Federal small rifle AR Match primers? Other AR primer questions...

[Charlie98]

I'm fixing to start working up test ladders for my DMR 5.56mm AR build. I have a fair stash of CCI #41 Arsenal primers, and some CCI #450 SRM primers. I just realized I don't have any SR standard primers... the only thing I load that takes small rifle is... the 5.56mm, and that is loading with H335, which some data suggests Magnum primers for, so that's all I've basically stocked for many years.

My LGS didn't have any standard SRP's, but they had a small stack of these Federal AR Match primers, so I bought a tray of them ($12.) Has anyone used these, with what powder(s,) and what did you think of them? I'm assuming it's sort of a standard-strength 'Match' primer, with the thicker cup of the Arsenal/Magnum primer, but I can't really find any definitive answer to that.

Why the standard primers? My tests with TAC in the .308 showed me TAC really, really doesn't like Magnum primers... at least in the .308. I'm trying to move away from H335 in the 5.56mm to TAC... to simplify my bench a little... and I've had really good results with TAC in .308, so I'm going to pit it up against H335, soon. I already have the data for my test ladders worked up. I plan on working up a separate test lot, the only difference being the AR Match primer, vs the Arsenal primer... just to see if I have the same reaction from TAC in the 5.56mm as I did in the .308.

I bought the AR Match primers just for this test, but I was wondering if anyone out there uses them on a regular basis, or at least for their 'Match' loads... if they make that big of a difference.


My other concern is with pierced primers. It seems like I read somewhere that one of the reasons to use Magnum or Arsenal primers in the AR is the thicker cup resists piercing, vs the thinner standard cup. If anyone has experience with that, I'm all ears. I won't be redlining these loads, but they will be up there.... and, as always, one set of data shows max load as one charge, other data shows another, so I'll have to tiptoe a little bit when I get worked up close to max... I don't really want to get a snoot full of gas from a popped primer.


Besides the primer questions... does anyone use TAC in their AR for match-type loads... that is, 69 or 75grn BHTP's, etc. I've never considered H335 to be a great powder for accuracy... it drops consistently, and it goes bang, which is great for blasting ammos, but not so much for accuracy ammos.

 

[Blue68f100]

I've used the Fed AR Match primers and liked them for my match loads. They gave me a lower ES over the 41's. AR primers have a different anvil in them so they are not sensitive to slam fires. I've had slam fires with the std Fed SR primers. They also have a slightly thicker cup than std with a brilliance similar to a Mag primer for cold weather ignition.

The twist rates in my rifles (1:9, 1:10) do not shoot the heavy bullets well. But load it with 52gr SMK with TAC and their a tack driver.

 

[41 Mag]

When I initially started to load for my rifles, I was just lookin for a load to play with and used standard primers. I really didn't notice anything out of the ordinary.

When I started working on hunting loads and got above the starting data, I was inspecting things a bit more in detail. I never had a pierced primer, or slam fire, but I did note some primers were dented after releasing the bolt on both rifles.

I switched over to the AR type primers in both calibers and it went away.

I'm loading 150gr over H4895 in the 308, and 62, 69, and 72gr over Shooters World Precision Rifle. All of these loads and weights will hover in the 3/4 - 1" group ranges at 100yds and just at or under 2" at 200yds, in the perspective rifle..

Just work up as you normally do and you should be fine. I have worked with the powders mentioned above and the shot, just not as accurate as what I settled on. Now I'm using up a bulk jug of TAC for my blasting ammo and the others for hunting purposes.

 

[Show Me]

Seen unchambered live rounds with a pin scratch or tick most of the time. That's why we let the bolt fly safely. Never in the house

 

[JEBruns]

I'm fixing to start working up test ladders for my DMR 5.56mm AR build. I have a fair stash of CCI #41 Arsenal primers, and some CCI #450 SRM primers. I just realized I don't have any SR standard primers... the only thing I load that takes small rifle is... the 5.56mm, and that is loading with H335, which some data suggests Magnum primers for, so that's all I've basically stocked for many years.

My LGS didn't have any standard SRP's, but they had a small stack of these Federal AR Match primers, so I bought a tray of them ($12.) Has anyone used these, with what powder(s,) and what did you think of them? I'm assuming it's sort of a standard-strength 'Match' primer, with the thicker cup of the Arsenal/Magnum primer, but I can't really find any definitive answer to that.

Why the standard primers? My tests with TAC in the .308 showed me TAC really, really doesn't like Magnum primers... at least in the .308. I'm trying to move away from H335 in the 5.56mm to TAC... to simplify my bench a little... and I've had really good results with TAC in .308, so I'm going to pit it up against H335, soon. I already have the data for my test ladders worked up. I plan on working up a separate test lot, the only difference being the AR Match primer, vs the Arsenal primer... just to see if I have the same reaction from TAC in the 5.56mm as I did in the .308.

I bought the AR Match primers just for this test, but I was wondering if anyone out there uses them on a regular basis, or at least for their 'Match' loads... if they make that big of a difference. My other concern is with pierced primers. It seems like I read somewhere that one of the reasons to use Magnum or Arsenal primers in the AR is the thicker cup resists piercing, vs the thinner standard cup. If anyone has experience with that, I'm all ears. I won't be redlining these loads, but they will be up there.... and, as always, one set of data shows max load as one charge, other data shows another, so I'll have to tiptoe a little bit when I get worked up close to max... I don't really want to get a snoot full of gas from a popped primer.

I've used standard SR, #41 and match primers in my AR. I've done a lot of testing with them and several different powders (TAC, N140, CFE223, H335 and Varget). I've never seen the primer make any difference at 100 yards. And I've never had a slam fire.

Besides the primer questions... does anyone use TAC in their AR for match-type loads... that is, 69 or 75grn BHTP's, etc. I've never considered H335 to be a great powder for accuracy... it drops consistently, and it goes bang, which is great for blasting ammos, but not so much for accuracy ammos.

The reason I bought the TAC and N140 is for heavier bullets. I've not found that magic load for those yet though. Like blue68f100, my most accurate load is with the 52gr SMK bullet. H335 is great for plinking loads. It and CFE223 flow well through my Dillon 1100, so they get a lot more use than the other stick powders that have to be hand dropped.

 

[Charlie98]

Now I'm using up a bulk jug of TAC for my blasting ammo and the others for hunting purposes.

I've already got a recipe worked out with TAC, for blasting ammo in the 7.62mm... I'll be finalizing that over Christmas (with the chronograph.) I'm sure I'll have a 5.56mm blasting load that will be adequate with TAC... that's a no brainer. But, just like with my .308 Savage 10, my DRM AR deserves something better... that's why I built it. In .308, the Easy Button always has been IMR4064, but with the 5.56mm I've not really strayed very far from H335... and only because I've never really loaded for accuracy there. The TAC burn rate is right for 5.56mm heavies, and it flows great in my Hornady powder drop, and I already have a jug of it... so that's why I'm giving TAC a try.

Seen unchambered live rounds with a pin scratch or tick most of the time. That's why we let the bolt fly safely. Never in the house

Even my Arsenal primers have a dimple from dropping the bolt... faint, but it's there. I'm a fanatic about seating the primers below flush, and I've never had a slamfire in any of my semiautos, including my M1 and M1a. The Federal Match AR primers seem like a little round peg for that little round hole, but I want to make sure they justify the cost.

I've never seen the primer make any difference at 100 yards.

Neither have I... except... with TAC and the #34 in the .308. All else being equal, the #34's opened the group up by nearly 100%... I'd never seen anything like it. It could very well be I was on the edge of the node with the standard primer, and the #34 pushed it past it or something, but that is not the first time I've heard of TAC not liking Magnum or Arsenal primers.

The reason I bought the TAC and N140 is for heavier bullets. I've not found that magic load for those yet though.

I tried loading IMR4895 in the 5.56mm some years ago... what a train wreck that was.

 

[Kaldor]

I'm fixing to start working up test ladders for my DMR 5.56mm AR build. I have a fair stash of CCI #41 Arsenal primers, and some CCI #450 SRM primers. I just realized I don't have any SR standard primers... the only thing I load that takes small rifle is... the 5.56mm, and that is loading with H335, which some data suggests Magnum primers for, so that's all I've basically stocked for many years.

My LGS didn't have any standard SRP's, but they had a small stack of these Federal AR Match primers, so I bought a tray of them ($12.) Has anyone used these, with what powder(s,) and what did you think of them? I'm assuming it's sort of a standard-strength 'Match' primer, with the thicker cup of the Arsenal/Magnum primer, but I can't really find any definitive answer to that.

Why the standard primers? My tests with TAC in the .308 showed me TAC really, really doesn't like Magnum primers... at least in the .308. I'm trying to move away from H335 in the 5.56mm to TAC... to simplify my bench a little... and I've had really good results with TAC in .308, so I'm going to pit it up against H335, soon. I already have the data for my test ladders worked up. I plan on working up a separate test lot, the only difference being the AR Match primer, vs the Arsenal primer... just to see if I have the same reaction from TAC in the 5.56mm as I did in the .308.

I bought the AR Match primers just for this test, but I was wondering if anyone out there uses them on a regular basis, or at least for their 'Match' loads... if they make that big of a difference.


My other concern is with pierced primers. It seems like I read somewhere that one of the reasons to use Magnum or Arsenal primers in the AR is the thicker cup resists piercing, vs the thinner standard cup. If anyone has experience with that, I'm all ears. I won't be redlining these loads, but they will be up there.... and, as always, one set of data shows max load as one charge, other data shows another, so I'll have to tiptoe a little bit when I get worked up close to max... I don't really want to get a snoot full of gas from a popped primer.


Besides the primer questions... does anyone use TAC in their AR for match-type loads... that is, 69 or 75grn BHTP's, etc. I've never considered H335 to be a great powder for accuracy... it drops consistently, and it goes bang, which is great for blasting ammos, but not so much for accuracy ammos.

I have shot a few thousand of the Fed AR Match primers, and honestly I couldnt tell the difference at the chrono or on the target between those and CCI 400s so I used them interchangeably. A standard primer has zero issues lighting off any powder you might use in 223 and Ive used a bunch of different ball powders over the years from H335, CFE223, AA2230, AA2520, TAC, Staball Match, and probably a couple more. And that includes shooting in weather around zero degrees or lower here in WI.

I have never found a need to use a 41 or a mag primer in 223, and I have some pretty crazy loads that I run on a consistent base with CCI 400s. Stuff like 69gr RMRs at 3000 FPS, and 77 SMKs at 2850 FPS. I do see some flat primers, but never pierced or leaking. Its not that I have never used them, its just that I personally have never seen a need in my rifles which are 5.56 and Wylde chambers. Maybe the 223 chamber might be a little more touchy as it has a shorter leade and will see higher pressures? One thing I have seen guys do is rely on the 41 or mag primer to get higher velocity which is fine, until it isnt it. The rifle will go from being fine with minimal pressure signs to blowing primers out of the case without warning in some cases. The standard primers will let you see primer pressure signs as they come on at safe pressures.

One argument I can see for a 41 or a mag is you are trying to chase a node that looks promising and the standard primer just cant handle the pressure so you sub a 41/mag primer in to test that last top node to see if its worth chasing. For me its not worth keeping yet another component on hand for one special load get an extra 25 FPS on a load when I can drop back 25fps and have something accurate and more importantly safe.

Edit: I will not say Ive never pierced a CCI 400, but when I see that, I know its time to back off my load. Ive seen a small dimple on my CCI 400s, but never to the point of inducing a slam fire. This was mostly an issue with the old Rem 6 1/2s which shouldn't be used in high pressure cartridges anyway.

 

[AJC1]

I like 24.0 with 69 rmr/smk and 23.5 with the 75 horn bthp. All with cci 200. If your looking to prevent slamfire I have never had one and followed guidance of always feeding off the mag to slow the bolt. I took tac to the limit of 556 data from western and after 24.0 it just kept opening up. The 75 grain at 23.5 was my dad's load, works gooder but I don't have the full experience with that one.

 

[41 Mag]

Well I already had plenty I'd standard Sm and Lr primers on hand. All worked great for both rifles, except for the occasionaldimpled primer upon bolt release. I however am not the only one who shoots these. I would probably react much more subtle than any of my three grandsons who might be behind them.

I am animant about seating as well, and I always feed from the magazines in both. Fact of the matter they have both dimpled primers, neither resulted in firing, but I would rather not have it happen. Since I switched exclusively to the 34 and 41 I have not had an issue with dimpled primers.

 

[DMW1116]

I used the Federal AR match primers for my 55 grain soft point varmint load. At the time, we had some groundhogs that were causing problems. The neighbors got them before I did, but I used TAC with the Federal AR primers and it worked fine. The minimum load was the most accurate, but that's not unique to this combination from my rifle. I'd guess the load was running around 2700 from the 16" barrel, plenty for a <100 yard on a groundhog. During testing it shot under 1 MOA, but it would be hard to reproduce that from the back porch over the blackberry bushes. I tried some of these Federal AR primers with TAC, H335, and CFE 223 using the Hornady 55 grain soft point flat based bullet. No problems with any of them. TAC just shot a split hair better than the others.

I don't know what kind of accuracy you want, but I've used TAC and H335 with 52 grain Barnes Match Burners and CCI 400 primers. Both loads are essentially interchangeable in terms of accuracy and shoot right at or a shade over 1 MOA from my 20" FN barreled upper and nitrided 16" barreled upper. If you're looking for a solid sub-MOA load, neither TAC nor H335 may be the best powder. They work for me and my budget rifles though, both PSA kits built on PSA lowers.

 

[Charlie98]

If you're looking for a solid sub-MOA load, neither TAC nor H335 may be the best powder.

What would be some suggestions? I have all the appropriate IMR powders... but nothing else, besides TAC and H335

 

[DMW1116]

What would be some suggestions?

A better gun than mine. Barring that, TAC is as good a place to start as any. I am preparing to retest TAC with this bullet. My H335 load and TAC bounce around 1 MOA in both rifles. Not bad for stock PSA kits with upgraded Schmidt two stage triggers. I’ve been having good results with Shooters World Tactical Rifle and Match Rifle but not enough rounds to be absolutely certain though.

A 52 grain SMK might be more accurate than the Barnes, maybe. I’d like to try the Hornady 53 grain HPBT but I’m in a holding pattern with what I have for a bit.

The best load I’ve tried has been a Hornady 75 grain HPBT with IMR 4064 and a CCI BR4 primer. Velocity is probably on there lower side but it been very accurate when I’ve shot it from my 16”. My 20” hates it.

 

[JEBruns]

What would be some suggestions? I have all the appropriate IMR powders... but nothing else, besides TAC and H335

For my AR (16" 1:7), 27.5grs of CFE223 with a 52gr SMK produces 1/2" 5 shot groups at 100yds. That is my most accurate load so far.

 

[Charlie98]

A better gun than mine. Barring that, TAC is as good a place to start as any. I am preparing to retest TAC with this bullet. My H335 load and TAC bounce around 1 MOA in both rifles. Not bad for stock PSA kits with upgraded Schmidt two stage triggers. I’ve been having good results with Shooters World Tactical Rifle and Match Rifle but not enough rounds to be absolutely certain though.

A 52 grain SMK might be more accurate than the Barnes, maybe. I’d like to try the Hornady 53 grain HPBT but I’m in a holding pattern with what I have for a bit.

The best load I’ve tried has been a Hornady 75 grain HPBT with IMR 4064 and a CCI BR4 primer. Velocity is probably on there lower side but it been very accurate when I’ve shot it from my 16”. My 20” hates it.

All of my barrels are 1:7, as is the custom these days, I would much rather have 1:8, but those are hard to find, hence the 62/68grn bullets, and maybe someday, the 75's.

I did a basic load test with IMR4895, once... they were quite slow. I could pull the trigger, go get a ham sammich and a cup of coffee, then walk down to the target and watch the bullet hit. I'm not opposed to extruded powders, but I want to load these on the progressive... which dictates ball powder.

Funny... my 20" 1/7 Colt H-Bar hates anything 55grn.

 

[Charlie98]

CFE223

A lot of people use that, and IMR8208, for AR accuracy rounds. It's my understanding that IMR8208 gets a little testy at the upper ranges of pressure, which is why I haven't fooled with it. If TAC doesn't work out like I hope, CFE223 is probably, logically, the next in line, or maybe one of the Shooters World powders.

 

[Blue68f100]

My best loads with 69gr SMK was with Varget. These produced 1/2 moa /10 rounds. This was with a 1:8, twist barrel, Wydle chamber . That same barrel would not shoot anything accurate that was less than 62 gr. Believe me I tried, 5 different bullets and 6 different powders. I eventually burned out the barrel trying to get it to shoot the light bullets. The 69gr SMK load opened up to 1.5 moa.

 

[DMW1116]

Both my 16” & 20” barrels are 1:7 twist. The 69 grain RMR is a middle ground for both. One likes the Hornady 75 grain bullets and the other likes the 77 grain SMK and they don’t mix. I tried each in the other and they shot worse than 55 grain FMJ.

 

[Kaldor]

A lot of people use that, and IMR8208, for AR accuracy rounds. It's my understanding that IMR8208 gets a little testy at the upper ranges of pressure, which is why I haven't fooled with it. If TAC doesn't work out like I hope, CFE223 is probably, logically, the next in line, or maybe one of the Shooters World powders.

Ive been a devout user of 8208 in 223, 6 Grendel and 308, and Ive never seen it pressure spike at high charge weights, even compressed loads. I use it exclusively for my highest velocity 69 and 77 grain loadings in 223. Its great stuff, decently temp stable, meters well, and accurate, if you can find some. Ive got about 5# left, and Im using it sparingly until I can get another 8#'er.

Never been a huge fan of CFE223. In order to get accuracy from it, Ive found you have to load it pretty heavy, and because it is not very temp stable, you can get into trouble with it on a 15-20 degree temp swing.
I have a couple pounds of Staball Match hanging around that I plan on testing as Im looking for a decent ball powder.

 

[2ndtimer]

A lot of people use that, and IMR8208, for AR accuracy rounds. It's my understanding that IMR8208 gets a little testy at the upper ranges of pressure, which is why I haven't fooled with it. If TAC doesn't work out like I hope, CFE223 is probably, logically, the next in line, or maybe one of the Shooters World powders.

If available, you might try some Shooter’s World AR Plus. I was pleasantly surprised with both velocity and accuracy with 55 gr bullets in several AR’s. It is also attractively priced and uses lower charge weights. I have a couple pounds of Shooter’s World Tactical that I have yet to play with, but had I known how good AR Plus worked I would have just ordered more of it and skipped the Tactical.

 

[Yankee1986]

I'm very new to this hobby but the person showing me the ropes has loaded quite a few rounds.
His recipe that I've been using: CCi SR, BL-C 2 with 55gr Nosler spitzer has been sub moa in my 1/7( I believe) Larue 16" and .5-.75 moa in his bolt gun at 100yds.
No primer problems. If I remember correctly, the charge is 1.5-2gr below max, so not hot by any means.
It meters well in the 650 we use to press them and seems to be available but I don't see very many recommendations for it.

 

[Charlie98]

It meters well in the 650 we use to press them and seems to be available but I don't see very many recommendations for it.

BL-C(2) has been described to me as 'quite blasty.' H335 is bad enough, I have no interest in BL-C(2)... but thank you.

 

[Yankee1986]

BL-C(2) has been described to me as 'quite blasty.' H335 is bad enough, I have no interest in BL-C(2)... but thank you.

It's the only powder I've personally loaded so I don't have any comparison loads with other powders to judge.
It doesn't seem any different than the factory loads I've shot.
By "blasty" do you mean a fireball?

 

[Charlie98]

Both H335 and BL-C(2) are the military equivalents of WC844 and WC846, respectively, for loading 5.56mm and 7.62, respectively. Factory loads you've shot have probably been made with the bulk version of those, or something very similar.

By blasty, I mean not only fireball, but concussion as well... and is a very subjective thing. I've loaded H335 in both .308 and .30-06 (Garand) and the fireball was impressive to say the least... nothing like I get from IMR powders, for example. My M1a has a 16" barrel with a brake, and the flame out of the brake rivaled that of the cheapo Russkie stuff.

Many shooters use BL-C(2), it's true... it a ball powder that flows well through a measure, and produces top level velocity. I've just decided it's not my cup 'o tea.

 

[DMW1116]

If available, you might try some Shooter’s World AR Plus. I was pleasantly surprised with both velocity and accuracy with 55 gr bullets in several AR’s. It is also attractively priced and uses lower charge weights. I have a couple pounds of Shooter’s World Tactical that I have yet to play with, but had I known how good AR Plus worked I would have just ordered more of it and skipped the Tactical.

I’ve been using a lot of the SW rifle powders lately. AR Plus in my 308 for 150 gr FMJ is a new favorite, though I’m probably a little below my goal of 2700 fps.

Tactical and Match Rifle cover 223. The low charge Tactical Rifle FMJ loads are very nice to shoot for practice and Match Rifle is my go to powder for the batch of 69 grain RMR bullets I have left. AR Plus is a good 55 grain FMJ option but for my rifles it’s better used in 308 for now. If I wanted to simplify, a big jug of Match Rifle would cover 308 and 223.

 

[Charlie98]

I have not yet delved into SW powders... but I know there is a good number of you who do. Part of it is availability and the name... I wasn't really even familiar with Accurate/Ramshot powders for a long time, it took me a bit to break free of the 'always there, always reliable' powders like IMR and Alliant... which have since become 'not necessarily always there.' Funny how things change. If TAC doesn't work out well... and I don't have any reason to think it won't... I'll probably give SW a try. I am asking a LOT out of TAC... I want it to be my blasting powder for 5.56mm and 7.62mm, which it has no problem doing, I would like it to be my replacement powder for IMR4895 in the M1 Garand, and I'd like it to work well with target-level loads in both 5.56mm and .308 (in my Savage bolt gun.) That would, quite honestly, eliminate 3 expensive IMR powders off the bench, and H335.... and I understand I won't likely get all of that in a neat can of TAC. 3 of 5 would be nice, and I would consider it a small victory.