Load development

Discussions of powders, bullets and loading information.

Moderators: Kirk, Lucinda

semtav
Posts: 2874
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: Montana

Load development

Post by semtav »

For years, when I started a load development, I always started with the same primer. BR-2.
After I worked up a load that shot well with that primer, I would test other primers against it.
Invariably, the results were almost always the same.
The Fed 210's were close, once in a while a pistol primers was as good, maybe even better, but the Remington and Winchester primers were horrible. To the point I had no use for either primer and would never use one in a rifle. I even tried the white box Winchester primers that Kenny liked to no avail.
It wasn't until I was talking to MikeH tonight about load development on the cheap, that some things started to click. I haven't been starting with the same primer yet regardless of which one I start with I made a real good load using it. The Browning 45-110 that I've been shooting for the last 3 years, I started out with the Fed 210's and they are shooting great. With the Wesson 45-100, I started out with the BR-2's and it is shooting great. But because I got a whole bunch of 40-82 brass already primed with Winchester primers, when I got the Borchardt, I just decided to use them up. It shoots great with them. The primer I thought was junk!!

That got me to thinking, are we actually developing a load to match a primer when most of us think we trying to get a primer to match a load?
gunlaker
Posts: 2764
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:16 pm

Re: Load development

Post by gunlaker »

In a couple of rifles with Dan Theodore's paper patch chambers I've almost always had the best results with Winchester Large Rifle. I am testing a new lot of Swiss 1.5 with BR2's this time and it's looking good. BR2's or Fed LR/LP match primers are what I usually use in most of my rifles though.

Interestingly, one of my most accurate loads that I use for practice in my .40-65's is with some old FFFg Express, Saeco #740, and Remingtion LP primers. However most any LP primer works in that load. For some reason Remington primers are almost never seen where I live though.

Chris.
DeadEye
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:38 pm
Location: The Flatlands of Canada

Re: Load development

Post by DeadEye »

I do believe you are correct. As we all know, only change one thing at a time regardless of if it is the primer, wad, powder, brass. The 'load' is the combination of all the components and how they interact. The theory with rifle primers is that they are too 'hot' which led to the use of pistol primers for their lower brisance. I believe that holds true in the 2.1" case length but as you stretch out to 2.4" and above I believe a little more 'oomph' is a good thing. I think it also relates to the amount of compression as in more compression needs a hotter primer and the converse is true. I think that could be why the W-W primers worked in the 40-82 for you. I have always stayed with 0.060" to 0.10" compression and LP primers have always worked for me but I believe as you compact the powder more and therefore reduce the amount of oxygen present a LR or even a magnum primer would be worth a try. Just a WAG but . . .

Paul
"My heroes have always been cowboys and they still are it seems."
User avatar
Don McDowell
Posts: 7633
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:04 pm
Location: Ft. Laramie Wy
Contact:

Re: Load development

Post by Don McDowell »

Primers are one place that reloading smokeless and black are very similar. Much as in smokeless the rifle is going to have it's primer preference, along with the load. Does anybody work up a smokeless load in their high-power centerfire, and then wonder why if you switch primers groups change?
AKA Donny Ray Rockslinger :?
semtav
Posts: 2874
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: Montana

Re: Load development

Post by semtav »

DeadEye wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 8:20 am I think that could be why the W-W primers worked in the 40-82 for you. I have always stayed with 0.060" to 0.10" compression and LP primers have always worked for me but I believe as you compact the powder more and therefore reduce the amount of oxygen present a LR or even a magnum primer would be worth a try. Just a WAG but . . .

Paul
Interestingly, my original 40-82 really liked a magnum pistol primers and the small primer hole when stuffed full of Swiss. My 45-90 also liked magnum pistol primers both when used with grease groove bullets. That did not carry over when I switched directly to PP bullets.
Maybe cause I was going about it all wrong. I need to start over and work up a load for those primers instead of the other way around.
DeadEye
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:38 pm
Location: The Flatlands of Canada

Re: Load development

Post by DeadEye »

Still on the subject of 'Load Development' has anyone tried duplexing different granulations of Black Powder? Two things are converging here. First I am running out of Olde Eynsford and secondly I have on hand a case of Goex 2f (bought in 2004) along with a bunch of Goex 3f. Until O/E once again becomes available I am toying with the idea of using say 10 or 15 grains of 3F on the bottom and 66 grains of 2F on top. I know there would be some co-mingling while dropping the 2F. My present load is 81 gr. of O/E for the 45-90. What say you . . . ?

Paul
"My heroes have always been cowboys and they still are it seems."
User avatar
Don McDowell
Posts: 7633
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:04 pm
Location: Ft. Laramie Wy
Contact:

Re: Load development

Post by Don McDowell »

That's just something that will take a bunch of fiddling around with. Might be best to just blend some of the 3 with 2 and go from there.
Otherthan that have you tried just starting workup with 82 grains of 2f or 75 or so of the 3f.
It's looking like Estes is about ready to start shipping powder, don't know if OE is in the mix or just the red can stuff.
AKA Donny Ray Rockslinger :?
DeadEye
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:38 pm
Location: The Flatlands of Canada

Re: Load development

Post by DeadEye »

I agree with all that you say Don, I was just trying to kill two birds with one stone. Use up both powders which I have no other use for at this time. Well that's not quite true, my Silhouette Chicken load uses 58 gr. of the 3F but at that rate I have more powder than time. :wink:

By the way, it was you who put me on to the idea of upping the primer power as compression increases. Many years ago I read a post of yours that said the change point is 0.150" compression. Do you still follow that idea or I should ask, do you remember making that statement?

Paul
"My heroes have always been cowboys and they still are it seems."
User avatar
Don McDowell
Posts: 7633
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:04 pm
Location: Ft. Laramie Wy
Contact:

Re: Load development

Post by Don McDowell »

I don't recall that about the primer thing Paul, but it does make since as when compression goes up, the powder column becomes more dense, therefore being harder to ignite.

On the duplexing thing, I'm wondering with the 3f on the bottom the initial hot spark from that 3f might not start the rest of the powder column and bullet to begin to move before the charge is fully ignited? Maybe a small primer charge with 2 or 3 grains would be ok. But keeping in mind that according to Roberts Schuetzen rifle book, duplexing got started because those with the primers from pre smokeless days couldn't reliably get the smokeless to ignite. So the duplexing a small charge of black under the smokeless to get reliable ignition. He also recommended screening the smokeless powder and sorting it into separate jars according to screen size.
The same thing occurs today when trying to get pyrodex to work in a flintlock, if you pour a primer charge of 3f black down first then the pyrodex a flintlock can use the stuff, but my gosh what a pain in the tush that is.
AKA Donny Ray Rockslinger :?
DeadEye
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:38 pm
Location: The Flatlands of Canada

Re: Load development

Post by DeadEye »

Right Don, it would be a PITA. I thought of duplexing to be sure I had the exact amounts of both powders per round. The thought of not having a precise mix would keep me awake nights. What you say about a double bump getting the column started is exactly the theory that I have read behind the use of pistol primers and why I have been using them for many years. I have a few pounds of O/E left and might make it through the season but if not I will be involved with the title of the thread. You be well

Paul
"My heroes have always been cowboys and they still are it seems."
Clarence
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 7:38 pm
Location: Hill Country, TX

Re: Load development

Post by Clarence »

20-25 years ago, I got a batch of Elephant FFg that had not been dried correctly, to the point that the metal cans rusted. A full load barely gave me 1000 fps in the .45-70. I finally loaded 6 grains of old DuPont FFFFg against the primer and then the Elephant. That combo brought up the velocity to 1100-1150 fps and allowed me to use the Elephant until I could get better powder. My recollection was that the combo shot okay but not great. As soon as I got better powder, the remaining Elephant went to re-enactors who only cared if the rifle went bang.

Clarence
User avatar
bpcr shooter
Posts: 800
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 5:30 pm
Location: Madison, Wi

Re: Load development

Post by bpcr shooter »

[/quote]

Interestingly, my original 40-82 really liked a magnum pistol primers and the small primer hole when stuffed full of Swiss. My 45-90 also liked magnum pistol primers both when used with grease groove bullets. That did not carry over when I switched directly to PP bullets.
Maybe cause I was going about it all wrong. I need to start over and work up a load for those primers instead of the other way around.
[/quote]


How much freebore do you have in that 40-82?? whats your twist?

FWIW, I have found many, many loads with 1.5f swiss, Fed210M, and a .060 poly wad. 3/45-70's, 44-100, 44-70, 38-55, 40-82, 40-70 Most are in the .085-.095 compression range. I have a old Pedersoli that with slicks, it liked a BR2, under primer wad, and .020 compression. I did replace that bullet with a DDPP and it went right to .090 after that, and with a fed210m and a .060 poly wad it shot fantastic.

It may just be that we fancy a certain primer and do more load development with it than others because we have had more success with that primer. Not that one is better than the other. Many people here shoot primers that, in "my" mind dont perform well, but then you read their scores and its fantastic! I feel that having 1 or 2 primers just makes it easier to keep on hand then having 4-5 different brands and 3-4 different styles within that brand laying around.

Maybe Im wrong.... just how I feel about it.

matt
NMLRA Member
Winnequah Gun Club Member (Lodi, Wi)
WIFORCE Member
SCI Member
semtav
Posts: 2874
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: Montana

Re: Load development

Post by semtav »

Matt.
My original 40-82 that shot so well with the pistol primers was a Browning 16 twist with the Crossno chamber.

My current one is a Borchardt with a 13 twist barrel
Neither of them have any freebore in them.

I plan on shooting a different gun at each Long Range match this year and hopefully will have it ready for the next match.

I would think with the current primer shortage, people might start finding out a lot of different primers are capable of match accuracy, if the load is taylored to them. And not just replacing the primer on a current load.
.
semtav
Posts: 2874
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: Montana

Re: Load development

Post by semtav »

I've come to the same conclusion on primer favorites and why a particular one almost always works best for us. Cause that's the one we develop the load for.
Kenny Wasserburger
Posts: 4728
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2002 3:53 pm
Location: Gillette, Wyoming

Re: Load development

Post by Kenny Wasserburger »

Deadeye hit upon something about needing a bit more umph.

Especially in the longer cases, the Federal 210 match and the old Winchester white box primers give me the best results in the 45-110. Best results in the 40-70 Sharps the Federal 210 match by far. Again I believe it’s due to the taller height of the powder column. And perhaps the heavy compression is a major factor also. Something else I have thought on.

Now I use a primer wad inside the case for both, years of chronograph testing said it makes a difference, plus with a steady wind condition at 1 mile (seldom the case) I ran a record of 8/10. The bullet strikes were all within 18 inches of vertical on the target. The mile shooting has proven to be a very educational test medium, on bullet design, base finning and wad stacks. There are those that poopah those opinions and observations, that which is fine.

You have never been or attended the match, so in essence you’re simply armchair quarterbacking, such opinions are to be ignored, as they have no practical experience, on the subject. :lol: shorter test mediums may not give such clear or concise data. So that probably should be taken in consideration. Walking around that mile target is quite educational, if one chooses to attend.

Load development over the years has always centered around 2 primers for myself, Federal 210 match or Winchester WLR. I have secured a large supply of them over the years especially back in the 90’s as they were proven on My Ohler chronograph shooting the 110. With a primer wad the numbers between these two primers have proven nearly indistinguishable to tell a difference. Without the primer wad I can not say. The Watman ashless filter paper is what I use. Something that Dan and myself had considerable correspondence over. Much like our correspondence on the Hyde base fold over on Paper Patching. When I shot that Paper patch group at the 5@200 Dan was at Raton and we discussed in depth my primer choice, the Hyde base, and my wad stack in great detail, multiple evenings at the Cabin that year of 2008. Something that I shall remember. My amount of compression was also subject to scrutiny and conversation, and Dan felt that it was a contributing factor. That advice was from Bill Bagwell’s experience with Goex. When Express was in the development stages, Bill came to Wyoming on Goex’s tab, with several formulations of Express for testing at 800 and 1000 yards. From the bench I fired some insane groups, at 800 and 1000 yards that Bill photographed. I was sworn to not reveal them as no one would believe them. :shock: Bill carried that data back to Goex, the powder went from being called new process to EXPRESS. While Bill and Dan were never friends, I sort of bridged the gap between the two on multiple occasions. Both were extremely strong personalities, often at odds, the fact that I was friends with both of them, well Bruce Moulds commented on it on several occasions. Another who I miss correspondence with a great deal.

I have also multiple tape results from the Chronograph used back in the day at Raton in my shooting diary for Creedmoor. For the velocity requirements in place. To verify my numbers

I believe that the Remington 9-1/2 is a possible candidate but will obviously require load work up, as one would expect.

Excellent points here by all. Brian also you’re probably more right than you realize.

Kenny Wasserburger
We'll raise up our Glasses against Evil Forces, Singing, Whiskey for my men, Beer for my horses.

Wyoming Territory Sharps Shooter
Post Reply