- Joined
- Feb 4, 2021
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 99
Ok so I am not exactly new but I thought this question would go well in this sub forum.
I see a lot of conflicting info out there. Many MLS are set up for 209 these days. My first ML, a CVA Stagnorn, was so equipped and it worked great, IMO. That Staghorn was an open primer design. I read often of converting open primer design MLs to 209 and that causes a lot of blowback. I have experience with this….but not from my Staghorn. Actually, from a TC Black Diamond and a Knight MK-85.
Many folks recommend sticking with the No 11 or Musket cap with these MLs. This, of course, makes the use of BH209 or pelletized propellants null and void.
I guess my question is, is there really a superior primer? I started on 209 and as such, believed that was the end all be all. More recently, I have discovered the advantages of loose powder, be it Pyrodex, 777, or real black. as such, I have experimented with and researched different priming methods for each.
I am of the opinion that 209 priming may be a solution to a….not so much non-existent problem but rather a problem that I don’t have. That being, pelletized propellant. Even though I started on it, I am loathe to continue using it. I have found a affinity for older style inlines as well and have embraced their “shortcomings”. I like loose powder and No 11s or musket caps. I like Knight MK-85 s and their ilk as well as original DISCs and Rem 700 MLs.
When I hear and read stories about converting TC Bkack Diamonds or Knight MK-85s to 209 primers, often, blowback and dissatisfaction ensue. Many recommend going back to No. 11 or musket caps and say they are just fine...which they are…but it makes you question why 209 was ever developed for inlines to begin with.
I see a lot of conflicting info out there. Many MLS are set up for 209 these days. My first ML, a CVA Stagnorn, was so equipped and it worked great, IMO. That Staghorn was an open primer design. I read often of converting open primer design MLs to 209 and that causes a lot of blowback. I have experience with this….but not from my Staghorn. Actually, from a TC Black Diamond and a Knight MK-85.
Many folks recommend sticking with the No 11 or Musket cap with these MLs. This, of course, makes the use of BH209 or pelletized propellants null and void.
I guess my question is, is there really a superior primer? I started on 209 and as such, believed that was the end all be all. More recently, I have discovered the advantages of loose powder, be it Pyrodex, 777, or real black. as such, I have experimented with and researched different priming methods for each.
I am of the opinion that 209 priming may be a solution to a….not so much non-existent problem but rather a problem that I don’t have. That being, pelletized propellant. Even though I started on it, I am loathe to continue using it. I have found a affinity for older style inlines as well and have embraced their “shortcomings”. I like loose powder and No 11s or musket caps. I like Knight MK-85 s and their ilk as well as original DISCs and Rem 700 MLs.
When I hear and read stories about converting TC Bkack Diamonds or Knight MK-85s to 209 primers, often, blowback and dissatisfaction ensue. Many recommend going back to No. 11 or musket caps and say they are just fine...which they are…but it makes you question why 209 was ever developed for inlines to begin with.