Larger cases NEED mag primers. The .475 and up NEED them for accuracy as do many large rifle rounds. The 30-06 does NOT need them but the .300 Weatherby NEEDS them.
The .44 DOES NOT! Plain and simple.
You are out of your league about primers, leave it to us experts.

OK

Wow, really?

I wasn’t involved in this “discussion,” but read the linked article with interest. Again, I have no dog in this fight, but you seem hell-bent on proving a point, and now you are using this piece as supporting documentation for your theory. I was merely pointing out that you seem to be cherry-picking parts to lend support, while ignoring other parts that do not support your argument.

Sorry, just trying to help you, counselor. This is Debating 101 – if you are going to use a document to support your argument, make sure that said document doesn’t also contain information that may not support your argument. In other words, you need to read the entire article before declaring that it vindicates you.

I did and it clearly states too much primer pressure can unseat a bullet.
Now just how did I figure that out long ago myself with no test equipment?
I need no documentation at all but it was a surprise to see an expert come to the same findings.
You seem to ignore facts.
Why do you continue? You are wrong and JWP is wrong.
Primer pressure can unseat a bullet before burn, it is fact, get over it and quit trying to dispute it.
Learn to read too, it states in plain English that some cases need magnum primers and is exactly what I have said.
Prove to everyone that the .44 NEEDS a mag primer---can you do it? Come clean and prove it.
The ball is in your court and I don't want to see written rag junk, I want to see YOUR proof.
OH heck, I forgot, I made your loads! OK, buy some mag primers for your .44.

I will pit my reading skills against yours any day. Are you off your meds?

The example he cited specifically was the 9mm and the .22 Hornet. Where did you read .44 Magnum? I am not arguing against your theory, I am telling you that the article doesn't necessarily support your argument. But you have turned this around and attacked me personally. That is a clear indicator that you have a weak argument. I never said anything against you or your theory, merely pointed out segments of the article you are glossing over or not completely comprehending. Good grief!

Explain to me why the major manufacturers of ammo use mag primers in the .44 Mag loads? Is it because they are not experts?

I am grateful I didn't have to use my Lee handloader any more as it was time consuming (particularly when I was a college student). But you, sir, have no class.

WHOA --- I did not intend to start a heated argument. Sorry that I posted the link. I had found it interesting and hoped that others would also find it interesting, if not useful. I did not intend to throw gasoline on a burning fire --- LOL

I'm watching...........

It wasn't you WT!

You have a good grasp on the subject

Me2, and I've got my popcorn ready ;-).

The part that you continue to miss is that the powder ignites the instant that the primer flash clears the flash hole. The primer simply does not push the bullet before the powder ignites.

You only posted a legitimate article on the subject, a value of information. Accurate information shared is what these forums are about and I value accurate information

Do not feel that you did anything wrong, you did a service IMHO......

LOL.that is funny.

In reference to the original topic, I have had similiar experiences while handloading large charges of H4227. Lots of unburned powder, and it would fly back into your face. quite uncomfortable to shoot. I used all of it up as soon as I could and switched powder and never had another problem.

Threads like this make me glad I dont handload, and have to ask questions!! Wow.

Hahahaha!!! May just be the most sensible post in this thread.

you know I don't mind spirited debates but one thing on this one really got under my skin. Just because someone may not have the years in experimenting or researching a certain subject doesn't mean they don't have usefull information and can't be an asset to a discussion. I learned a long time ago that if you are really intelligent you will learn something everyday and many times it will be from the most unlikely source, ie the most green of all people in whatever subject your dealing with. The day you consider yourself an "expert" instead of others doing so is the day you have a problem. At that point your basically saying I know it all and that will always bite you in the ass. If you let yourself you will be learning something new and that will only stop the day you die and maybe not even then. But don't discount what others may have to say. It's like the sign on my Snap-On box said "Be careful of who's toes you step on today as they may be attached to the ass you kiss tomorrow". I have no negative feelings toward any of you but don't put down others for trying to contribute even if you disagree with them.
I've been in some heated debates on here and some have gotten personal and some have crossed the line but even then I never told someone to stay out of a conversation.

Dang, Rod, that was downright phyliosyphical. And I couldn't agree more....

Honestly, I can’t prove it… I don’t know how, I don’t have the facilities, or the finances…

I can only do what is available to me. I take out my gun, shoot as many loads as I can manipulate, compile the data the best I can, and shoot what the gun likes. In my 9.5 SRH 44 I shoot a 300XTP on the second crimp line with a “max” charge of H110 and a CCI Mag pistol primer. That is the best load I have been able to develop. And it will shoot a 1in gourp at 100...

To be honest 430 Man, you and hero pictures with your revolvers is one of the motivations I have had to start casting again. I am currently getting my feet wet with a 310 Lee mold. Granted I have cast 54 cal round balls for quite some time, I have never cast conical bullets and I have been wanting to get into the art, I just never been able to physically because of location discrepancies. Thank you for the inspiration, however I am still going to shoot what my gun is the most accurate with, be it standard or magnum primes.

I'm going to wave a white flag while barely poking my head out of a hole to say this, so please don't shoot me...

Can we suffice it to say that mag primers may not be "needed", but under the right conditions, can be used.

OK, back into my hole with my popcorn...

I prefer Winchester large pistol primers, one primer for all occasions, no magnum, no standard, just the one. Simple is easy, keep it that way ;-)

Me too although during the shortage when the idiot was elected I could only get hold of CCI's so I'm stocked up with those for the moment and I have no issues. I use mag primers in 357's, 41's, 44's, and 45's and of course the biggest bores but all of the ones listed I have loads that are accurate and they all use the same powder, H110 and in max doses.

Bottom line if you reload then experiment with different components if you wish although I've found that following the recommendations of the manuals is normally best and if you shoot factory ammo then try different ones until you find the one that works best.

Hey s4s4u, Do you suppose that would hold true for the 460 smith and wesson also? I'm a BIG FAN of keeping things simple. But if I'm not mistaken, I think the 460 can do the magnums.

Jeesh, now I'm even leary to say the word "magnum". Don't want to set something off again...

I agree with the what the article stated and that is if the load data uses and calls for a mag primer then that is what should be used. H-110/296 data uses mag primers. The article flat out states that the load shoots with more uniform pressures (consistent burn rate after ignition)

As with the 9mm and 22 Hornet the use of too hot of a primer is possible because of the small case capacity. Nothing new or earth shattering in this revelation, many already realize this.

The 475 and 500 Linebaugh case from Star Line have large rifle primer pockets, but the use of large rifle primers can cause as much as 10,000 PSI pressure increase without an increase in velocity. John Linebaugh told me that is what he found when Hornady pressure tested this for him with his pressure barrels. Again the cause is too much ignition that increases the burn rates
I will post this again as it is a perfect example of burn rate chang in powder as the charge wieght is increase even with the same primer




I could not agree more, it is about the ignition characteristics

Yes, that was all I used in my 460 and 500S&W's and I used them in all my other magnum cartridges until I ran out and stocked up on the CCI Large Pistol Mags and so far they haven't had a negative effect on my accuracy but I'll stock back up on the Win's when these run down but I still have a few thousand to go through.

First of all may I add that a primer only in a bottleneck case will move the bullet forward, barely makes an audible noises and causes an eight point to give you that "whaaat was thaaaat" look, almost supporting the notion that a mag primer changes effective case volume... but regardless, it really embarasses a veteran handloader. really rotten time for the first no powder load in thirty years of reloading.