Author Topic: 209 vs 209-4 Primers (Read 1555 times)

Grunthunter · « **on:** July 29, 2005, 05:05:30 PM »

There's an interesting article in the Aug '05 issue of Outdoor Life about using 209-4 primers instead of 209. They claim you'll have no more 'crud ring'.

Anyone one else using the 209-4 primers and if so, how do they work ?

Chuck White · « **Reply #1 on:** July 30, 2005, 03:14:05 AM »

Grunthunter
I didn't happen to see that article, but I have heard that the Remington 209-4 primers will lessen the crud ring! Unfortunately, I called Remington a few days ago and they confirmed that the 209-4 primers have been discontinued!

Remington now makes a new primer, the 209-ML which is supposed to do about the same thing as the 209-4.

From what I've read, the standard 209's actually have enough power to actually move the powder, sabot & bullet down the barrel a little and then ignite! What we actually want is for the powder to ignite right where we have put it!

I got lucky and got almost 300 of the 209-4's from BUBBA, he had converted his Encore to the 25 ACP ignition setup!

rjo3491 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 30, 2005, 12:00:33 PM »

After just unloading, cleaning and reloading 100 25ACP shells, I look forward to, "taking a shot" (no pun intended) at this product. Please post success or failure stories if you have any.

Thanks!!

Grunthunter · « **Reply #3 on:** July 30, 2005, 05:25:21 PM »

Chuck,

I wonder if the 209ML stands for 209 Muzzle Loader ;-) Seems like I remember the article mentioning that the 209-4 was for the 410 shot shell. I guess I'd better get out and see if any are left on the shelves anywhere.

Chuck White · « **Reply #4 on:** July 31, 2005, 06:27:05 AM »

Grunthunter
According to the rep. I spoke with at Remington, yes the 209-4 was initially made for loading 410 shells! Then people tried using them in their inline Muzzle Loaders with good success! Now for an unknown reason, they quit making them!
Now they make the 209-ML! Yes the ML stands for Muzzle Loading!
The guy wouldn't say if they would be OK for loading 410 shells! They are supposed to be a little cleaner than the 209-4 and the standard 209 primers!

sabotloader · « **Reply #5 on:** August 02, 2005, 04:39:53 AM »

Chuck White,

Chuck I have been using the 209-4 for years now and really like them. I do not get the infamous crude ring in any of my guns and I have no idea if that is because of the the 209-4 or not. I have also used a lot of Cheddite 209's and have not really noticed the crud ring either.

I think the biggest differences in the two primers, the 209-4 and 209ML is the PRICE... ML's are much more expensive, I am getting 209-4's for $20/1000 the new are $20/500...

A second difference is the body of the primer - the 209-4 are brass and the ML's are aluminum or at least silver in color...

Here is some information from Cabelas - If your local Wal-Mart has guns they are in the stores now - Wal-Mart made a huge purchase from Remington.

http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0033460215897a&type=product&cmCat=search&returnString=hasJS=true&_D%3AhasJS=+&QueryText=remington+primers&_DARGS=%2Fcabelas%2Fen%2Fcommon%2Fsearch%2Fsearch-box.jsp.22&N=4887&Ntk=Products&Ntx=mode+matchall&Nty=1&Ntt=remington+primers&noImage=0&returnPage=search-results1.jsp

ONE HOLE 4570 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 03, 2005, 04:51:35 AM »

Found som federal 209-4 primers I'll have to try. New to inlines & have been using some old cci skeet&trap primers with loose 777 no crud ring I'll see if there is a difference in ignition , point of impact & grooping

Keith Lewis · « **Reply #7 on:** August 03, 2005, 06:03:53 AM »

Quote from: sabotloader

Chuck White,

Chuck I have been using the 209-4 for years now and really like them. I do not get the infamous crude ring in any of my guns and I have no idea if that is because of the the 209-4 or not. I have also used a lot of Cheddite 209's and have not really noticed the crud ring either.

I think the biggest differences in the two primers, the 209-4 and 209ML is the PRICE... ML's are much more expensive, I am getting 209-4's for $20/1000 the new are $20/500...

A second difference is the body of the primer - the 209-4 are brass and the ML's are aluminum or at least silver in color...

Here is some information from Cabelas - If your local Wal-Mart has guns they are in the stores now - Wal-Mart made a huge purchase from Remington.

Not in stores in Arizona as yet.

http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0033460215897a&type=product&cmCat=search&returnString=hasJS=true&_D%3AhasJS=+&QueryText=remington+primers&_DARGS=%2Fcabelas%2Fen%2Fcommon%2Fsearch%2Fsearch-box.jsp.22&N=4887&Ntk=Products&Ntx=mode+matchall&Nty=1&Ntt=remington+primers&noImage=0&returnPage=search-results1.jsp

coop2564 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 05, 2005, 09:56:51 AM »

Winchester also has a 209ML now, just bought a pack at wal-mart 5.97. haven't tried them yet still to hot to shoot.

Keith Lewis · « **Reply #9 on:** August 05, 2005, 01:47:09 PM »

I think you will find the Winchester 209ML are just the standard 209 primers packaged differently for the muzzleloading crowd. I do not think they are like the Remington lower power primers.

chamisi · « **Reply #10 on:** August 07, 2005, 05:36:14 AM »

I just started ML last year I heard about the 209-4 is it a grouping thing

poncaguy · « **Reply #11 on:** August 07, 2005, 07:15:52 AM »

I got 2 packs of the Rem 209 ML.......to hot here to shoot too........

chamisi · « **Reply #12 on:** August 07, 2005, 10:04:23 AM »

where did you get those primers?

poncaguy · « **Reply #13 on:** August 07, 2005, 10:22:33 AM »

Got 1 box of Winchester ML and 2 boxes Remington ML here in Ponca City ,OK. at Wally World. Plus I have the 25 ACP conversion in my Omega. Will use the 209's in my new Traditions Pursuit LT ( has an excellent trigger!) and my Encore 209X50

chamisi · « **Reply #14 on:** August 07, 2005, 10:57:27 AM »

are the 209-4 a different size than 209?

chamisi · « **Reply #15 on:** August 07, 2005, 11:01:20 AM »

I have a cva optima pro I bought it last year I killed a deer with it last year but I missed the first one I shot at I blame the primers lol

poncaguy · « **Reply #16 on:** August 07, 2005, 11:15:22 AM »

the flash hole size is smaller in the Remington 204 ML than in thr Winchester ML primers

J.P. Harrington · « **Reply #17 on:** August 11, 2005, 04:27:19 PM »

My local Wally World (Appleton, WI) didn't have the Rem 209ML. Neither did a few other of my local haunts. I found one box left at Scheels -- 100 ct for $4.
I can't wait to try 'em out. I've had nothing but trouble getting my TC Omega to group with BM3. I'll follow up soon with results.
One interesting thing that struck me, though -- When comparing firing the Rem 209ML (with an empty barrel, of course) to the 'old' Rem 209s and CCIs, I noticed a huge difference. The other, so called standard, 209s would light a flame about foot long from the muzzle (in the darkness of my garage). The Rem 209ML had a much shorter flame, less noise -- and here's what caught my attention -- threw a bunch of sparks like Fourth of July sparklers out the muzzle.
A closer exam of the spent primer revealed that there's a metal 'bridge' in the body of the primer, obviously taking up space. I can only conclude that there's less charge in the Rem 209ML than other 209 primers.
J.P.