I am just about ready to start reloading and have noticed that it is hard to find Federal Gold Medal 210M primers in stock. CCI has their BR2, which I have heard is comparable, but costs more. What is your experience as to reliability and accuracy between the two? I have heard great things about Federal Gold Medal 210M primers, but imagine that the BR2s are also good. I will be shooting .308 from a bolt-action rifle with a custom built rifle (using a Nucleus action), shooting from 100 going up to 1,000 yards for bench rest, target and some prone shooting. What are your thoughts? I am hoping to learn more about both.
- Thread starter BroncoMustang
- Start date
Years ago it took me 4 years to track down Fed 215m primers and when i did i paid a premium. I load my 308 win w Lapua brass CCI 200 primers and take it out to 1k w sub .5 MOA
Nice results. Thanks for the feedback. I've had a hard time finding 210M primers lately, but hope that this changes in the near future.
Don't under estimate good standard primer. I use a Magnetospeed during load development and the CCI has low ES and SD
BCX,
Thank you for the input. I have asked around before joining the Hide, and heard that many people respect CCI's products, especially the BR2 (which I think is what I would need for my .308 bolt-action rifle).
Thank you for the input. I have asked around before joining the Hide, and heard that many people respect CCI's products, especially the BR2 (which I think is what I would need for my .308 bolt-action rifle).
Well, if you are concerned about the difference between primers, you probably should have gone with a chambering that gives you better BC and MV. The improvement you would get with a 6.5 Creedmoor and standard rifle primers would have been a lot more than the 210Ms would give you in a .308.
Though I like 6.5 Creedmoor and think it is likely a superior bullet than .308, I have already invested in a lot of Lapua brass for the .308. I've read that 210M primers and BR2 work with this set-up. Thanks for the input.
Another primer you may want to look at is the Remington 9 1/2. I've had good results with them and some times interchange the two with little or no difference.
Byron,
Thanks for letting me know about the Remington 9 1/2. I hadn't heard about it before this. Just out of curiosity, how far did you shoot with it?
Thanks for letting me know about the Remington 9 1/2. I hadn't heard about it before this. Just out of curiosity, how far did you shoot with it?
I use the BR2 in all my large rifle chamberings. I've used the 210M for a few thousand rounds and didn't see any improvement in group size, SD, or ES. Actually, I think my SD and ES were slightly higher with the 210M, if I remember correctly. Personally, I wouldn't shy away from them, but I also wouldn't pay a premium for them either. The regular CCI 200 or Federal 210 would probably do just as well for you.
Ive used about all of them in my 308 with Lapua brass and noticed very little difference. BR-2 has produced slightly better es and sd than the 210m in my load. I’ve also fired many loaded with standard cci 200 primers and accuracy wise couldn’t tell a difference.
I shot both primers in my M1A for NRA Highpower matches out to 600 yards.
Thank you for the info. It's nice to hear that you didn't notice a big difference between 210M & BR2. It's also good to read that you think the CCI 200 or 210 would probably do about as good.
It is interesting to see that you found the BR2 to be slightly better. It's also encouraging to see that you (& canezach) both think that CCI 200 would do about the same, as I am guessing they are probably cheaper and possibly more readily available. Thanks for your input and opinions.
Wow; then they must have been reliable and repeatable, which is what one is after. I will definitely check out the Remington 9 1/2. Thanks again.
I have been off FGMM and onto CCI BR for well over ten years now. I find that using BR-4 and CCI 400 in the .223 demonstrates no difference in performance.
I use Win WLR for my Garand and 7.62x54R loads, where precision accuracy is an unnecessary luxury.
Greg
I use Win WLR for my Garand and 7.62x54R loads, where precision accuracy is an unnecessary luxury.
Greg
I'll have to go back through my notes after work, but with the ONLY change being the primers (between BR2s and 210Ms) I saw a slight velocity change and better SDs... favoring the 210Ms. They are harder to find so I just buy a dickload when I find them.
Thanks for the information. It is good to hear that you didn't notice a difference between the Bench Rest (BR) line and the CCI 400s.
Gconnoyer,
I totally AGREE about buying a boatload when they become available. I had been waiting for a little over 2 1/2 years for some 210Ms to become available, and when they finally did, I bought 10,000 (which may have been the last boxes available). I almost felt like I won the mini-lottery. I've heard or read very good things about both the 210Ms and BR2s, so I'd expect both to perform very well. Thanks.
I totally AGREE about buying a boatload when they become available. I had been waiting for a little over 2 1/2 years for some 210Ms to become available, and when they finally did, I bought 10,000 (which may have been the last boxes available). I almost felt like I won the mini-lottery. I've heard or read very good things about both the 210Ms and BR2s, so I'd expect both to perform very well. Thanks.
Last edited:
Sorry I completely forgot to post when I got home from work yesterday. Here's the small bit of data I got from my test.
This was all from the same lot of brass, same exact load, seating depth, process, etc.... the ONLY change was the primers.
Loaded with a Chargemaster at 44.4gr Varget, 24" barrel.
I did 5 shots, 5 min break, 5 shots of the other primer, 5 min break, repeat.
This was inside at a pistol range, 25 yards, not really aiming and not letting the round sit in the chamber to gather any heat. Just load and fire.
I might try and redo the test because my technique or consistency must be getting better. I've gotten my loads down to an ES of 20 and SD of 5 or less.
CCI BR2 - ES 36, SD 9.6
210M - ES 29, SD 7.6 (avg about 20fps slower)
So take it for what its worth lol
This was all from the same lot of brass, same exact load, seating depth, process, etc.... the ONLY change was the primers.
Loaded with a Chargemaster at 44.4gr Varget, 24" barrel.
I did 5 shots, 5 min break, 5 shots of the other primer, 5 min break, repeat.
This was inside at a pistol range, 25 yards, not really aiming and not letting the round sit in the chamber to gather any heat. Just load and fire.
I might try and redo the test because my technique or consistency must be getting better. I've gotten my loads down to an ES of 20 and SD of 5 or less.
CCI BR2 - ES 36, SD 9.6
210M - ES 29, SD 7.6 (avg about 20fps slower)
So take it for what its worth lol
Thanks for the information; much appreciated.
I have no complaints about Federal primers; they worked great for me when I was using them.
They just weren't available on the shelf as much as I needed them to be. The CCI's were there for me.
My typical Load development practice is to do all my development with non-match primers; then test the non-match primers against match with the final resulting load. If the match primers outperform the non-match; then they have earned their way into the final load recipe. It happens, but not especially often.
I stopped using the chrono when I found from research that any/each velocity reading a chrono provides can be randomly off by as much as +/-1% of the displayed velocity, i.e +/-25fps for a 2500fps displayed value, which, IMHO; erased any serious consideration by me of SD/ES numbers smaller than that. I also concluded that load development accuracy testing on the target itself was the only reliable indicator of good loads.
Greg
They just weren't available on the shelf as much as I needed them to be. The CCI's were there for me.
My typical Load development practice is to do all my development with non-match primers; then test the non-match primers against match with the final resulting load. If the match primers outperform the non-match; then they have earned their way into the final load recipe. It happens, but not especially often.
I stopped using the chrono when I found from research that any/each velocity reading a chrono provides can be randomly off by as much as +/-1% of the displayed velocity, i.e +/-25fps for a 2500fps displayed value, which, IMHO; erased any serious consideration by me of SD/ES numbers smaller than that. I also concluded that load development accuracy testing on the target itself was the only reliable indicator of good loads.
Greg
Last edited:
Thank you for the information; I appreciate it. Will take into consideration.
I wish that Federal would make more 210M primers available. After waiting for over 2 1/2 years I finally wrote them a letter asking to please increase production so that they would be more readily available. Haven't seen a big difference since then, but am hoping that changes in the near future. I like that they are about $40 cheaper than the CCI BR2s, but if they continue to not be available I may need to switch over to the BR2s.
1000% agree.
I did 100% of my load development on paper and never even bothered to check velocity until I was done.
I dont care what the chrono says if it doesnt group/string well at 300,500, 600, etc.
In reality I see no on target difference to a grand between cci 200's an BR-2's except price in either a 308 or 300wm. I find the softer I can reliability lite the powder the better on traget I get.
D
Deleted member 113831
Guest
Fed 210M is hotter than the CCI-BR2. I have had hangfires with the BR-2 when the weather is below freezing. I have never had it happen with the FED210M. In warm weather, both have performed well, any differences being the random product of variations from lot to lot.
In my .308's I've used nothing but CCI250 magnum primers for years with Varget. Works for me.
Im the same but i use CCI 200 w heavy compressed loads. My most consistent loads out at 1K yards to date
Thanks for your feedback; I appreciate it.
Thank you for replying with the information from your experience; I appreciate it.
This is good to know. I have some Varget, so when I run out of my 210M I might switch over. Thanks for the information.
I also have used both 210M and CCI BR2's both with great results. The BR2's have an up and downside, Upside they have been very consistent never had and issues and are readily available from may sources. Down side is cost they run about $20 per 1000 more then 210M's. Never tried the 9 1/2's.
I appreciate the information. I wish the 210M was more widely available, given that it costs less.
Not sure about chi but federal 210 & 210M are the same primers.
At at $20 more per 1000, I'm not getting turned away...; not when I can walk into the LGS and pick them off the shelf pretty much whenever I like.
Greg
Greg
Wish we had them on the shelf where I live. Thanks.
^^^^^This, if you want ease of loading and cheaper primers.
I did a lot of primer testing last year with 210M's, CCI BR2's, and S&B in a 6XC - just because I had them on the shelf and was curious. My findings were:
S&B 2950 fps
CCI 2965 fps
Fed 210M 2980 fps
All with the same charge of H4350
The interesting thing was when I really tried to dial in a load with all three, was the windows where there was a a low SD and ES. Even though the S&B was slowest, the was about a .8 grain window with low ES&SD. The Fed 210M only had about a .2 grain window, and the CCI fell in the middle. In these windows all the loads shot in the .1-.2's for 3 shots.
I need to find those s&b on sale like cabelas a few years ago on their s&b pistol primers. Wouldn’t mind trying them.
I've seen little or no difference in my scores or group sizes between the two. I have also not seen any difference between the standard and match primer. I do use match primers even though........ I don't have any chronograph numbers to compare between the two.
Thanks for the information; I appreciate it. I heard from a few others who did not notice much difference between match and regular primers.
Has anyone had luck with the S&B pistol primers?
Federal primers are not necessary. They work, but so do most of the others. Get your powder charge, then do a length test, then a primer test with 4 or 5 different primers, then fine tune powder/ length. Should take under 75-100 rounds. Ive seen cci's work, as well as wlr's, and federals.
Thanks for the information; I appreciate it.
In my experience, the CCI BR2/4's are on par with the Federal's. Now with the 200/400's with two rifles, one bolt, one semi, over 4 5 shot groups each, .2 difference, so standard to match comparison. Although on one other bolt, couldn't measure a difference between the two.
Just another data point:
I run a 6.5 CM for competition and typically load a 140 ELD with 42.5gr H4350 and BR2 primers. This got me 2742 fps.
I decided to change over to the 210M because they were cheaper and at the moment more available. With the same exact load, only changing the primers my velocity dropped to 2699 fps and bumped me out of my accuracy node too. (both velocities shot over 10-shot strings with a magnetospeed)
I think I need to do a whole new load workuo for this primer now.
I run a 6.5 CM for competition and typically load a 140 ELD with 42.5gr H4350 and BR2 primers. This got me 2742 fps.
I decided to change over to the 210M because they were cheaper and at the moment more available. With the same exact load, only changing the primers my velocity dropped to 2699 fps and bumped me out of my accuracy node too. (both velocities shot over 10-shot strings with a magnetospeed)
I think I need to do a whole new load workuo for this primer now.
You should just be able to bump the charge back up and get it back to your 2740fps velocity and be back in the node (if you can get more powder in)
Similar threads
Reloading Equipment Federal Gold Medal Match .308 Once Fired Brass - 230 pieces - $75 shipped
