LR Primer Types Tested for Velocity, ES/SD, Group Size and More!
Click Photo to read full test results in Target Shooter Magazine.
If you shoot a .308 Win, or any cartridge that uses a Large Rifle (LR) primer, you should read an important new article by Laurie Holland in Target Shooter Magazine. Holland, a talented shooter from the UK, tested no less than sixteen (16) different large primer types using a custom F-TR target rifle shot from the bench. Laurie loaded .308 Win ammo* with 16 LR primer varieties and then tested for average velocity, ES/SD, and group size. This may be the most comprehensive and thorough LR primer test ever done. Here are the primer types tested:
| CBC Magtech 9½ CCI 200 LR CCI BR2 Match CCI 250 Magnum Federal 210 Federal 210M Match Federal 215M Magnum Match Fiocchi Large Rifle |
Kynoch Large Rifle Murom KVB-7 (PMC LR) Norma Superflash LR PMC LR Magnum Remington 9½ LR Remington 9½ M Magnum Sellier & Bellot LR Winchester WLR |
LINK: READ Large Rifle Primer Test Complete (16 Primer Types)
Test Rig: Osprey Rifles-built F-TR rifle with Savage PTA action, 32″ Bartlein 1:12″-twist ‘Heavy Palma’ barrel, and Dolphin Gun Company modular stock with an F-Open/Benchrest fore-end.
Some of Laurie’s results may surprise you. For example, would you guess that Sellier & Bellot primers had the lowest ES, by a significant margin? And get this, among ALL the primers tested, Rem 9½M Magnum primers produced the lowest velocity, while Rem 9½ LR (non-magnum) primers yielded the highest velocity. (The total velocity spread for all primers was 35 fps). That’s counter-intuitive and it’s odd that Rems were at opposite ends of the speed spectrum among ALL primers tested.
“The rationale for doing side-by-side tests is to see what effect primer choice has on ballistics, i.e. average velocities and MV consistency. There are a great many views on the subject, a few based on tests (including primer flame photography) but most apparently hearsay.” — Laurie Holland
Every serious hand-loader should definitely read the full test results to understand Laurie’s methodology and get all the details. This is an important test, with significant findings. But if you can’t spare the time right now, here are some highlights below:
Primer with Lowest Velocity: Remington 9½ M Magnum (2780 fps)
Primer with Highest Velocity: Remington 9½ LR (2815 fps)
Primer with Lowest ES/SD: Sellier & Bellot LR (12/3.1 fps)
Primer with Highest ES/SD: Remington 9½ M Magnum (47/14.0 fps)
Primer with Smallest Group Size: Remington 9½ LR (0.43″ average, three 5-shot groups)
Primer with Biggest Group Size: CBC Magtech 9½ (0.7″ average, three 5-shot groups)
Editor’s Comment: Laurie shot three, 5-shot groups at 100 yards with each primer type. The average group size for the top six primers varied by only 0.10″ (0.43″ to 0.53″), so one can’t conclude that one type is much better than another. Total group size variance (from best to worst) was 0.27″.
“The biggest surprise to me … came from an elderly (at least 10 years) lot of Czech Sellier & Bellot standard caps with an ES of 12 and SD of 3.1 fps, way below those of the nearest competitor. By contrast to the Fiocchis, they were an almost slack fit in the cases and this may have contributed to their consistent performance.” — Laurie Holland
NOTE: Values in chart are based on 15-Shot strings. The ES/SD numbers will therefore be higher than is typical with five-shot strings.
Testing 16 primer types was a huge task — we commend Laurie for his hard work and thoroughness. This extensive test is an important contribution to the “knowledge base” of precision shooting. Laurie’s findings will doubtless influence many hand-loaders who hope to produce more consistent ammunition, or achieve better accuracy. Credit should also be given to Target Shooter Magazine for publishing the results. Well done gentlemen…
*Reloading method for Test Ammo: “Test batches consisted of 16 or 17 rounds for each primer, charges thrown by an RCBS ChargeMaster and checked on lab-quality electronic scales, adjusted if necessary to within ± 0.04gn, so any charge weight variation would be under 0.1 grain which equates here to 5 fps.”
Similar Posts:
- Ultimate Large Rifle Primer Shoot-Out — 16 Types Tested
- Primer Availability Report — Wolf Primers Have Arrived
- Quest for Less Vertical — Six Primer Types Tested at 500 Yards
- Vertical Dispersion Test — Six Primer Types Tested at 500 Yards
- Primer Comparison Testing with 6 BRA at 500 Yards
Share the post "LR Primer Types Tested for Velocity, ES/SD, Group Size and More!"
Tags: CCI, Extreme Spread, Federal, Laurie Holland, PMC Primer, Primer, Sellier Bellot, Target Shooter Magazine
Interesting, But I would like him to do one more test with a rifle with a different action and fire control system just for arguments sake..
Laurie , thank you for the hard work as well as the money spent just to share this with the world.
Thanks! Great job! Unfortunately the Federal 210 M is non-existent on shelves these day.
Laurie:
Thank you!
Pray tell why you used a 10 year old lot of S&B when that is quite unlikely to be what anyone can buy at retail today? Suspect you expected poor performance and therefore did not buy new.
Interesting how little correlation there is between low spreads and group size.
Thank you for this data. Extremely useful and I look forward to the small primer test to come.
Thanks again.
Now, on to small primers!
Laurie’s comment that the C&B primer was the best maybe because it was a loose fit into the primer pocket, hence the primer is not deformed on seating. An interesting test would to take tight primer pocket brass,plus the same brass with reamed pocket so that the same primer fits tightly in one and loosely in the other and see if it makes a differance with ES.
I didn’t notice any comments on primers that didn’t go off. I switched from the federal 210 match to the standard federal 210 like everyone else that cant find the 210m now i get 1 out if 50 that doesnt go bang. Haven’t tested for sd/es byt accuracy seems to be on par.
All these loads have terrible ES. Not sure anything can be determined from this test. — Paul
Editor: Actually, for the top half of the samples the ES figures are quite reasonable. Be aware that the ES was calculated with FIFTEEN (15) shots through the chrono, not a mere five as some folks do. You can’t compare a 15-shot string with a 5-shot string. We recommend evaluating ES with at least 10 shots.
Wow! A very interesting test and a lot of effort as well.
However, the first take away that hit me like a sledge hammer is that the lowest ES is higher than any ES I have ever seen. Respectfully, there has to be a lot more more going on here than primers.
Editor: Please note the ES/SD values are based on FIFTEEN Shot strings. The values are reasonable given the larger sample size.
Editor: Well I guess I have to respond now. Here we go.
The values are not reasonable. They are absolutely terrible. No need to sugar-coat it. The tester here is a very accomplished international Palma shooter. That may be the reason for the 15 shot strings — as in Palma competition. That being said, what would the ES values in this test get you on the 1000 yard line at Camp Perry? How about in F-Class shooting 20 round strings? Long range prone shooting 20 round strings?
As for me, I would not bother to crank my truck and drive to match with such numbers on my match loads.
I come close to winning the Palma at Camp Perry in 2008 after shooting clean at 800 and 900 with 25X only to have my clocked cleaned by Bryan Litz because he was a better wind reader at 1000, and did not drop a point on the way to his Championship — while I barely made the Palma 20 after droping all of my points at 1000. But, my loads were precision with under 5 fps ES in all testing leading up to the Nationals. I did not get beat because of “precision”, I got beat on the “accuracy” component of a better rifleman.
The honesty of the test and the tester is evident by the honest posting of figures — despite the fact that they are shocking to me. Maybe a bad chrono. Maybe bad ignition because of a worn firing pin spring. Maybe a dragging firing pin. Maybe bad brass or pockets. I don’t know. But I do know that something has gone very wrong and the numbers are totally unacceptable to anyone in the long range precision game. If anyone on the United States Palma Team for F-Class team would want to compete at the Nationals or Worlds with match ammo yielding such ES values, please let me know.
With the high level of competency possessed by the rifleman and tester, I can only guess that his shooting package has let him down because I just fail to believe that the ES values meet his standards.
If the ES values here are reasonable”, how bad does it have to get before the values are unreasonable? 60 ES, 70 ES … 100 ES?
Regards,
Jim Hardy
Jim,
the tests deliberately did not involve highly prepped cases. Thye used RWS as it comes from the box, once fired in a 308 TR rifle with a Bisley 150 reamer. This brass is very similar to standard LRP Lapua in capacity, specification, and production quality, that is good but far from perfect. It’s the sort of components and load combination that thousands of club target shooters use every week of the year across several continents.The brass was not neck-turned, nor wer flash-holes reamed, nor were pockets recut, again deliberately. (That will be the subject of a before and after test using several makes of 260 Rem brass in due course.)
Looking at real (ie ordinary, salt of the earth, reasobaly competent club shooters’ results on a weekly basis with .308 win, I’ve got to say I’m surprised, will go further amazed by you comment that something other than primer effect is happening here in that “the smallest ES is higher than any ES I have ever seen”. I see 308 Win ES values in the 30s, 40s, and even above in people’s loads on a regular basis. I’ve recently chronographed some factory hunting ammo with three figure ES values.
Now if you’ve really never seen a 12 fps ES in a 15-round string, PLEASE, PLEASE start a thread on the forum on sharing the information on how to produce ammo that 100% guarantees single-figure ES values in .308 Win.
Nowe if it were just we incompetent Brits who shoot FTR, Match, Palma and Target Rifle, well maybe we’ve never got to grips with anything more modern than the .303, but there are thousands of words in scores of posts on the US Long-Range Shooting Forum (the US Palma Teams’ website) on the reasons for adopting the small primer .308 Palma case over the previously used standard Lapua case, not all in favour mind you, but the team capatains adamant that ES values dropped from 20s to 30s by a third. Here’s a typical input from a pretty competent 308 shooter, handloader, and also member of this forum ‘Memilanuk’ (Monte Milanuk, US FTR team member, captain of Team Savage all round top world-class FTR competitor) re 308 in this other forum:
“I know I’d pretty much resigned myself to not being able to get much better than SD=8, ES = 20-25 for 15-20 shot strings using Lapua cases, Varget, & 210M primers. On rare occasions I’d get something closer to 15, but it wasn’t consistently repeatable.”
and I believe Monte is talking batched and prepped brass here, not straight out of the box.
I did try to find Dan Simpson’s test report on standard v small primer brass which gave the results for the apparently inferior ammunition previously used by US Palma teams, couldn’t find it … but it there somewhere on that forum.
Jim,
our comments having apparently crossed, I should point out I’m not and never have been a Palma shooter. I shoot FTR and did so in the GB team for three or four years including the last F-Class World Champiopnships at Raton in 2013.
The test specifically mentions an FTR rifle with some barrel life left in it.
I do get ES values in my competition ammo that are single figure. I don’t run at under 5 fps and frankly don’t expect to now or in the future except for the occasional unrepresentative string.
We’ll simply have to agree to disagree on this. If you think the tests are in effect useless, that’s your prerogative. I’ll challenge though you to repeat them with all primers producing single-figure ES values.
Laurie:
I must admit that I am uncomfortable with this conversation. However, since the well respected Editor and you have challenged me openly, in good faith, I will respond again. I have never learned to run backwards. I hope this ends the conversation for me.
First of all, I have addressed only the ES in the testing and no other values or comments on the value of the testing itself. You cannot show me where I said the testing was “useless” as I never said that.
You have now admitted that the components in the loaded rounds were not match prepared at all — despite the fact that the powder charges were very well done. That supports my point. I don’t give a rip about what a club shooter will accept or how bad factory ammo is that you have tested. This is simply not precision. I don’t understand why you would not test with match prepped ammo to conduct this test to remove any variables on that end, if any. The high ES just sticks out like a neon light to any reader.
I addressed that there must be something else wrong with the shooting package as I could not believe, and have a hard time believing it now, that you would load this level of ammo for a test. I will say no more about that pursuant to your admission as to how the rounds were prepared.
I grin as you strongly doubt my ability to get very small ES at 5 and below all the time. You bet I can. You ask me to please tell how I do this. OK, hear is a taste of what I do.
I spend hours prepping match ammo because I enjoy it. I weight sort the brass to .1 of a grain. I expand my necks with custom carbide mandrels made just for me and my brass. I twice turn the necks to absolute perfection with a Pumpkin and carbide blades and mandrel. The brass is trimmed square and true with a carbide cutter. I polish the inside of the necks with flitz ad .000 steel wool to a glass finish after which I induce a little high grade “stuff” to make sure I do not have a problem with the coefficient of friction. Each bullet bullet seats with the same feel and releases with the same bullet pull.
I use true carbide bushings to ensure roundness on that fixture that is often lacking on commercial bushings. I prep my primer pockets and flash holes perfectly with exactly the same custom venturi (spelling) on each flash hole so that the flame is consistent and the majority of the ignition energy goes into the case — not back to the primer — you then can can control the intensity of the uniform flame with primer testing. This makes high nodes very possible. Only two people have this fixture — my friend who makes them and me.
I also have custom fixtures to chamfer the necks to marry up with each bullet I have shot in 6mm, 7mm, .308 and .338. I have from dead nuts to .0005 runout on all of my loads.
I check the water volume of each piece of brass and keep a record on that data as well as the ES of EACH individual piece of brass when shot during testing. I sort each bullet by weight, BTO and bullet meplat size after closing. I even have gone so far as to sort my primers by weight.
I always inspect the anvils. I only shoot small firing pins and hard cup primers that give great ES at the high node. I also sort loaded rounds from the base of the loaded round to the bearing surface/ogive that engages the bore — the same as it would be from the bolt face. I have uniformed the base of the brass and the extraction grove (keeping head space very precise).
I use the best reamers by Hugh Henricksen and JGS — all custom and none off the shelf. Al Warner helped me design my .284 Shehane reamer.
I make sure my ignition system is free from restraints and drags of any kind — very much like Dwight Scott does for Tony Boyer. I use custom dies by Jim Carstensen and Al Warner — made for my modified brass. The precisely made dies allow the brass to be shot dozens of times — annealing religiously.
My barrels are chambered very precisely with no burrs of any kind anywhere. No copper fouling even during break in. The threads are cut like glass and the crowns are perfect.
That is a just a taste of what I do to get great single digit ES — always and every time. Is it too much work? My passion for precision tells me NO. I love the prep.
Bottom line is that we just have totally different views of precision and perfection. No problem. I have been beaten in Palma competitions by Black Hills ammo — but it was me and not the ammo.
I look forward to your additional tests as you have been dedicated in this venture and have put a lot of work into it. The subject matter is very interesting and worth testing with large and small primers. I congratulate you and honor your efforts.
God bless,
Jim Hardy
Jim,
many thanks for your reply and your, if I may say so, very generous comments. I do understand you come to this subject with an approach that starts from a position of exactitude, of 100% precision.
My starting point was to look at how primer choice affects the results of the efforts of what we call Joe Public in the UK, the guy who puts a bit of research and a bit of care into producing good, but not necessarily the ultimate ammunition for whatever shooting purpose. I think it provides some pointers, I can’t say more. I should have put a caveat in saying these were neither 100% scientific tests – no tunnel range or similar – and that results for these primers apply potentially only to that components combination. Change cartridge, bullet, and powder, and some results may be reversed.
I personally sit somewhere in the middle between Joe Public and your approach. I use some of your techniques and tools, but am unlikely to – in fact never will use all of them. I do respect your approach and dedication though.
I made a start today as it happens on the next stage, the small primer testing process. I’ll have to rethink it unfortunately and change rifles as I intended to use an old Paramount TR rifle, but its very tight bore (for 7.62 Nato fodder) proves very inhibiting, so I’ll have to use my #1 FTR Stolle action / Broughton barrel rifle in lieu. I’ll start with a Lapua LRP case / F210M combination as the benchmark.
Many thanks for sharing your precsion techniques and philosophy,
Laurie
I was excited about this article. I am not a competition shooter but compete against my Old Man a couple times a month. My hope was that I could improve my groups by simply changing my primers next purchase. Now I have to spend hours with custom mandrels expanding necks on every test of do otherwise it doesn’t count.
Thanks for your informative write up. It obviously took a lot of time and i thought it was well done. Regardless of your spreads. I think like you said. Most shooters that will benefit from the post will be in the 20-30 fps spread rather then the guys that are trying to drop from the teens to single digits.
Interesting information – but I can’t quite figure out what the conclusion is. Yes primers affect things – MV, SD/ES.
What does the average joe do with this info – would maybe be a good follow on…
Could the article draw a conclusion for a primer to select (purpose would be required) and then take that into the load room and then into practical shooting with an assessment of the choices made and results?
Again thanks for the info and testing – interesting stuff.
Great testing info but I was wondering. I don’t see what powder was used. Don’t different powders react differently to primers? It seems that the loading manuals always show which primer was used for specific powders. I am not a great shooter or reloader. I am only interested in what makes a difference.
A bit late finding this, but much appreciated Laurie. Had a chuckle about the 10 year old S&B because I am still using Remington 9.5LR and Remington 7.5SR that I bought in bulk in 1978 when I was working as a professional culler for Parks and Wildlife Service (AUD$1.75/100). Still using them in various rifles of various calibers and they work fine in spite of having been exposed to high variations of temperature and humidity (never kept them in hermetically sealed condition) as I travelled around Australia. Excellent SD and ES figures for loads with various powders and fine accuracy. So it really looks like primers do not grow old like we who use them.