Primers: Berdan vs. Boxer.

[RangerJoe]

As I understand it, (and I claim to have little knowledge of this subject, so if I'm mistaken please correct me) Berdan primers are at least mildly corrosive, whereas Boxer primers are non-corrosive.

Given a choice, for a civilian-manufactured rifle, is there a reason to stay away from Berdan? I am leery of the corrosive nature of the primers - the concern being a result of using some berdan-primed Russian cheapo 5.56mm in a Ruger Mini-14 and having the firing pin break on me twice. After the 2nd breakdown, I sent the rifle and the spent cartridges I was using back to Ruger. They told me to stop using the ammo I was using and I'd stop having problems - and they were right. It may be mildly annoying, but ever since I started using US-manufacture boxer-primed non-corrosive stuff exclusively, I haven't had a problem at all.

These days, my objective is trying to find myself some decent .30-06 ammunition that won't cost me ~$1+ a round, but also won't give me trouble with busted firing pins. While I've never busted a firing pin in anything else, I'm not looking to start. I don't shoot enough .30-06 (or anything, really) to warrant re-loading, in my opinion. The day may come though that I start loading my own, especially if .30-06 rounds are going to keep getting more expensive.

Feel free to include any caveats about military-surplus rifles as well pertaining to Berdan primers. While I don't own one now, a Garand is on my short list, and I'm sure I won't want to bust it. Since a lot (most?) of mil-surp ammo seems to be Berdan-primed, I'm guessing the military rifles stood up to the corrosion better, or maybe the military just didn't care, I don't know. Lowest bidder and all that, after all. I understand that the benefit of Berdan is basically that it's more reliable in combat conditions, but mercifully that isn't a concern for me.

Thanks very much.

[yooper77]

I quickly discard Berdan primer brass that I find. I am not sure where someone would purchase any new Berdan primers in volume for reloading.

Basically Boxer primers are the best choice and honestly any Berdan primed brass and/or ammo carries zero value in my eyes.

Here are a few links I found illustrating Berdan primers.

http://www.dave-cushman.net/shot/berdanprimers.html
http://davecushman.net/berdandecap.html

yooper77

[Bigeasy]

The words Berdan and Boxer describe a design of the primer.  It has nothing to do with weather they are corrosive or not.  Corrosive primers are a result of the priming mixture, not the design.

Berdan primers have no anvil, and use the shell case for that function, with 2 or 3 small holes drilled off center in the casing for the force of the primer to reach the powder charge.  Boxer primers have an anvil in the primer, and their charge is directed thru one opening in the center of the shell casing.

Berdan primers can be reloaded, but a regular center punch primer removal pin cant be used because of the off set holes in the shell casing.  Usually water or air pressure is used to deprime - not a popular method in the US.

I really doubt the cause of your firing pin failures was due to Berdan primers, as they have been proven in millions of rifles over the years.   I believe all the current production Berdan primed Russian Wolfe ammo is non-corrosive.  It is non-reloadable due to its steel casing, but is fine for practice.  My local Walmart has Federal 30-06 ammo for $14.00 a box, and you can find cheaper if you search such places a Cheaper Than Dirt.

Larry

[RangerJoe]

I have seen it said that not all Berdan primers are corrosive. But Boxer primers are apparently NEVER corrosive.
This is from Wikipedia's entry on "centerfire ammunition":
"Military-surplus ammunition often uses inexpensive corrosive or slightly-corrosive Berdan primers because they work reliably under severe conditions, whereas modern Boxer primers are almost always non-corrosive and non-mercuric. Determination of corrosive or non-corrosive characteristics based on the primer type should consider these final headstamp dates of corrosive ammunition production"

I agree that it isn't simply corrosive vs. non-corrosive that makes a primer Berdan.... obviously there are some design differences.

As far as the damage to my Ruger earlier, I didn't want to believe it myself, but Ruger said it was because foreign-manufacture ammo is often heavily corrosive and leads to pin damage. I would put some of this back on Ruger, myself - make a rifle that's tough enough to take it, for God's sake. But since I stopped using it, I've had no problems, which lends credibility to the argument against corrosive ammo/berdan primers.

I can remember that the Mini-14 used to punch a hole in the primer - not every time, but maybe one out of 3 or 4, the firing pin would actually drill a hole in the primer rather than simply dimpling it. That never happens with any US manufacture ammo.

[Dixie Dude]

When you pierced the primer, that is probably where the burned corrossive gases flashed back across the firing pin, eventually causing it to break. 

[anweis]

When he pierced the primer, the corrosive compound may have leaked outside and may have caused the firing pin to CORRODE, as in rust, but not break. This has nothing to do with corrosive primers. The pin would have to slowly rust, then break, which is not what happened.
What happened there was that a weak firing pin broke because it was designed for soft Boxer primers. The Berdan primers in that particular military ammunition are much harder, to prevent slam fires when the bolt closes on semi-auto rifles. Because the primers had a harder cup, they were pierced instead of being dented.