CCI #41 Mil-Spec 5.56 MM Primers ?

[billt]

Has anyone used these, and if so what kind of performance have you had with them? I ask because tomorrow I'm going to pick up a few thousand. I've heard the cups are very hard, and can cause misfires in some rifles. They are harder to prevent slam fires, but I've never heard of an AR-15 having a slam fire. A Ruger Mini 14 perhaps, but again I've never heard of any. Are these things a solution to a non existent problem, or is there a valid reason for their use? Thanks in advance, Bill T.

 

[william]

I have used about 1000 of them with no problems yet. I also read the thread about the slam fires. I picked up 15,000 at a recent gun show. So I hope they work well. The only thing I noticed is that the primers are a little harder to seat than the Remington ones I was using before. I have been told that CCI primers are a little bigger around than other primers maybe that is why they are harder to seat. I am getting ready to load 5000 this weekend. Hopefully it will go well, and I can report better info. So far the first 1000 worked great in an AR.

 

[Aszerigan]

I use standard CCI 400's in my .223. Never had a slam fire, and don't see the need to spend the extra $6-$8 per thousand.

 

[billt]

don't see the need to spend the extra $6-$8 per thousand.

This is my thinking as well. Bill T.

 

[william]

This is my thinking as well. Bill T.

I agree too. I have never had a slam fire or heard of one. The #41 primers were the cheapest I could find at the show though....They were $125 per 5000 no tax or shipping. I thought that was cheap but maybe I'm wrong. How much are you getting the #400s for?

 

[Lock n Load]

I tried some back when supplies was scarce, didnt notice any difference in the actual performance of my reloads, but I too noticed they were more diffecult to press in and they are definately harder also.

IIRCC they were the same price at Cheeks as the other primers.

 

[billt]

How much are you getting the #400s for?

Cabela's has them on sale for $19.95 @ 1,000. Tomorrow I'm going to grab 5,000. Bill T.

 

[builder_one]

Another one here who has used CCI400's as well as Winchester WSR's with no slam fire issues whatsoever. I have used both types in three different AR's, unless the #41's are the only thing available I wouldn't spend the extra cash on them either.

 

[03A3]

I don't think you could go wrong with the #400's. I've never had any issues with them. I think the #41 are overkill.
The #41 are considered a magnum primer too.

 

[bulletbaron]

CCI # 41 Primers

I am just curious, how many of you INGO member have FULL AUTOMATIC Weapons that use a 223 Remington (5.56 NATO) round??? If you do not have one, you should not be giving your opinions concerning performance of the CCI #41 primer. I have loaded well over 250,000 rounds of this calibre and have had no complaints concerning the performance of this primer nor its capabilities. If you have any doubts of the performance of my product, go to "you tube.com" and put in "DOLTON SWAT". There you can see why I will spend the few extra dollars to insure a TOP Quality product

 

[03A3]

We are entitled to our opinions too.
Never said the #41 was a bad primer or that it had problems.
I said it was overkill, and yes I was talking about for use in a semi-auto. That is what the average person has.
Not impressed that you have an M16 and have reloaded a semi truck load of ammo for it.
Don't care to see your Youtube video either.

 

[IBTL]

Let's keep the comments on point here. No need to get riled up like other forums do. I, too, have wondered about the difference and now I am happy to hear the big deal. Thanks for the input folks!

 

[billt]

I am just curious, how many of you INGO member have FULL AUTOMATIC Weapons that use a 223 Remington (5.56 NATO) round??? If you do not have one, you should not be giving your opinions concerning performance of the CCI #41 primer. I have loaded well over 250,000 rounds of this calibre and have had no complaints concerning the performance of this primer nor its capabilities. If you have any doubts of the performance of my product, go to "you tube.com" and put in "DOLTON SWAT". There you can see why I will spend the few extra dollars to insure a TOP Quality product

So what exactly are you saying? If you don't shoot full auto you don't need them??? Bill T.

 

[Stschil]

I am just curious, how many of you INGO member have FULL AUTOMATIC Weapons that use a 223 Remington (5.56 NATO) round??? If you do not have one, you should not be giving your opinions concerning performance of the CCI #41 primer. I have loaded well over 250,000 rounds of this calibre and have had no complaints concerning the performance of this primer nor its capabilities. If you have any doubts of the performance of my product, go to "you tube.com" and put in "DOLTON SWAT". There you can see why I will spend the few extra dollars to insure a TOP Quality product

Wow, talk about getting your panties in a twist!
It would have done you much better to have stated that you have had great experience using that primer and that you've not had malfunctions shooting them through an FA rifle. No response that I read took a negative stance against the #41, just that for normal usage, most of us haven't had the need to spend the extra money on them.

And btw, who was knocking "Your" product? Are you the creator of the #41?

Just sayin'

 

[billt]

If bulletbaron's argument is based on the "fact" the #41 Primer is only required for full auto weapons, it is invalid. The reason is many AR-15 shooters enjoy bump firing their weapons. There are even gadgets and stocks for sale that allow this practice to be performed very easy.

I don't perform this with my rifles because I think it is a silly waste of ammo, that costs hard earned money to buy and or manufacture. But that doesn't concern the many shooters who do participate in the practice of bump firing, or the enjoyment they get from doing it.

A semi auto AR-15 rifle is capable of being bump fired at just as high of a cyclic rate as a full auto weapon of the same type. Perhaps much higher if the full auto version in question is only capable of firing a 3 shot burst. I've seen Semi auto AR-15's empty a 30 shot magazine in mere seconds while being bump fired.

Now, perhaps there are other reasons the military has made this primer a Mil-Spec. Military 5.56 ammunition is not limited to being fired in only M-16 type weapons. It is also used in the S.A.W. (Squad Automatic Weapon). That weapon uses an entirely different firing mechanism than the M-16 / AR-15 does. Perhaps it is more prone to slam fires, I don't know. Regardless, to jump on to a thread acting like if you don't shoot full auto, you don't know crap is ludacris. The time spent typing that post would have been better served explaining what the exact differences are, and if the #41 Mil-Spec Primer is needed to meet any requirements the civilian AR-15 shooter might encounter, instead of acting like God. Bill T.

 

[bulletbaron]

Apology Offered!

I did intend to upset anyone and if I did, I apologize. I was just trying to point out that the #41 primer is a military primer (as is their #34) and the vast majority of 223 Remington (5.56 NATO) shooters have AR-15 type weapons which is a military type rifle. The vast majority of my 223 ammunition is sold to Law Enforcement and many of the Training Officers requested the #41 Military Primer due to the fact that they do have M-16's, M4's, & HK weapons that are fully automatic and a good percentage are former military personnel.
.
Again, my apologies!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Stschil]

I did intend to upset anyone and if I did, I apologize. I was just trying to point out that the #41 primer is a military primer (as is their #34) and the vast majority of 223 Remington (5.56 NATO) shooters have AR-15 type weapons which is a military type rifle. The vast majority of my 223 ammunition is sold to Law Enforcement and many of the Training Officers requested the #41 Military Primer due to the fact that they do have M-16's, M4's, & HK weapons that are fully automatic and a good percentage are former military personnel.
.
Again, my apologies!!!!!!!!!!!

And, at least from me, accepted.

 

[03A3]

I accept your apology bulletbaron, and I apologize to you and everyone else. I myself came off a little rough. I could've responded to you in a much more civil manner.

 

[Stschil]

Just a WAG on my part, but perhaps the stiffer primer in the #41 is used do prevent primers from igniting during the crimping process? Again, just a guess, but it makes sense. Doesn't it?

 

[03A3]

That's a possibilty, but probably just an added benefit. I have no doubt that the Military specified this type of primer for a good reason.
FA weapons used by the Military and Law Enforcement must have all the odds on their side, as much as possible. And as billt said the SAW may be an entirely different situation when it comes to slam fires. I don't know anything about a SAW.