powder charge.

Because I know the mistakes I'm capable of, I didn't just simply put the rounds in separate containers; I marked them with Sharpies.


Here are my rounds, ready for testing:


I met up with a couple buddies at the range, one of whom has a Labradar chronograph. It uses doppler radar to measure speeds so it isn't sensitive to light whatsoever--which means we could use it at our indoor range. Here's my buddy, testing some ammo:


My first test gun was my Gen5 G19. The second gun was a 5" 1911 9mm. As for the outcome, out of the G19, the rounds loaded with SPP's averaged 1048 fps at the muzzle, and the rounds loaded with SRP's averaged 1065 fps. Out of the 1911 with its extra inch of barrel, the SPP rounds averaged 1131 fps and the SRP rounds averaged 1151 fps. I checked my load data, and the speed with SPP's was about what I was expecting. The speeds from the rounds loaded with SRP's were still within the zone of what one could expect. All of the rounds that were loaded with SRP's fired on the first try and were every bit as accurate as the regular rounds. Here's a shot of some of the primers:


While I don't think my test conditions or small data sample are solid enough to draw any specific conclusions, I am at least satisfied that I won't blow myself up when swapping a SRP for a SPP when using low book load data. Since I shoot primarily pistols, it helps to know I've got an extra 10,000 primers for handgun use, should I need them.

Nicely done.

Good info. Nice to know; not as much difference as I’d have thought.

Excellent info, Wade. Thanks for sharing.

Interesting in these times

I haven't loaded for any handgun in decades. Just recently considered getting some of the handgun cartridge dies out, as choices are so limited when you can find ammo.

Would a Large Rifle Primer work in a large pistol (.44 or .45) load?

Awesome job, good to know.

Excellent info, thanks for taking the time to share.

I hadn't thought about it (mainly because I'm not anticipating needing to find out), but it appears that you might be able to make it work. I found this SAAMI spec chart during my initial research when I was considering swapping small rifle in for small pistol:



As you can see, SRP's and SPP's are dimensionally the same, but a LRP is .008" taller than a LPP. Would that be enough to make a difference? Maybe it'd bind a revolver's cylinder from rotating, but how much would it affect the cycling of an automatic? Additionally, I suppose you'd need to find out what the differences are in the priming compound of each. But, given the nature of the shooting community, you know it has to have been tried before. There's just too many shooters with the "mad scientist" gene for it not to have already been done.

Thank you for taking the time and sharing the info!

Might be mistaken,but I thought the major difference was the cup thickness in the primer.Handguns typically have lighter primer strike. Although I have used SR primers in a .357, but was primarily shooting them in ammo I used in a Rossi Model 92 carbine. They did go bang in my Ruger Security Six and S&W 686 however.

Right now with the AR crowd buying up every SR primer on the shelves I use the SP primers I have.

Based on an article by John Barsness - GUNS magazine pg 26 May 2009. [JB, formerly of Handloader is one of the most qualified gunwriters when it comes to primers and reloading in general]
Information from the Speer #14, Hornady #7, Nosler#6, and Lyman #49 reloading manuals, Alliant and Accurate Arms data.

CUP THICKNESS

Handgun primers have thinner cups than rifle primers, making them easier to ignite with the typically weaker firing pin fall of handguns. Small Pistol primer cups are .017" thick, while Large Pistol primer cups are .020" thick. This is the reason using handgun primers in .22 Hornet rifle loads sometimes results in pierced primers in some guns. Obviously their substitution in the high pressure .223 Remington would not be a good idea.

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

Thanks, Waders! I will try to do the same thing this week with some SRPs that I wouldn't mind allocating to pistol ammo. I'll be using mixed brass and 124 grain Precision Delta JRN that I don't intend to weigh for consistency. Report to follow.

Excellent empirical test, thanks for posting that. I would have figured the small rifle primers to be a good deal hotter than small pistol but your results show right around a 20 fps gain for both pistols which is less than 2% of the greater velocity (1.6% and 1.7% respectively) . One might see 20 fps difference in small pistol primers of two different brands or between standards and magnums


More data never hurts but your results across two firearms definitely show a trend. I doubt the same test repeated 10 more times or using different guns would vary significantly from what you're showing.

Now you've inspired me. I have just under 4,000 CCI 400's which I found out aren't supposed to be used in higher pressure rifle loads, and in fact one load in a .223 produced a pierced primer. Might have to do a little experimentation with a couple of .357's and .38's and get velocity readings with CCI-400 SRP vs. CCI-500 SPP. It'd be a good winter project.

Thank you kindly for the effort and information you have compiled!

Very relevant in today's political climate as I'm sure many folks have a stockpile of small rifle primers which will, in a pinch, substitute in small pistol loads.

I don't accept John claim that **all** Small Pistol cups are .017 and that ***all*** Large Pistol cups are .020 thick. This is likely true for some manufacturers, but there's a huge variance in the overall "toughness" of small pistol primers. Some of the European brands, especially S&B are very hard as they are designed for use in both pistols and SMG's. IME, failure's to fire or primers requiring double strikes are much more common with the hard European primers in regular handguns. In Contrast, Winchester primers, or at least the older Winchester's I'm still using on from my Y2K stash, are much softer and with all else being equal, primer ignition problems go away when they are employed.

Since I have a better stock of pistol primers right now, I'll be saving the S&B SP's in the event I need a substitute for SR's.

Sheeeit............now SRP's are gone gone gone

According to some internet reports, which I have no way to verify, but perhaps it would be a good question for John, in some instances, Magnum small pistol primers and normal small rifle primers have the exact same amount of priming compound.

Again, this are claims by unverified internet sources, and I'd feel more comfortable from someone whom I know had reputable industry connections, so take if for what it's worth.

Just about all primers are gone!

The only thing you might find are 50 BMG primers, the big musket caps, and occasionally shotgun primers.

So anyone experiment with stuffing a 50 BMG or Shotgun primer in a .223 case?

Interesting.

Curious to know what results of 124+P and 147gr cartridge loadings.

...probably wouldn't even need powder with the BMG primer!