A 52 FPS difference between a Win WSR primer and Rem 7 1/2 primer. (??)

V

VaniB

New member
I was surprised to compare and find how the fired Remington 7 1/2 primers on my 223 cases appeared rounded and had signs of low pressure, while Winchester fired WSR primers looked very flat with signs of much higher pressure. To confirm my suspicions, I chronographed the round with the WSR primers to verify a 52FPS increase. This was at 72º (a typical "winter day" in Houston)

I was more expecting this when using something hot like the CCI 450 magnum primers, but not when comparing two supposedly standard primers. There's no doubt there would have been be a fair difference in group performance using the two different primers. I use to interchange primer brands for informal target practice and not think much of it. No more of that!

Is this a typical? Or do I have an abnormally manufactured hot batch of WSR's....or abnormally cold batch of Rem 7 1/2's?
 
parden my french...but ....duh?????

would you change case brands and not expect a difference ?

change bullet makers and not expect a change ?

change powder makers and not expect a change ?

why on this earth would you think different maker's primers would perform the same ?

anyone with any common reloading sense knows that if you change anything in a load, you start over, work up and evaluate.

??????????????????????????

mike in co
 
Dunno if it's the same with small rifle, but Winchester LR primers are not (were not?) standard primers. They were specifically designed to light up Winchester ball powders, which with their particular level of surface retardant, take more than the average powder does to get lit up. I'm sure that they were even advertised that way once.

I've always considered these primers to be semimagnums.
 
A 52 fps

Reminton Primers 7 1/2 have a thicker cup then Winchester primers.
 
Yes, The 7.5 has a thicker cup and its very hot.
Hottest SR primer you can buy in the "photo tests" I've seen.

Not sure how scientifically accurate those photo tests really are but the 7.5 throws flame like no other.
 
Yes, I also have found significant differences in fps with different primers and often not in the direction expected. In the AR15 it is well known that WSR are thin, pierce, and blow out much easier. On top of that In my AR therun hotter than the CCI primers.
 
mike in co said:
parden my french...but ....duh?????

would you change case brands and not expect a difference ?

change bullet makers and not expect a change ?

change powder makers and not expect a change ?

why on this earth would you think different maker's primers would perform the same ?

anyone with any common reloading sense knows that if you change anything in a load, you start over, work up and evaluate.

??????????????????????????

mike in co
Click to expand...




mike in co:

As I slowly strolled down the thread to read the 5 replies I found, I instantly spotted your orange avitar, and my heart sunk before I even had a chance to read your reply. I said to myself "OK Randall, be prepared to have your butt chewed".

Well, my expectations came to fruition. Your reply was needlessly belligerant. Do you Sir see anyone else here being rude and talking down to me as you have? You display a reoccuring pattern of aggression. I don't know what your personal problem is, but I am not your dog. Please do not reply on any of my threads again. I will check the control panel to see how I can have you blocked from future threads. You have the distinction of being the first time in my life (after many years on the internet) that I have ever had to check into this. Any subsequent insolence directed by you toward me on other threads that I might have to share with you, shall be referred to the moderators.

________________________________________







Ok gentlemen....where was I before I was rudely interrupted?........oh yea;

Yes gents, I have heard about the WSR's getting pierced. The AR15 is the rifle that I have been using during this load development. The problem is that I have about 800 of these primers left, and hate to toss them. I figured that I would use them for "SHTF defense rounds". About 200 of these rounds with these primers will likely just sit idle in a closet. While I became aware of the issue about the thin metal, I really wasn't aware of how they burn hotter and cause such a large diffeence in FPS. Gosh....it's a terrible reputation that Winchester has developed with these primers. Some places have gone so far as to publicly post their disapproval with the WSR primer and suggest that nobody use it. I'm surprised that Winchester can still sell them. I guess it's the unknowing folks that still buy them. (I bought these primers about 4 years ago when I didn't know better)

Gerry,
I have heard about the thicker cup with Remingtons too, which some folks have said might cause misfires. But, it still is seperate of the 52FPS difference. Evidently, the WSR's must still be burning hotter regardless of cup thickness.

JohnK,
Maybe that's the issue;Maybe these small rifle primers were designed to burn hotter just like the WLR primers.....to properly ignite the ball powders. That's a good point.

jo1911,

Your saying that the Rem 7 1/2s burn way hotter is the opposite of what I'm saying here. (and what others like jcummings have also found) I will not dispute it. It's just the oppopsite of what I am reporting that I have experienced.

Like I said, maybe I have had a bad manufactured batch?

(ie; the 7 1/2's burning too cold, and/or the WSR burning too hot?) Maybe the next different lot of 7 1/2's and WSR's would burn different? ( I have enough of each though, and I will not be replacing them anytime soon)








Thank gents for the input. I just thought I would share this with you, and see what you had to say.
 
Vanib,


fwiw, I tinkered around with my .223 for a long time. I found a good load with N133, and another load with Benchmark with 40 grain VMax bullets and Fed 205 primers. Both were clocking around 3850 fps.

This particular gun shot just about everything well--except RL10x. One day, months after RL10x was introduced, I went back to it to see if I could get it to shoot purely out of curiosity. I decided to stoke it up until I got pressure signs. Well, when I got up to around 3800 fps, it started to shoot but I wasn't getting the velocity of Benchmark or N133 and that was odd to me considering RL10x is quicker burning. Well, knowing that WSR and 7.5 primers were hotter from previous experiments with other calibers, I substituted the 205 with them. BINGO! The WSR gave me 3950 to 4000 fps depending on the load and the 7.5 went beyond 4000 fps. But, the WSR shot bugholes and the REm was all over the place. So, I picked the best load with the WSR's, and loaded it up again only this time with the 205's. They clocked 3850.

Well, this was interesting to me so I decided to run the primer switch test with N133 and Benchmark. In all powders tried, the 205 was the slowest velocity, then the WSR, then the Rem 7.5. However, with N133 and Benchmark, the jumps in velocity with the other primers were not near as dramatic. They only increased 40 or 50 fps instead of 100 fps or more like they did with RL10x. For whatever reason, RL10x's chemistry combined with the chemistry of the WSR and 7.5 made for some "off the charts" velocities and they have been totally safe without so much as a sticky bolt lift. Go figure.....
 
Butch Lambert said:
VaniB,
For a guy that won't go to a match, he sure knows how to bee really sweat to a person asking a question.
Butch
Click to expand...

but u b wrong butch...i shoot matches every year.....just not yours.....mainly because i have not got my vaccinations to go into texas.....i did get a passport and have applied for a visa, but they have question my sanity for wanting to go to texas...

mike in co
 
VaniB said:
I was surprised to compare and find how the fired Remington 7 1/2 primers on my 223 cases appeared rounded and had signs of low pressure, while Winchester fired WSR primers looked very flat with signs of much higher pressure. To confirm my suspicions, I chronographed the round with the WSR primers to verify a 52FPS increase. This was at 72º (a typical "winter day" in Houston)

I was more expecting this when using something hot like the CCI 450 magnum primers, but not when comparing two supposedly standard primers. There's no doubt there would have been be a fair difference in group performance using the two different primers. I use to interchange primer brands for informal target practice and not think much of it. No more of that!

Is this a typical? Or do I have an abnormally manufactured hot batch of WSR's....or abnormally cold batch of Rem 7 1/2's?
Click to expand...


sorry to have ruffled your tender texas feathers.
the std rem small rifle primer is a 6 1/2.....the 7 1/2 is not a "std", it is listed as a br primer.
again if you had read and applied common shooting sense you should not have been suprised.

your best buddy
mike in co
 
My experiences with the Winchester WSR primers have been in the 6PPC, the 22PPC and in recent years the 220 and 6mm Beggs cartridges. Before discovering the Wolf SRM primer last year, the Winchester WSR was my favorite. Yes, the cup of the WSR is softer than the Fed 205 and CCI BR4, and when using actions with large diameter firing pins you are more likely to experience primer piercing. I shoot mostly Stiller Drop Port actions with small diameter firing pins and have never pierced a Winchester primer.

The Winchester WSR is a fine product and yes, the 52 fps increase you see is normal. Nothing in the world is perfect for all applications but the Winchester primers are a great product. I will always be found using them or Wolf SRM's. The Wolf primers have the hardest, toughest cup I have ever encountered but do not produce the extra energy of the WSR. They are accurate! :)


Gene Beggs
 
VaniB

Yep, I'm offering no conclusions on why the Win is faster than the 7.5 in your case. Stuff happens;):D
FWIW I've had some good luck with Win SR primers in my 204R's. They do flatten right up but they will handle any "book data" load I've thrown at them in Savage bolt guns. I've had some pretty accurate loads worked up with them. I use mostly 205m's and 450's tho.
So far I've only found one load in a 6BR 14 twist that appreciated the 7.5 above all others.

Anyhow...

Heres one of those primer tests I referred too. As I said, no idea if the amount of flame is indicitave of higher brissance. WSR is not included in this test.
I believe I once read the 7.5 was first labeled 7.5 Magnum. Rem switched the designation to BR shortly after thier initial introduction.


http://www.6mmbr.com/PrimerPix.html
 
VANI...
you did not say what you were doing with the 223 ??

i highly reccomend the wolf sr 223 primer for ar's....consistant....

in a bolt gun either it or the srm have a great following....

mike in co
 
A guy brought this to me after he switched from wsr to 7 1/2 primers without working the load back up.

burnt_223_bolt_face.jpg
 
What a whole lotta interesting testimony here.....as Jo1911 and goodgrouper detailed, a particular powder can really react quite differently then what might otherwise be expected. I would have anticipated peformance variances in velocity and accuracy from one powder and primer combination to the next, but 52FPS surprised me for two supposedly standard rifle primers. And then in one instant the Rem7.5 is faster then the WSR, but then in the next instant the WSR is faster then the Rem 7.5 Like goodgrouper says...."go figure". The powder I was using was IMR 4195 powder. But then also throw compressed .223 loads into this equation too.

Gene, it was also interesting to hear you say that the WSR's have their place, and I guess that I shouldn't run too far from it. Hopefully, the AR15 firing pin has that same small head surface as you describe, and I will not suffer piercing. But man, do they sure flatten out more then the CCI 400, BR4's or the Rem 7 1/2'S.

This whole deal has caused me to go shopping for a new chronograph so I can commence with more thourough testing. I need to find me a smaller and more portabe chronograph then my 15 year old Oehler 35 that I can take to the range. It needs to have a remote readout screen that I can keep on the bench to monitor each shot results.

______________________________________________

EDIT:
PEI Rob,
Oh gosh....at the risk of really looking newb here :eek: ;

What lesson does that photo depict? If those are burn marks all around the pin that were caused by a pierced REM primer............then what does the powder load not having been brought back up have to do with it? Thanks.

Or did you mean when he changed from WSR's to Rem 7.5's he got higher pressures from changing to the Rem 7.5 and failing to re-adjust the powder load back down?

_____________________________________________







BTW; Has anybody here ever had to use the "ignore list"? I have it on now, and it is isolating me from seeing whatever the intruder is posting. But just the fact that I had asked him not to participate any further in my threads, but I still see his name appearing, tells me that this feature is next to useless with folks like this that have no shame, and go where they please and where they are not wanted.
 
Last edited:
yep i'm still here. i even offered some advice, but some people are so sensitive that they ignore good info....its ok....the issue is its not "your" thread. its wilbur's site and a public forum. so deal with it like an adult.

and i see you made the same wrong statement about the 7 1/2 being a "std" primer......you dont seem to learn .......


mike in co
 
A 52 fps

If i remember right back when the 7 1/2 was designated a magnum
primer. The flame from the primer is very long as posted before.
A test was done many years ago about this.
The post about the photos was one test , also one was written in ps years
ago with a metal rod in the barrel. The rod was placed in the barrel and a primed case behind it , the rifle was shot and measurments were taken on how far thye rod moved from the Muzzel.
Remingtons 7 1/2 moved the farthest.
WOW i'm getting old That was a very long time ago
I wonder how many guys are still around that read that"???
Well those Winchester small rifles, lately were used in bolt rifles with good success, so good some guys are using them in benchrest competition.
I would save them and use them in one of my other rifles {bolt action}
for other shooting. The winchester [primers are very consistant.
Now the Wolf primer that were talked about are The small rifle magnum.
They also have a thicker cup. Make sure you give those a crush fit for posative ignition. If they dont get seated all of the way they will misfire.
I have two AR's and all I use in them is the 7 1/2.
I hope this answers your questions and is of some help. GERRY
 
I agree with Gerry. I would save the WSRs for bolt guns. I find both WLRs and WSRs work well for ball powders.

Here's a couple good resources for AR15 loading:

http://www.whiteoakprecision.com/info-reloading.htm
http://www.njhighpower.com/

You'll note that John Holliger (one of the top high power shooters and AR15 gunsmiths) states "I use Remington 7-1/2 primers, but Federal work fine also. Winchester primers have a tendancy to pierce, so I do not recommend them."

The widely preferred AR15 primers for competition are Rem7-1/2, Wolf SR Mag, and CCI BR4 or #41.

The njhighpower reference has a nice table with primer cup thickness.

Despite this I can tell you that the WSRs CAN be used in your AR15 but you will need to back down on the load and I strongly recommend chronoing. They do work well with W748 which is a good powder in the AR15 for the lighter bullets. It is temp sensitive however which can be a hassle.

James
 
Last edited:
Yes, I've seen that Hollinger warning. Between the higher 52FPS and the much flatter primer cup, this pattern makes sense with what he warns. I've just been fortunate so far that out of about 150 rounds I haven't experienced a blow-out yet.

I've been handloading my chrome lined 16" barreled Colt 6920 AR, for the best groups at 100 yards as possible. Considering the collapsible LMT stock, and short 16" stock chrome lined barrel, I've been satisfied with the consistant 1" groups. However, due to the loss of velocity with the short barrel to begin with (ie; 2,560fps with WSR), I hate to lose that 52FPS. I can try BR4's and cci 400'S that I have on hand, but I doubt that the BR4'S will increase velocity over the Rem 7.5's. But maybe the CCI 400's will.(?)

As far as powders go, I've had the best accuracy with 24.5 of IMR4895, and 25.0 of RL15. I'll likely stay with the 4195 which for some reason gives me a little less verticle. They are both within 25FPS of each other with low pressure signs on the Rem7.5 primers. (very rounded fired cups)It's just I hate to lose that extra 52FPS.


Thanks gents for the good info. :) It seems like I really need to find me a portable chronograph for the range and get to the bottom of things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top