9MM Primer Test

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would like to thank walkalong for his time and efforts in this trials, i am looking forward to the results and specifically the difference between SRP and SPP, i don't have a chrono to test differences and have been using the same primers since I started loading
 
I don't expect a large difference, people who used small pistol mag primers or small rifle primers in place of standard small pistol primers during the great run on components reported anywhere from "no difference" to "slight increase in velocities", IIRC.

Barring unforeseen circumstances I am headed to the range after work today.
 
Many years ago, i used the Fed 200 in an M16. I just found the load info in an old ammo can the other day, so i am 100% positive of what primer was used.

I am guessing the pistol primer is only good to about 40,000 PSI. Not for a rifle. IMO. Or the primers were defective?? M16A1Bolt.JPG Federal 200 Primer.JPG

I am interested in the test and i don't even own a 9mm.
 
Last edited:
I don't expect a large difference, people who used small pistol mag primers or small rifle primers in place of standard small pistol primers during the great run on components reported anywhere from "no difference" to "slight increase in velocities", IIRC.

Barring unforeseen circumstances I am headed to the range after work today.

Looking forward to seeing your results and comments. What will you consider to be a significant difference?
 
. What will you consider to be a significant difference?
A consistent 15 FPS difference would be interesting, a 25 FPS difference would be significant IMHO. A 50 FPS difference would be..... wow, didn't expect that.
 
A consistent 15 FPS difference would be interesting, a 25 FPS difference would be significant IMHO. A 50 FPS difference would be..... wow, didn't expect that.

Let's hope there are some 50 FPS differences in your testing results. At typical pistol distances I'll be curious to see if there will be a felt recoil and accuracy difference.
 
The old Fed 200 was meant for mild rifle like .22 Hornet etc. Today they label their small pistol mag primer 200. Same mix? Same cup thickness? I have no idea.
I have no idea why any company bothers. It's also like the Remington 6 1/2 primers, they are only meant for the 22 Hornet, why bother? I'm sure a standard rifle primers will be just fine for that application. It sounds strange to continue manufacturing a primer for such a limited use especially when there are other good options.
 
My plinker load that I am using for this test is often shot in a 5" Colt 1911. With WSP or CCI500 primers it always clears the brass from the gun. When I tried S&B SS primers it would occasionally catch a case. That is a real world difference to me. I have chronoed both the WSP and CCI 500 primers with this load before, more than once, but I haven't chronoed the load using the S&B primers. No matter what this small test shows, there is enough difference that occasionally a case would fail to eject without getting caught.
 
When loading brass for testing, I use a sharpie to mark the brass with either the load or other variables.

Can't wait to read your results. And thank for sharing your experiment.
 
My plinker load that I am using for this test is often shot in a 5" Colt 1911. With WSP or CCI500 primers it always clears the brass from the gun. When I tried S&B SS primers it would occasionally catch a case. That is a real world difference to me. I have chronoed both the WSP and CCI 500 primers with this load before, more than once, but I haven't chronoed the load using the S&B primers. No matter what this small test shows, there is enough difference that occasionally a case would fail to eject without getting caught.

When I did my test in 40s&w the trend I saw seemed to indicate that Czech (S&B) and Bosnia (Unis Ginex) primers produced lower velocities compared to CCI500 and WSP. With a normal light plinker load I assume the lower velocities could probably cause some failures to eject. It will be interesting to see what differences you find between the different primers. Following are my results from just 4 different primers:

40SW, P229, 3.9"
Case: Federal
Trim: .843"
COL: 1.125"
Xtreme, 165gr, RNFPHPCB, BE86, 5.8gr, CCI500
Average: 908
ES: 17
SD: 7.3
Velocities: 904, 915, 907, 916, 899
Test Date: 04/21/2017

40SW, P229, 3.9"
Case: Federal
Trim: .843"
COL: 1.125"
Xtreme, 165gr, RNFPHPCB, BE86, 5.8gr, WSP
Average: 907
ES: 36
SD: 13.5
Velocities: 922, 886, 913, 911, 903
Test Date: 04/21/2017

40SW, P229, 3.9"
Case: Federal
Trim: .843"
COL: 1.125"
Xtreme, 165gr, RNFPHPCB, BE86, 5.8gr, SBPRSP
Average: 886
ES: 28
SD: 11.6
Velocities: 894, 900, 888, 872, 877
Test Date: 04/21/2017

40SW, P229, 3.9"
Case: Federal
Trim: .843"
COL: 1.125"
Xtreme, 165gr, RNFPHPCB, BE86, 5.8gr, GINEXSP
Average: 880
ES: 30
SD: 12.1
Velocities: 864, 883, 894, 872, 888
Test Date: 04/21/2017
 
Made it to the range after work as planned. I woke up with a headache, had a long day (Getting ready for JCAHO. Should be here next month.) and was edgy when I got to the range, not a good day for accuracy testing, but I never really planned to worry about that and just get numbers. I was sloppy the first mag of ten (The three worst shots hanging out were from the first mag), then settled down some. I fired fairly quickly and just got it done. Mag after mag the hole got bigger. :)

In hindsight I should have thought to bring my 1911 in case the XDm did not set off some of the rifle primers because I knew there was a chance of that. The XDm failed to set off 2 of the S&B small rifle primers, and 6 of the CCI #41 small rifle primers. All others fired. I saved the ones that failed to fire and will try them in my 1911 later.

Not overly surprisingly a couple of the rifle primers gave the highest average FPS, but not by a lot (Less than 25 FPS), and the other rifle primers were pretty close to the pistol primer numbers. The lowest ES & SD was the 4 shot average of course, no surprise there, and ten rounds don't give definitive ES & SD numbers anyway.

So, kind of neat to see the numbers, and it kind of validates what folks said about not seeing big differences when using small pistol mag or small rifle primers in place of standard small pistol primers when they could not find them.

I am tumbling the brass and will sort out cases into a smaller weight spread and test a near full power load using Silhouette under the RMR 124 Gr MPR JHP. I hope to be able to get enough cases with a smaller weight spread to do ten rounds with four or five primers. Which ones should I do? I am thinking the S&B SR & CCI #41 are out.

9MM Primer Test - Target Pic 1.jpg 9MM Primer Test - Target Pic 2.jpg 9MM Primer Test - Target Pic 3.jpg 9MM Primer Test - Excel Sheet Pic 2.jpg 9MM Primer Test - Excel Sheet Pic 3.JPG
 
Why are you weighing them? What does their weight have to do with this test?
 
Nice right up, looks like the S+B SPs are a little milder.

I just can't help myself I have to ask if you shot the fly on purpose?:)
What is the preferred bullet for hunting flies at range?


I used to work at a Hospital JCAHO visits were always "fun"
Upper management always seemed to get their knickers in a knot when it was time for JCAHO.
 
Last edited:
index.php

Wow, wow, wow !!
 
In reality you could have said all those strings were fired with the same primers and most would not think otherwise. 23fps from the slowest to highest AV is not huge. (like you said) I was surprised to see the fastest standard pistol primers (Federal) were only 13fps slower than the fastest SRP. The Federal SPP were actually faster than the Federal SRP, again surprising.

Thank you very much for taking the time to run the test and then report the results. I appreciate it .
 
Thank you very much for taking the time to run the test and then report the results. I appreciate it .
As do I. I am new to a lot of this, but, if I am interpreting the data correctly, it seems that while the S&B produced the lowest velocities, they were second in consistency (for SPP) only to the Winchester. If that theory carries over, I wonder if the same, improved consistency of the rifle primers, would exhibit similar results with rifle loads. At any rate, I found this to be extremely informative, as a reinforcement that primer compounds are different between manufacturers, and may produce similar performance, but not exact replicas. Be safe when altering components. Thanks again for your time and effort with this!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top