Back when I started reloading, I had only one good local spot for buying stuff, and that was Relo up in Fairfield. Relo had a good selection of stuff. I relied on them exclusively until they went out of business a few years later. The fellow that ran Relo's counter helped get me going on reloading. He and Relo set me going, and they influence me to this day.

One habit I got into was using CCI primers. Relo carried CCI primers. I bought CCI primers. All my recipes included CCI primers. When I would run out, I'd go buy CCI primers. It's been nearly 20 years, and all I've got on hand is CCI primers. I've been contemplating a new load for my 30-06. With a lot of prodding from folks like Ken Waters, etc. I decided to break the tradition. I was at Cabela's over the weekend. I picked up Remington 9 1/2.

I just thought I'd mention this here in hopes of starting a discussion of primers and their differences and their effect on your loads.

I started out reloading in 1973 and used CCI primers at that time, never liked how hard they seated in rifle brass. This caused me to switch to Winchester primers which I used until a couple of years ago when I started getting duds with Winchester large rifle primers. Winchester refunded my money for 3K primers I had on hand at the time. I went back to CCI primers which now seat without the amount of force I remember from back in the day. I have never tried switching brands of primers when developing a load and was always able to develop accurate loads without doing so. Not saying that this is without merit just that I've never done it and I use several Ken Waters loads and Pet Loads is a valuable reference when I'm developing loads.

There will never be consensus on which is best as we all have differing experiences apart from the Winchester fiasco a few years back.
Our other bias comes from distrust when a product lets us down or performs poorly.

You see examples on here all the time of people who used Nosler Ballistic Tips in the 80's and had such poor performance, they will never go back. Same with other items and components. Trust lost, is very hard to gain. They don't make salesmen that good.

I was hunting once with a bunch of rifles as usual back then, where I had 3 Remington primers fail to fire in rifles that never before nor since exhibited the problem. One was a .375 H&H Factory load and the 2 others were handloads with a .243 and a .257 Weatherby. Never used a Remington primer in the 42 years since and never will again. Firearm reliability is absolutely non negotiable.

And even with trucks!


Anyhow, in the experience this non-gun-writer [this forum notwithstanding], the old saw has held true: primer choice doesn't seem to matter much... except when it does. Occasionally, I've found that a rifle would show a marked difference in accuracy with one kind of primer vs. others, or decreased standard deviation in velocity. For that matter, the notions that ball powders, or loads with > 60 grains of powder, necessitate magnum primers, hasn't always held true in my endeavors.

When might one start experimenting with primers? I've found it best to pursue MD's advice to pursue the other end of the cartridge (the, "steering wheel") before working on primers. Case neck thickness/uniformity, concentricity, & seating depth seem to yield more results than primers. In the event that a consensus "good load" isn't working in a rifle, then I'll load a few groups of 4 rounds with different primers, & see what happens.

FC

I use CCI’s too

At one time CCI's were hard to seat. Heard various theories that they were slightly larger or that CCI used thicker material for their cups. Maybe JB knows and will let us know. Anyway that is ancient history although I still have a couple hundred small rifle BR's that have the problem but if a bench mounted primer seater is used, they work fine.

I must admit I switch between WLR, CCI and Rem primers without adjusting loads or even noticing any difference in group size. A few years ago my PMC 7x57 cases were getting a little too easy to seat WLR primers. I tried CCI 200s and they were nice and snug again so got a couple more loads out of the cases before junking them. I'm using the last of the WLR primers then will switch to CCI as I have 3000 of them. I've mostly always used WLR but am a bit hesitant after the issues of a few years ago. The ones I have were all bought before the bad batches.

I've used RWS, Herters, CCI, Winchester, Remington, Federal, (maybe more) and never had a problem with any of them. I have used them interchangeably and no problems.....

In bygone years I had a few duds with Federal but no duds with any of them for forty years. Today I use CCI only because I bought a lot of them after the last shortage.

Where's the Federal love? 215's are my go to for magnums. For "standard" rifle loads I'll use CCI-200's or Fed 210's. As others have observed, CCI-200's can be a bitch to seat with a hand priming tool.

Had the hard seating problem years ago also. I went to federal for years. No problems now with any of them.i will add that randomly switching primers in a 22-250 made my savage go to about 3 inch groups instead of three quarter inch groups. Ed k

No particular priority, some work better here and there. CCI/ FED/old WW.

Federal primers tend to boost velocity for a given charge IME , sometimes good, sometimes not.

I dont like the packaging the Federal uses.

Years ago, I did some load work and consistently got poor results with Remington 9 1/2s, both in terms of accuracy and speed. Dedicated experimenter that I am, I took this small sample in one rifle and decided that I didn't really care for the 9 1/2s and have not used them since.

The two most common primers in my area are CCI and Remington. I've exclusively used both for many years.

I've swapped CCI 200 and Remington 9 1/2 primers on many loads and have not seen any change. I would note however that I have seen a noticable change in some loads when swapping from a non magnum to a magnum primer and now days thats the only change I try with primers

Since CCI primers seat harder I often use a 9 1/2 Remington and switch to a CCI when the 9 1/2 primer starts seating easier than I like. Gets some extra mileage out of the brass

Primers probably make a difference for a thousand yard benchrest shooter but for the average hunter my opinion is its mostly about finding the right powder and loading straight ammo

I use cci 250 they are silver.

I use Remington 9.5s they are gold.

Now I know when I am at magnum versus standard primer.

I have used a variety of primers over the last 50 years, sometimes just buying what was available. My opinion is CCI's are as good as it gets, not that I've ever seen a great deal of difference. In some loads, my biggest decision wasn't what brand to use but whether or not I should use a standard or magnum primer.

My primer of choice has always been Remington. They were readily available and I got good accuracy. Use them and enjoy!

For the most part I avoid CCI primers. In my early years reloading I was getting 1-2 misfires per 1000 rounds with CCI. My only current load for CCI primers is for a gun I sold. It used the 350 to light 22.5 grains of Win 296 under a 300 grain LBT WLN GC bullet. I developed that load during one of the primer shortages when Fed 155s were not available. Most of my current .44 ammo uses the WLP, 24 grains of Win 296, and home cast 250 grain SWCs. For everything else today I use Federal 155s. I use the Fed 150 where a standard primer is called for like with 2400.

I haven't had real good luck with Remington primers .. with one exception. I picked up a carton each of large rifle and large rifle magnums. I'm getting misfires with them. My one exception is the Remington 7-1/2 which I am using in my .204. For a long time I used Federal 205s, std and match, and Winchester small rifle, but my current 700s bolt face has a sloppy firing pin hole and those primers will pierce even with light loads. The 7-1/2 cup is thick enough to span the gap .. zero problems and half MOA accuracy. I blew up 2-3 Jewell HVR triggers and a couple tuned Remington/Walker triggers figuring it out. Not planning any further experimentation.

For large rifle and magnum I shoot Federal, preferably match. Cost .. an extra $5/1000 primers does not matter to me. Range time is more precious than $$ saved anymore.

I also shoot Federal in my AR .. the 205 AR match works very very well.

Tom

Primers can make a big difference. With the newer more progressive powders like the Reloader line I usually start with magnum primers and it can reduce extreme spread and standard deviation with some combos. I also do this as I feel like I do not need to reduce charges much if any when going from a magnum to a standard primer. This is not a hard and fast rule that magnum primers will produce more pressure but if you are not red lining the loads too much it is fairly safe. I like Wolfe primers when I can get them they seem to be more consistent and maybe a hotter formula, not sure though.

The only time I use Remington primers is in the 17 Rem. they seem like the cup is harder and the 17 Rem. at max loads you want to stick to the formula exactly as any component change can red line an otherwise safe load in the little 17.

Other times I am fairly indiscriminate and will buy whatever is available locally to avoid hazmat charges fro just a brick or two. Some loads seem not to be affected others there can be major improvements on accuracy, but it is the last component that I juggle around when looking for smaller groups.

I use CCI for everything I load. Rifles, handguns and shotguns. I used Win. for many years and had 3 misfires, one on a very large 4x4 mulie. Switched to CCI and many thousands of rounds later I have not had a single issue.

Tom, I have never had a single misfire with a Remington or CCI primer both non magnum and magnum. I often see the statement I've had problems "In my early years" That statement " In my early years" lends more to the reloading technique of a beginner being the culprit than the actual primer.

A wise man once told me when you are experiencing difficulty if you blame something else as a starter it becomes very difficult to fix whatever it is you may be doing wrong. I'm not insinuating that you didn't have a primer problem I'm just saying if it was early on in your experience it may not have been an actual primer problem

When we got into competition we tried all kinds of things.

One thing we found was that on any given load a primer change could cut a group in half, double it or more or have zero effect.

And that certain cases/powders seem to have a best primer for the most part regardless of the gun.

Varget in a 223 sized case has almost always been best with BR4...

Bottom line I keep on hand every primer I can get my hands on just in case. Find the right primer if its an issue, and go buy at least 1000 if not 5000 for that particular combo.

I have never had a misfire with Federal 210 or 215s, Remington 9 1/2M, S&B, or Winchester (old stock). I also have never had a Remington or Federal handgun cartridge fail to fire. That’s why I use them in my carry piece. Happy Trails

PS: I’m sure that I have less experience handloading than many on here, so my sample size is considerably smaller. The only factory loads I have had issues with were Hornady, PMC, and Winchester cheap target loads. Never a fail to fire with SIG Sauer pistol loads.

I've had FTF's with just about every common primer tried over the years, which I would guess is due to shooting a lot. (Same deal with having 20 different brands of scope fail in some way on my rifles, including some known for being very tough. That's brands, not individual scopes.)

What I tend to believe about primers these days are two things:

They do vary from lot to lot, and more than most handloaders believe, just like powder--or even bullets.

Trying different primers with the same basic load makes more of a difference in smaller-capacity and, to a lesser extent, with larger-capacity cartridges. Rifle rounds that work well with the vast amount of medium-rate powders (say around IMR4895 burn-rate) usually do not improve vastly by trying different primers. But you never know!

At one time I had a variety of primers on hand then over time just exclusively used Feds. I've bought out a few reloading benches over the years and a brick of WLR's came with one. On a whim I tried the WLR's in a load, and I'll be darned, the groups got smaller. So I'm back to stocking a smorgasbord of primers in my cabinet.

One of the interesting things about this thread is how many posters decided long ago to use one brand/model of primer. There's nothing wrong with that, but have noticed that many 24hour posters who have never tried different primers suggest "whatever bullet your rifle likes best" or some handloading technique such as seating a bullet partway, then turning the round a little and seating some more, as one of the "the secrets" of accurate loads.

Have thoroughly tested turning the partway-seating bullets technique in a bunch of rounds, and have never been able to find any advantage, in either bullet run-out or smaller groups. Instead I experiment on how to seat 'em straight in the first place, which is what I've found, through lots of testing, works far better.

Yet many of the same handloaders who try such stuff somehow don't believe a different primer--or even a different batch of the "SAME" primer--can make any difference. They can make a difference, and do--partly because even the "same" primer often changes over the years, whether due to the priming compound, thickness/alloy of the cup, or just from lot-to-lot.

Will readily admit that am somewhat obsessive about this sort of stuff--but that's my job.

John: So to compress your last two posts into one summary and relate it to my current scenario, switching from CCI to Remington in a 30-06 150 grain hunting load will probably not show a whole lot of difference, right? Either way, the difference might be due to lot-to-lot differences rather than something inherent in the brand. Furthermore, 30-06 burning H4895 is not the sort of scenario which would accentuate a primer difference.

Let me throw out another scenario: As you know from prior threads, I'm using REM 223 as a cheap way to wiggle my toes in the waters of accuracy. I'll be working this year with my RAR Predator to see what I can produce. Based on what you've stated, this might be a situation where primer differences would be more likely to show up. Right?

I've just never thought much about primers before.

BTW: My copy of The Benchrest Shooting Primer showed up. Yikes! Turgid is a mild description. This is turning into quite a bunny hole.

I've been using CCI primers for many years, but not exclusively. I usually base primer selection by what's on sale. Just had my first failure to fire with CCI primers a couple of days ago. Shot 300 rounds of 9mm and had 2 primers that didn't fire. The firing pin dent was just as deep and centered as the rest.

I shoot as many handgun rounds in a week ( 250-300) as I shoot rifle rounds in a year. I can't remember the last bad primer in a rifle round.

210M’s, 215M’s. That all I use for the most part. I do have a custom Mexican Mauser in 257 Roberts that only likes WLR’s so that’s what she gets.

Are those sold as match any better in this regard?

And primers are not the only lot to lot thing. Bullets. Cases. Powder. Hmm did I miss anything? Even know a guy that was going along and all of a sudden ammo didn't shoot... took lots of components until he fell back to the indicator and found somehow his press had sprung... banana ammo isn't that great especially in competition

Anal is what led to buying a 200 pound container of powder years ago for us. Think it only had 170 pounds of powder in the copper container though. LOL

And then I SWEAR, since we lived without AC for some years, that I had a batch of super good primers for one load, that the primers went bad, changed etc... not sure if heat or humidity or age. Have never seen it since but switching to a different lot of primers was the only thing that brought that accuracy back...

I recall reading about some primer cups being "hard" and some "soft". Is this your experience, and what brands are "hard" and what brands are "soft"?

In my experience, CCI 200's are "harder" than Fed 210's. I've had more misfires with the CCI's vs Fed's.

I can only comment on SR primers.

In the AR15 you have a floating firing pin. It dings a primer as it chambers. Lightly, hopefully not enough to set the round off.

Slam fires have come from the new WWSR brass colored primers and from federal SR primers. I"ve never seen or heard of a slam fire from any of the other ones. So those 2 are soft for sure.

In over 100K rounds using the R7.5, the BR4, 450 and M41 We never had a single failure to fire or slam fire. There were even a couple of cases of the old WWSR silver primers shot in those 100K plus rounds over the years. I'd say these then are fairly tough primers.

A few years back I was shooting several hundred rounds a week. I use mainly CCI and Winchester primers. Swapping primers didn't seem to make much difference on paper, at least I could see no difference. Then I built a new rifle in 338 Jamison. Could not get that gun to shoot much less than an inch and I wanted much more. An older friend and long time reloader and I were BSing and I mentioned primers and that problem. He was hung up on Remington, which I had never used. He suggested a Remington 9½ and VOILA, under half inch. The only time I ever saw much difference in them, so I guess they can and do make a difference.

The last thing I do in developing loads is to swap primers at the end to see if there is any effect or improvement. I almost always stay with the one I started with.

It is possible but not certain. I had to unlearn a lot of pure garbage my father taught me. One of the things I "unlearned" was the use of WD-40 as case sizing lube. That overlaps with buying a case tumbler and switching to Federal primers. So yes, there could have been a learning curve component. However, lest we over-value that, it's important to note that while I was getting misfires with the CCI primers, I was not getting misfires with the Remington and Winchester primers I was also using. And yet again, lest THAT be over-valued, I was shooting a lot more CCI than the others combined, so maybe I just didn't shoot enough of those to encounter the problem. Another change, not related, but giving some view of the scope of the necessary unlearning, was I also started trimming my brass, something my father never did 'til I bought him file/trim dies for his '06 and .30-40 about 20 years ago. Funny thing .. when you trim brass and don't use a spray can of oil, the neck/shoulder dents and the long wrinkly necks go away.

It's a wonder I survived given my, er, mentors.

So, again for context, my latest problem with Remington primers was only a couple years ago, not a learning curve issue. I've had probably 30 years of success in between those old CCI failures and the recent Remington failure. I'm not throwing those primers out. Times, politics ... I think having even slightly questionable primers could be more valuable than having none at all some time down the road.

Tom

I use CCI and Remington. My Winchester Large Pistol primers fire 8 out of 10 times. It's good training for clearing a malfunction under stress so I kept them...lol.

Dan

Years ago, I worked as a Quality Assurance Manager. What happens is that once you start in on improving the quality (in this case consistency) of a given component, you end up identifying other components that require improvement. A manufacturer will enter into a positive feedback loop where the overall quality keeps going up over time. The payoff will be less scrap, and therefore lower costs. If it happens with one mfg, then it can set up a chain reaction with others. I suspect this is what has happened to ammo mfg overall since WWII.

The stuff we're shooting now (ammo as well as components) is overall better than what was available 80 years ago and a lot of it comes from trying to build lot-to-lot consistency into the process. I work next door to the QA manager at my current company. Trying to keep lots of mfg'd components within tolerance shift to shift, day to day is a constant bugaboo. A lot of our mfg is automated, so now it appears we have more inspectors than anything else.

Back during the Great Primer Drought I bought 1000 Win LP primers for the 41 mag. Same problem, except the ratio was closer 30% misfires in the Taurus Ti Tracker, 5% in the Ruger SBH, and 15% in the 657.

I now keep enough CCIs in small pistol, large pistol, rifle, and mag rifle to get me through the next shortage.

A few years back, a guy named Stan Watson put out a pretty cool book documenting his results playing with a 30-06 equipped with a Oehler PBL to measure pressures as he shot it over a chrono. Watson played with different primers, bullet brands, powders, seating depths etc and documented the effect of each on pressure and velocity. Very cool stuff, especially for the era (late 90's). I'll see if I can dig mine up and share his primer results. The results related to the specific brands are probably no longer valid, but it did illustrate how much changing your primers could effect your pressures and velocities.

I'm with Rost on primers. I'm not wedded to a particular brand. I'll use it as a variable to tune a load. As the range gets longer, the primer brand (and lot) becomes more important and finding the right primer can make the difference between a load that shoots acceptably and one that doesn't.

Something i learned from Bob Jensen was that when you run out of a particular lot of primers, you need to test any new lots as if you're working with a completely different primer. The context of this was for long range shooting as Bob was an commercial accuracy handloader and loaded the hundreds of thousands of rounds shot in the 1992 Palma Matches at Raton.

Chris,

There have also occasionally been MAJOR changes in long-time standard primers over the years, often without the manufacturer announcing any change. A good example is the CCI 450 magnum small-rifle primer. When it first appeared. the only difference was a heavier cup, to withstand pressures over 50,000 PSI or so. Sometime later the amount of the priming compound was increased, and in the 1990s the compound was changed to a hotter formula--and the CCI 250 large-rifle magnum's compound was also switched to the hotter mix at the same time.