Mag primers vs. non-mag primers

[mugsie]

Need some advice guys. My speer manual recommends that when using BLC(2) powder under a 55g bullet .223 caliber, that I use a Mag primer. Hogdon on the container of powder states the same charge, 25.5g but with a small rifle primer. It does not recommend a mag primer.

So, what's the difference? If I use a non mag primer, as Hogdon recommends, will it perform any differently than with a mag primer? Also, if Hogdon says non mag at 25.5g, then wouldn't the speer manual create excessive pressures by using a mag primer? All will be fired in a Savage bolt action.

Thanks....

 

[P0832177]

Follow the load data from the bullet mfg, and when you get comfortable with reloading you can swap out variables ie primers but you have to work up the load over again!

 

[Grumulkin]

Magnum vs nonmagnum primers usually don't make any appreciable difference in accuracy or pressure though I've encountered some exceptions. In a 223 Rem., I can't think magnum primers would be of any benefit.

 

[layusn1]

for my 223 load I use the CCI Small Rifle Magnum primers with W748, as recommended in one of those little complete load books. I tried the same load with different primers and accuracy wise the magnum primer won hands down...dime sized 5 shot group...I have pictures to prove it...lol.

 

[shark40sw]

For the .223 I can't say if the magnum vs standard primer would make any difference. I haven't tried using a magnum primer because I never saw a reason to try it. However in something like a .454 Casull it makes all the difference in the world. On 3 seperate occasions I've had handloads using standard small rifle primers fail to ignite the powder and just push the bullet (and unburned powder) into the first inch of the barrel. The first two times I thought it was the powder choice. I have since traced it to the standard primers and have never had a problems since discontinueing their use.

 

[layusn1]

I think the reasoning behind the magnum primer in my load was because of the W748. Apparently it light it off more completely/uniformly. Either way, it works for me and right now, when all of the other primers are flying off the shelf, the magnum primers are still there. I think its just something like every other facet in reloading. Its all your mileage may vary. I can't guarantee trying my load in your rifle would work the same. I do know you have to work up loads all over again if you are going to use magnum primers.

 

[jr81452]

i'd say that if the powder company says use standard then i would take their advice. better to be a little under the pressure max than a little over it. besides my Lee and Lyman manuals say standard small rifle.

 

[wolfe28]

Difference

I recall reading somewhere that magnum primers have something like powdered aluminum in them, where as the regular primers do not. The aluminum, when the primer is fired, burns and flies into the powder charge (presumably larger, since it is meant to be in a magnum size case) and generates a more uniform ignition of a larger powder charge. Regular primers, lacking the aluminum, ignite the powder from the back of case only.

Large artillery shells (I am speaking of 4-6" shells from WW2, the only ones I have looked inside of) have a primer that is about the diameter of a large crayon, and it is about 2/3 the length of the brass to evenly ignite the powder. This would kind of back up the idea of the burning metal aiding in the ignition of the powder in magnum cases.

All of that being said, I tried magnum primers in a 308 once (with an appropriate starting charge). They didn't work for me, so I gave the rest to a friend that could use them.

D