"New" CCI primers, softer?

[PC40]

Sorry if this is old news, i have checked but info seems scarce to me.

Supposedly the latest version of CCI primers are more reliable.

http://www.cci-ammunition.com/products/primers/primers_prod.aspx?id=32

Also I have seen a couple of things on the web that state Federal has aquired CCI and Fed/CCI primers are made in same factory now. There has apparently been a recent change in CCI packaging, what I have at home doesn't look like anything I see on the web.

Just getting back into reloading after some years away.

My lightly sprung GP100 seems to set the CCI's off reliably except for a couple of high primers which I partially blame on some old beat up brass. If suddenly the new CCI's are the same as the old Federals then Lee may have to add CCI to his banned list for the Auto Prime?

ETA: ATK owns:
Federal Premium and Estate Cartridge ammunition
CCI, Speer, Lawman, and Blazer ammunition
Gunslick, Outers and Shooters Ridge gun care and shooting accessories
RCBS reloading equipment
Champion clay targets
Weaver mounting systems
Alliant Powder and gun powders for sporting re-loaders and ammunition manufacturers

 

[ArchAngelCD]

It has been reported the new CCI primers require less impact to fire. Most people are reporting the are "softer".

 

[Handgunr]

PC40,

I went through this with CCI's tech. dept. a few years ago. I've been reloading constantly for many years and CCI primers were, and always have been the most common primers available.

I always liked them, but I ran into problems back in the 90's where I had not misfires, but total failures to fire, based on problems with them. Everyone always thought that CCI's were harder than all the other primers (which they weren't), but in many of my instances with them, even second hits wouldn't set them off.

I also noted that they'd seat a lot harder than all the other primers that I used.
I finally had it when I had a beautiful shot at what I felt was a trophy buck with my Contender and the primer failed to go off.
Now, I don't handle my primers at all, they are stored in a humidity controlled case, and for the most part I seat them by feel.
Meaning a very small chance that all I can do to make them operate is covered.

Deciding not to speculate it all to death, I contacted CCI's Tech. Dept. and spoke with one of their senior Reps. about my issues.
I wondered why several of my rounds were either not going off at all, or in a very small percentage, were taking a second strike before going off.
When I was seating them, they'd come to a complete stop in the primer pocket, and gave a very positive feel of being fully seated.
He stated that CCI manufactures their primers to the upper end of allowable manufacturing tolerences as far as primer cups go. In other words, a larger diameter cup.

I passed the harder primer cup theory/rumor on to him, and he said "no, they aren't harder. They are a standard primer cup hardness. The problem that you are having is a conflict of the primer cup diameter being seated in a primer pocket (certain brands of brass) that's slightly tighter, and the priming pellet is being fractured and falling into the powder charge.
This renders the primer useless".
This has been a long problem with CCI's and they are apparently only now starting to listen. They've been making their primers this way, at least as long as the early 90's. And when I called and explained my dilemma to the guy I spoke with, he knew "right off the bat" what the issue was, and openly admitted it to me.

The rounds that went off on second hits were where the primer, even though it felt seated, based on the aforementioned issue, it wasn't , and the firing pin would cave the cup in on the first hit, activating the anvil, and then on the second hit, they'd go off.
Most of those primers, when the round was decapped, would leave a ridge inside the primer pocket where it gouged the brass, almost creating it's own edge.

Anyway, I quit using the CCI's back around the mid to late 90's. I switched to Fed. Match primers for my rifle loads, and Winchester primers for most of my pistol loads. I couldn't afford any further problems with the CCI's, and to be honest, my problems ended with that decision.

I always liked them prior to that, and I it was sad to have to leave them after a long history, but I couldn't deal with the issues anymore.

Well now that you posted that they have improved their primers, it might be worth a new look. I still have some older boxes left over as I usually buy them in lots.
At today's prices I'd hate to toss them, but I also don't want to relive all the old issues either.

Good post....glad to hear they've done something, and the link was appreciated.

Take care,
Bob

 

[Curt Blunt]

Years ago I changed from CCI to Winchester primers because they were easier to seat. Recently I've bought a bunch of the new CCI's because they were on sale. I'm finding the new ones easier to seat. I don't recall ever having an ignition problem but then I don't use super light springs.

 

[SASS#23149]

sorry, but i"m not buying the part about not being harder.My lightly sprung ruger blackhawk gets a LOT of FTF'f with CCI primers,virtually none with other brands,especially Federals.
I can't scientifically prove it,but I know it to be true.
..Have not tried the new ones yet,but will and will report back when I do.

 

[nitesite]

I know that my #41 primers are a real pain to seat in a lot of my cases. They are certainly larger than Remington 7-1/2s.

 

[Handgunr]

Sass,

My lightly sprung ruger blackhawk gets a LOT of FTF'f with CCI primers,virtually none with other brands,especially Federals.
I can't scientifically prove it,but I know it to be true.

Previously, I might've agreed with you as I shot PPC for years, and I was a police firearms instructor for many more than that.
I've reloaded ammo all my life, and I would've always had a tendency to agree that CCI's primers were harder based on my experience with them.
That's what prompted me to call CCI and chew the fat over all this.

The Rep. easily agreed with the cup diameter issue, so I figured if there was any issue on harder cups, he'd of admitted that as well, but he said no.....so who am I to argue.

I considered another avenue that maybe their nickeling of the cups might create the hardness issue, as he said "the cups" weren't harder. Who knows........I had misfires/failure to fires with them similar to your experience.........and that's with stock springs. I don't use light springs in any of my guns, as I have no reason to.

If I had a reason to use them, I surely wouldn't be relying on CCI's I don't believe........
But that's said based on the old one's. I haven't tried the new ones.

Take care,
Bob

 

[PC40]

Just checking back on the thread after a few days of backpacking in the mountains.

Interesting discussion Handgunr had with the CCI rep.

To sum up my own unscientific and incomplete "tests" (total 300 rounds fired) with new CCI primers:

200-250 rounds 9mm through GLOCK 34 with no failures.

50-100 rounds 38 Special through GP100 with light spring, 2-3high primers (cylinder binding), no failures on other rounds. Old brass, near the end of it's lifespan, various manufacturers, I need to do better QC when capping.

Guess I'll have a better feel for them after 1000 rounds or so.

 

[Jim Watson]

How do you tell the "new" from the "old?" The box looks the same at the CCI site.

I sure have not heard a rumor that CCI was labeling primers out of the Federal plant.

 

[PC40]

This is what my CCI's look like. I didn't see anything like this on their website last week.

I have sent (or at least attempted to send) a message to CCI, using their online message utility, requesting info on packaging of their new, improved primers.

 

[Jim Watson]

Ok, I got rifle primers boxed like that in my recent order from Powder Valley.
If I could find some locally, I'd buy a few to try, but if I have to buy in bulk, I will wait for Federal to catch up on orders.

 

[mainebear]

Well CCI is doing something different and IMHO much better than they used to. The old ones had the problems that everyone has mentioned, and the new ones are 100% better. Perhaps it was just the oversizing that caused the problems, and not the hardness, but whatever it was its gone now, and not a moment too soon either!

 

[PC40]

FWIW, I think they are fine. I have gone through a few hundred with no problems except 2-3 that were operator error.

As for the rumors my web search uncovered stating they may be made in the same facility as the Federals (one was posted on a shotgun forum several years ago), I don't believe that they are manufactured identically to the Federals as they still require more effort to seat. In my current experience the Federals seat very easily in comparison, but they both are reliable.

The effort required to seat the CCI's is dependent upon the case manufacturer as mentioned by HANDGUNR above - for example, they seat nicely in Winchester brass and not so easily in R-P.

I think I am going to continue to use the CCI primers in a what will become my standard loads for my 9mm GLOCKs. My .38 loads will probably use Federals.

 

[ftierson]

Interestingly enough, I have used CCI primers (CCI 400, 200, 300 and 500, and, more recently, #34) for all of my reloading life (dating back to the mid-60s) and have never had problems with any of them except for one brick of CCI300 (LP) that were slightly oversize and hard to seat...

That includes many, many tens of thousands of primers...

That's it...

If they've changed their product appreciably, I won't be really happy...



Forrest

 

[PC40]

Forrest, I am curious, do you also stick with a particular brand of brass? What brand(s) do you use? Thanks

 

[45ACPUSER]

They might be owned by ATK, but CCI and Federal are two different companies. I know that Federal makes their primers in Anoka, MN and CCI theirs out in ID. And we are lucky that CCI has not adapted Federal boxing practices. I can store 5K of cci in darn near the space that 1K of Feds take up!

Federal primers are softer! I can not shoot reliably anything but Fed 150's in my 625's that have been worked over! That is widely held notion! Go look at a custom gunsmith sites and they will tell you that the using a Fed 150 is a must......

My USP's will lite anything off..... but not the 625's........

 

[ftierson]

Originally posted by PC40
Forrest, I am curious, do you also stick with a particular brand of brass? What brand(s) do you use?

Funny that you should ask about the brass...

I am a notorious brass scrounger and will use just about anything that I can find. Since I shoot a lot of 5.56x45mm/.223 Rem., I use a lot of military cases for loading this cartridge. The same goes for 7.62x51mm NATO/.308 Win. and for .30-06 Springfield...

If money was no object, I'd be using Lapua and Norma brass, in that order...

However, cost is important.

Currently, for rifle cartridges, I usually will jump for Remington brass before Winchester brass if I'm buying new brass. The Remington brass is a little softer than the Winchester, but has worked well for me. Although not related to reloading value per se, I find that the headstamp on the base of Winchester brass is often not quite as pretty as on the Remington brass.

Actually, I've had pretty good luck with just about all the brass out there with only a couple of exceptions. Such exceptions include A-MERC brass, which is much too soft and just crap. I throw A-MERC brass away when I find it (and, given that I've admitted to being a brass scrounger, that pretty much says what I think about it). Also, some of the Chinese cases in 9x19mmP ammo are too soft. I usually run Chinese 9x19mmP cases through my resizing die and see if a compression ridge is formed at the bottom of the carbide insert. If not, I load the brass. If so, I toss it out...

There are also the Israeli TZ80 7.62x51mm NATO cases that are known to be too brittle, cracking at the base when fired and blowing up guns. However, that was a unique problem and most Israeli brass is top notch.

And speaking of primers again, I have also used a bunch of Winchester primers over the years. The only problem that I ever had with them was receiving a couple of cases of Winchester SR primers during the primer shortage/scare of a decade and a half ago that were very poorly made (due, most likely, to the ramped up production to meet demand (and I give Olin credit for doing that)), with the bottom of the cup all wrinkled. I contacted Winchester and they replaced the primers...

For what it's all worth...

Forrest