Pistol Caliber Primer Questions

Bruce · Post by **Bruce** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:47 pm

While I have reloaded both pistol and rifle calibers over the years, I have never loaded a pistol caliber round that could/should/may use a magnum primer. I am at a point that I am ready to load some .44 magnum rounds that will be shot out of a Marlin 1894. I am also ready to load some .357 magnum rounds that will be shot out of a S&W 6" Model 586 revolver. To keep things as simple as possible, I have decided to try two different powders in both. One powder will be Winchester's 296 and the other will be Alliant's 2400.

For the .357, I will try jacketed rounds in 125 gr. and 158 grn. For the .44, I am going to start out with jacketed 200 grn. rounds and then go to 240 grn. rounds if needed. I am not looking for recoil killing rounds, but I am not looking for low loaded plinkers either. Both rounds could be used for short range hunting. I am hoping the light for caliber rounds will work out - kind of like express rounds.

I am looking for experiences using these combinations and whether or not I will need to (have to or should) use magnum primers? I am having no luck finding any magnum primers anywhere near me. If there is not an absolute need to use them or no real advantage with these powders, I will use standard primers that are readily available to me.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:26 pm

Bruce,

From my experience you "do not need" magnum primers for 2400 powder in the .357 mag, or the heavy .45 Colt loads. I seriously doubt you'd need them in the .44 Mag loads either.

From what I've read in many places you "do" need a magnum primer with 296.

Joe

Post by **Hobie** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:14 pm

It is my opinion that the manuals are right and you need/should use a magnum primer with W296 or H110 but you don't with 2400.

colo native · Post by **colo native** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:35 pm

kinda depends on the load,ie, vel you are trying to get...

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:27 pm

The 296 loads will go boom with a standard primer, but you will see more uniform velocitys and probably better accuracy with magnum primers and a firm crimp.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:43 pm

Good answers.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:19 pm

I think the 296 loads need a bunch of tight crimp more than they need the magnum primer.
The 2400 needs neither a super tight crimp nor a magnum primer and that's why I have choosen to stick with it as my "magnum" powder. 296/h110 just need to much care and attention to suit me, and the 2400 will give enough velocity to do anything needing doing with a handgun anyway.
Just for grins you might want to try some large rifle primers in the 44 rifle loads with the 296. I found that when running extra hot loads in the 45 colt in a rifle the rifle primers didn't flow as bad as the large pistol primers did.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:30 pm

An expander .004"-.005" smaller than bullet diameter will help big time. CCI-350 primers with the .44 mag. 296 loads are recommended. 1886.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:32 pm

Don McDowell wrote:I think the 296 loads need a bunch of tight crimp more than they need the magnum primer.
The 2400 needs neither a super tight crimp nor a magnum primer and that's why I have choosen to stick with it as my "magnum" powder. 296/h110 just need to much care and attention to suit me, and the 2400 will give enough velocity to do anything needing doing with a handgun anyway.
Just for grins you might want to try some large rifle primers in the 44 rifle loads with the 296. I found that when running extra hot loads in the 45 colt in a rifle the rifle primers didn't flow as bad as the large pistol primers did.

Don,
Did you do anything to your .45 Colt cases to facilitate seating the LR primers?
I've never been able to get them seated below flush on an unaltered case.

Joe

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:09 pm

Joe no, nothing other than clean the pockets good. The brass I use the most for those +p colts is some old Federal from factory loads I shot up in the early 80's. I have used some winchester brass with lr's.

Lefty Dude · Post by **Lefty Dude** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:33 pm

I use Winchester LP primers, which are for Std/Mag use.

I have no problem lighting off 296 or H110 in a 44 mag..And my loads are very consistant.

Guncase · Post by **Guncase** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:44 pm

Just for the record, since ATK bought Alliant powder, the "new" 2400 is slightly different. It is recommended to use STANDARD primers with NEW 2400.

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:55 pm

Guncase wrote:Just for the record, since ATK bought Alliant powder, the "new" 2400 is slightly different. It is recommended to use STANDARD primers with NEW 2400.

Ohhhhh....crud.

I have some 2400 on the shelf and some warmish .44 Mag loads planned in the near future. How do I determine which "type" of 2400 I have, so that I can use the proper loads? Is there a list of lot numbers or something like that?

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:27 pm

IF they would of changed 2400, they would now call it 2375 or maybe 2520 or some other thing, but it would no longer be 2400. This" they've changed "this and that stuff has been around for ever, and if you contact the powder company they'll say nope didn't change a thing.

Folks in the know said that Elmer Keith never owned a magnum primer, always used regular primers in his 2400 loads.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:36 pm

JohndeFresno wrote:
Guncase wrote:Just for the record, since ATK bought Alliant powder, the "new" 2400 is slightly different. It is recommended to use STANDARD primers with NEW 2400.
Ohhhhh....crud.

I have some 2400 on the shelf and some warmish .44 Mag loads planned in the near future. How do I determine which "type" of 2400 I have, so that I can use the proper loads? Is there a list of lot numbers or something like that?

2400 has not changed any perceptible amount. Different lot to lot variations is all you'll come across.
Pick your load and drop down 10% then try a few. If that's Okee Dokee load up the rest and go shoot 'em.
I'm shooting the same exact 2400 loads today that I shot 25 years ago and I'm getting the same results.
A couple years ago I purchased a partial can of 2400. The little metal can from the 60s. I loaded it side by side in my .357 mag and heavy .45 Colt loads using the exact components other than the powder, and guess what .... I couldn't tell any difference in the performance of the different powders.
I will say that the old powder was a bit dirtier and produced more muzzle flash. Otherwise, no difference.

Joe

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:27 am

J Miller wrote:...Pick your load and drop down 10% then try a few. If that's Okee Dokee load up the rest and go shoot 'em... I'm shooting the same exact 2400 loads today that I shot 25 years ago and I'm getting the same results...I will say that the old powder was a bit dirtier and produced more muzzle flash. Otherwise, no difference.

Joe

Thanks, Joe. I worked up these loads a year or two ago, so I guess I can still use them just as they are.

Bruce · Post by **Bruce** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:29 am

Thanks for the responses. It looks like I would be better off just trying the 2400 and going with standard primers, which I can get locally.

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:09 am

Definitely use the magnum primers. The Winchester "standard/magnums" SUCK for getting magnum loads to light properly. In a revolver, you need them all to light uniformly.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:43 am

Travis Morgan wrote:Definitely use the magnum primers. The Winchester "standard/magnums" SUCK for getting magnum loads to light properly. In a revolver, you need them all to light uniformly.

This is a perfect example of how two people can use the same components and have dramatically different results.
I've used the Winchester Standard or Magnum LP primers for decades with excellent results. I do combine them with a heavy neck tension and crimp though. That might be one difference. But I'm sure there are others in the way we assemble our ammo.

Joe

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:57 am

It also depends on powders. The Winchester primers don't work reliably with H-110. Most of 'em go off, but I get sick of getting out the range rod real quick.

piller · Post by **piller** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:08 pm

I have shot the .45 colt using Speer 300 gr sp bullets loaded with WW296 for about 7-8 years and the Winchester LP primer is all I have used. Never once has it failed for me, but I use a heavy crimp. The last time I chrono-ed it the loads had pretty good consistency, standard deviation was in the single digits. I have had even better luck with Hodgdon Lil' Gun when making very warm loads. Better velocity and accuracy for me. I may try some with the CCI magnum LP primers just for the fun of it. If I get better accuracy and consistency, then I win, but if not, then I had fun and won anyway.

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:36 pm

Yeah, once I use up this pound of H-110, I'm probably just gonna go to 296 or Lil gun. A buddy of mine that likes hotter loads told me that he's getting areal good results with the Lil gun.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:12 pm

This is just an off comment about magnum primers. I bought a pound of AA 5744 a couple years ago and loaded it per the loading manuals. It was the filthiest powder I've ever used. Not only that it left a large amount of unburned powder in the case, chamber, and barrel.
The first load I used was with all the exact components listed in the loading manual, and they recommended a standard LP primer.
I tried various brands of LP standard primers and varied the charges all with no success. Filthy, filthy, filthy powder. I was sooooooo glad when I loaded the last out of that bottle.

Well, somewhere in there I loaded up 50 rounds with CCI LP mag primers. Number 350 I think. After getting IJ back from Steve Young I had a wee bit of trouble with misfires due to a light hammer strike. Once that problem was diagnosed and taken care of I went to the range with 100 rounds of CCI primed ammo. One was the box with 5744 and CCI mag primers.
Well, the mag primers brought the 5744 back into what I consider normal. Almost no mess, and virtually no unburned powder.

So, for some powders I do think magnum primers have a place.

Joe

alnitak · Post by **alnitak** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:24 pm

I've been using Winchester LP primers with 17.5-19.5 grains of 2400 with great results and excellent accuracy for a 240 grain LSWC bullet.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:52 pm

[quote="Travis Morgan"]Yeah, once I use up this pound of H-110, I'm probably just gonna go to 296 or Lil gun. A buddy of mine that likes hotter loads told me that he's getting areal good results with the Lil gun.[/quI

If you are using H-110, you are using 296. Regards, 1886.

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:54 pm

The folks that manufacture H-110 are the ones that told me to use Magnum primers, BTW. They also mentioned that it's no good for anything but magnum type loads, and that it'll melt a cast bullet if it's not gas checked.

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:55 pm

1886 wrote:
Travis Morgan wrote:Yeah, once I use up this pound of H-110, I'm probably just gonna go to 296 or Lil gun. A buddy of mine that likes hotter loads told me that he's getting areal good results with the Lil gun.[/quI

If you are using H-110, you are using 296. Regards, 1886.

Sorry, meant to say 2400.

Leverdude · Post by **Leverdude** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:20 pm

I'v been told dozens of times that H110 & W296 are the same.

Anyway, I generally use Mag primers in 357 & 44 mags wether or not a book calls for them. I use mostly Win primers & their LP is suposda cover both.

JustaJeepGuy · Post by **JustaJeepGuy** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 2:17 am

I've read many, many times in the last 27 years that WW296 and H-110 are the same, too, but I've also read that H-110 is actually "WW295". I've also seen many loads shown where there are different charge weights for H-110 and 296 for a given bullet/case/primer. If they're the same, why would there be different charge weights?

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:57 am

Uh-oh! There's a reason I didn't point that out! If the right idiots choose to repond, that question is just as bad as .45 vs. 9mm or Chevy/Ford.

JustaJeepGuy · Post by **JustaJeepGuy** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:02 am

And I walked right into it....oh, man....I guess I could edit it out. But where's the fun in that?

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:10 am

If I'm not mistaken, both powders are owned by the same conglomerate, too. They're both listed in the Hodgdon catalog, anyways.

Edit to add: The guys that would argue the hardest about it probably never shoot, anyways.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:11 am

JustaJeepGuy wrote:I've read many, many times in the last 27 years that WW296 and H-110 are the same, too, but I've also read that H-110 is actually "WW295". I've also seen many loads shown where there are different charge weights for H-110 and 296 for a given bullet/case/primer. If they're the same, why would there be different charge weights?

I have seen the same discrepancies. They are the same powders currently and have been for a while. Different lots I suspect. This is why it is recommended to buy components that you like in bulk. Many powders are named differently but otherwise are the same, 231/HP-38, 296/H-110,760/H-414. They are even showing up on dealers shelves in the same type of container now. Have you noticed that the Winchester powders no longer come in a handled jug? 1886.

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:26 am

If you take a look at the Hodgdon Annual Manual you will see the powders 1886 mentions above (760/414, 296/110, etc.) all have the EXACT same powder charges.

AndyM · Post by **AndyM** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:27 am

I use regular primers with 2400 and mag. primers with H110.

Although, I do feel primers are created and burn differently. I have no way to test, but it seems to me Winchester brands are hotter than CCI and Remington and Winchester LR Primers are closer to CCI Mag. LR than regular CCI LR primers. For my max accuracy loads, though, I usually stay away from Winchester and go with CCI and sometimes Remington if they are available in my area.

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:15 am

I'll try to find 'em, but somewhere, I have pictures of the flame from the different primers. They are not all created equally. The difference between one brand's magnum and another's standard is surprising.

Incidentally, Andy, what calibers are you using the H-110 in with standard primers? I'm using it mostly in .45 Colt, but I figure it'd light better in the puny case of a .357.

2571 · Post by **2571** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:55 am

" I found that when running extra hot loads in the 45 colt in a rifle the rifle primers didn't flow as bad as the large pistol primers did."

Been reloading for 30 years. What do you mean by "didn't flow"?

Post by **Hobie** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:09 am

JustaJeepGuy wrote:I've read many, many times in the last 27 years that WW296 and H-110 are the same, too, but I've also read that H-110 is actually "WW295". I've also seen many loads shown where there are different charge weights for H-110 and 296 for a given bullet/case/primer. If they're the same, why would there be different charge weights?

Different lots.

I did a study of this once, comparing every manual entry which used both powders. Most vary by less than 3% at max charge level which is the SAME variation for either powder compared to itself in other manuals. IOW, lot-to-lot variation. Really old manuals might show more variation but I think that the powders were made by different companies at the time.

Guncase · Post by **Guncase** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:15 am

I always spend alot of time researching when I work up a Magnum pistol load because I use heavy LBT bullets and data is hard to come by. My .45 Colt load uses 300 grain LBT WFN with 23 grains of H110. I crimped heavy and used standard primers. I have fired several hundred through my Bisley/Vaquero with great success. I have not yet settled on my .357 Blackhawk load, but have tried many powders and primers. So far with 2400 (old in metal can) I like Magnum primer. Speer #13 manual states that they worked up new .357 data for 2400 (new ATK) and specifies using only standard primers. I will probably end up with H110 and magnum primers with my LBT 180 grain FN, but I'm waiting on another box of gas checks to finish my testing.

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:32 am

Hobie wrote:...but I think that the powders were made by different companies at the time.

Expanding on what Hobie says, both H110 and Win 296 are made by Saint Mark's Powder Company, which (I believe) is currently located in Florida. It is then repackaged by Hodgdon and Winchester. Hodgdon HP 38 and Winchester W231 are also the same.

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:45 am

JohndeFresno wrote:Expanding on what Hobie says, both H110 and Win 296 are made by Saint Mark's Powder Company, which (I believe) is currently located in Florida. It is then repackaged by Hornady and Winchester. Hodgdon HP 38 and Winchester W231 are also the same.

Why would they be repackaged by Hornady and Winchester? They're certainly not sold under those names, except in ammunition, possibly.

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:24 am

Travis Morgan wrote:
JohndeFresno wrote:Expanding on what Hobie says, both H110 and Win 296 are made by Saint Mark's Powder Company, which (I believe) is currently located in Florida. It is then repackaged by Hornady and Winchester. Hodgdon HP 38 and Winchester W231 are also the same.
Why would they be repackaged by Hornady and Winchester? They're certainly not sold under those names, except in ammunition, possibly.

Whoops - I meant that they are both the same, but packaged and sold by Hodgdon and Winchester as being their respective powders. While I'm at it, the HP 38 and W 231 are also manufactured by St. Marks and sold under similar circumstances. Thank you for correcting my error; I have edited my post as "Hodgdon," not "Hornady." I use Hornady bullets extensively as my jacketed bullet components; thus the typo.

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:35 am

I figured it was somethin' like that. Have some coffee, it'll be alright.