Has anyone tried this? I have some heavier cast bullets on the way for 357 Mag and normally use standard SPP with Alliant 2400. However, I’ll run out before using all the bullets. Enforcer is much more available and half the price when I have seen 2400. I do not however have any SPM primers. Alliant data uses standard primers but all my sources for Enforcer use magnums.
Using Standard Small Pistol Primers with Ramshot Enforcer Powder
- Thread starter DMW1116
- Start date
AJC1
Member
I have no reservations about building up a load with any primer. I've even run srp trying to get 4227 to burn good in 357. A mag primer is what I test with first in 357 and reduces erratic ignition in slower pistol powders.
2400 doesn’t seem to burn well until the charge gets on the upper half of the load range. If Enforcer is the same it would work probably, as there’s no reason to use either for light loads. 2400 isn’t accurate for my Blackhawk at light loads either.
AJC1
Member
I've been burning up my #9 and 4227, they both hate being downloaded. The leftover chunks say so.
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,085
I’ve used both and over a chronograph there’s no difference in velocity within what I consider normal variation. I have not had any ignition problems at all.
I was/am concerned about powder ignition with Enforcer. I do use standard primers with 2400. However the load data in my Lyman manual says to use magnum pistol primers. Alliant says they used standard SPP. That all works out if I could find another bottle.
Lyman publishes data for Enforcer and 158-ish grain cast bullets but uses magnum primers. Even with the 2400 I can recover from some cast 30-30 loads, I don’t have enough to finish out the 500 count box of bullets. That’s probably fine though as I’d like to try some of those bullets with W231 in 38 Special too.
Lyman publishes data for Enforcer and 158-ish grain cast bullets but uses magnum primers. Even with the 2400 I can recover from some cast 30-30 loads, I don’t have enough to finish out the 500 count box of bullets. That’s probably fine though as I’d like to try some of those bullets with W231 in 38 Special too.
35 Whelen
Member
I load metric crap-tons of .30 Carbine and Ramshot Enforcer and Accurate 4100 (One and the same) have been my go-to powders for some time now. In this cartridge loading, 15.0 - 15.5 grs. of this powder, I've used SRP, SRMP, SPP and SPMP primers and there's not a nickels worth of difference in velocities. Same with all these primers and H110/W296.
So, go in peace and use the primers you have.
35W
Excellent. 2400 has given the best group I’ve ever shot with a pistol (1” @25 yards) with a full power load behind a 158 grain XTP. If it or Enforcer will get close with these 158 grain cast bullets I’ll be set for a while (pronounced with the H).
Does Alliant publish data for Ramshot (Hodgden) powders? My Google fu is weak if I didn’t see that.
Bearded Phil
Member
Probably meant to say Accurate, not Alliant.
FROGO207
Member
FWIW I have standardized all my small primers to SRP for ease of inventory. I do have some SPP for a couple pistols that will not reliably set off SRP though. As 35 Whelen states I find no difference in them other than hardness of the cup.
Firewood535
Member
My experiences with Ramshot Enforcer in .357 Magnum have been that it, being a ball powder, is somewhat hard to ignite with regular small pistol primers. I use Magnum primers and a firm roll crimp, and keep my charges near the upper ranges. I do not use it for lower powered loadings... It is a MAGNUM handgun powder after all! Had several failure-to-fires when I was learning what this powder likes... push it hard and it is very accurate, powerful, and gives outstanding velocities. There are other powders better suited to mid-range and plinking type loads, e.g. HP-38/Win 231, etc.
westernrover
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,613
I don't have the means to develop the idea, but I've long imagined that a primer booster would be a useful innovation. First, we should understand that powders can have non-linear burn rates. They're "slow" or "fast" in burn rate, but they can also increase and decrease in burn rate through the combustion cycle. Progressive (increasing) burn rates are usually achieved through deterrent coatings on ball powders or surface-area features like perforations through extruded powders. As the deterrent coating burns off, higher energy cores are exposed and combustion gas production increases. As the extruded grain burns from the inside-out, the surface area undergoing combustion increases, accelerating the rate of gas production. Progressive burn rates are valuable to increased bullet velocities because they can avoid exceeding pressure maximums shortly after initial ignition, but then ramp-up gas production once the bullet has moved some distance down the bore allowing for more space for the gas to expand into. The challenge, particularly with deterrent-coated ball powders is ensuring a positive ignition and start to the combustion, especially when the case is large in diameter and even more so when it is deep and some of the powder is a good distance from the primer.
Using a small amount of an undeterred or fast burn rate powder blended with the more progressive powder could help with ignition. It would also make the burn-rate more digressive. It would be difficult to pack the increase in pressure into the combustion timeline before the progressive powder reached peak pressure.
Arranging the powder in the case is another possibility. If you've ever seen different colors of sand layered in a glass bottle, you get the idea. Cases would have to be full to prevent mixing. Another similar concept would use propellant shapes and textures to maintain the arrangement. If you've ever used Alliant Steel, you know that propellant flakes can be pretty large. Imagine stacking a large flake or pellet over the primer and then filling the case with a more granular propellant.
I imagine using some kind of primer booster could negate the need for large primers and for magnum primers and for differences between pistol and rifle primers except with regard to their ability to handle pressure. Perhaps primers could even be shrunk or primer mixtures reduced. If a primer could be reduced enough, it could even become non-hazardous and avoid classification as an explosive. The boosters would be regulated as explosive like propellants, but it would be far easier and less costly to produce what would amount to powder flakes than it would be to produce boxer-type primers.
If primers could be much wimpier than they are today, it would be no problem for primer factories to spring up anywhere and everywhere.
Using a small amount of an undeterred or fast burn rate powder blended with the more progressive powder could help with ignition. It would also make the burn-rate more digressive. It would be difficult to pack the increase in pressure into the combustion timeline before the progressive powder reached peak pressure.
Arranging the powder in the case is another possibility. If you've ever seen different colors of sand layered in a glass bottle, you get the idea. Cases would have to be full to prevent mixing. Another similar concept would use propellant shapes and textures to maintain the arrangement. If you've ever used Alliant Steel, you know that propellant flakes can be pretty large. Imagine stacking a large flake or pellet over the primer and then filling the case with a more granular propellant.
I imagine using some kind of primer booster could negate the need for large primers and for magnum primers and for differences between pistol and rifle primers except with regard to their ability to handle pressure. Perhaps primers could even be shrunk or primer mixtures reduced. If a primer could be reduced enough, it could even become non-hazardous and avoid classification as an explosive. The boosters would be regulated as explosive like propellants, but it would be far easier and less costly to produce what would amount to powder flakes than it would be to produce boxer-type primers.
If primers could be much wimpier than they are today, it would be no problem for primer factories to spring up anywhere and everywhere.
AJC1
Member
If your looking for a spp friendly replacement mag powder sw heavy pistol claims good with spp. I haven't vetted that claim fully with sd/es testing but it does go bang.
Hooda Thunkit
Member
What you describe here is called "duplexing", or a duplex load. It is used to get a very slow powder started burning, almost always in a rifle case. A small charge of a fast-burning powder is used as a 'kicker' beneath a charge of very slow or hard to ignite powder.
It is an advanced handloading technique, and some consider it a very dangerous technique.
I won't comment except to say that it should not be attempted unless one is very certain of what one is doing. This is not a technique to be used in the fog of ignorance.
LV Gun
Member
I am currently using Enforcer as I have a hard time finding 2400 or W296/H110 where I live. I loaded 24 rounds of Enforcer each with SPM and SPP at starting load in 357 magnum and a158 gr LSWC , primers used were Winchester SPM and Servicios Aventuras SP I really did not see any difference in how it burned or felt recoil , I don’t have a chronograph so I don’t know if it affected fps , I shoot by how loads feel. I have used SPP in W296/H110 also the only real difference I noticed is that it did burn slightly dirty.
Riomouse911
Member
That was Dick Casull’s original method to get higher velocities when developing the .454, only he used triplex loadings!
A Half Century With Sixguns: Casull
The year was 1954. The words “under God” were added to the Pledge of Allegiance and the Dow reached an all time high of 382.74. Elvis was telling us That’
gunsmagazine.com
Risky stuff. Personally, I prefer to let others give it a whirl and read about their results.
Stay safe.
