best primers for Bullseye with .45 ACP

[mike_mccue]

I am considering loading .45 ACP with Alliant's Bullseye powder (because its the first brand name that stuck in my head as suitable for 45) but the reciepes offered by Alliant call for Federal primers. Can you substitute Winchester, for example, or are primers different enough to require different reciepes?

thanks,
mike

 

[Aneat]

You can substitute any "standard" primer. Shouldnt be a problem at all unless you are on the ragged edge of a max load.
Ive used Winchester primer for years with Bullseye, works great.

Adam

 

[P0832177]

Personally till you gain experience with reloading follow the load guide to the "T". Because when you change parameters you need to work the load up again! And, if you are shooting the 45ACP in S&W revolver then I would really stick to Federal 150's!

 

[2400]

I've been using Winchester primers with Bullseye in my loads. Last one I loaded was 4gr Bullseye, WLP, 230gr rn lead, it's accurate in several of my 45's.

 

[Canuck-IL]

3.8 gr BE with 200 LSWC for short line, 4.0 for long line, slide mounted optic with a 12# spring, OAL about 1.240, whatever large primer is handy.

The only advantage to Federals is they're a little easier to set off so they're preferred if the mainspring has been significantly lightened. Win are intermediate, CCI are harder, never tried Rem.
/B

 

[Aneat]

3.8 gr BE with 200 LSWC for short line, 4.0 for long line, slide mounted optic with a 12# spring
/B

I have a question there Canuck. I have been using 4.0 bullseye, 185 Star hp for long and short line. I just change my elevation on my dot. With your setup do you have to change your sight/dot settings between 25 and 50 yrds??

Thanks; Adam

 

[HankB]

For ordinary, run-of-the-mill loading, primers will have little effect. I've used Winchester primers for decades in .45 ACP with no problem.

A light short range plinking load using Bullseye is 3.5 grains under a 200 grain lead SWC . . . chronographed muzzle velocity is about 630 ft/sec, noticeably less than most manuals suggest. Increasing the powder charge to 4.2 grains results in a mild target load, suitable for most bullseye competition.

IIRC the standard military G.I. load called for 4.6 grains of Bullseye under a 230 FMJ . . . but note, the military Bullseye powder is probably not exactly the same as the cannister-grade powder you buy, so always check any loads you see posted here against a reloading manual . . . or preferably, more than one, lest you become victim of a misprint.

 

[ATAShooter]

I use CCI standard Large pistol primers, 5.0gr Bullseye, 230 RN Rainier. Has been a good load for my 1911. You can use Fed, win, CCI, just as long as it is standard Large pistol.

 

[mike_mccue]

thanks everyone.

mike

 

[Paul "Fitz" Jones]

Feedback from thousands of customers

From my thousands of Bullseye, Combat and worldwide Law enforcement customers my feedback is to use anything but the very common cheapest brand if you wish reliable primers in a progressive reloader.

My Bullseye customers Prefer Federal for the 25 yard range and Winchester for the 50 yard range because they are a little hotter. Remingtons are fine but more expensive unless they are on sale and I would not recommend or use anything but the three brands of primers mentioned here and in the order mentioned.

 

[YellowLab]

From my thousands of Bullseye, Combat and worldwide Law enforcement customers my feedback is to use anything but the very common cheapest brand if you wish reliable primers in a progressive reloader.

Ummm why? Other than a special use (ie magnum, military type) primer they all do the same thing.

I understand that many loads will list the bullet, case, powerer, primer etc, but none specify 'all but the the cheapest'.

I would submit that for all but the most rententive of people it does not matter a hoot what primer you use, unles you need a magnum one.

 

[ClarkEMyers]

Fitz is right - and has his reasons.

Fitz is right - and has his reasons.

Some of us remember the days when the advice to match the brand of case and the brand of primer really meant something. My Hollywood Universal Turret is set up with a 4 position turret for priming punches because long ago some manufacturers used a flat faced primer and some used a domed primer and there were real by design dimensional differences. There are still some differences.

I suspect without meaning to put words in anybody else's mouth that the truth is the cheapest mass market primers have from time to time varied a little more in dimension - and perhaps compound though I've only measured never weighed fired and reweighed.

Perhaps in order to be cheaper manufacturers used a little more worn machinery or a little broader tolerance limit that led to inferior (not impossible just inferior) results in automatic primer feeds on progressive loaders.

Today when multiple brands are under the same ownership perhaps regular testing and rethinking is wise - I haven't changed my mind - for pistol - but I'd like to think I'm open to it. Then too there are special cases - I use Winchester small rifle primers in 9X23 for instance.

That's one reason many folks use a seat by feel in accuracy rifle - it's easy - not necessarily cheap but easy - to use a tool like the Gun Clinic priming tool to seat a primer a given distance below the case head but hard to know what this accomplishes if the primer cup and anvil heights vary and they do, as do the the diameters though perhaps less.

No doubt it's retentive of me but I weighed every single one of my own cast bullets (using an original Saeco#130 just because when I started they were all original, and truth is they all weighed about the same, maybe I was sorting them back to individual cavities and maybe I wasn't) and I strongly preferred Federal primers across the board. I did sometimes use the cheapest primers I could find and sometimes the only primers I could find. Unlike Fitz I always used Bullseye and stuck with it despite tasting the Bullseye and Alox/beeswax when I fired indoors. 231 didn't exist when I started, in fact 230 wasn't out yet. Today I'd use the ball powder.

I also approached 50 yards as an entirely different thing than gallery pistol with a start from scratch load development.

I do have a Ransom rest but I suppose I would have to fire many more shots than I do to make really fine distinctions. Since I've never been quite satisfied the normal or Gaussian distribution applies to my guns and loads (I suspect I make systematic errors but I don't know which mistakes I'm making) I've never really trusted the confidence intervals anyway.

Be nice to have say Rick Jamison's setup but I don't and never will. Field reports from enough people - as Fitz mentioned - help me decide without spending all my time and money doing my own tests.

All the above applies to handguns only of course. I didn't do the tests myself but I do believe that for shotguns and for rifles the primer will greatly affect peak pressures and so require either following the load exactly or operating well below peak - something I might be able to in rifles but have no idea about in shotguns. I have faith, without really knowing, that my pistol target loads are well below peak. My field use case full of 296 revolver loads aren't.

 

[The Bushmaster]

I use CCI and Winchester primers in all my firearms...As I have found Winchester primers are just a little hotter then CCI. I use one or the other to fine tune the load...If you are at the top of the load data I would use CCI. If you are at the bottom of the load data I would use either Winchester or CCI until you know what is going on...A chronograph is of great help when working up a load of any kind...

 

[ClarkEMyers]

Sure see e.g. Velocity and Pressure Handloader 236

Sure see e.g. Velocity and Pressure Handloader 236 by John Barsness in which he pressure tests and velocity tests while cross tabulating against primers. Barsness gives rules for associating velocity and pressure and substituting primers (watch out for primers to change over time). But only for rifle pressures in rifle barrels. For rifle only see also Bob Hagel's tests for temperature effect and other primer testing from Handloader or as reprinted in Hagel's books.

I'm not sure any of this applies at normal .45 ACP pressures and I am sure I have no reliable way of estimating or even judging peak pressures for .45ACP match loads in my own guns. I go through the process in 9X23 but I'm not sure what I'm doing - fresh Winchester cases and ramped barrels are comforting at rifle pressures.

I hear that for instance the same .45ACP load will have different, actually higher, pressure in a revolver as the bullet first expands in the gap from cylinder throat to forcing cone (goes barrel shaped) and is then squeezed down. Furthermore the bullet will skid on the rifling in a revolver. Finally for best practices with cast or swaged bullets there should be a match between pressure and bullet hardness - again I don't worry much about this in a 1911 in .45ACP. I'd heat treat once but ignore changes over time. I'd never change cast bullet hardness to match different primers or charges and maybe they all fall close enough anyway.

In .45ACP match loads I'm pretty sure my peak pressure is within acceptable limits and that's about all I know. I have no qualms about substituting in my lightweight wadcutter loads with 3.5 Bullseye. I begin to get nervous about 230 Ball and 5 grains of Bullseye. Not necessarily suggested loads. For anything more I begin to look at Tuner and the flatter bottomed firing pin retainer and matching springs and using buffers as much as I do at the primer.

 

[jeepmor]

Please explain

And, if you are shooting the 45ACP in S&W revolver then I would really stick to Federal 150's!

Umm, care to explain why? Please share your experience and explain.

Primers that fit will work, all (your pistol cartridge size primers here) will work in your pistol cases they are built for. That is why there are different sizes from each other. If I'm wrong on this, then let the beatings begin. I think I saw a small rifle primer is something else on this thread.

jeepmor

NEVERMIND, found it. Good data here
The only advantage to Federals is they're a little easier to set off so they're preferred if the mainspring has been significantly lightened. Win are intermediate, CCI are harder, never tried Rem.

 

[Pumpkinheaver]

I switch between CCI and winchester primers routinely(prefer win but not alway available) when loading with bullseye.

 

[halvey]

WSP