I went through the Tula learning curve pre-internet.Changed it...
I went through the Wolf primers back then. Really had to lean in to them to make sure they were bottomed out.
I have had no issues with them igniting W296/H110 and today I tried them with Ramshot Enforcer same results no unburned powder, complete burn and accurate. They can handle these powders with ease which I like as I donāt have to buy magnum primers then for one caliber. I think you will get the same results. I just may have to try a few in 454 Casull as it uses SRP just to see how they react.
Iāve already burned through 200/1000. If I designated the remaining 800 as single action and single shot magnum only it would take me (probably) a year and a few months to burn through them all. That way I donāt need to worry about weak springs or seating problems. I currently use small rifle for those things and I have plenty but why not save the good stuff if I can?
The issue with Wolf primer not igniting 100% turned out to be harder primer cups and Wolf ended up offering refunds to customers of affected lot # of primers.
Yes, it was me who previously posted that different brand primers have different anvil height and tip shape and are shipped with differing amount of "pre-load" of anvil feet sticking below the primer cup. But anvil tip is not in full contact with priming compound for safety reasons during often harsh shipping/handling process to prevent primer ignition. So to ensure reliable primer ignition, when we seat primers, seating depth must be deep enough (Around .004" below flush) to push anvil tip against the priming compound that requires 2-step primer seating - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-and-discussions.778197/page-10#post-11386382
One of several threads on THR members getting refund for Wolf primers - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ack-of-concern-from-wolf.526906/#post-6540749
Yes you posted about different primers, but I don't see anything about the SyA specifically in your findings.
Yes, with very little anvil feet sticking below the cup, there's less opportunity for reloaders to add any more "pre-load" to the anvil tip against the priming compound.
I'm telling you that photography is awesome...makes me forget the subject. You and @Walkalong...The issue with Wolf primer not igniting 100% turned out to be harder primer cups and Wolf ended up offering refunds to customers of affected lot # of primers.
It was same with Tula SP primers with particular lot # that had harder primer cups (I found out these primers were 100% reliable when used in .45 ACP cases with SP primers)
With all the discussion taken place on several threads up to now, issue with Servicios & Aventuras primers seems to be primer seating depth to set the tip of anvil against the priming compound as expressed by @9mmepiphany below with 100% reliability with 3000+ rounds:
Yes, it was me who previously posted that different brand primers have different anvil height and tip shape and are shipped with differing amount of "pre-load" of anvil feet sticking below the primer cup. But anvil tip is not in full contact with priming compound for safety reasons during often harsh shipping/handling process to prevent primer ignition. So to ensure reliable primer ignition, when we seat primers, seating depth must be deep enough (Around .004" below flush) to push anvil tip against the priming compound that requires 2-step primer seating - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-and-discussions.778197/page-10#post-11386382
Step 1 - The initial resistance you feel when seating primer is primer cup being pushed down the primer pocket. Depending on the primer pocket depth, seating primer cup flush may not set the anvil tip against the priming compound.
Step 2 - The secondary resistance you feel is primer anvil feet bottoming with primer pocket and sliding up inside the cup to pre-load/set against the priming compound (.004" below flush) and face of cup deforming (.008" below flush).
Take a look at different brand primers pulled apart and you will see different anvils with varying heights and tip shapes used.
Due to different anvil height/tip shape, you will notice shorter Tula/PMC anvil with less pointed tip will be "pre-loaded" deeper with less anvil feet sticking below the cup compared to Winchester/Magtech.
I like to see a full circle impression of the seating stems face. But I donāt like to flatten the whole primer.
But if primer won't ignite because anvil tip is not pre-loaded against the priming compound/cup, then you have no choice but to flatten primer cup.
Sometimes, it is what it is.
Personally, I have ONLY primed on a Dillon 550 whether it be progressively or 1 at a time single stage style when loading rifle stuff.But if primer won't ignite because anvil tip is not pre-loaded against the priming compound/cup, then you have no choice but to flatten primer cup.
Us? Say it aināt soā¦..
This is what I do also.
I use a handprimer and also do the 180 rotation. Never a problem. Sometimes primers just don't go in straight. That's all primers. I have no experience with the primers in question. If they are a bit larger they probably aren't going in straight and only one side of the anvil is against the bottom of the primer pocket.
But I prefaced the post with "if primer won't ignite"You even quoted @Walkalong :
...and nowhere does his statement say to "flatten" any primer, just seat it fully so the cup "swallows" the anvil legs ...
But if primer won't ignite because anvil tip is not pre-loaded against the priming compound/cup, then you have no choice but to flatten primer cup.
Works for me.But if primer won't ignite because anvil tip is not pre-loaded against the priming compound/cup, then you have no choice but to flatten primer cup.
Sometimes, it is what it is.
Walkalong's linked post reaffirms why primers must be seated deep enough to pre-load the anvil tip against the priming compound or the firing pin/striker indent won't ignite the primer - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...primers-before-shooting.832434/#post-10757047
"Primers need to be seated until the anvil legs touch the bottom of the primer pocket (Minimum), and then a little more so the cup pushes down around the legs, up until it hits the bottom of the primer pocket (Maximum).If seated to little (Anvil legs not touching the bottom of the primer pocket), the firing pin has to seat it fully and then have enough energy left over to crush the priming compound between the cup and the anvil. Sometimes it does not, these are the ones that so often fire on the second try. The first try seats them fully, the second try fires them.[Live life] has some great primer pics here somewhere that shows the cup and anvil and how they are positioned with each other prior to seating [See post #155]. The anvil legs are sticking out of the cup just a little bit.After fully seating the anvil's legs and the primer cup is hard against the bottom of the pocket, it takes a great deal of pressure at this point to damage the primer so much it fails.It is fairly easy to seat a primer too soft, not fully seating it, so that it misfires, but difficult to seat them so hard it damages them to the point of not firing. This statement is based on my decades of seating primers with various tools. I have never had one fail from being seated to hard/deep. Not saying that with some primer tools and some gorilla grips it can't be done, but it is 100/1000 times less likely to happen than seating one too shallow/soft.We have threads here all the time when failures to fire end up being primers seated too softly/shallow. I can't remember one where it turned out someone managed to crush a primer into submission. I would suggest to all to try it. Some priming systems simply cannot do it for mechanical reasons. Some might have enough travel to do it if you have the strength, That cup surrounded by the brass primer pocket is tough to crush. Very tough."
Fiocchi follows CIP standards. You can download their full product catalog online in English, Italian, German or French.
