Federal changing their primers

U

Unclenick

Staff
Federal's new lead-free Catalyst primer design is being phased in over the next five years. They think it is actually better technology than lead styphnate. They must have tested it pretty thoroughly, as the military is accepting it and so it must be stable enough to meet the 45-year stockpiling spec and its extreme temperature specs. Also, Federal wouldn't want to put its match ammunition reputation at risk.

My immediate reaction is to wonder if the sensitivity is still a match to the basic lead styphnate primers they use. Federal has been a go-to for guns with weak springs because of its sensitivity. I'm also curious how the primer residue will compare to the current primers and whether or not they changed flash hole sizes to accommodate it, or if the compatibility is 100%. I'm going to email them to ask.
 
if someone can get hold of some a side by side test similar to this on is in order

http://www.6mmbr.com/primerpix.html

any clue when they will be on the shelf ? A quick chrono test will tell the tale. I have found Federal 205's and CCI 400/450's both give me the more consistent SD's and lower ES numbers than Remington 7 1/2's so I can always fall back on CCI if the new Feds suck
 
It is a good news indeed. Lead styphnate primer residue is my number one concern whenever I am doing anything firearms related. 5 years is perfect, so that I can use up current cache. Thanks for the info. I will be waiting with credit card.

There were, maybe still are, lead-free primers from Russia. No good.

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
 
The sensitivity of Federal primers, with more reliable detonation in race guns, I understand is due to a softer or thinner cup rather than chemistry.
 
Back in the late 80's someone did a survey and found that most slamfires on the Service Rifle Match firing line occurred with Federal primers, crediting this to Federal's greater sensitivity. But Federal responded that their primers were no more sensitive than anyone else's and that the reason most slamfires involved Federal primers is that most match shooters reload with them.

Assuming Federal was accurate in their statement, this suggests that on an H-test, Federal primers have the same mean ignition energy threshold most primers do, which, in turn, suggests to me it isn't the cups. You would get higher apparent sensitivity if the basic lead styphnate has a sharper threshold knee than normal lead styphnate so that you don't get as many randomly harder-to-ignite primers. But I don't know. It's just speculation. I've thought of building an H-tester. It's not hard and would be interesting to play with.


Houndawg,

The only clue is that broad 5-year time frame.
 
Interesting.

One thing that article was 100% right about the general ignorance about what makes up a primer. I am wondering, will this be a proprietary product or will the chemistry be obvious and available to the other manufacturers?

IMO, it'a a bigger deal if it would be available for all.
 
I don't think they share exact formulations intentionally (note that a key element is the moisture-immune mix of sensitizer and fuel and binders, and that isn't spelled out) and they may have applied for a patent, but I don't know. But you can bet other manufacturers will be working on competitive components.
 
Being that I own revolvers with limber springs and short actions, I have no doubt Federals are more sensitive, whether soft cups or basic styphnate.

Should I get a lifetime supply of Real Federals?
 
New Primers Dove-tailing with LPP for .45acp vs SPP for .45acp

I just recently got a few .45acp casings with SPP instead of LPP as I am used to and have only reloaded in the past. I assume these new primers mentioned above are the "green" SPP.

I had a question here. All things being equal, loading SPP for larger calibers is recommended to load as usual with same load-data for LPP. Is slower or faster powder better suited for this use? (Make sense?)

I found 50 casings with SPP pockets so loaded 25 with 'Autocomp' (slowest powder I had on hand). And 25 with "Titegroup" fastest powder on hand.

Any opinions as to how to deal with the SPP casings? Would slower powder or faster be better in those larger cases? Or does it matter? Just curious.
 
Jim,

Well, Federal primers sure fail to fire a lot less often than anyone else's, whether it's due to greater mean sensitivity or a narrower sensitivity bell curve. Let's see if we can get more information about when the changeover is scheduled? On the one hand, primers don't go bad very easily, so there would seem to be no drawback to buying ahead. On the other hand, what if it turns out the new ones are actually better and produce even more reliable ignition and tighter groups? Then you're stuck with a lot of inferior primers. But then, if you have the precision you want and know you can get it with the old primers, then a bird in the hand…


Robhic,

They aren't necessarily green primer cases. It started out that way, but even for standard primers they often use small pistol primers now just so they don't need to produce two sets of case designs. We've had some board members report on comparing them in .45 Auto and finding basically no really significant performance difference with the same powder charge. Try it for yourself and see. Personally, I've not bought any of the SPP cased ammo and am sticking with LPP 45 Auto just to avoid jamming the loading equipment up.
 
Small primer .45 Auto was orinially made with the "hot" and expensive Dinol lead free primers. I think some lines are getting small styphnate primers for manufacturing convenience.
Wonder which the new stuff will get.

I tried different powders with small versus large primers and saw 25 to 40 fps drops. If that mattered, a small Magnum primer or a fraction of a grain more powder would get it back.
Some say it has made no difference but I wonder if they were chronographing.
 
When Winchester changed to unplated cups, sensitivity improved, presumably due to softer plain brass cups. They were ALMOST reliable in my Colt Custom Tedford action Python. Yet the CAS loaders were complaining of misfires.
 
[SPP] aren't necessarily green primer cases. It started out that way, but even for standard primers they often use small pistol primers now just so they don't need to produce two sets of case designs. We've had some board members report on comparing them in .45 Auto and finding basically no really significant performance difference with the same powder charge.
Click to expand...

Thanks. That's the sorta info I was curious about. If slower or faster powders made any difference in performance. I'll keep the LPP and SPP brass separated so as to not have to go through that exercise again! BTW, these were "BLAZER" ammunition.

I will only bring and shoot one or the other at a time. Separate containers and individual use at the range (or elsewhere). I'll no longer fear the SPP cases! :D
 
The only exception would be if you owned a 1911 fit up old school so the center of the chamber was high enough off the firing pin tunnel centerline that it might strike too near the edge of a small primer to ignite it reliably.
 
Being that I own revolvers with limber springs and short actions, I have no doubt Federals are more sensitive, whether soft cups or basic styphnate.

Should I get a lifetime supply of Real Federals?
Click to expand...

I did.:D I always cringe when someone says they "improved" something that I was already very happy with.

Don
 
As I have four (absolutely inspiring...) purpose built PPC revolvers that will give a 40-60% MALF rate if I feed them anythimg other than the classic Federal 100, I will also be buying often and stacking them deep.

Basically, I posted here to subscribe. ;) Thank you as always, Gentlemen.
 
They aren't necessarily green primer cases. It started out that way, but even for standard primers they often use small pistol primers now just so they don't need to produce two sets of case designs. We've had some board members report on comparing them in .45 Auto and finding basically no really significant performance difference with the same powder charge. Try it for yourself and see. Personally, I've not bought any of the SPP cased ammo and am sticking with LPP 45 Auto just to avoid jamming the loading equipment up.
Click to expand...

I use a SS press so I don't have to worry about jamming. I went and shot the SPP 45acp rounds I made up. 25 using AutoComp and 25 using TiteGroup. I loaded these with .1gr higher than book data lowest load (4.1 TG instead of 4.0 and 7.2 AC instead of 7.1).

They fired without issue and, actually, a little hotter than I expected so close to minimum. Not a lot, but more than I'd require for paper-punching.

Looks like SPP causes no difference in loading and as long as I keep them scrupulously separated I think I'll have no future issues.
 
Changing primer mix

I'm concerned that abandoning the traditional reliable lead mixture may cause problems with ammunition reliability long term. We know militaries sell off old ammo and buy fresh ammo. But how good are these lead free primed rounds going to be in 50 or 60 years? We know mercury primers from WWI are still good today and lead primers from WWII have proven to be equally durable long term. Only time will tell if the new mix has the long term stability we desire. I don't want ammo with an expiration date even if the government does. rc
 
The military uses 45 years as the stockpile limit for single-base powders and the ammunition loaded with it. Since accelerated aging (heat to 140°F and let sit for about 18 months to equal 20 years) has been done (this and other military lead-free conversion development testing has bee going on for some time) and the military has accepted them, I think 45 years is now a minimum bet on longevity. Like powder, they will actually last longer a good portion of the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top