6.8 SPC Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just curious when switching from CCI SRP to #41's, do I need to re-devlop my loads? I have a good one for my rifle that I have been using with SRP's. 110gr Sie PH, 28.0 AA2200, COAL 2.275. Should I start all over again at the low end?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,873 Posts
Just curious when switching from CCI SRP to #41's, do I need to re-devlop my loads? I have a good one for my rifle that I have been using with SRP's. 110gr Sie PH, 28.0 AA2200, COAL 2.275. Should I start all over again at the low end?
Yes. But only partially. Back off 5%, then do a short ladder to work back up. I run 28.5 gr. 2200 with 110 Hornady HPBT and the #34 primer in Rem cases. That's equivalent to the #41 in small primer cases. You shouldn't have any problems with that load, but do it the safe way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,500 Posts
Yes. But only partially. Back off 5%, then do a short ladder to work back up. I run 28.5 gr. 2200 with 110 Hornady HPBT and the #34 primer in Rem cases. That's equivalent to the #41 in small primer cases. You shouldn't have any problems with that load, but do it the safe way.
Solid advise here, anytime you change anything to a load it is wise to redevelop especially when loading around max. FYI mag primers typically produce a better burn especially with ball powders their for creating better consistently.

But 41's? Why choose the most expensive one out there. Have you considered 450's, wolf mags, or Tula 5.56m? Much cheaper for the same results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Solid advise here, anytime you change anything to a load it is wise to redevelop especially when loading around max. FYI mag primers typically produce a better burn especially with ball powders their for creating better consistently.

But 41's? Why choose the most expensive one out there. Have you considered 450's, wolf mags, or Tula 5.56m? Much cheaper for the same results.
I already had some 41's from just before the craziness started and they were getting extremely difficult to find. I also bought some Tula 556 primers while we still could as well. I have 5k of each plus what I have left of the CCI SR. Glad I got the Tula's when I did. They are extinct in the US market.

BTW, thanks for all the info. Gives a me a good excuse for some more range time. Not that I needed ANY excuse. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,500 Posts
I already had some 41's from just before the craziness started and they were getting extremely difficult to find. I also bought some Tula 556 primers while we still could as well. I have 5k of each plus what I have left of the CCI SR. Glad I got the Tula's when I did. They are extinct in the US market.

BTW, thanks for all the info. Gives a me a good excuse for some more range time. Not that I needed ANY excuse. ;)
Ahhh, that explains alot. Good luck bro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,873 Posts
Solid advise here, anytime you change anything to a load it is wise to redevelop especially when loading around max. FYI mag primers typically produce a better burn especially with ball powders their for creating better consistently.

But 41's? Why choose the most expensive one out there. Have you considered 450's, wolf mags, or Tula 5.56m? Much cheaper for the same results.
Because the #41 was designed as a civilian version of the mil-spec primers used in the M-16. Functionally, my AR is no different than an M-4, so the components I use are those appropriate to use in those rifles.

Yes, the #450 will work fine from an ignition standpoint. Everybody blows off the possibility of a slam fire happening, which is why the #41 uses the different anvil, but it does happen, so I want every advantage that can work in my favor in there pitching away. An extra half a cent per round is cheap insurance if you ask me. And no, I only use American primers. Tula has a 3-4% failure rate per 1000. I haven't had that high a failure rate with CCI primers in 40 years, and that covers hundred of thousands of primers.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,955 Posts
What you'll no doubt discover is an immediate accuracy increase with mag or 41 primers and 2200 powder. My groups, after load re-development, ended up about 30% smaller with the same 30.5gr powder charge and 90gr TNT's using mags (CCI450's) instead of 400's. I do have 6K of the 41's I bought at Christmas time when I came across some on-line for $21.95 per K and discounted HazMat. They ended up costing me $25 per K so why not. Otherwise I never buy them. I've loaded and shot tens or thousands of rounds for my M1's and AR's without ever seeing a slam fire using standard primers so rather than pay more I just buy more. Slam fires are about 99.9% caused by badly loaded ammo with high primers, rifle malfunctions, insufficient headspace, seized or locked up firing pins or defective manufactured ammo. So few are ever caused by the type of primer that you probably can't even calculate a percentage to affix to them. Marketing hype has been well done by CCI concerning their "mil spec" primers. Someone, at CCI, no doubt gets a decent bonus each year because of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
393 Posts
Is there a benefit to using lg mag primers too or does the lg std primer already provide the ignition desired for 6.8?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
What you'll no doubt discover is an immediate accuracy increase with mag or 41 primers and 2200 powder. My groups, after load re-development, ended up about 30% smaller with the same 30.5gr powder charge and 90gr TNT's using mags (CCI450's) instead of 400's. I do have 6K of the 41's I bought at Christmas time when I came across some on-line for $21.95 per K and discounted HazMat. They ended up costing me $25 per K so why not. Otherwise I never buy them. I've loaded and shot tens or thousands of rounds for my M1's and AR's without ever seeing a slam fire using standard primers so rather than pay more I just buy more. Slam fires are about 99.9% caused by badly loaded ammo with high primers, rifle malfunctions, insufficient headspace, seized or locked up firing pins or defective manufactured ammo. So few are ever caused by the type of primer that you probably can't even calculate a percentage to affix to them. Marketing hype has been well done by CCI concerning their "mil spec" primers. Someone, at CCI, no doubt gets a decent bonus each year because of it.
30% increase? I hope you're right. I went to the range yesterday after getting new glass. I zeroed the scope, fired some development rounds I had previously loaded and then shot a 5 shot group with my "standard" load. This is the tightest group I've ever had with this rifle. This is 28.0gr of AA2200 pushing a 110gr Sie. PH bullet. I kind of hurried my last two shots since the range timer was about to expire.

Circle Recreation Plate Platter
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,955 Posts
30% increase? I hope you're right. I went to the range yesterday after getting new glass. I zeroed the scope, fired some development rounds I had previously loaded and then shot a 5 shot group with my "standard" load. This is the tightest group I've ever had with this rifle. This is 28.0gr of AA2200 pushing a 110gr Sie. PH bullet. I kind of hurried my last two shots since the range timer was about to expire.

View attachment 14492
Bet it improves with the mags. 2200 seems to love them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,500 Posts
Because the #41 was designed as a civilian version of the mil-spec primers used in the M-16. Functionally, my AR is no different than an M-4, so the components I use are those appropriate to use in those rifles.

Yes, the #450 will work fine from an ignition standpoint. Everybody blows off the possibility of a slam fire happening, which is why the #41 uses the different anvil, but it does happen, so I want every advantage that can work in my favor in there pitching away. An extra half a cent per round is cheap insurance if you ask me. And no, I only use American primers. Tula has a 3-4% failure rate per 1000. I haven't had that high a failure rate with CCI primers in 40 years, and that covers hundred of thousands of primers.
Sound justification and I don't fault your decision, however I have never experienced a "slam fire" wuth 450's or Tula nor has anyone I know. They produce the same results and in some cases better results, meaning some of my loads liked them better. I have also never had a "mis fire" related to a bad Tula primer. In the good ole days of SSA they loaded with 450's. Even though Tula are no longer available to us "thank obummer" I will most likely take a look at wolf next, they run $12 cheaper than 41.

Keep in mind though I typically buy all my primers (pistol and rifle) in very large lots, and once I get to the last 1000 I will stock up. So $8-$12 per 1k makes a big difference when buying in bulk, it really stretches my dollar. I also buy all my go to primers and powder online.

That's my justification why I use non 41 mag primers, but to each their own. Everyone has a different take on the matter and not that you right and I am wrong just that we both have weighted the options and came to a decision on what fits our needs and wants.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
399 Posts
I started reloading for subs in 300BLK and used CCI450 for them and once I saw the light and came to the 6.8 side of things, I kept using them. I've loaded 15K CCI450 and zero non-magnum SRPs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,873 Posts
You'll see all kinds of anecdotal posts on primers and how this or that Primer X has worked for them without problems. But you can't rely on anecdotal information. You have to look at things in total. After many years of following trends, its pretty much established that Tula has about a 3-4% failure rate across the board; that Federal primers are considered 'soft' or ultra sensitive; that CCI probably has the best record of all brands; and that Winchester has had problems with their primers off and on for at least 10 years.

Some other things we know is that standard primers in ARs will show pressure signs and don't handle pressure as well as mag primers due to cup thickness, or lack of. We also know that gas operated rifles with free floating firing pins can slam fire. Load several live rounds with the charging handle from the magazine, but don't fire them, just eject them. If you examine the primers, you'll usually see evidence of a firing pin strike, and sometimes you can see the difference between standard and mag primers because the thinner standard cups will have a larger dimple. Under the right conditions, that firing pin hit can set off the primer and fire the round -- a slam fire. It doesn't happen often, but its often enough that the military felt the need to modify the anvil to reduce the risk. The #41, #34, and #35 are have the same anvil set up for that reason.

Other than that, #41 and #450 are identical, as are the #34 and #250. Same cup, same priming mixture, same cup thickness, etc. The #35 is for the .50 BMG, but I don't what the non-milspec version of that one is.

Bottom line is, those of us who recommend them do so for valid reasons. For me, it is safety first, reliability a close second, and cost third. While its anecdotal, I've used CCI for many decades, and can count on one hand the number of bad primers I've had. I can't say that about any other brand. Other benefits of using mag primers are better ignition overall, especially with ball powders, and better accuracy in many cases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,873 Posts
Should I really switch to CCI 450 or CCI 41 primers? I've been using CCI 400 primers with no problems. Thoughts?
Yes, without any reservations. Using standard primers limits you from achieving full potential because they cannot handle full pressure. The #41/450 primers have a thicker primer cup, making them stronger in terms of how they handle pressure.

So, if you are running SPC II full pressure loads, then use the appropriate primer. In addition, the #41/450 give better, more consistent ignition using heavily coated ball powders.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
Should I really switch to CCI 450 or CCI 41 primers? I've been using CCI 400 primers with no problems. Thoughts?
You could also try Wolf magnum primers, they have the thicker cup without magnum primer brilliance.
You may find they work better with stick powders.

If the powder is getting a bit to "excited" in your load a non magnum powder may settle it down a bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,873 Posts
You could also try Wolf magnum primers, they have the thicker cup without magnum primer brilliance.
You may find they work better with stick powders.

If the powder is getting a bit to "excited" in your load a non magnum powder may settle it down a bit.
There have been too many reports to suit me about problems with the Wolf primers. Things like failures to fire, too tight a fit, etc. Then there's the whole 'made in Russia' thing. The government has banned imports of a lot of stuff from Russia, so availability is a potential issue going forward.

I'll stick with American made, known performance, and 40+ years of near perfect experience with CCI. In any case, if you work the load up from the start with the mag primer, you can find the accuracy nodes and all that just the same as the 'softer' primer, with better pressure handling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
There have been too many reports to suit me about problems with the Wolf primers. Things like failures to fire, too tight a fit, etc. Then there's the whole 'made in Russia' thing. The government has banned imports of a lot of stuff from Russia, so availability is a potential issue going forward.

I'll stick with American made, known performance, and 40+ years of near perfect experience with CCI. In any case, if you work the load up from the start with the mag primer, you can find the accuracy nodes and all that just the same as the 'softer' primer, with better pressure handling.
That mean you dont use S&B brass too, its not American made?

I primarily use CCI 450, BR-4, CCI 250 and Fed GM205MAR primers.
The Wolf was presented to me by H as an alternate in certain loads that may be had to tune with a true mag primer.

I have heard a many instances of pierced S&B primers lately.
Not in loaded ammo much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,873 Posts
That mean you dont use S&B brass too, its not American made?

I primarily use CCI 450, BR-4, CCI 250 and Fed GM205MAR primers.
The Wolf was presented to me by H as an alternate in certain loads that may be had to tune with a true mag primer.

I have heard a many instances of pierced S&B primers lately.
Not in loaded ammo much.
The only foreign brass I use is 6.5x47 Lapua reformed to 7mm Valkyrie. I also have a batch of new Norma .308 brass to be used for another wildcat, the .358 Yeti. I've not been impressed with S&B ammo, or their primers. All of my 6.8 brass is Remington large primer. Tough as nails for the most part, and most of the time it was a lot easier to find and cheaper to buy than anything else. My standard load in that brass ran about 58K pressure according to H, and the Rem brass held up well past 5 reloads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
The only foreign brass I use is 6.5x47 Lapua reformed to 7mm Valkyrie. I also have a batch of new Norma .308 brass to be used for another wildcat, the .358 Yeti. I've not been impressed with S&B ammo, or their primers. All of my 6.8 brass is Remington large primer. Tough as nails for the most part, and most of the time it was a lot easier to find and cheaper to buy than anything else. My standard load in that brass ran about 58K pressure according to H, and the Rem brass held up well past 5 reloads.
I use all the 6.8 brass, Rem, Hornady, Fed, S&B, SSA. I have small quantities of most every kind ever produced.
I do have one load I use Rem exclusively on.
S&B is my favorite hands down.
Wouldnt it be grand if Lapua made 6.8 brass.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top