Non-magnum primers and WW296?

[securitysix]

I needed to load some .22 Hornet brass to fireform into .22 K-Hornet brass the other day.  I decided to use a 55 grain FMJ (we have several hundred and nobody seems to use them for anything else) and about 7.7 grains WW296 (we had an old can of it that was pretty much full, figured if no one was going to use it for anything else, I might as well use it for fireforming).  I looked through our primers for trays that had odd numbers of primers (7 in one, 9 in another, etc.).  They were mixed brands, but since I'm not terribly concerned about accuracy just for fireforming (hence the heavy bullets), I wasn't terribly concerned about that.

I came across some Federal small pistol primers that weren't magnum primers.  I didn't use them because everything I've read says to use magnum pistol primers with WW296, and I didn't want to stick a bullet in the barrel.  The question is this:

If I'm using a smaller charge (7.5 to 8.5 grains or so) of 296, can I get away with using a regular small pistol primer, or do I need to stick with the magnum variety?

[Graybeard]

You are treading in potentially VERY DANGEROUS waters here.

First up the manufacturer and most every loading manual I know of tells you to NOT down load ball powders and especially so W296. It can cause potentially disasterous failures. Less can be a LOT MORE here pressure wise. So you've made a very bad decision in chosing this powder and using loads below those listed in books for it. I suggest you cease immedidately.

Now as to the concern over primers. Most do suggest mag primers with it and that's a sound recommendation but since the use you are making here is fire forming loads and you're not seeking accuracy from them I don't think that's a big concern. It should light the powder off OK and not stick a bullet or cause any real safety issues I don't believe.

BUT loading that powder way below book recommended levels IS DANGEROUS.

[buck460XVR]

The books I have show your load of 7.7 as a middle of the road load with a 55 gr. bullet in either the 22 Hornet or the 22 K-Hornet......but they also say to use a small rifle primer instead of a small pistol /small pistol magnum primer.

[Sweetwater]

The books I have show your load of 7.7 as a middle of the road load with a 55 gr. bullet in either the 22 Hornet or the 22 K-Hornet......but they also say to use a small rifle primer instead of a small pistol /small pistol magnum primer.

My Speer #12 agrees with this. From 7 to 8 gr of W296 with a CCI400 primer - small rifle primer.

I read the OP same as GB and all kinds of red flags went up for all the same reasons. Then, the above post caused me to take 5 and research. The offered load in the OP is not a reduced charge, and choice of primer for fire forming should not be a concern. Reduced charges with ball powder can be disasterous, as stated. I've got a Remington 722 in 257Roberts that my Dad used a reduced charge of AA#2230 and blew the bolt where it wraps around the head of the case. He wasn't hurt at all, but it was one event that led to him retiring from handloading last year at 82 years young.

Regards,
Sweetwater

[Graybeard]

So long as the powder charge is within that given in the load manuals (I did not look just assumed it was lower based on OPs comments) then I see no safety issues.

[Smokin Joe]

can I get away with using a regular small pistol primer, or do I need to stick with the magnum variety?

I tried that once in a .44 Mag T/C pistol and got one Bitch of a hangfire.

[mauser98us]

I concur. Ball powders have a bad habit of detonation if not loaded to max or near max. This has been covered ad naseum in most trade publications.Best to be safe and not sorry,as many handloaders still don,t know/understand this potential for danger. Matter of fact, in this lawyer oriented society, I'm surprised ball powders are still availible.

[securitysix]

So long as the powder charge is within that given in the load manuals (I did not look just assumed it was lower based on OPs comments) then I see no safety issues.

I checked Hornady 6th edition and a fairly recent Sierra manual and picked a nice middle of the road charge.  I won't use a powder charge that I can't find in at least two manuals.  Hornady says 7.5 grains is minimum, but since my powder measure throws +/- 1/10th of a grain, I figured I'd go up a little.  I settled on 7.7 grains, which means I'm actually running 7.6 to 7.8 grains, so still safely away from too little and nowhere near too much.

My main concern, like I said, was whether or not I would get sufficient ignition with non-magnum small pistol primers.  The last thing I want is to fail to get the powder to light sufficiently, resulting in a squib and a bullet stuck in the bore.  The next to last thing I want is an overcharge resulting in a kaboom.  Since I wasn't sure, I loaded with small rifle and small rifle magnum primers (another reason I didn't want to be on the raggety edge of max with the powder charge and erred on the lower side of published data).

[stimpylu32]

SS

I have a pistol that I load with 25.5g of H110 and use standard LP Primers , well over 500 rounds now and not one hangfire or squib shot , yes standard primers will light ball powders , are they always the best choice - not always , however they will work .

The round I load , H110 gives me 90% case fill so there is a bit of room for the primer to work , were this powder would need a mag primer if the powder was loaded to a fuller case cap , in the case size and powder % your using I see no reason for them to be an issue .

stimpy 

[LaOtto222]

In the Speer #14 manual they use a CCI 500 (reg small pistol) primer for the Hornet in every load including w296 and H110. They do not list any 55 grain bullets, but do list a 52 grain bullet. Beginning loads of W296/H110 with a CCI 500 primer is 7.9 grains with a max of 8.9 grains. I do not know how familiar you are to the capacity of a 22 Hornet, but 7.9 grains does not even come close to filling it. I am using a beginning charge of 12.4 grains of W296 under a 34 grain bullet with CCI 500 primers in a Winchester case. So 8 grains is not going to fill the case. Of course there is not a lot of volume left in this small case even if it is not full. What does this prove? I do not know, because I have always tried to use case filling or near filled charges of W296 when safe, and when not, I use some thing else. I do this because of the horror stories of not filling the case with ball type powders - I do not like to take chances when there is no good reason not to. I have however switched to using CCI 500 primers with W296 with very good results - high velocity with normal or less than normal case stretch. Pretty good accuracy too.

Here is a couple of pics shot at 100 yards with my Handi 22K Hornet using 12.8 grains of W296, CCI 500 primer, Remington cases and a Mid South 34 grain Nightmare bullet.





While not benchrest quality - not bad

I too have a 22K Hornet and I too am using Full metal jacketed 55 grain bullet pulls with 9.0 grains of Lil'Gun, WSR primers in new Remington cases as a fire forming load. I have shot over 300 fire forming loads and have not lost a single case and they are perfectly formed.

Good Luck and Good Shooting

[corbanzo]

I've only had accuracy problems with h110 and non mag primers when it comes to compressed loads, like what stimpy was talking about earlier.  I think its because it's so thin, it gets packed tight and the primer needs more power to shoot flame through the powder and get quick ignition.  I've never had a problem with loose loads. 

[securitysix]

Thanks, guys.  Next fireforming loads I need to do, I'll go ahead and use up those small pistol primers.  I'm convinced that at this point, if I don't, no one will.

[GRIMJIM]

can I get away with using a regular small pistol primer, or do I need to stick with the magnum variety?

I tried that once in a .44 Mag T/C pistol and got one Bitch of a hangfire.

Same here. When I first started reloading I used the wrong primers and got a terrible hangfire.