Still on sale(primers)

[Mitty38]

Anyone tried Fiochi Small pistol primers luo of Winchester.
All my current small pistol loads are Worked up with Winchester.
But I am down to 400 now.

Of the shelf at the Belden FinFeatherFir.
I can get Winchester for a hundred. 10.99
But Fiochi I can get a box of 150 off the same shelf for 10 bucks.
Just wondering if it would make a big enough difference in my pistol loads.
When I switched from CCI to Federal it only messed with 1 load I had and it was not enough to rework it.
If I would end up having to rework All my loads, then I will just buy a couple packs of Winchester at eleven bucks . Then call it a day.

 

[JBinMN]

I was taught in Centerfire reloading, when ya change a component of a load... Work it up from Start again.

Or not.

YMMV

One can ask others all about the new component, but as each weapon/firearm is different, so might be the results of changing a component.
What gave good results can change to bad & what might have been bad goes to good.

Once again, YMMV.

I would work up the loads again. Folks can do as they like though...

(P.S. - In case folks have forgotten... primers, like powders can change due to "lot #s" ( Production lots) from year to year or even in a change at the MNFR due to "who supplies what" which can change the brisance of a primers, as far as the little components that make up the primer compound, even if it is still within MNFR "specifications".
As far as I know, powder is the same way. MNFR changes a "Lot", then the powder resultant "characteristics" can possibly change.
Another reason why the manuals used to change most every year, Burn rate charts change, & the lot numbers were important to keep things "Consistent".
Most every reloading manual I have read said to basically, "Start over when changing components.". Seems to be good advice to follow.

Preaching to the choir, I reckon... Unless someone forgot words to the song(s).

CYA around.

 

[Mitty38]

I was taught in Centerfire reloading, when ya change a component of a load... Work it up from Start again.

Or not.

YMMV

One can ask others all about the new component, but as each weapon/firearm is different, so might be the results of changing a component.
What gave good results can change to bad & what might have been bad goes to good.

Once again, YMMV.

I would work up the loads again. Folks can do as they like though...

(P.S. - In case folks have forgotten... primers, like powders can change due to "lot #s" ( Production lots) from year to year or even in a change at the MNFR due to "who supplies what" which can change the brisance of a primers, as far as the little components that make up the primer compound, even if it is still within MNFR "specifications".
As far as I know, powder is the same way. MNFR changes a "Lot", then the powder resultant "characteristics" can possibly change.
Another reason why the manuals used to change most every year, Burn rate charts change, & the lot numbers were important to keep things "Consistent".
Most every reloading manual I have read said to basically, "Start over when changing components.". Seems to be good advice to follow.

Preaching to the choir, I reckon... Unless someone forgot words to the song(s).

CYA around.

Ye but... Depends on what you are loading.
When most of my loads are in the middle of, or at the bottom of the data. Can't see reworking a whole load from scratch with those ones. Just for a primer change, without popping a few in and trying them out. When I am no where near the top recommended powder charge.
If they are using Small Pistol primers then obviously they are loading for a gun in at least the same category.
Just getting a feel ... Before ending up with a bunch of primers I have to do a lot of work to make due with.
Like when I went from CCI to Federal. Bought one pack after asking and listening a bit. I just dropped them all a .2 then loaded them up. All the loads but one did better, or close enough, at the original load. Easy change over.
If I hear a bunch of results being way off then I don't have time or money to play with loads, that have worked for years to save a few bucks.
If not much deviation reported between the two for general non magnum pistol rounds and powders. Then maybe I will try the Fiochi. Drop it down . 2 grain and go from there..like when I switch lots on something.
Otherwise I will just pay the 11 bucks.

 

[BMW Rider]

Anyone tried Fiochi Small pistol primers luo of Winchester.
All my current small pistol loads are Worked up with Winchester.
But I am down to 400 now.

Of the shelf at the Belden FinFeatherFir.
I can get Winchester for a hundred. 10.99
But Fiochi I can get a box of 150 off the same shelf for 10 bucks.
Just wondering if it would make a big enough difference in my pistol loads.
When I switched from CCI to Federal it only messed with 1 load I had and it was not enough to rework it.
If I would end up having to rework All my loads, then I will just buy a couple packs of Winchester at eleven bucks . Then call it a day.

Only $10 to find out. I’d buy a sleeve of Fiocchis and try them out and compare to your current loads. I’ve shot thousands of them and they’ve all been good to go in my plinking loads (9, 38/357). Haven’t noticed any difference between Fiocchi, WSP, or S&B in my light loads.

 

[Mitty38]

Only $10 to find out. I’d buy a sleeve of Fiocchis and try them out and compare to your current loads. I’ve shot thousands of them and they’ve all been good to go in my plinking loads (9, 38/357). Haven’t noticed any difference between Fiocchi, WSP, or S&B in my light loads.

Thanks. Thoughts are, .... Maybe just get them as replacements in the lighter plinking loads. Like 9, 38.
Save the Winchesters and the CCI(if I ever see a CCI primer again) for the heavier stuff. Like .Hot 38+p, Hollow point hot .357 "hunting" loads. My 100 yard .357 rifle loads, and the like.

 

[fiver]

cram e'm in there Emmett

 

[Mitty38]

cram e'm in there Emmett

You know me... meander around. Ask questions. Consider the consequences. Then do what I want to, mostly anyway. LOL
Cept for that One time when you, Glen, and one other person here. Talked me out of putting a light load of H110, under a 30 caliber bullet, with corn meal in between. Wisely listened to the science and did not do that .....at least yet.

 

[fiver]

I'll send you my H-110 30-06 data... LOL

 

[L Ross]

The only time I'd even worry about changing lots or primers or brass or even bullets is if I was loading maximum performance loads or if I had a super accurate load and ran out of identical components. I even change primers in mid batch of plinking ammo. Often shot mixed brass in handgun ammo.
I used to worry about silly things like getting top velocity for my "big game" jacketed hunting ammo.. Then I started shooting actual game and realized I did not need them, even when I went out West.

 

[Petrol & Powder]

When you're operating right at the edge of maximum loads or you are trying to squeeze out that last little bit of accuracy from a cartridge, then yes- primers matter.

I'm with L Ross on this. Changing a component can change the pressure and get you into trouble but only if you were right on the edge to start with.
When loading rifle cartridges for maximum accuracy, I pay attention to all the details and would never swap out one primer type for another. Same holds true for max loads in magnum cartridges but I rarely find myself in that situation.
A little common sense goes a long way.

 

[RBHarter]

Ballistic Products published data with Federal 209A vs W209s and CCI 209s in 1-1/8 oz 2-3/4" loads that were otherwise identical loads . The W209 turned in something like 10,100 psi and CCI about 11,800 . Those aren't particularly spicy 12 ga loads , dove and quail /target loads really. Just to keep things in scale the 1-1/8 oz Rem Nitro Steel 2-3/4" "mags" say 1050 BAR right on the cases which is 15,000 psi , I'm left to believe that is the modern/post 3" mag maximum loading. The Federal 209A popped the loads up to 20,800 psi. There are similar,although not as extreme , examples in the #3 Lyman shot shell manual . As a result of that reading I don't mix anything with known data especially just swapping primers.

With that said I once switched from Win LRP to CCI on an out in the weeds no known data load and closed groups from 8+" at 50 yd to 3×5" at 100.
A more recent experience with the same case capacity and a 20 gr lighter bullet in 7 mm instead of almost sheds light on that load making me think maybe a 16-1700 fps 200 gr paper patch in a 24"the SKS was a lot more than the 35kpsi I thought it was as the 7×6.8spc with the 180gr had gas leaks around the primers right at what had been a start load . That plan was abandoned with the start loads pushing 65kpsi . The only thing I can think of that might have been a major contributing factor was the change from CCI to Winchester. With the Winchester being suitable for mag and standard and the CCI being a standard in the small case with 4350 . I also can't rule out the DuPont 4350 getting squirrelly in it's old age .

 

[Mitty38]

When you're operating right at the edge of maximum loads or you are trying to squeeze out that last little bit of accuracy from a cartridge, then yes- primers matter.

I'm with L Ross on this. Changing a component can change the pressure and get you into trouble but only if you were right on the edge to start with.
When loading rifle cartridges for maximum accuracy, I pay attention to all the details and would never swap out one primer type for another. Same holds true for max loads in magnum cartridges but I rarely find myself in that situation.
A little common sense goes a long way.

Yep

I think a lot of those reloading recommendations are for those people, who do not educate beyond what is needed, to get what works.
Or who extrapolate well for themselves. When it comes to loading.
Oh and the "speed demons".
To keep them out of trouble and keep the law suits in check.

If I listened only to the commercial entities recommendations.
Half my Red Dot loads would not exist. And half my "used" Estate sale Red Dot and Green would be in the trash. Rather then making my happy.

Now shotgun. Na I would always work up from a trusted source. You are talking volumes more explosive involved, then with a pistol. Kinda common sense there.

 

[fiver]

the thing with them is your working in a much lower pressure window.
a deeper than measured crimp will jump your PSI by 1000 to 1500 points without changing the 'safe' recipe in any way.

the 1050 thing come around when the 3-1/2" 12 ga. come out, they raised the max pressure for that round and then it kind of got out of hand.

 

[JBinMN]

I have a bit of a different perspective now a days than I had , even just 5 years ago.
Trying to not goin to a lot of detail, but it may take me some time to try to explain it.
Skip it if ya don't feel like reading this.

Anyway, I like to "experiment" (might also be called,"extrapolate") on some loads I shoot & have done so since I started reloading and particularly after I started casting bullets. Same with alloys & that with casting. Or, with lubes or using PC... You know... Trying different things to see what works for me & what doesn't.

Generally if I found it to be basically my only option, or if I wanted to try something that had not been tried as far as I knew in my limited exposure to others who reloaded & cast bullets, I either could have just stuck with "book loads", and did not try other things, or did what I did. Stuck with the same alloys, stuck with the same lubes...

I'd Experiment/extrapolate, when necessary, or if I thought I might find improvement.

Basically when it was about load data, it came down to the situation that many times I could not find what I wanted in paper manuals & so I had to do what I could to figure out how to safely make something work that was not out there in print.

With all that I did , I did not "catastrophically disassemble" any of my firearms & no one has ever been hurt. I may not have always reached the goals I was after, but that is just how things go sometimes. Many times things worked out just fine.
With that said, the reason I typed out the first sentence is why I became a bit more hesitant after I saw just how folks were getting BS-ed about things in general, but most of all about the quality of products that were being offered, and how many just took for granted. ( Oh I know I did...For a while anyway. Bet most did...)

Then I realized that while the price of things was getting higher, not just due to inflation or shortages, or even jus the "times", but at the same time the quality of things was diminishing at the same time. Some might say, "drastically".
( Things are not like they were in older times when something was "Made in Japan", or "Made in Taiwan", or "Made in China" was basically saying it was a POS product compared to US made or even German made, etc... You know if ya lived it then. )

Not unlike the "shrink-flation" ya see now a days with the bag of chips staying the same, or the bag/box/etc. might even be the same, but less chips in the bag/box/etc., and more "air", and the same goes for boxed goods as well as canned, or for that matter most any "containerized" stuff.

Then another method the make $$ & you get less, is the amounts get smaller & so less of it in the same container so they reduce the container size, & still less amount of product, but the Price Goes Up. Doesn't it?

They want to make $$ & not lose anything when it comes to inflation, supply issues, whatever... It is all about where they can "save", or "make" & get away with it....

So that brings me to....

We have, in our pastime/hobby/tradition of casting & reloading, seen the same has gone on in the price of the components, haven't we?

Price of components has gone up, hasn't it?

Well, then how about "Quality", or even "Quantity"?

If the price has risen, we can sort of expect that with supplies being limited & all that jazz.
We EXPECT the quantity to be the same.. What was a pound is still 16oz, and so on up to an 8pound jug of powder. Still the same amount, container pretty much the same. The price went up though... Just a "supply thing"?

100 or 1000 primers is The price went up though... Just a "supply thing"?

Where could the bean counters still make some more $$$ since the pound has not changed & the "count" has not changed?
QUALITY of product could be reduced or, QUALITY ASSURANCE ( QA) becoming less "stringent" & important. THAT might be a place to count them beans & make more $$, couldn't it.

Yeah, I know some of you are shaking your heads...

Let me ask ya something though while ya shake the head...
Would ya ever thought that having parts fall off airplanes, which USED TO HAVE some of the most stringent QA inspection standards in the world, to start happening "regularly" almost, with doors falling off, cowlings separating in flight, etc., would seem like it was getting more & more common?
At least compared to the past? Like Five years ago? You know what I mean. I hope.

Well, just with those examples, I can only say that I will keep on doing my "experimenting/extrapolating" in the same way I did before,
BUT, I am still gonna "Start low & work up" just as I did before, whether with established "Re-Loading Manual" load data, or my own doings.

I No Longer Trust what I am getting, "Of Any Product", to be as reliable, or as good of quality as it was 5 years ago or before. ( What is commercially produced that still is? )

That bums me out & spooks me a bit... Not just for myself, but more for my concern about this issue as I try to get my sons and grandsons more & more into our shared pastime, I want them to also learn that not everyone is looking out for their best interests & when it comes down to reloading & casting, it is Your Butt that is on the line for what you are doing. Not anyone else.

So, While I understand working up from previously established loads, as I have done it myself, or , working up new stuff or "experimenting", it seem prudent & safer to me to keep doing the old ways & also only change one component at a time & if ya change one, Start over & work up the load.


Long one... Oh well. Either it gets read or not.
I don't get paid for it. Just sharing an opinion. YMMV, of course, as they say.

 

[Petrol & Powder]

JBinMN

Good comments and observations. I agree in part and disagree in part. So respectfully, here goes:

As for your experimentation, I would say that responsible, intelligent people possessing ordinary caution follow the same path as you do.

And like you, they have not “catastrophically disassembled” any firearms, or harmed anyone.

For example, if one were engaged in reloading 38 Special cartridges for use in modern guns in good condition, 3.5 grains of Bullseye behind a 158gr lead bullet seated at the crimp groove is probably going to be just fine without regard to the brand of small pistol primer used to ignite that charge.

So, I agree that with some knowledge, common sense and ordinary caution, most people have the tools to make sensible decisions for themselves. (whether they will choose to make sensible decisions is something completely different).

As for prices, inflation and shortages, we differ a bit in that arena. Issues such as prices, inflation and shortages are complex and cannot be distilled down to single factors or even a handful of factors. The real world is just not simple to dissect. There are so many intertwined variables that it is impossible to point to one event or condition and accurately proclaim that is the sole causation of price, inflation, shortage, or some combination of those situations.

While I don’t disagree that some products are sold in decreasing quantities to conceal the higher per unit cost; I don’t think the practice goes unnoticed. As I type this, I’m looking at a can of coffee that was traditionally sold as a “pound” of coffee. The label indicates it is 11.3 ounces, that’s hardly a pound but I’m aware of this and think accordingly.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to accurately compare the prices of goods using money as a static yardstick. Inflation is a way to qualify buying power, so a dollar today is not the same as a dollar was in say 1970. Nor can you qualify labor to money, even if you adjust for inflation because there are other intertwined factors. For example, increased legislation, regulation, tariffs on materials, taxes and other factors change the value of that labor. So, you can’t even reduce the cost of a gallon of milk to a certain number of minutes worth of labor – there’s just too many variables, on both sides (the production of that gallon of milk and the value of labor for the person buying it).

Big picture economics is COMPLICATED!

While I don’t disagree that costs have increased, I’m not sure by how much. Cost is a relative thing based many factors.

I disagree that the quality control of the aviation industry has significantly declined in recent times. I will say that the media senses “blood in the water” and every aviation incident will get a disproportionate amount of media attention until this issue is replaced by a different media storm.

Knowledge of history is an excellent means to provide perspective. For those of you old enough to remember the McDonald Douglas DC-10 (and later MD-10, MD-11) airliner, you may recall that it had a less than stellar reputation for safety. The DC-10 undoubtedly had problems, but the media attention made those problems seem worse than they were. Assuming Boeing survives this latest frenzy, they will move past this era. Perspective is critical.

Getting back to JBinMN’s comments, Are prices higher now than 20 years ago? Using nothing more than the numbers used to express prices – YES, those numbers are higher. Are the prices higher in terms of my own buying power? Maybe, but It’s difficult to say by how much.

Have manufacturers reduced quality to maintain profits without raising prices? In some cases, yes. But this is nothing new.

Have manufacturers resorted to reductions in quantity to hold profits steady without raising prices? Also occasionally yes, but again, shrink-flation is nothing new.

Throughout history there have been good times and bad times. There have been times of prosperity and times of recession or even depression.

The economy of the 1920's grew at incredible rates only to be crushed by the 1929 stock market crash and resulting depression. There was a huge economic boom following WWII but there was a recession in 1958. There were two gas shortages in the 1970’s The housing market imploded in 2008. The big picture is complicated.

 

[fiver]

correct on both posts.

only if you took notes and added up the increases as they were released by the manufacturers you start to notice a few things.
30% of 150$ isn't 90$
and 10% and then another 20% of 220 really isn't 110$.

works the same way by the 1,000 count.
23.99 was the going rate and then stuff happened and now 300% [minimum] over that is the markup?
that's some serious dollar down grading right there.

 

[Jeff H]

Honestly, as masochistic as this may sound, the resulting challenges offered by "shortages" are..... FUN.

When the sky was falling on 2008, I proposed on a different (very different) forum that we embrace the opportunity to hone our "survival skills" and learn how to navigate, negotiate this obstacle course with the resources between our ears. I stepped into 2008 with the notion that I was going a step further personally and walking away from a "career" that was eating my soul, and looking for something I actually LIKED doing and would allow me time to do more things that I liked doing - like being with my family.

I've had a lot of fun. I've off-loaded a bunch of guns and all associated paraphernalia required to keep them functional. I've narrowed things down to a small handful of stuff I really like and have experimented extensively on how to keep it going. Its really been a lot of fun. I have a lot more fun with a lot less stuff today than I ever did when I had everything I THOUGHT I wanted.

Seeing how much I can do with how little ha been SO much more gratifying than buying the next new gadget, or another gun in another caliber. I'm excited to get rid of f few more guns actually.

Don't get me wrong, I will still complain about prices and availability. It is my job as a responsible consumer. I'm probably set for like with most components, but I bought primers a few weeks back just because they were HALF the going rate and I wanted to vote with my dollars. I might eventually use them or I might give them to a budding hand-loader. I will know when the opportunity arises.

And, yeah, I truly believe we're being ripped off. I'm not disagreeing with @Petrol & Powder , but the complication of which he speaks provide a lot of concealment for sleazy-dealin'.

Bottom line, I'm going to do what I want to do and will find ways to thwart anyone or anything who or which deludes themselves that they will deprive me of that or try to milk me in the process.

EDIT: AND STAY THE HELL OF MY LAWN!

 

[fiver]

we will all suck it up and PAY the 400$ next time we need some 4064... sad to say.
i'll put it off till my death bed if possible and shoot 4895 instead, but i'm starting to run out of all the odds and ends of powder i had kicking around.

the real sucky thing is i start burning up those last 8 ounces or a pound of this and that and find an even better load than i had before,, then i'm like well crap.

 

[JonB]

There is always some odds and ends of vintage powders at the gunshows. I thought I had seen the last of the Alcan AL8, then low and behold, the last gunshow I was at, there was two square cans (8 oz) of that square flake powder for $12 a can. I like it, but it likes to bridge.

 

[Brad]

Was at Scheels today- saw more primers for sale than I have in years. REM 7 1/2 and 1 1/2 for 80/K. Same for WInchester. Must have had 60K or more total out.
I didn’t buy and as I am in pretty good shape for now.