Quantcast
Tula Primers...What's your experience? - Page 5 - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Ammunition, Gear, and Firearm Help > Handloading and Reloading

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 21, 2011, 01:44 PM   #101
bds
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: January 10, 2010
Posts: 9,427
GLOOB, that's why I swapped out the striker from G22 and used it in G17 in post #94 and it still resulted in failed primer ignition. I can deprime the failed Tula SP primers and restrike them in G22 tonight.

I am planning to do more testing in G22.
bds is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 01:47 PM   #102
GLOOB
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 16, 2007
Posts: 5,026
Not striker. Extractor. If the extractor is looser in your G17 (and it is in my G19) that could result in a softer and shallower strike if the brass is shorter than the chamber. (And it almost always is).

So check to see how tight the extractor holds the brass in each respective gun. And see if swapping the extractor might help.
You might also attempt to measure the rim thickness of your PMC brass compared to the other brass. Also the length of the brass, too. If the brass is headspacing off the chamber, not the extractor, then perhaps your PMC brass is shorter.

Another thing you could try to eyeball is how far the striker protrudes from the breechface in each respective gun. Perhaps there's a noticeable difference, there, as well.

Last edited by GLOOB; December 21, 2011 at 01:54 PM.
GLOOB is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 01:57 PM   #103
Master Blaster
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 26, 2002
Location: Delaware home of tax free shopping
Posts: 4,675
Primers have to work reliably in any gun they are used in to be Good primers from my perspective. Tulas and Wolfs have issues that other brands don't have, mainly they have far more Duds. So unless you are using them for cheap plinking ammo avoid them.

JMHO YMMV
__________________
יזכר לא עד פעם
Master Blaster is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 02:01 PM   #104
GLOOB
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 16, 2007
Posts: 5,026
By using this logic, then CCI/WIN/REM primers are far less reliable than Federals, because some revolvers only shoot Federals. The CCI's in the same revolver have a lot of "duds."

See. You can't call these things "duds" if they work 100% in another gun. That's like saying .223 mil spec primers are unreliable, because you have a lot of "duds" when you shoot them out of your hunting rifle.

Some guns will only fire more sensitive primers. That doesn't necessarily make other primers any less reliable in other applications.

Quote:
At the present, my tentative suspicion for Tula SP primer misfire maybe due to harder/inconsistent hardness cup as the heat test indicated the priming compound was still active after 4 strikes to the cup
Another example of faulty logic. If it was primer inconsistency, then it would be happening in all the brass in all the guns. It's not. It's very specific to one brass and one gun. So all you have determined is that Tula primers take a harder strike to ignite (no surprise. These aren't Federals), and for some reason your Glock 17 isn't striking your primers as good as your other guns. The fact that it primarily occurs with one particular headstamp actually demonstrates a high degree of CONSISTENCY of these primers.

So IF BDS's G22 lights 'em all 100%, and the G17 is only batting 90%, it's not because all the duds happened to occur in the G17. It means there aren't any duds. The G17 just isn't hitting them hard enough to be reliable.

Last edited by GLOOB; December 21, 2011 at 02:24 PM.
GLOOB is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 02:15 PM   #105
bds
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: January 10, 2010
Posts: 9,427
it wasn't just PMC case, Blazer case also failed to ignite. All the test cases were full-length resized on single stage press.

I haven't thought about the extractors but will include them in the test as well.
bds is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 02:26 PM   #106
kingmt
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 17, 2009
Posts: 3,063
I have had alot of CCI fail but never a Tula. I won't blame CCI because I may have been the problem because of something I missed.
__________________
What I do isn't instruction for others. It is only the way I do things. You need to make your own decisions.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
For every action there is a reaction.
kingmt is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 02:30 PM   #107
GLOOB
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 16, 2007
Posts: 5,026
Quote:
it wasn't just PMC case, Blazer case also failed to ignite. All the test cases were full-length resized on single stage press.
Yes, you are quite correct. But if the trend continues, it will occur more often in certain headstamps. And as I have discussed, there's a reason why headstamp could have an effect on the strength/depth of the primer strike, particularly in a Gen3 Glock 9mm which has a trifecta of generous chamber cut, loose extractor, and short firing pin protrusion.

In fact, the more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to believe those two deep-seated duds I had weren't crushed duds, at all. My G19 striker probably just couldn't reach them to give 'em a good 'nuff strike.

Last edited by GLOOB; December 22, 2011 at 10:43 PM.
GLOOB is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 04:44 PM   #108
bds
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: January 10, 2010
Posts: 9,427
You could be right. There were some variations in primer pocket depths from .115" to .120". I could do a larger sampling of cases and retest using more consistent primer depth cases, like .118" deep.
bds is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 05:33 PM   #109
GLOOB
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 16, 2007
Posts: 5,026
I'd be much more interested to hear what happens after you swap your Glocks' extractors. A primer that works only in certain headstamps is pretty useless (at least for an autopistol caliber). I have a hunch you might be able to get these primers 100% reliable in your G17, even in PMC and Blazer brass.
GLOOB is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 06:22 PM   #110
floydster
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 13, 2008
Location: Central, Mn.
Posts: 1,610
All this primer talk is making me dizzy, I have been at the loading bench for over 50 years and in the last 4 years i have used 30,000 Wolf/Tula primers with nary a problem, and use these primers in all of my 26 guns at the present time.
If you gun is working as it should and you seat the primers like a man, you won't have any problems
__________________
Smokeyloads
floydster is offline  
Old December 21, 2011, 06:57 PM   #111
greyling22
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 6, 2007
Location: East Texas
Posts: 3,514
I found a tula small pistol primer with no anvil tonight. 1st instance out of several thousand.
greyling22 is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 03:47 PM   #112
4895
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 6, 2011
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 704
Lot 19-10
4895 is offline  
Old December 31, 2011, 09:23 PM   #113
bds
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: January 10, 2010
Posts: 9,427
OK, continuing from posts #94 and #98 for Tula SP primer testing in 45ACP cases with small primer pockets:

As many suggested for this phase of primer testing, instead of the "sterile" testing process I have used thus far by cleaning the primer pockets and seating the primers .004" below flush or just flush; I decided to use a more "typical" reloading process by not cleaning the primer pockets and seating them until they hit bottom.

Different head stamp small primer pocket 45ACP cases (Federal, Blazer and Fiocchi) were tumbled in fine grit walnut media/NuFinish until they were clean (about 20 minutes) and deprimed/resized on C-H 205 single stage press and hand primed using Lee XR priming tool but this time I seated them until I "felt" them bottoming out and gave a little bit more push on the handle to ensure the anvils were set. The test rounds were loaded with MBC 12 BHN 200 gr SWC (Bullseye #1) and 5.0 gr of W231/HP-38 loaded to 1.245" OAL (due to very short start of rifling in Sig 1911) and .472"-.473" taper crimp. The reloading process was finished on the Pro 1000 using Pro Auto Disk powder measure and combination bullet seat/taper crimp die.

To further expand the testing, I decided to take M&P45 and PT145, both striker fired pistols along with the Sig 1911.



Range Report:
Several hundred rounds were tested. All of the Tula SP primers ignited without any failure, even in M&P45 and PT145 while producing accurate shot groups. These are primer indents of M&P45 and PT145.



These are primer indents of Sig 1911.



Well, I guess not cleaning the primer pockets maybe the key? ... just kidding.

I will repeat the testing in 9mm and 40S&W cases without cleaning the primer pockets and seating them by "feel" for the next round of testing.


Happy New Year!!!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 45primer2.jpg (95.7 KB, 714 views)
File Type: jpg 45primer3.jpg (124.4 KB, 552 views)

Last edited by bds; December 31, 2011 at 09:42 PM.
bds is offline  
Old January 4, 2012, 10:28 PM   #114
GLOOB
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 16, 2007
Posts: 5,026
What a turn of events. Went shooting, today. Now, I'm the one having duds.

I shot 150 rds, 100 of which were recently manufactured reloads, through my FNX40. I had 1 light strike. The primer looked fine. It was seated deep. Probably 0.004" or more by eyeball, but not crushed in the slightest. CBC case. Never had a misfire in this gun or with this brass before. Rechambered it and got another click. Had true DA, so I pulled the trigger a half dozen more times for the heck of it. The primer indent is now rediculously deep, and no bang.

I also brought the G19. Shot 300+ reloads through it, and I had 1 dud. Primer looked fine, again. Rechambered it and fired it a second time with no luck. Primer indent looked rather pathetic. I think it's time to clean my Glock, just in case.

That's 7 total failures I've had with Wolf and Tulammo primers. I think 2 were seated too deep for my Glock, in all honesty. But that still leaves 5 potential duds. 2 in my GP100, 1 in my FNX40, 1 in my G19 and 1 Wolf .223 in my MSAR.

Incidentally:
I also had my first magazine malfunction with the G19 using a KCI mag. I noticed off the bat that the top rd appeared like it was sitting too high. Removed it and put it back in, and it still looked too high. I had a mag induced failure to feed on the third round of that magazine. I also found 2 of my intact reloads on the ground where I shoot when I was policing my brass at the end of the day. I load the mags in another area, 12 feet away. So I am guessing a couple rounds jumped out of the mag, somehow. Maybe during a mag change while slidelocked?

Also incidentally:
I had a couple pieces of 9x18 brass sneak into my 9x19 bin. They got sized for parabellum before I noticed, so I decided to load 'em as 9x19 and bring 'em along so I could fire-size them closer to 9x18 dimensions. I mixed them in with my first G19 mag to see if they would cause any malfunction, and they fed and fired just fine.

*Edit:
Measured the depth of the primers after I got home. Both primers were around 0.009" deep. The 9mm was in an R-P case. These were both seated a bit deeper than average, but nothing too bad IMO.

Last edited by GLOOB; January 4, 2012 at 11:04 PM.
GLOOB is offline  
Old February 22, 2012, 06:27 AM   #115
bds
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: January 10, 2010
Posts: 9,427
Update from post #113.

It's been almost 2 months of further testing with Tula SP primers (2000+ rounds) and I have continued the "dirty" testing of not cleaning the primer pockets and seating them flush, .004" below flush, crush depth/.008" below flush in 9mm, 40S&W and 45ACP SP cases.

I also expanded the pistols used to include G17, G22, G27, G36, M&P40, M&P45, PT145, Sig 1911, RIA 1911. Two coworkers just bought G27 and G36 and I also included them in the test.

My G17, G22 and G27 slides were also completely stripped down to individual components (even the striker assemblies were disassembled) and thoroughly cleaned with care given to the bottoms of striker tube channels to ensure there was absolutely no packed fouling deposit at the bottom. QC was done by scraping the bottom of striker tube channels until metal surface was seen. Care was also given to ensure the extractors were free of accumulated fouling gunk.

In addition, I talked to several other reloaders and comparison reference loads were also tested using various lots of Winchester/CCI SP primers along with Magtech/PMC SP primers I have (1000+ rounds).


Range report:

- None of Winchester/CCI/Magtech/PMC SP primers failed to ignite
- None of 45 caliber pistols failed to ignite Tula SP primers
- 23 9mm/40S&W Tula SP primers failed to ignite in Glock 17/22/27 (including the new G27)
- 9 of failed to ignite Tula SP primers fired on second primer strike


At this point, I feel that I have given this particular lot of silver colored Tula SP primers more than sufficient opportunities to ignite in various pistols, cases and seating depths. I have considered replacing the strikers in my Glocks but since they ignited all the other brand/lot of primers, I am not so sure that it's striker-related. I still think that the failure to ignite issue is based more on harder primer cup than anything else - it's odd because the same Glocks have no problem igniting Tula .223/military primers that are supposed to have harder cups ...

Next, I am planning to continue my primer testing using Tula .223 primers in the same Glocks that I experienced failure to ignite with Tula SP primers.

Last edited by bds; February 22, 2012 at 07:20 AM. Reason: spelling
bds is offline  
Old February 22, 2012, 08:27 AM   #116
Master Blaster
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 26, 2002
Location: Delaware home of tax free shopping
Posts: 4,675
Quote:
By using this logic, then CCI/WIN/REM primers are far less reliable than Federals, because some revolvers only shoot Federals. The CCI's in the same revolver have a lot of "duds."

See. You can't call these things "duds" if they work 100% in another gun. That's like saying .223 mil spec primers are unreliable, because you have a lot of "duds" when you shoot them out of your hunting rifle.

Some guns will only fire more sensitive primers. That doesn't necessarily make other primers any less reliable in other applications.
When I hit the primer 4 or 5 times, and the firing pin strike looks like its 3/4 of the way through the primer and its still does not fire that's what I call a dud.
Out of 5000 or so Wolf/ Tula primers I have loaded and fired I have had about 25 complete duds. Thats an astronomical number to me, and makes them unreliable for serious purposes. They are also harder to seat and so if not completely seated, two hits to fire, that's also unacceptable when it happens even 1 time per hundred as other primers I use DO NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM.
__________________
יזכר לא עד פעם
Master Blaster is offline  
Old February 22, 2012, 10:47 PM   #117
lono
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 23, 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 179
I have shot 2000 small pistol primers in 92FS 9mm without one failure. I have also shot 1000 large pistol primers in 1911 45acp without one failure. I plan to buy Tulla primers as long as I can get them for 40% less than other brands.
__________________
For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.
Thomas Jefferson
lono is offline  
Old February 23, 2012, 08:52 AM   #118
frankge
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 3, 2010
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 339
I have loaded over 20k of these primers now... also been using Tula .223 primers too. I experienced light strikes in my G34 which I shoot USPSA with. 13lb recoil spring, 4lb striker, stock striker. 1 in 50 failures. I changed the stock striker to the ZEV4 skeletonized (lighter) with an elongated tip. Now if it's a misfire I can always track it down to a bad reload job on my part.

I'd use US primers in a second if they became more reasonable. MAybe they will be on sale when I need primers the next time through.
frankge is offline  
Old February 23, 2012, 09:23 AM   #119
mgmorden
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 22, 2009
Location: Charleston, South Carolina
Posts: 3,811
I've never used Tula's primers for reloading, but I have shot their live ammo and experienced duds from those. That has me scared to try to live primers.

Oddly enough, I've never had a dud from any reloaded round. I've typically used CCI or Winchester primers - occasionally Federal (never tried Remington). I DID find a CCI missing an anvil once but it was caught before I seated it. I'm currently working through a large case of Fioochi primers. Can't say that I've had any duds yet, but the priming compound isn't always the same color in them (ie sometimes its red, sometimes white), which doesn't instill confidence, but we'll see .
__________________
"What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving." - Adrian Rogers
mgmorden is online now  
Old February 23, 2012, 09:54 AM   #120
bds
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: January 10, 2010
Posts: 9,427
I have shot 30,000+ reloads with Wolf LP and Tula LP/SP primers and have experienced no failure with bronze/brass colored Wolf/Tula LP primers. I have also shot several thousand reloads with Tula LR/SR/.223 primers and no failure to ignite.

The failure to ignite has been with silver colored Tula SP primers only.

BTW, 15,000+ reloads with Magtech/PMC SP primers with no failure. Of course, 300,000+ Winchester and CCI pistol/rifle primers are continuing to fire without failure.


frankge, good info. Thanks!
bds is offline  
Old February 23, 2012, 08:22 PM   #121
GLOOB
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 16, 2007
Posts: 5,026
I am also giving up on Tulammo SPP. I went through the first 3k without any issues. But the last 1k was really disappointing. I had at least 5 unexplained duds.

Quote:
Next, I am planning to continue my primer testing using Tula .223 primers in the same Glocks that I experienced failure to ignite with Tula SP primers.
I've tried a couple mags worth of Wolf .223 primers. It was a Glock day, so they went in my G27. Over a third failed to ignite. I saved the rest of the 50 rds to try in my FNX, next trip.

PV still has some Wolf SR primers in stock, and I'm tempted to buy a whole bunch. But I think I'll just go with CCI 400's and 500's. They're reasonably priced, right now, and I've never had a failure with either of those, yet.
GLOOB is offline  
Old April 2, 2012, 08:36 AM   #122
bds
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: January 10, 2010
Posts: 9,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by bds
- 23 9mm/40S&W Tula SP primers failed to ignite in Glock 17/22/27 (including the new G27)
- 9 failed to ignite Tula SP primers fired on second primer strike

At this point, I feel that I have given this particular lot of silver colored Tula SP primers more than sufficient opportunities to ignite in various pistols, cases and seating depths. I have considered replacing the strikers in my Glocks but since they ignited all the other brand/lot of primers, I am not so sure that it's striker-related. I still think that the failure to ignite issue is based more on harder primer cup than anything else - it's odd because the same Glocks have no problem igniting Tula .223/military primers that are supposed to have harder cups ...

Next, I am planning to continue my primer testing using Tula .223 primers in the same Glocks that I experienced failure to ignite with Tula SP primers.
Update to post #115

"Firmly" seating Tula SP primers seemed to have decreased the incidents of failure to ignite. However, light strikes are continuing in various Glocks (mine and other shooters'). Below is a picture of Tula SP light primer strike in a "brand new" Glock 22. As to Tula .223 primers being used in my G22 with 9mm conversion barrel for 9mm Major load workup, no failure to ignite (and I thought .223 primer cups were harder than SP/SR ).

Attached Images
File Type: jpg TulaSPbrandnewG22.jpg (33.3 KB, 193 views)
bds is offline  
Old April 2, 2012, 02:31 PM   #123
GLOOB
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 16, 2007
Posts: 5,026
Quote:
As to Tula .223 primers being used in my G22 with 9mm conversion barrel for 9mm Major load workup, no failure to ignite.
That right there makes me think there's some significant difference between Tula and Wolf primers, despite they're made in the same plant.
GLOOB is offline  
Old August 7, 2014, 11:22 PM   #124
RussellC
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 26, 2013
Posts: 901
Discussing this issue recently with Bds, he suggested I give some updated info. A few weeks ago Midsouth offered a 5000 primer promotion where no hazmat fee was charged. Among others, I bought 3000 Tula SPP as part of my 5000. Bds brought up this thread, and the past difficulties with these SPP.

All of the primers I received were lot #3-14. The primers are all brass colored.
I used a Glock 17 9mm pistol to test these...this was one of the pistols that was giving trouble back in the beginning of this thread.

I have only gone through a couple hundred so far, but I have not had a single dud yet. I mentioned this to one of my gunshop guys, and he told me he uses Tula SPP by the thousands and hasnt had failures either. I will continue to monitor these primers and report if any result in a dud.

Hopefully, this problem has been put behind them. My gunshop guy did mention he had some trouble with Tula Large Rifle Primers in some rather old ammo, but no trouble with the SPP. I dont know how old "old" was in that case, but that's what he said. I will continue to report as I burn through these primers.

Russellc
__________________
"Every gun makes its own tune."
RussellC is offline  
Old August 8, 2014, 12:01 AM   #125
Hondo 60
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: September 6, 2009
Location: Manitowoc, WI
Posts: 4,316
Over the last 3 years, I've used probably 8-10,000 tula small pistol primers.

They're a bit oversized, so they seat very tight.
If your case is even a tiny bit off, the primer will crush.

And I've had about a 1% failure rate, where the primer just will not fire.

I've also used probably 20,000 CCI 500s (also small pistol primers).
I had 1 fail - just this week.

If your ammo absolutely HAS TO FIRE, tula primers are not the best answer.
If it's for plinking, and you enjoy saving as much as $10/1,000 tula does it.

Tula primers also help extend the life of your brass - loose primer pockets are filled nicely with slightly over-sized primers.
__________________
Courage is being scared to death, but saddling up anyway - John Wayne
<><
When you're holdin a hammer, everything looks like a nail - Bryan Glover


If you enjoy THR, why not contribute?
http://www.thehighroad.org/payments.php
Hondo 60 is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.