• Help Support TNDeer:

Remington Primers CS call

MUP

MUP

Well-Known Member
TNDeer Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2007
Messages
104,442
Location
Just North of Chatt-town
Got the call back from Remington regarding my ftf primer issue with their LR primers. I was told that my primers were seated .008-.010" below the case face, which is .003-.005" below industry standards (.002"-.005"). These primers had a crater indentation from the firing pin in them, and were struck no less than 3 times in an attempt to get them to fire. I'm no dummy, and I deal in thousandth's of an inch every day, so if .003" is the reason these primers didn't fire, then I won't be buying anymore of them from now on anyway. Very disappointed in Remington CS.

Also, I've loaded .223, hundreds of them, with Remington SR primers with not one single issue or ftf, and since the LR primer deal, have switched over to CCI LR primers in my 06 and 300WSM, and have fired hundreds of rounds combined from these rifles, also with no issues. I can't help but see what I think is the obvious crux here, that something is off with at LEAST this batch of primers. Rant off.
 
Pure spin, bad QC on Remingtons part. They're not the only company with QC problems with ammo and reloading components though. Seems to be systemic in the industry these days. Bad primers, bad powder, crappy brass, variance in bullet weights from lot to lot and I won't even mention all the factory recalls on loaded ammo. I guess the industry hasn't been able to keep up with demand and are rushing through production. I've been reloading for 40+ years, never seen it this bad. If you do get a great recipe going you better stock up on it because next week it's sold out everywhere.
 
The CS rep also mentioned head dimensions, that the head dim's on these particular cases would allow the case to go too far into the chamber. Funny, but all the other rounds that ftf were unloaded and reloaded using CCI's and they have fired 100% of the time so far. Also, it's Remington brass that I'm using! Another issue from their QC operations it seems.
 
You read threads where folks are using primers from different manufacturers and reporting zero problems, equivalent results, no need to stick to a single brand they are all the same. I don't agree with that philosophy and if you do, more power to you.

And yes, in partiucular the quality of new Brass is disturbing. Several years back I purchased some factory blems from Hornady. Well, blemished means discoloration or appearance shortcomings. In Fact, the flash holes were oblong and nearly all were off-center. 18% of the flash holes were so offcenter you could not FL size them without removing the decap pin. I wrote Hornady asking for relief, they said blems is blems. You may see every now and then a distinct anti-Hornady tilt in my threads.

There have been many threads here and elsewhere in recent months regarding Winchester brass. Enough so as to make me back off acquisition.

Don't know where these quality issues are headed. But as mentioned, if you have a favorite load best stock up.
 
I didn't verify it, Remington did. I wouldn't doubt my extra pin strikes trying to achieve ignition were the cause of some extra depth. The pin strikes are deep. All that is mute anyway when I've taken down the rest of the duds and reloaded with CCI primers, and have had 100% ignition rate, from the same brass cases that the Rem primers failed in. I've used the Rem SR primers for hundreds of rounds from my AR's, and now have had a couple hundred using the CCI's without a single ftf. Just something about this particular batch of LR primers is my thinking.
 
Just yesterday I read a great article on primers, of all things. I was waiting for tires at Sam's Club and it was either Recoil or another mag on long range shooting. Wish I could remember which one it was.
edit: I found the magazine today, Guns & Ammo - Sniper.

Anyway, they listed the many reasons for a primer to fail to fire.
#1 Failure to have the bolt fully down. Impedes firing pin speed. I never knew this one, but seen a lot during the heat of competition.
Crud in firing pin channel.
Improper seating depth
Chamber dimensions, allowing cartridge to move forward during primer strike.
Out of dimension primer pocket that doesn't allow the anvil to compress
According to the author (Black Hills ammo) his incidents of true defective primers number about 2 out of 300,000 using WInchester.

One thing they mentioned is if you have a misfire, DON'T restrike the primer. The primer material has already fractured after the first strike and it likely won't work now. But a double strike makes it impossible to examine and get a proper analysis by the manufacturer.
 
That's very interesting Lance. I had a FTF factory load, Corlokt ammo, back in 2013(first time ever for that), and when I called CS they asked if I had tried striking again, then told me to put the round into another rifle and see if it would fire in it. All the while saying it was likely my rifle producing a "light strike" even back then. Btw, I still have that round, and it didn't fire in another rifle either. Oh, and the ftf? It happened during a hunting shot, dandy 8 pt made it to another year. :)
 
Yea, the QC and CS at Remington these days is terrible. They gave me the same runaround on a 700 5R I bought a couple of years ago that had serious chamber issues. After the 2nd time of sending it back their excuse was their rifles were not meant to shoot reloaded ammo in, only factory ammo and Remington's at that!!! I said "Sure......tell that one to the military".
 
Yeah, to say that any primer is so sensitive that seating it .003 to .005 too deep is going to make it fail is crazy. Not one in 1,000 reloaders ever even measure this dimension, including yours truly. I've always gone by feel when seating primers and never had a problem except with my Marlin 336 and that had nothing at all to do with a primer failure but instead was a gun issue(main spring). I guess the guys at Remington just don't want to admit that they don't know why your ammo failed to fire. :)

Lance, I experienced the problem about bolt handle position you are talking about. I'd never even considered the bolt having to be fully down before I stocked a model 98 Mauser barreled action with a partially inletted stock where I had to finish the bolt handle cut. I thought I had removed enough stock material to let the bolt handle go down all the way. I got a couple of rounds of ammo and went to test my "new" rifle. The darned thing just "clicked" and left somewhat shallow but mostly adequate looking primer dents but refused to fire. I was about to pull my hair out because I had test fired it, strapped to a big piece of wood, with no stock and it fired. I finally noticed that the stock cut for the bolt handle was too shallow and wasn't letting the bolt handle go down all the way. If the bolt handle doesn't go all the way down, the slot in the rear bottom of the bolt, which cams the striker rearward when cocking, doesn't get out of the way of the striker when it tires to drop. In other words, the striker cocking piece hits the camming surface of the bolt body and uses part of it's energy rotating the bolt handle down. In the case of my rifle the unfinished stock prevented the firing pin/striker from ever going all the way forward. In a rifle with a good, fully finished stock, you'd run into the situation I described above where the striker is hitting the cam surface of the bolt body and using part of it's energy slamming the bolt handle down. It might fire and it might not. Ignition could get erratic.
 
One more thing from the magazine aticle, it talked about different primer sensitivities.
The manufacturers are trying to accomodate all types of weapons but don't want too hard of a primer that won't reliably go off, and don't want one too soft to prevent a floating firing pin from discharing it.
So, sensitiviy can differ between makers.
The only time I used the harder mil-spec primers was when loading for NRA Service Rifle and using an AR.
 
Hunter 257W":30huw5zo said:
Yeah, to say that any primer is so sensitive that seating it .003 to .005 too deep is going to make it fail is crazy. Not one in 1,000 reloaders ever even measure this dimension, including yours truly. I've always gone by feel when seating primers and never had a problem except with my Marlin 336 and that had nothing at all to do with a primer failure but instead was a gun issue(main spring). I guess the guys at Remington just don't want to admit that they don't know why your ammo failed to fire. :)
Click to expand...

And, that's why the term "seating" the primer is used, not placing, adjusting, or any other term...it's seated. I looked up the SAAMI specs for primers and primer pockets and, even from the factory, there is a .009" possible tolerance stack up. The primer min length dim is .123" if I recall correctly, and the primer pocket max depth is .132" , thus, when a primer is seated, there is the potential of .009" gap from the base of the case to the top of the primer, with factory tolerances.
 
MUP":1mu3fy17 said:
Hunter 257W":1mu3fy17 said:
Yeah, to say that any primer is so sensitive that seating it .003 to .005 too deep is going to make it fail is crazy. Not one in 1,000 reloaders ever even measure this dimension, including yours truly. I've always gone by feel when seating primers and never had a problem except with my Marlin 336 and that had nothing at all to do with a primer failure but instead was a gun issue(main spring). I guess the guys at Remington just don't want to admit that they don't know why your ammo failed to fire. :)
Click to expand...

And, that's why the term "seating" the primer is used, not placing, adjusting, or any other term...it's seated. I looked up the SAAMI specs for primers and primer pockets and, even from the factory, there is a .009" possible tolerance stack up. The primer min length dim is .123" if I recall correctly, and the primer pocket max depth is .132" , thus, when a primer is seated, there is the potential of .009" gap from the base of the case to the top of the primer, with factory tolerances.
Click to expand...
Actually SAAMI recommends flush to .008" ;)
 
MUP":1ixzco8t said:
Then those dimensions would would be correct for pocket and primer looks like. Within .001" anyway.
Click to expand...
Your tolerance stack analysis is correct, however is a primer that is seated deeper than recommended by SAAMI the fault of a component manufacturer?
 
infoman jr.":qoxwmh2g said:
MUP":qoxwmh2g said:
Then those dimensions would would be correct for pocket and primer looks like. Within .001" anyway.
Click to expand...
Your tolerance stack analysis is correct, however is a primer that is seated deeper than recommended by SAAMI the fault of a component manufacturer?
Click to expand...

Mine were found to be .008" max deep btw, this according to the Rem dept. So I should be good according to SAAMI specs as well.
 
Remington doesn't hold to the primer spec in their own ammo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Latest posts

Back
Top