Primer Pin Whole

[Casey Simpson]

Re: Primer Pin Whole


<span style="color: #006600">Following this thread and not asserting my opinion to the original poster, but to others who might be following it too.

Even if the primer issue is ignored, the case head imprints from the bolt face show excessive pressure whose source is whatever it is, and regardless of the other examples of primer failure with loads that are not near maximum charge, the .284 Winchester loads pictured are too hot.

However, except for the failed primer, the 300 Win Mag case head shown does not appear to show signs excessive pressure, clearly in contrast to the .284 Winchester case.

This problem illustrates why load manuals set out a range of possible charge weights that mean at some point within the range of charge weights tested a loader might find an acceptable charge weight that shoots well in THAT rifle, THAT day, using THAT case brand, primer, propellant, barrel, chamber, bolt headspace....... ad nauseum. Loading ammunition is an experiment.

Noting again the original poster did not solicit advice, but others reading the thread might want it anyway. Several matters could cause excessive pressure in loads shown by the manual to be moderate ones. Bolt lubricant can migrate from the bolt lugs and body to rounds in the magazine or otherwise and then to the chamber. Liquids do not compress well. The chamber throat could be too small for the brass cases. The loader's scale could be defective or not set right. A step in the loading process could be defective. The reasons could go on.

The 300wm cases in this thread do not show excessive pressure except for the primer that failed, but the 284win case shown indeed shows excessive pressure in addition to the primers that failed.</span>

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

The shiny spot on the case head is from the cameras flash. As you look at the pictures one by one, you will see the shiny spot move around the case head. I can assure you that the was no other pressure sign, other than what is seen from the primer it's self.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Casey Simpson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="color: #006600">Following this thread and not asserting my opinion to the original poster, but to others who might be following it too.

Even if the primer issue is ignored, the case head imprints from the bolt face show excessive pressure whose source is whatever it is, and regardless of the other examples of primer failure with loads that are not near maximum charge, the .284 Winchester loads pictured are too hot.

However, except for the failed primer, the 300 Win Mag case head shown does not appear to show signs excessive pressure, clearly in contrast to the .284 Winchester case.

This problem illustrates why load manuals set out a range of possible charge weights that mean at some point within the range of charge weights tested a loader might find an acceptable charge weight that shoots well in THAT rifle, THAT day, using THAT case brand, primer, propellant, barrel, chamber, bolt headspace....... ad nauseum. Loading ammunition is an experiment.

Noting again the original poster did not solicit advice, but others reading the thread might want it anyway. Several matters could cause excessive pressure in loads shown by the manual to be moderate ones. Bolt lubricant can migrate from the bolt lugs and body to rounds in the magazine or otherwise and then to the chamber. Liquids do not compress well. The chamber throat could be too small for the brass cases. The loader's scale could be defective or not set right. A step in the loading process could be defective. The reasons could go on.

The 300wm cases in this thread do not show excessive pressure except for the primer that failed, but the 284win case shown indeed shows excessive pressure in addition to the primers that failed.</span> </div></div>

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Better pics of the bolt face....

Damage to the bolt face is most likely due to the jet blast racing around the recess between the primer and case head primer pocket rim, and the blowing out the other side. If you look at the pics of the cases, you will notice a large deposit of carbon opposite the pin whole that confirms this theory, as well as a thick deposit of carbon along this path....

In the older bolt face pic you can see a build up of brass on the face. This is from me not being in the "Clean, Clean, Clean" camp of rifle maintenance.

The newer pics are after cleaning and removing the carbon, and brass from the bolt face....

 

[Casey Simpson]

Re: Primer Pin Whole


Could you shoot better pics of the cases, and the whole case, with pierced primers?

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Only if Winchester can ship them back home to me... I doubt that is going to happen though...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Casey Simpson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Could you shoot better pics of the cases, and the whole case, with pierced primers? </div></div>

 

[YAOG]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The loads are far less the SAAMI max pressure..... The first load is at 56.3ksi, and the second 52.5ksi (Engineer Confirmed), so not "Hot" at all.....</div></div>

Actually the SAAMI pressure spec for the 284Win is a MAX average of 56Kpsi so you are over pressure on your first load by your own engineer confirmed data.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: _9H_Cracka</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Show us pics of your strain gauge setup and printout from the testing please.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wish I had one.... (Maybe after a collect my lottery winnings

) I have a close friend of mine who is an engineer, and he worked it out for me. I'm sure that is one of the test that Winchester will be doing conducting on the five loaded rounds that I am sending them....</div></div></div></div>

He cannot show you his pressure testing rig because his pressure numbers are from QuickLOAD simulation software. IMO this may be part of the problem but who know without any instrumented testing.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: flounderv2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold">I don't care who your friend is both he and you have no idea what the pressure in the chamber is. If he is actually a mech E he was sleeping in class. </span>This is a very simple thing which like a battle plane goes all to hell once the trigger is pulled.

Software modeling like Quickload etc. needs good initial data to even come close and cannot produce the same level of certainty about chamber pressure as a strain gauge with a data logger on the other end of the cable. Heck did you measure your case volume? Do you know how much volume you have in the loaded case? Do you know how much jump your bullets are making or are they jammed?</div></div>

Here we go again. Let me get my popcorn..

And YAOG,, everything you questioned was done and then some as I know how this load was worked up. You may want to step down from your high horse for just a second and try and provide useful commentary vs temper-mental ranting. </div></div>

The OP did not do any actual instrumented pressure testing of this load in his rifle so he does not know with any real certainty if excessive pressure was part of the problem or not. All he can do is try to make an educated guess which is what everyone is doing because there was no testing done that can eliminate that possibility.

As I posted previously I think he has a few potential issues with this load and he was just unlucky. Several of these issues just stacked up against him and the potentially marginal primers are where these issues manifested themselves.

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

I loaded rounds with 162gr A-Max's in .5gr increments from 52gr to 54gr. OAL was the same for all grain weights. Here is what I found: (Groups and data from 54.5gr is from the other day when I had the primer failure)

Chrono 10 rounds at each grain weight. Chrono was 10 feet from muzzle. I allowed ample time between strings for barrel cooling.

52.0gr: 2645 SD 14
52.5gr: 2668 SD 13
53.0gr: 2695 SD 17
53.5gr: 2724 SD 15
54.0gr: 2766 SD 18
54.5gr: 2789 SD 22

All casings are from the same lot, and had only been fired 3 times prior to this firing. Primer pockets were not loss while seating primers.

Primers were from same lot as the other day, and all loads resulted in the same amount of cratering.

Groups below are five rounds with the exception of one ten round group that is mark as such:

From left to right 54.0gr down to 52.0gr

From left in rows of five from 54.0gr down to 52.0gr ten cases from each grain weight

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Just because you know someone that is or was some form of an "engineer" does not excuse ANYONE, engineer or otherwise from instrumenting a multi-variant experiment with very few knowns.

And NO I did not consult with an engineer (other than myself) before asking my question above or making this statement.

OP, your approach is flawed in many ways. Be glad you have all of your fingers and both eyes intact.

 

[YAOG]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I loaded rounds with 162gr A-Max's in .5gr increments from 52gr to 54gr. OAL was the same for all grain weights. Here is what I found: (Groups and data from 54.5gr is from the other day when I had the primer failure)

Chrono 10 rounds at each grain weight. Chrono was 10 feet from muzzle. I allowed ample time between strings for barrel cooling.

52.0gr: 2645 SD 14
52.5gr: 2668 SD 13
53.0gr: 2695 SD 17
53.5gr: 2724 SD 15
54.0gr: 2766 SD 18
54.5gr: 2789 SD 22

All casings are from the same lot, and had only been fired 3 times prior to this firing. Primer pockets were not loss while seating primers.

Primers were from same lot as the other day, and all loads resulted in the same amount of cratering.

Groups below are five rounds with the exception of one ten round group that is mark as such:

From left to right 54.0gr down to 52.0gr

From left in rows of five from 54.0gr down to 52.0gr ten cases from each grain weight

</div></div>



While I don't see any blown primers in these cases it can clearly be seen that the primer radius is reducing as you increase chamber pressure. As I posted previously your 54.9gr charge is over pressure even using the 3.100 COAL this is 12,000psi over SAAMI spec pressure. Combined with some possibly weak primer cups you got unlucky a few times.

Obviously once you backed off the powder charge a bit (but still 9,000psi over pressure BTW) the primers did not fail any more. If you back off a bit more you will probably be safe under most conditions even if you continue to use the primer lot in question. QuickLOAD says 51.5 grains yields approx. 56kpsi.

Of course I'm still guessing about this as is everyone else including you because you still have not performed or at least not posted any actual instrumented pressure test data. Clearly by backing off almost 1 grain the pressure has been reduced enough to reduce the likelihood of primer cup failure. Find someone with an RSI pressure Trace system and have a look at the results we are all be sitting on pins and needles.

Hope this helps!

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

What "Data" are you using? You know the saying "Bad in, Bad out"? You must not be as good as you thought.... They're NOT over pressure.... It's a Remington design problem.... Even my 22-250 with factory ammo craters primers.... Get over yourself....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
While I don't see any blown primers in these cases it can clearly be seen that the primer radius is reducing as you increase chamber pressure. As I posted previously your 54.9gr charge is over pressure even using the 3.100 COAL this is 12,000psi over SAAMI spec pressure. Combined with some possibly weak primer cups you got unlucky a few times.

Obviously once you backed off the powder charge a bit (but still 9,000psi over pressure BTW) the primers did not fail any more. If you back off a bit more you will probably be safe under most conditions even if you continue to use the primer lot in question. QuickLOAD says 51.5 grains yields approx. 56kpsi.

Of course I'm still guessing about this as is everyone else including you because you still have not performed or at least not posted any actual instrumented pressure test data. Clearly by backing off almost 1 grain the pressure has been reduced enough to reduce the likelihood of primer cup failure. Find someone with an RSI pressure Trace system and have a look at the results we are all be sitting on pins and needles.

Hope this helps!

</div></div>

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

From the Hodgdon site: Starting load of H4831 for a 162gr projectile is 53gr, and max load is 58gr.... Starting load of H4831 for a 175gr projectile is 52gr and max load is 57gr.... Lighten up Francis....

Edited to add link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6cxNR9ML8k

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: _9H_Cracka</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just because you know someone that is or was some form of an "engineer" does not excuse ANYONE, engineer or otherwise from instrumenting a multi-variant experiment with very few knowns.

And NO I did not consult with an engineer (other than myself) before asking my question above or making this statement.

OP, your approach is flawed in many ways. Be glad you have all of your fingers and both eyes intact. </div></div>

 

[YAOG]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While I don't see any blown primers in these cases it can clearly be seen that the primer radius is reducing as you increase chamber pressure. As I posted previously your 54.9gr charge is over pressure even using the 3.100 COAL this is 12,000psi over SAAMI spec pressure. Combined with some possibly weak primer cups you got unlucky a few times.

Obviously once you backed off the powder charge a bit (but still 9,000psi over pressure BTW) the primers did not fail any more. If you back off a bit more you will probably be safe under most conditions even if you continue to use the primer lot in question. QuickLOAD says 51.5 grains yields approx. 56kpsi.

Of course I'm still guessing about this as is everyone else including you because you still have not performed or at least not posted any actual instrumented pressure test data. Clearly by backing off almost 1 grain the pressure has been reduced enough to reduce the likelihood of primer cup failure. Find someone with an RSI pressure Trace system and have a look at the results we are all be sitting on pins and needles.

Hope this helps!

</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What "Data" are you using? You know the saying "Bad in, Bad out"? You must not be as good as you thought.... They're NOT over pressure.... It's a Remington design problem.... Even my 22-250 with factory ammo craters primers.... Get over yourself....

</div></div>
The primer cratering as you call it is not a design problem as far as I know. The oversize bolt face firing pin hole has been around since the first Remington 700 has been produced and as far as I can see the designed in clearance is there to insure that the firing pin always falls and successfully ignites the primer. If the firing pin and internal bolt machining was dimensioned and shaped differently I might agree that it was a design problem but it is what it is and Remington has seen no good reason to change it for the last 50 years or so.

As I previously posted I'm using the same program your engineer friend used, QuickLOAD simulation software for Hornady 162gr A-MAX bullet over 54.9gr 4831SC. COAL. The Hodgon data site says they used a starting charge weight of 53gr for a standard SAMMI spec chamber and Hornady boat tailed soft point which AFAIK is a 0.19" shorter projectile than the A-MAX bullet of the same weight. Chamber pressure increases significantly as volume is reduced and when QuickLOAD does the math it shows you would be very safe if you were using the shorter bullet as shown on the Hogdon loading page for the 284Win cartridge.

So what data are you using?

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Do a search over the net of people with 700's that have been getting cratered primers. Everyone says the same thing. "It's due to Remington's design"....

How about you post a couple screen shot of what you are loading into Quickload, so we can compare....

My Data? I already gave that... Look back in this thread, and input what "I" gave you...

Action: Remington 700 Long Action
Barrel: Hart 26.125" Stainless 1:8tw
Chamber: .284 Winchester
Brass: Winchester 284
Primer: Winchester WLRM
Powder: Hodgdon 4831sc 54.5gr
Bullet: Hornady 162gr A-Max
OAL: 3.200" / .052" Jump
Case Capacity: 65.48gr Water

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The primer cratering as you call it is not a design problem as far as I know. The oversize bolt face firing pin hole has been around since the first Remington 700 has been produced and as far as I can see the designed in clearance is there to insure that the firing pin always falls and successfully ignites the primer. If the firing pin and internal bolt machining was dimensioned and shaped differently I might agree that it was a design problem but it is what it is and Remington has seen no good reason to change it for the last 50 years or so.

As I previously posted I'm using the same program your engineer friend used, QuickLOAD simulation software for Hornady 162gr A-MAX bullet over 54.9gr 4831SC. COAL. The Hodgon data site says they used a starting charge weight of 53gr for a standard SAMMI spec chamber and Hornady boat tailed soft point which AFAIK is a 0.19" shorter projectile than the A-MAX bullet of the same weight. Chamber pressure increases significantly as volume is reduced and when QuickLOAD does the math it shows you would be very safe if you were using the shorter bullet as shown on the Hornady loading page for the 284Win cartridge.

So what data are you using?

</div></div>

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Direct from Remington:

Discussion Thread
Response Via Email (Danny) 08/30/2012 01:00 PM
The cratering you are seeing is normal on the gun manufactured between 2008 and 2010. We began putting a bevel on the face of the firing pin hole in order to allow the primer cup to flow back and thicken the primer at the most likely point of failure during the firing pin strike. This was to reduce the likelihood of a pierced primer and greatly reduce the risk of injury to the shooter overall.
Customer By Email (hugo) 08/30/2012 12:55 PM
Hello,

I own more then a few Remington 700's. I have noticed that they have a tendency to crater primers, with factory ammunition. I know that a cratered primer is one of the signs of high chamber pressure, but this also happens with low powered ammunition. Could you please explain why this happens, and what, if anything, I should do to correct this?

Thank you for your time,

Hugo

Question Reference #120830-000045
Product Level 1: Firearms
Date Created: 08/30/2012 12:55 PM
Last Updated: 08/30/2012 01:00 PM
Status: Waiting

 

[BuzzBoss915]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

General observation. I have looked at the photos and offered my opinion/excessive pressure.

Here's the thing that sorta irritates me, for some reason? The tendency to refer back to published data; Hodgdon's says it's okay, blah blah blah.

I use published data for a starting reference point and after that, my rifle will tell me when I find an accuracy node or a max pressure load. What the book says is irrelevant at that point.

I am perfectly capable of determining what is safe and what is not so safe. I have a safe full of rifles and if I listed them, I might miss a few, but I handload for every one, (except the 44-40) so I think I can figure out safe and accurate loads with very little help from Sierra or Hodgdon's.

Anyway, that's my message. Refrain from quoting data that says loads are safe when (to me) there is evidence that suggests otherwise. You either have a problem or you don't. If you have a problem, don't tell me that "so and so" says you <span style="text-decoration: underline">shouldn't have a problem</span>.

If you have unexpected pressure signs, that's life in the big city. Back it off and try it again. This stuff is, and it isn't, rocket science. I think millions of people navigate the hazards and come up with acceptable loads....especially 308, with (literally) a ton of support data. It's hard to assemble a poor load for 308, in my limited experience. (end of rant) and, no offense intended! BB

edit: PS I thought we already established that Remington was doing something weird to the firing pin hole? I hope that is not the sole reason for these two pages? Now, if somebody over there will admit to being responsible, let's take him out and have him shot ASAP.

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

The reason is people are unaware of the Remington modification that cause cratered primers. Some people cannot see that the cratered primers in some weapons is no loner a sign of dangerous high pressure, but a normal reaction to this modification.

Basically, it's your typical forum pissing match...

Like I posted above, here is the response from Remington about the modification, and cratered primers:

<span style="color: #FF0000">Discussion Thread
Response Via Email (Danny) 08/30/2012 01:00 PM
The cratering you are seeing is normal on the gun manufactured between 2008 and 2010. We began putting a bevel on the face of the firing pin hole in order to allow the primer cup to flow back and thicken the primer at the most likely point of failure during the firing pin strike. This was to reduce the likelihood of a pierced primer and greatly reduce the risk of injury to the shooter overall.

Customer By Email (hugo) 08/30/2012 12:55 PM
Hello,

I own more then a few Remington 700's. I have noticed that they have a tendency to crater primers, with factory ammunition. I know that a cratered primer is one of the signs of high chamber pressure, but this also happens with low powered ammunition. Could you please explain why this happens, and what, if anything, I should do to correct this?

Thank you for your time,

Hugo

Question Reference #120830-000045
Product Level 1: Firearms
Date Created: 08/30/2012 12:55 PM
Last Updated: 08/30/2012 01:00 PM
Status: Waiting</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BuzzBoss915</div><div class="ubbcode-body">General observation. I have looked at the photos and offered my opinion/excessive pressure.

Here's the thing that sorta irritates me, for some reason? The tendency to refer back to published data; Hodgdon's says it's okay, blah blah blah.

I use published data for a starting reference point and after that, my rifle will tell me when I find an accuracy node or a max pressure load. What the book says is irrelevant at that point.

I am perfectly capable of determining what is safe and what is not so safe. I have a safe full of rifles and if I listed them, I might miss a few, but I handload for every one, (except the 44-40) so I think I can figure out safe and accurate loads with very little help from Sierra or Hodgdon's.

Anyway, that's my message. Refrain from quoting data that says loads are safe when (to me) there is evidence that suggests otherwise. You either have a problem or you don't. If you have a problem, don't tell me that "so and so" says you <span style="text-decoration: underline">shouldn't have a problem</span>.

If you have unexpected pressure signs, that's life in the big city. Back it off and try it again. This stuff is, and it isn't, rocket science. I think millions of people navigate the hazards and come up with acceptable loads....especially 308, with (literally) a ton of support data. It's hard to assemble a poor load for 308, in my limited experience. (end of rant) and, no offense intended! BB

edit: PS I thought we already established that Remington was doing something weird to the firing pin hole? I hope that is not the sole reason for these two pages? Now, if somebody over there will admit to being responsible, let's take him out and have him shot ASAP.
</div></div>

 

[MtnCreek]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

I’m not going to get involved in application of published data, quickload or any other debates about assumed or actual pressures; I’m not qualified to speak about anyone else’s handloads and there’s probably people that think I’m not qualified to comment on my own loads (heck, maybe I’m not…).

About the same time Hugo had issues with Winchester primers, I had a similar issue. I can’t tell you what kind of chamber pressure was inside my rifle, but I can tell you there is no reason for me to believe I was at or beyond maximum. I fired other cartridges loaded the same; no over pressure signs and no primer pops. IMHO, I think we should take this thread for what I think it was intended for: Watch out, there are some bad primers out there.

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BuzzBoss915</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Here's the thing that sorta irritates me, for some reason? The tendency to refer back to published data; Hodgdon's says it's okay, blah blah blah.

</div></div>

It's called Dissociation/Dissociative Behavior.

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Dissociation / Dissociative Behavior is to "Detach", not "Attach"..... You've got it backwards..... People are "Attached" to the published data as a reference, not dissociated from it....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: _9H_Cracka</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BuzzBoss915</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Here's the thing that sorta irritates me, for some reason? The tendency to refer back to published data; Hodgdon's says it's okay, blah blah blah.

</div></div>

It's called Dissociation/Dissociative Behavior. </div></div>

 

[BuzzBoss915]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

I can't think of too many ways to say it? Hodgdon's and Sierra can't tell you what is safe in your rifle, it's up to you to figure it out. If you see pressure signs at 53 grains of a certain powder and the book says that 54 is max, well guess what? YOUR MAX IS WELL BELOW 53 GRAINS, and that's just the way it is, there is no mystery, and Hodgdon's makes plenty of disclaimers that tell you that what they find to be safe, may NOT be safe....in your rifle.

 

[jdmartin]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Did you try seating a new primer back into the case which had a pierced primer? If the primer pocket is now loose then I think the load was hot enough to stretch the pocket over multiple firings . If the pocket is still tight I would be more likely to buy defect.

The first primer failures I experienced were in my 6.5 06.I had primers blowing about every other round with a load I had used ever since I had the gun built. I did not notice anything seating the primers , but after one would blow, the next primer would seat with no effort and would probably have fallen out if you tapped the bottom of the case. It may have been my ignorance in not noticing that they were already too loose. I am a lot more aware of the force needed to seat primers now.

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Like I posted, maybe ten times by now, the primers pockets are not loose.... There is no sign of over pressure, other than the cratered primer. Now with the reply from Remington telling that the cratering is "Normal", due to their modification, that only leaves a defective primer.... I could back this load down until the bullet is just falling out the muzzle, and I could see it still cratering primers....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jdmartin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Did you try seating a new primer back into the case which had a pierced primer? If the primer pocket is now loose then I think the load was hot enough to stretch the pocket over multiple firings . If the pocket is still tight I would be more likely to buy defect.

The first primer failures I experienced were in my 6.5 06.I had primers blowing about every other round with a load I had used ever since I had the gun built. I did not notice anything seating the primers , but after one would blow, the next primer would seat with no effort and would probably have fallen out if you tapped the bottom of the case. It may have been my ignorance in not noticing that they were already too loose. I am a lot more aware of the force needed to seat primers now. </div></div>

 

[RTK]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Those primers DO NOT seem to be flattened either. Mine always tend to when I push them too much.

 

[jdmartin]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Like I posted, maybe ten times by now, the primers pockets are not loose.... There is no sign of over pressure, other than the cratered primer. Now with the reply from Remington telling that the cratering is "Normal", due to their modification, that only leaves a defective primer.... I could back this load down until the bullet is just falling out the muzzle, and I could see it still cratering primers....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jdmartin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Did you try seating a new primer back into the case which had a pierced primer? If the primer pocket is now loose then I think the load was hot enough to stretch the pocket over multiple firings . If the pocket is still tight I would be more likely to buy defect.

The first primer failures I experienced were in my 6.5 06.I had primers blowing about every other round with a load I had used ever since I had the gun built. I did not notice anything seating the primers , but after one would blow, the next primer would seat with no effort and would probably have fallen out if you tapped the bottom of the case. It may have been my ignorance in not noticing that they were already too loose. I am a lot more aware of the force needed to seat primers now. </div></div> </div></div>
I reviewed the thread.I assume from your response that the primer pockets were tighter than a virgin with her legs crossed when you tried to reseat them.It's just that if people don't consider blown primers to be a possible sign of over pressure loads ,the next sign may be a blown gun which makes a mess of their face .I appreciate your effort at posting this.I just want to learn what I can from it,therefore the question.

 

[BuzzBoss915]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Okay then, what's the question, what's the problem?

1) We have established that Remington cratering is meaningless, for the sake of this discussion.

2) I think the OP is of the opinion that the load is safe?

3) Therefore, the phenomena is defective primers, right? Or, did I miss something? Much to do about nothing.
BB

edit: I'm not sure of any of the above, BTW

 

[jdmartin]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BuzzBoss915</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Okay then, what's the question, what's the problem?

1) We have established that Remington cratering is meaningless, for the sake of this discussion.

2) I think the OP is of the opinion that the load is safe?

3) Therefore, the phenomena is defective primers, right? Or, did I miss something? Much to do about nothing.
BB

edit: I'm not sure of any of the above, BTW

</div></div>

My question was "Did you try seating a new primer back into the case which had a pierced primer?" It did not seem clear to me whether the pockets were tight before <span style="text-decoration: underline">and</span> after the primer pierced, but I am pretty dense.

 

[BuzzBoss915]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

He says right here: <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Like I posted, maybe ten times by now, the primers pockets are not loose.... There is no sign of over pressure, other than the cratered primer.</div></div>

However, looking at the first posted photos, those pockets look pretty gnarly, to me? BB

edit: pic #4 first post

 

[hugo121175]

Re: Primer Pin Whole

Just heard from Winchester on Friday. The tech's at Winchester viewed the "Un-Fired" primers under a microscope, and notices stress cracks from the manufacturing process on the bend of the outer primer cup. This is what caused the failure of the primers, according to Winchester.

Winchester tested my loads, and stated that they were 100% "SAFE".

Winchester is sending me $50 in Winchester Certificates to buy Winchester reloading products.