Remington Kleanbore primers?
- Thread starter DonC
- Start date
Help Support Modern Muzzleloading Forum:
- Status
Big6X6,
What is the design of the breechplug of your "other" smokeless MLer? Is it somewhat like the SMI plug? I'm going to start testing the SMI with the Rems as I feel that they will provide plenty of ignition with that design; and by their use, will be abiding by the principle of "not using any more primer than needed". Hotter primers than needed are known to reduce accuracy.
What is the design of the breechplug of your "other" smokeless MLer? Is it somewhat like the SMI plug? I'm going to start testing the SMI with the Rems as I feel that they will provide plenty of ignition with that design; and by their use, will be abiding by the principle of "not using any more primer than needed". Hotter primers than needed are known to reduce accuracy.
I've shot them,and I'm pretty sure they are nothing but,STS primers in a diffrent packaging (not a hot primer). When you buy the 100 packs of 209 primers,you are getting hosed for about a 60% price increase,for creative packaging Rem,and Win are the worst at it. Those little stickers (for muzzle loading rifles) that they had Raoul pasting on at the factory made them alot of extra cash! I buy them( Fed209A) by the [email protected]. Federal has never stooped down to this level. Kinda says something for a company,dosen't it! Ron 
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 450
- Reaction score
- 5
From what I've read, they are the same brisance as the .410 primers... If they work, great, but I think it's a marketing ploy be Remington. I'm willing to be proved wrong tho!
Blue-Dot-37.5
Blue-Dot-37.5
SW said:
Well one thing is for sure...the hotter the primer, the more carbon build-up within the breechplug which IS a problem with the Savage breechplug..
I don't know what the SMI breechplug looks like but here is what the ULA breechplug looks like...
It seals at the front leading edge of the breechplug, btw...[/quote]
That sounds like the Cecil Epp school of thought and I'm not sure I'm buying it. 
[/quote]
I don't believe Cecil Epp originated this principle. I just think he captalized on it. There is a basic reloading principle that use only enough primer to get the job done. Any more starts to degrade accuracy. That's why some 308 cases have .060" flash holes as well as some 223s that are used for competition. We don't use ball powders in smokeless muzzleloading. These powders often req hotter primers. In hunting applications, slightly hotter primers than req'd are often used for reliability's sake. The Sav breechplug design, as well as the internal fouling, has caused many of us to go to fairly hot primer usage. With a breechplug design that doesn't attenuate the flash of the 209, likely, IMO, the gentler 209s would be more accurate. This principle works in CF and with no neck tension and no land engraving I think it would apply even more with smokeless muzzleloading. My friend, who went from Win 209s to Rem209-4s in his 45 smokeless, picked up considerable accuracy according to him.
[/quote]I don't believe Cecil Epp originated this principle. I just think he captalized on it. There is a basic reloading principle that use only enough primer to get the job done. Any more starts to degrade accuracy. That's why some 308 cases have .060" flash holes as well as some 223s that are used for competition. We don't use ball powders in smokeless muzzleloading. These powders often req hotter primers. In hunting applications, slightly hotter primers than req'd are often used for reliability's sake. The Sav breechplug design, as well as the internal fouling, has caused many of us to go to fairly hot primer usage. With a breechplug design that doesn't attenuate the flash of the 209, likely, IMO, the gentler 209s would be more accurate. This principle works in CF and with no neck tension and no land engraving I think it would apply even more with smokeless muzzleloading. My friend, who went from Win 209s to Rem209-4s in his 45 smokeless, picked up considerable accuracy according to him.
Big6X6,
Thanks for the quick response. That certainly is a unique, strong looking breechplug design. The SMI plug has a more conventional concave muzzle end design. The constriction is at the 209 end and just flares out into the chamber. Likely more efficient burn but can't likely hold significantly higher pressure as can the ULA or Savage design. Savagebrother has apparently come to the same conclusion as he had an additional breechplug made for his SMI 45, with a ventliner, to contain higher pressure. I like the SMI design and intend to stay within its pressure limitations of 47,000psi, according to Ron N of when he starts getting 209 separation. I've yet to get 209 separation and have shot a little over the recommended loads but not a lot.
Thanks for the quick response. That certainly is a unique, strong looking breechplug design. The SMI plug has a more conventional concave muzzle end design. The constriction is at the 209 end and just flares out into the chamber. Likely more efficient burn but can't likely hold significantly higher pressure as can the ULA or Savage design. Savagebrother has apparently come to the same conclusion as he had an additional breechplug made for his SMI 45, with a ventliner, to contain higher pressure. I like the SMI design and intend to stay within its pressure limitations of 47,000psi, according to Ron N of when he starts getting 209 separation. I've yet to get 209 separation and have shot a little over the recommended loads but not a lot.
Best I can tell they are the very same. Buy them by 1000's. When I had a Black Diamond, I tried all 3 ignition systems. The #11s and musket caps were a little more accurate than the Win209s.Blue-Dot-37.5 said:From what I've read, they are the same brisance as the .410 primers... If they work, great, but I think it's a marketing ploy be Remington. I'm willing to be proved wrong tho!
Blue-Dot-37.5
SW said:That sounds like the Cecil Epp school of thought and I'm not sure I'm buying it.
I don't believe Cecil Epp originated this principle. I just think he captalized on it. There is a basic reloading principle that use only enough primer to get the job done. Any more starts to degrade accuracy. That's why some 308 cases have .060" flash holes as well as some 223s that are used for competition. We don't use ball powders in smokeless muzzleloading. These powders often req hotter primers. In hunting applications, slightly hotter primers than req'd are often used for reliability's sake. The Sav breechplug design, as well as the internal fouling, has caused many of us to go to fairly hot primer usage. With a breechplug design that doesn't attenuate the flash of the 209, likely, IMO, the gentler 209s would be more accurate. This principle works in CF and with no neck tension and no land engraving I think it would apply even more with smokeless muzzleloading. My friend, who went from Win 209s to Rem209-4s in his 45 smokeless, picked up considerable accuracy according to him.[/quote]
I understand that it might apply in CF where you have a case but I'm in doubt on the muzzleloading application.
[quote="dwhunter"
I understand that it might apply in CF where you have a case but I'm in doubt on the muzzleloading application.[/quote]
DW Hunter,
The reason I think it would apply even more to the muzzleloader application is that the more the load is disrupted by the primer the less accurate the load will be. Hotter primers disrupt even cartridge loads which have neck tension and lands to attenuate the disruption. The muzzleloader has only the mass of the load and the low resistance(comparatively to the land engraving of a CF) of the sabot in the lands to resist forward movement. Think about the fact that even a primer with a mis-fire of the powder can push the entire bullet,sabot and powder charge out the end of the barrel of a Savage. Remember how hard it was to push the saboted bullet down the barrel? Do we need this much ignition to just properly ignite the powder?
I understand that it might apply in CF where you have a case but I'm in doubt on the muzzleloading application.[/quote]
DW Hunter,
The reason I think it would apply even more to the muzzleloader application is that the more the load is disrupted by the primer the less accurate the load will be. Hotter primers disrupt even cartridge loads which have neck tension and lands to attenuate the disruption. The muzzleloader has only the mass of the load and the low resistance(comparatively to the land engraving of a CF) of the sabot in the lands to resist forward movement. Think about the fact that even a primer with a mis-fire of the powder can push the entire bullet,sabot and powder charge out the end of the barrel of a Savage. Remember how hard it was to push the saboted bullet down the barrel? Do we need this much ignition to just properly ignite the powder?
A
Anonymous
Guest
SW said:
Absolutely. It's borderline as is for 4227, as many have found out, and nitrocellulose smokeless is substantially harder to ignite than Pyrodex and T7: the "other" muzzleloading smokeless powders. It is also borderline with lightweight bullets.
Hot primers do nothing to hurt accuracy in a muzzleloader. Knight has won Friendship World Manufacturer's Championship 6 years straight-- with 209s and T7 primarily of late.
I tested my Encore with Federal 209A's vs. small bore rifle primers-- group size did not change, changing out breechplugs at the range. Use of Remington 209-4's did nothing to tighten groups either.
I did the same thing when developing three different A&H "Accu-Kleen" breechplugs. Though using small bore primers again, there was no accuracy change. If there was, I would have been VERY happy to claim it. There was not, so I haven't.
There is no evidence that it remotely applies at ALL to muzzleloading.
What is needed is fast ignition of the powder to seal the sabot. Smokeless powders used in the 10ML-II and others are very slow compared to flake powders used in shotshells. Additionally, the 209 is not touching powder as in a shotshell-- it has to go through a breechplug which has air in it. In a shotshell, the 209 itself is the flash hole directly contacting the powder.
The hottest 209 remains the Federal 209A-- if there was a hotter one, I'd sure use it. Primer gas cannot and does not "disrupt" a sabot-- it can't cock it, twist it, or misalign it. Gas pushes with equal force in all directions.
You might find the .454 Casull experiments interesting:
http://www.levergun.com/articles/454_case.htm
"Evidently, the smaller flash hole resulted in less bullet movement before effective ignition occurred but it also resulted in reduced ignition efficiency. See the live ammo test results." The flash hole comparison was large-- 0.059-inch vs. 0.081-inch.
It is not bullet movement that means anything in particular in accuracy-- it is variation in the amount of that bullet movement that may hurt accuracy.
Using 209-4's in a Disc Elite showed NO accuracy increase-- what it did was give me a few misfires with Triple 7 pellets; that was its sole "contribution." Using 209-4's in the Savage just gave me misfires.
Small bore primers in muzzleloading is very, very old news. They were featured over eight years ago in Knight Rifles' "Magnum Elite" as the "Posi-Fire" ignition system, which used a rifle primer pressed into a Speer .38 caliber plastic cartridge. It didn't do anything for accuracy then, and not much has changed since.
- Joined
- May 17, 2005
- Messages
- 4,940
- Reaction score
- 146
209-4's are no good in the Disc Elite. I have Winchester, Federal, and Remington 209-4's. know no difference in accuracy at all for me.
Randy,
I read all that you posted and have no reason to question any of it, except the part about no effect other than displacing the bullet. I'd think this would be a factor in what pressure is developed. Yet, the question at hand had nothing to do with anything other than SMI and possibly similiarly designed plugs that get a higher percentage of the flash into the charge. If, the minimum flash to get the job done, is a valid principle in smokeless, cartridge guns, I still don't see why it wouldn't be applicable with a muzzleloader such as the SMI. Points about 4227 and even the Sav were not part of the original question. I gave up on 4227 5 years ago. The question was and remains, and only testing will show, is that with a short straight thru, non-attenuated, breech-plug might the lower intensity 209 not work better than the hotter one. I suspect that a CCI regular or Rem 209 puts more flame into the powder charge in an SMI than a Fed209A does in a Savage. I still think this is a valid question concerning the SMI and ULA breechplugs.
I read all that you posted and have no reason to question any of it, except the part about no effect other than displacing the bullet. I'd think this would be a factor in what pressure is developed. Yet, the question at hand had nothing to do with anything other than SMI and possibly similiarly designed plugs that get a higher percentage of the flash into the charge. If, the minimum flash to get the job done, is a valid principle in smokeless, cartridge guns, I still don't see why it wouldn't be applicable with a muzzleloader such as the SMI. Points about 4227 and even the Sav were not part of the original question. I gave up on 4227 5 years ago. The question was and remains, and only testing will show, is that with a short straight thru, non-attenuated, breech-plug might the lower intensity 209 not work better than the hotter one. I suspect that a CCI regular or Rem 209 puts more flame into the powder charge in an SMI than a Fed209A does in a Savage. I still think this is a valid question concerning the SMI and ULA breechplugs.
A
Anonymous
Guest
SW said:
The "question at hand" as if the 209-4 aka new Kleenbore primers are cleaner burning.
The answer is that 209-4 primers use the exact same primer energetic as other Remington shotshell primers, so they can "burn" no cleaner.
As they have less primer material in them, they do produce correspondingly less residue. They are not hot enough to reliably ignite powder in the 10ML-II, so that moots it. They are also not powerful enough reliably ignite T7 pellets in Knight red plastic jacket rifles, or other BP rifles with similar length breechplugs such as an A & H.
They have shown no accuracy change with T/C, Knight, or A & H rifles-- nor have small bore rifle or pistol primers in A & H or T/C rifles with T 7 loose powder. As far as "cleaner," that also is moot when using filthy propellants such as BP / Pyrodex, or T7. They do reduce T7 fouling crud, however.
Attenuation is normally used to describe what a recoil pad does to recoil, if you choose to invent the application of the term to breechplugs so be it. All breechplugs "attenuate" 209 primer fire-- a 209 primer was designed to be in direct, intimate contact with propellant.
As for the hotter / weaker primer theory, Federal 209A primers are clearly hotter than Remington STS primers or Winchester 209s, and push a sabot farther up the bore in the Savage than the others do.
However, it has no effect on accuracy. A Federal 209A will, more importantly, ignite a powder charge in the Savage where a Winchester 209 will not.
Its amazing what a post can elicit! I did mis-state one part of my previous post. The "Hotter primers than needed are known to reduce accuracy" should have been "in most, if not all, centerfire smokeless situations excessive primer energy degrades accuracy". Granted my original statement is flawed; yet, that doesn't take away from my question concerning SMI and similiar breech-plugs and the usage of various 209 primers with smokeless powder. I think the verdict is still out on this one and that only testing/experimentation will give the answer. Black powder subs, Sav breechplug, etc results are not going to give the answer to this question. I choose to use the word "attenuation" with the breechplug effect on the available flame and doubt that seriously violates the meaning of the term.SW said:
A
Anonymous
Guest
SW said:
Do you have a single source you can cite?
The hierarchy of 209 primers established in Lyman's and other sources-- Rem., Win, Federal being the hottest. By your theory, Federal shotshells are not as accurate as Winchester, which in turn are not as accurate as Remington.
The notion of "attenuated breechplugs" requires special pleading. All 209 primers have integral flash holes, and all breech plugs attenuate the original flash hole with a flash hole of their own.
Ron Name has been smokeless muzzleloading for a long while, perhaps since the days of the Great Mojave forest. Note SMI recommended loads: http://smokelessmuzzleloading.com/loadingchart.html
All listed loads use Federal 209A primers, the hottest available. Do you thing Federal would be the ONLY listed primer if they degraded accuracy as you are trying to claim without any basis? :shock:
I used the Rem ML primers in 60 degree temps ,no problem in 50 shots.When the temp dropped below 30*I had three miss fires in three shots ,all with deer lined up in the scope.What do you think I think of them now?Went back to the range ,two more miss fires in 6 shots in 35* temps.Changed back to winchester 209 ,no miss fires in 35 shots.
- Status
