Primers and primer pockets

  • 3K Views
  • Last Post 06 May 2014
billglaze posted this 23 April 2014

Sorry for the long posting; hopefully, someone will find this information intriguing enough to follow up. Awhile back, it came to my attention that, when cleaning primer pockets with an elderly RCBS pocket cleaner/reamer, that I was seeing a different depth of pocket as shown by the gap between the case head, and the cleaning tool flange.  So, I started checking with my depth mike.  Sure enough, lots of different depth measurements.  I checked the SAAMI drawing for large rifle, and it showed a depth of .120"; no tolerance, which seemed to me to indicate that this wasn't an engineering or shop drawing; on the engineering drawings I was used to, each had stated tolerances. So, I chucked the tool/reamer in my drill press, and started uniforming primer pockets.  It didn't take long, before I had an impressive pile of brass filings on the drill press table.  I found that my primer pockets were now .122” to .123” depth.  I also found that instead of random combustion patterns on the pocket bottom, I had a very regular pattern showing the “feet” of the anvil, where, before, there was no regularity. Further, I had long wondered about just what it was that made “Match” cases, and, having a large quantity of Lake City '77 Match cases, went to work on the primer pockets of them, also.  Surprise!  Seldom was any significant brass removed from the floor of the pocket; almost always, just a little burnishing action.  A very uniform .122"-.123” depth.  Apparently, this was one of the criteria for “Match” cases.   Again, a regular burn pattern. Going once again through commercial cases, I found the same irregular depth.  And, miking the primer height of some standard large rifle primers, (Starret mike checked with a Standard) that the height varied from .120” to .1237 in a random manner.  Federal 210M seemed to be very regular at ~ .121".  Only thing I haven't figured out, is just exactly how to use this info to my advantage.  I am impressed by the uniform burn pattern, and I absolutely think that it has to be helpful;  I just don't know how helpful in terms of reducing group sizes. Sorry for this long posting; but it's the culmination of about 8 months effort.  Hope it helps someone, beside me. Bill  

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Ed Harris posted this 24 April 2014

For years I have used a carbide primer pocket uniformer which cuts primer pockets to a uniform depth. I need to measure it now to see what it cuts, but on most cases it cuts the pocket 3/4 of the way around, but on FA and LC match cases it just cleans the residue out, leaving a shiny surface. It is cut like an end millwith fixed depth shoulder. I'll have to measure it and take a picture. Mine is from Whitetail Engineering, K&M also makes them.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 24 April 2014

Like Ed, I have used the Whitetail carbide cutter for many years. Once uniformed, it will clean the pockets in 1/2 turn, faster than anything else. I think I paid $20 for mine and have down many thousands of cases. They are factory set for large rifle / pistol and small rifle depths. HTH, Ric

Attached Files

j35nut posted this 24 April 2014

Ed's article in Handloader #139 1989 “Reloading For Semi auto rifles” inspired me to purchase the Match prep tools.

I have noticed over the years that uniforming the primer pocket depth is not a one time deal.

Anybody else notice this?

-----J

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 24 April 2014

referring to my notes and conversations from cf mj benchresters  ... who have rifles capable of showing the difference ... yes, they use the uniformer often if not each time; some brass must be moving.

i also have a whitetail carbide reamer.

normal extension of firing pins is about 0.063, so i am thinking FOR OUR CURRENT STATE OF THE ART IN CAST BULLETS  ..  it is important to seat the primer fully against the floor of the pocket,  but not so important as to the distance from the bolt face to the primer cup.  ( within 0.005 )

when you get down to 1/2 moa with your cast bullets, go for the obsessive uniforming.   or, of course, if it makes you feel good. ( g ) .

so far, i use my uniformer to turn everlast cases on my lathe.

oh, if you use a gadget that seats primers a fixed distance, it would be good to use a uniformer.  primers should be seated with a very light squish .

ken

Attached Files

joeb33050 posted this 24 April 2014

6.3 PRIMER TESTS C. Dell   "I have been told many times down through the years that if a gun has a light hammer fall the groups fired with that gun will string up and down. I had always assumed that this was true as the persons reporting this effect were very respected men who had done a lot of really serious shooting.

Back before the primer shortage developed I had made a test rig to test primers all by themselves (a stand alone test of primers). Basically I was able to hit primers with a very repeatable force and was determining how much force it took to reliably fire them as well as the velocity that they would impart to a specially made pellet. Results were determined by measuring the velocity of the pellets about fifteen feet from the muzzle of the test rig. This testing was discontinued when the supply of the desired primers for testing dried up.

These tests have not at this time been resumed. Two observations were, however, made from the data collected at that time. One: the observed average velocities were not affected by how hard the primer was hit. Second: about one primer in five regardless of make or grade was to a noticeable amount deviant from the group average. This took the form of either being significantly higher OR lower in velocity than the average.

These properties were discussed with various shooters during the time that supplies of the various primers were not available. I was often asked if the same results would be observed if I were actually shooting cartridges loaded with powder and bullet. There was at that time no practical way that I could test this idea. As a result the question was left hanging with no real answer.

Recently a method was conceived that would readily permit study of this as well as other questions. I had a spare Douglas 32-40 barrel blank with a 1-12 inch twist that could be devoted to a test program. A breech system was devised that would permit various firing pin impacts on the primer to be studied. It is not a fast system but permits one shot to be fired about every two minutes. Bullets are weighed, lubricated and swaged so that they are as uniform as can practically be made. All of the shots in the test were fired from my rail gun at a range of 100 yards. This test was designed to equate obtained accuracy with primer impact.

It was determined that six five shot groups under three different striker impact forces would be studied. The cartridge case was my 32-357 Magnum which was developed back in about 1971 but not really used until about 1993 when I received a barrel blank from Ken Bresein that was cut with Pope style rifling. It is the cartridge that my current competition gun is chambered for. The bullet is a 200-grain basic bullet from a Colorado Shooter's Supply mold. the bullet is subsequently lubricated and swaged before shooting. The swage is one of my own design and build. The powder charge for this test is 8.1 grains of Accurate Arms #7. Primers for this test were the Remington 7 1/2. One cartridge case was used for all shooting in this test. Powder charges were cast from a Redding M 3 BR powder measure and not individually weighed. Groups were evaluated by two methods, extreme spread of the two widest bullet holes and by the mean radius concept which studies all of the shots in the group.

In studying the velocity of all the shots fired on the record groups it was interesting to observe that about one shot in five was deviant from the group average by more than five feet per second. As most groups did not have an extreme velocity spread of more than ten feet per second this was considered significant. The deviance occurred both ways from the average velocity of the group. Some deviant shots measured a low velocity and others a high velocity. When more than one deviant shot occurred within a given group of five shots it would raise or lower the group average. Because of this, all comparisons were to the overall average velocity as all shots were fired under basically the same conditions of loading, temperature and load.

I will report the average velocities of each of the 30 shot study groups and the final average velocity for the total 90 shots of the test.

In a similar manner I will report the average velocity spread within each set, the average standard deviation, the average extreme spread and the average mean radius. All averages taken on six five round groups.   Phase I Phase II Phase III     Light Moderate Heavy Average   Impact Impact Impact Overall Average Vel. (fps) 1227 1227 1228 1227 Avg. Velocity Spread (fps) 8 9 11 9 Avg. Vel. Std. Dev. (fps) 4 3 4 4 Avg. Extreme Group Spread (") 0.695 0.700 0.750 0.720 Avg. Mean Radius (") 0.281 0.252 0.276 0.270 This I believe shows beyond any reasonable doubt that accuracy is not affected one way or another by the force of the firing blow. If the primer goes off it goes off and the amount of energy transmitted to the powder is not affected by the impact energy of the firing pin. Even those primers that had to be hit twice in order to initiate ignition showed no difference from those that went off on initial impact.

While I believe that this eliminates one source of alibis for groups that are strung out up and down, it is one less thing that we as shooters of various old and new guns have to be concerned about. After completing this series of tests I can say without hesitation that accuracy is in no way affected by the force of the firing pin impact on the primer."

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 25 April 2014

very interesting. i am going to move my belief arrow over to about 90 %. ... but will accept further data ...

testing primers is about like testing flashbulbs ... ok ok remember flashbulbs ?? kitchen matches ??

ken

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 26 April 2014

Highly interesting post by Joe B. re:primer sensitivity.  One of the things that concerned me when I was uniforming/deepening pockets, was adequate  firing-pin contact to get uniform ignition.  Joe's research seems to point to the fact that, if it goes “bang” that all is, basically, good in the ignition dep't. and there is little difference (read: meaningless) insofar as how the “bang” is achieved.  Making my primer-pocket work totally superflous.  Well, I can live with that, too.As an aside, my latest brainstorm is to take some extremely reduced loads, (with the same powder charges I've used before, and fire them with Federal 150 Large Pistol primers.  I've a couple of examples of this same loading, with 2 different bullets, that show a 10-shot S.D of 7 and 9 respectively.  This with W-W Large Rifle primers.  I'm highly curious to fire this new stuff and compare numbers between the pistol and rifle primers.  Still doing lots of fiddling, with lots more to do. Bill\

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

joeb33050 posted this 27 April 2014

billglaze wrote: Highly interesting post by Joe B. re:primer sensitivity.  One of the things that concerned me when I was uniforming/deepening pockets, was adequate  firing-pin contact to get uniform ignition.  Joe's research seems to point to the fact that, if it goes “bang” that all is, basically, good in the ignition dep't. and there is little difference (read: meaningless) insofar as how the “bang” is achieved.  Making my primer-pocket work totally superflous.  Well, I can live with that, too.As an aside, my latest brainstorm is to take some extremely reduced loads, (with the same powder charges I've used before, and fire them with Federal 150 Large Pistol primers.  I've a couple of examples of this same loading, with 2 different bullets, that show a 10-shot S.D of 7 and 9 respectively.  This with W-W Large Rifle primers.  I'm highly curious to fire this new stuff and compare numbers between the pistol and rifle primers.  Still doing lots of fiddling, with lots more to do. Bill

The research was done by Charlie Dell, not me. I found Charlies results very interesting, and remembered a parallel. In “The High Speed Internal Combustion Engine", written by Sir Harry Ricardo long ago, Harry's research showed that lighting the gas/air mixture either happened or didn't-that the size or duration or intensity of the spark made no difference-it either burns or doesn't. (Better ignition systems increase the PROBABILITY of burning, not the intensity.) Charlie's results seem to mirror Sir Harry's.

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 27 April 2014

Bill, Be sure to let us know how your primer comparison turns out. Those are very good SDs.  What powder are you using? John John

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 03 May 2014

Interesting, (to me at least) is just what has been mentioned before: I have found that, after uniforming the bottom of the primer pockets, after firing I could “uniform” them again, and again, taking off a small amount of brass with my cutter each time.  Sometimes, as much as three treatments are needed until the cutter takes off only the residue, leaving the pocket bottom “smoky” looking--just what I want. The above only refers to the civilian-make cases; not to the L.C. Match stuff.  In my experience, the Gov't. brass is--once done, always done. Bill

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 04 May 2014

Back when I was building race engines for (primarily) drag boats,  I went through a fair amount of study on this.  Working with Mallory's local rep, (and others like MSD) it was determined that:  the so-called “200,000 volt” ignition magnetos were meaningless, because the mag only generated/used the amount of spark required to jump the electrode gap; no more, no less.  All the MSD, and dual plugs and high-potential mags did, was to make sure that at least something got started in the combustion chamber.  Same thing in the R-2800 and R-3350 aircraft engines.  Dual plugs with multiple electrodes supposedly got the fire lit.  (The idea of multiple electrodes is hilarious--totally foul one electrode, and you still have a mis-fire.)But, to get back to shooting, I'm still going to try to do a few things, and kind of “noodle” around to see if I can get some qualitative results--better or worse. Bill

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

.22-10-45 posted this 04 May 2014

I too use the Whitetail carbide tools in both small & large size. I have noticed even when shooting moderate smokeless loads from the .22 Hornet/.222 Rem. class up thru .40-70 2 1/2” straight..those tools are continually removing brass..not alot, and not the same amounts from case to case..but apparently that brass continues to flow thru the life of a case.

Attached Files

j35nut posted this 05 May 2014

Bill--Good luck and I hope you get some qualitative results.

I have always uniformed primer pockets more for safety than accuracy.

----J

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 06 May 2014

 John:Powder is 4756, new to me.  Very impressive results; since I posted last, I fired a 10 shot string with an e.s. of 30, and a s.d. of 3. (!)I've also fired some g.c. bullets without the g.c.'s and gotten some interesting results.I've got some more tests loaded up for firing this week; I want to see if there is any marked difference between LR and LP.  I've also got an idea for a non-firing test that may give another idea or two about the bullets' launch out of the case.Also, I just finished Major George Nonte's 1972 book about handloading; I noticed a few things that I'll post about later.  Interesting read. 

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

Close