CCI primers strike again...

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

halfmoonclip

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Messages
2,749
Years ago, quit using CCI primers because they were harder seat than other brands. This was before I started tuning up Smith triggers.
Recently, the primer shortage has led me to take what I could get. Tonight, had the 986 to the range, and had spotty ignition on double action, CCI primers. The double action pull is just wonderful, and it does have a ribbed mainspring. These, in theory only, don't reduce spring power. I've found they really help double action trigger pull, but the tradeoff is in less hammer energy in double action.
Anyway, long story short, I'll put a standard mainspring back in the 986.
This is more in the nature of an observation than a bitch, BTW.
Moon
 
Sure, old time loaders know you use Federal or Remington standard primers for tuned triggers. CCI and Winchester have their place but soft hammers isn’t it. I save the CCI’s for higher pressure loads and avoid using Rem 1-1/2 in anything higher than a 25yd target load. That’s why there’s so many different kinds of primers. ;)
 
I came to a similar conclusion. I use CCI in my 9mm and larger pistol calibers and they are fine, but they ftf a lot in my 380 and 32acp loads. No problems with Federal, so I only use Federal in those now.
 
Thanks, guys. I'll stick with CCIs being harder, and right now it's all I've been able to get.
But the accusation is somewhat misplaced, as it turns out. Couldn't abide watching the Steelers self-destruct, so headed to the shop to change out the mainspring. Have a set of composite grips that cover the entire gripframe; once they were off, the problem was clear... the strain screw was backed off!
The sideplate screws were a little loose as well, all very odd for me.
So I polished some things in there while I was at it, and put in a 13lb rebound spring, down from a 14.
It was just barely misfiring on double action, so the strain screw was the likely culprit.
Somewhat red faced,
Moon
 
halfmoonclip said:
Years ago, quit using CCI primers because they were harder seat than other brands. This was before I started tuning up Smith triggers.
Recently, the primer shortage has led me to take what I could get. Tonight, had the 986 to the range, and had spotty ignition on double action, CCI primers. The double action pull is just wonderful, and it does have a ribbed mainspring. These, in theory only, don't reduce spring power. I've found they really help double action trigger pull, but the tradeoff is in less hammer energy in double action.
Anyway, long story short, I'll put a standard mainspring back in the 986.
This is more in the nature of an observation than a bitch, BTW.
Moon
Click to expand...
I have Wolff Power Rib springs in a few revolvers along with reduced power (15#-16#) rebound slide springs and use nothing but CCI primers, or did until recently . I just ran out of CCI and had to start a brick of Federal. Last I have of my pre-covid primer stash. You are right about the CCI going in harder. I have not had any ignition problems due to ribbed springs. You do need a bit longer strain screw on some guns because of how it fits against the spring. Can't remember if it's round or square butt that need a tad longer strain screw, but kind of think it was the round
 
There is nothing "wrong" with CCI primers. They are made to function in all stock firearms.
Billions and billions of factory rounds have been made with them and function fine.

When folks start messing around with springs and mainspring screws then sure they may not go bang. Trigger jobs on SW revolvers are not spring replacements. Yes, I have messed with a lot of them. Usually only the rebound spring but leave the main spring (strain screw)alone. Then you will have to use only Federal primers!:what:
 
I have an old lot of CCI SP Magnum primers that gave me fits until I accepted that they were not going to be 100% in my pistols. Just glad I didn't load up several hundred of them. My understanding is that the newer production is not quite so hard.
 
Mike L, concur, have heard that as well. First noticed it 37 years ago, when first using a Dillon 550, and it took an extra lean on the op handle to seat the primers back then.
As regards Smith mainsprings, have a small stash of OEMs, and they vary significantly in thickness and resistance. Fooling with a 325, and found it would only go off reliably with the thickest of my assortment, never mind a ribbed one.
Yeah, know how to tune a Smith; an old hand showed me the ropes, and gave me his armorers books. They can certainly be smoothed, and the rebound slide spring lightened, but the mainspring is where a lot of the resistance appears in double action.
BTW, took down a 1917 the other day. Oddly, the springs don't interchange (main and rebound), and they are stouter than their modern counterparts. But the interior workmanship is outstanding.
Moon
ETA- that 1917 also has a spring and plunger in the yoke axle...launched itself across the room, just to aggravate me. Luckily, found it, or I'd have been talking to Numrich.
Moon
 
GeoDudeFlorida said:
Sure, old time loaders know you use Federal or Remington standard primers for tuned triggers. CCI and Winchester have their place but soft hammers isn’t it. I save the CCI’s for higher pressure loads and avoid using Rem 1-1/2 in anything higher than a 25yd target load. That’s why there’s so many different kinds of primers. ;)
Click to expand...
Learned Something new!

that’s why I was worried about Federal primers that Walkalong gifted me with 5.7 brass (THANKS!). I was use to CCI tight seating primers. Then when I reprimed with Fed primers with felt loose. Was not loose, just normal
 
Mark_Mark said:
Learned Something new!

that’s why I was worried about Federal primers that Walkalong gifted me with 5.7 brass (THANKS!). I was use to CCI tight seating primers. Then when I reprimed with Fed primers with felt loose. Was not loose, just normal
Click to expand...
Glad it helps. Bear in mind with all these mergers and acquisitions going on a lot of this old knowledge may no longer be accurate. You can test the hardness of a primer by CAREFULLY taking it apart (including the explosive charge) and using a firing pin sized punch with various weights of strikers dropped from a fixed distance. The depth of the dimple tells you the relative hardness of the brass.
 
GeoDudeFlorida said:
Glad it helps. Bear in mind with all these mergers and acquisitions going on a lot of this old knowledge may no longer be accurate. You can test the hardness of a primer by CAREFULLY taking it apart (including the explosive charge) and using a firing pin sized punch with various weights of strikers dropped from a fixed distance. The depth of the dimple tells you the relative hardness of the brass.
Click to expand...
Will do! I worked in many QC labs and I know how to setup a test! thanks!
 
halfmoonclip said:
Years ago, quit using CCI primers because they were harder seat than other brands. This was before I started tuning up Smith triggers.
Recently, the primer shortage has led me to take what I could get. Tonight, had the 986 to the range, and had spotty ignition on double action, CCI primers. The double action pull is just wonderful, and it does have a ribbed mainspring. These, in theory only, don't reduce spring power. I've found they really help double action trigger pull, but the tradeoff is in less hammer energy in double action.
Anyway, long story short, I'll put a standard mainspring back in the 986.
This is more in the nature of an observation than a bitch, BTW.
Moon
Click to expand...

Same story with a 67 Smith. Miculek spring misfired CCI.
 
Mark_Mark said:
Will do! I worked in many QC labs and I know how to setup a test! thanks!
Click to expand...
Post your results, please, along with method. Pix are always good for the visual oriented folks. Waaaaaaay back when I did testing on lots from each manufacturer and the results were pretty close. The difference between a Remington 1-1/2 and CCI 500 was pretty small but when you think about the difference in force at the tip of the firing pin even a 2-3BHN or half thousandths difference between two primers can be huge or irrelevant. In the case of my Rossi .32S&W Long the CCI primers are a solid no-go. For my Colts Pocket Positive it makes no difference. Voodoo.
 
All three of my .380's were bought new. Ruger LCP, Diamondback, and Taurus Spectrum. The LCP has the highest round count, probably bumping 2500. The Diamondback probably hitting 1500. The Taurus has less than 500. All three are bone stock, no mods All three have ftf with CCI and no problem with Federal.
I don't think I have a spring problem in all three guns. It could be I just got a harder batch of cups in my brick of CCI, but it is definitely not my imagination. I even put several of the miss fire rounds back in my bench primer just to be sure they were fully seated and they were. One thing I haven't done yet is punch them out and load them back in a 9mm or .40 case to see if they'll pop.
 
GeoDudeFlorida said:
Sure, old time loaders know you use Federal or Remington standard primers for tuned triggers. CCI and Winchester have their place but soft hammers isn’t it. I save the CCI’s for higher pressure loads and avoid using Rem 1-1/2 in anything higher than a 25yd target load. That’s why there’s so many different kinds of primers. ;)
Click to expand...

Where are you getting Rem 1&1/2?

My LGS says they aren't even made anymore.
 
hdwhit said:
Where are you getting Rem 1&1/2?

My LGS says they aren't even made anymore.
Click to expand...
The primers shelf in my storage room. I only have one or two bricks left, then I have to start using my Federal standard SPP’s for .32Long and .38S&W. :(
 
I use CCI 500 for 9x18 Mak and 9x19 mostly, seems to work well for me. The PM has a floating firing pin and the CCI 500 does well with that.
 
If you CCI pistol primers in a Hornet case and shoot them in a rifle, they go off every time from my experience.
 
I use CCI almost exclusively in rifles and never had a problem. Its only small cal pistols I've had issues. It may just be the bricks I got are an anomaly, but I'm not wasting any more to find out. They work fine in my larger pistols, so I'll just use Fed in my 380's and .32
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J-Bar
Crude comparison, small pistol primer hardness
Replies
5
Views
550
MarshallDodge
MarshallDodge
I
  • Locked
AR slamfire using CCI SR primer - pic included
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
Walkalong
Walkalong
M
  • Locked
Pistol Primer "Hardness"
Replies
22
Views
4K
mec
M
A
  • Locked
Primer hardness (I DON'T want Federal!)
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
1SOW
1
BRatigan
Servisios and Adventuras Primer Observations.
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
2K
GeoDudeFlorida
GeoDudeFlorida
Back
Top