Thank you, I remember Bryan Litz testing seating depths and found no on target advantages. It seems the only people who champion anecdotal advantages are those who have either sold expensive tools or those who have bought them.
Got to admit that $600-$700 priming tool looks absolutely marvelous though. I never got one, but if I did I would have simply set the thing to full depth and seated the primers by feel to the bottom of the priming pocket trying not to crush them, as that is what all the reloading manuals say to do [at least all the ones I have found that even mention this issue. Personally, I have over 60 different author's manuals. 30 from manufacturers and another 30ish from others in the industry.] So now there is a "Poorman's Competition Primer Seater" that cost $100-$200 (depending on if it has a micrometer or not) that looks marvelous enough, of which I am planning on getting and simply seating all primers flush with the bottom of the primer pocket. The only reason I want this tool is for fast efficient priming, period. th-cam.com/video/xPZFTrmJ6bs/w-d-xo.html&lc=Ugzrx7igbql7QheKEzJ4AaABAg.9yavDmUrDV5A4Q5l4yG2wV
Gotta say I respect your integrity. I'm sure a great deal of work went into designing the priming tool you were planning on selling. To then produce a video showing an in-depth test that demonstrates that the tool is most likely unnecessary for even high level shooters is impressive. If you do end up producing it, I'm sure a lot of people would buy it just because it's cool. If not, can we have a video about how it works? I have an idea, but I am curious how you did it. Thanks Keith!
I am not a competition shooter at all. Just a gun nut, gun builder, reloader, shooter and a hunter who is trying to learn about long range precision. There are so many aspects of reloading that I had no idea were so critical to accuracy, but in fact are! Clarity through testing is priceless. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. Your channel is great!
Great work Keith, I love your content, your humility and honesty with no bull. Would like to see a vid on what things reloaders should focus on in order of priority and what items should be discounted based on their actual affect on the target.
The only test I have seen yet is Witch Doctor's. He did a primer weight sorting test which showed a statistical difference and tighter group sizes when all the primers in a given set of cartridges weighed the same or within a small spread. There is a difference in crush on precision. You lose some velocity if the primer has to push itself back far enough to get a flame down the flash hole. Don't crush them to the point the anvil blocks the flash hole. I seat mine between .003 and .006 and never have a problem. Thanks for doing this, Keith. As a patron and a member of the F-Class community, I appreciate all the money, time, and effort all of the creators put into these tests. I believe it helps folks sort the tools they need from the ones they don't. Personally, I enjoy collecting precision measuring tools, and being a science guy in college, I enjoy gathering empirical data just about as much as I do shooting that data. Please, keep up the great work and keep teaching. You have a teacher's heart. I can tell how passionate you are about it, so no matter which direction F-Class ends up going, please continue to teach!
have you ever taken apart a primer? taken out an anvil? shot a puff load? fired a primer without powder or bullet? primer only backs out when chamber pressure pushes it out.
One thing that occurs to me is that primer seating depth is likely a small influence. If you're outside your node then the other factors may hide that difference in a larger amount of noise. If being in the node is 50% of accuracy and primer depth is 5% then it's going to be very hard to see the 5%. I think it would make more sense to do a test where everything is dialed in except the primer depth. In any case, Thanks for the extra data as always!
Call me crazy but I simply use a hand priming tool and stop when I feel the primer contact the bottom of the pocket. Seems simple, is simple, and it works for me because I'm a big fan of simple. That is not to say that I'm a simpleton, I just don't believe in unnecessarily complicating a simple task.
I'm crazy too. A firm squeeze after it's seated and my groups are in the .1-.15" range at 100 yards and an SD of 5. I also use a cheap mechanical beam scale.
Outstanding objective data results. Love your stuff, Keith. Truly do and a lot of your content settles many of the endless arguments on precision rifle formats that generally begin..."this is X common knowledge...." LOL Please do keep the content coming.
I use a modified Lee ram primer system they no longer make because people were having bad problems with them, it has a feed tray on it and auto feeds primers. I put 2 mods to it. 1st I put a shell holder position adjusting set screws on it so I can insure better center of primer to pocket alignment as different brand shell holders can align different and next put the adjustment to the primer depth in the ram pin instead of the die, as it required to screw in or out the ram die to change depth. Using different shell holders changes the depth even when using the same brand holder. And yes, the base of the case even in the same lot can change a little bit which effects the depth of the seating , and believe your tool will fix this. I watched it's operating closely. Hope to see it soon on the market.
now that you have done all this Keith, you need to tell us about the Stop Priming Tool......I've been using an RCBS Bench Priming press since it came out, and I liked the looks of what you had there bud......OnWard.....
The major benefit of even primer depth below flush to the case base is more even firing pin impact timing on the primer between pin release (trigger let off) and impact. This is somewhat negated by very low trigger pull settings that can be used in games like F-class. It is very valuable where rules require trigger pulls to be in a more "normal" range like 2 to 5#s. Primers seated short can lead to some ignition SD/ES problems, and if too short can lead to miss fires as noted in the video. Primers crushed too much can also lead to ignition SD/ES problems because the pellet compound may fracture or push out of proper pinch between the cup and anvil. There is usually a .006" tolerance between primer seated to touch and primer seated to excess pellet crush. Different primers will have different tolerances.
Best blind test Ive ever seen/heard. You are far too advanced my brothrer.We need people like you for us common folks..LOL You do great work Keith.I hope your Life & Health is good and getting better each day.
My 300 win mag Lapua brass (haven’t touched the pockets) is showing as mostly .125” deep on my Accuracy One depth gauge, yet my Federal 215M primers measure mostly around .1285”. I’m seating them about .002” below flush which sure seems like a lot of crush, and the pocket measurements seem shallower than what I’ve seen posted elsewhere. I’m shooting it through a new Bergara MG Lite that I’m working up a hunting load with Ramshot Magnum and the 175 grain Barnes LRX. In my sweet spot between 81.2-81.8 grains of powder it was shooting all .4”-.7” groups at 100 yards with a 5-6 SD without tuning for set depth, so it seems like they are igniting just fine. But after watching Erik Cortina and Greg Dykstra’s conversation along with some other testing I really want to get my primers set to precise depths to control as much as I can, but in the end I may not notice the difference with a hunting loads in a factory rifle.
the primer is the WILD CARD that we are all at the mercy of. Until we can charge our own primers we just have to hope they are all charged the same and create the same pressure. I like what your doing with your vids . keep up the great info
I enjoy your videos because I appreciate your attention to detail, imagination, and intelligence. These days, I simply want MOM (Minute-Of-Man) out to 1320 yards and 100% hit rate at 600 yards on a "12x24 inch target." You're ideas, test results, and thoughts are much appreciated.
In Excel, if you hold the cntrl key down and push the Tilde key it will show you formula view. (Shows you any formulas in each cell) Also, if the spreadsheet is saved you can enter into a cell the following syntax. =CELL("FILENAME") and that cell will always display the location, book name, and sheet name of your spreadsheet no matter where you move it
Thank you so much. A test is better than 1,000 opinions. I want to put a link there where Greg Dykstra talks to Erik on the subject. And there I simply lacked tangible facts. I use Lapua cases and it works. If something doesn't work, it's me. A lot of shooters say "if I make the ammo better and more consistent..." instead they should be spending their time on the range to get better...
Most people would never realize any improvements in primer seating beyond what we already have. The primer still has to fit flush or below the surface. Cases vary, primers vary, powder weight varies, bullet weight and diameter differ. OAL varies. trigger pull varies, & mirage, no nobody will notice. Just make a tool that works well & is cheap and last forever.
Nice information, I realized this when loading 10mm pistol at the hot end. Best velocities, sd, es were the worst groups at 25 yards. Best GROUPS were NOT the best es and sd.
Very interesting! By chance, I was doing some stats / number crunching not long ago and someone recommended the Levine test to me. Still on my 'reading list', so it's good to hear someone else using it at least a little! That said... I wonder how the effect might change with case size, etc.? The people that have ran tests where it did were usually using something smaller - 6 PPC / 6 Dasher range. The .308 Win, especially with the 185 Juggernaut, is kinda like the honey badger of match rounds (relatively speaking) ;)
Thank you for taking the time to do this. Ignore any pushback you get. It was an honest test. It is what it is, results wise. I have a hard time believing anyone who has skin in the game when shilling a product. Although it may make a very miniscule difference, it's just another "feel good" process that is pretty much a waste of time and money imho.
Thanks for doing this extensive testing. I like when the outcome goes as this one did. My simple squeeze type primer seater will do just fine in the future! Lol. By the way, I love how you mentioned getting the.”Yips”! Lol
Wow, I -KNOW- I don't know everything about precision reloading, but this level of primer seating is something that I've never heard of... I'm going to have to reevaluate my "smash it until just before it detonates" approach to seating primers...
Two things: firstly, the point of anything other than a hand primer could be consistency. So a test of any consistent depth vs. priming with a hand tool, or deliberately constructed set of varying depths, would be great. Secondly, sample size is too small for asymptotic statistics. You need to use a randomisation test. But probably on groups defined by consistent vs. random seating. ;-)
I get reloading OCD sometimes, too. I think some of the things we do are more akin to the superstitious routines baseball players follow. Everybody should do whatever gives them the most confidence.
While this test does a good job of showing that the actual amount of crush happening to a primer might not make a difference, I wouldn't go so far as to say it debunks the idea that primer seating doesn't have an effect on precision. Another round of testing where the primer depth (in relation to the case head) is actually changed would help settle the matter. I love the effort that you put into making these videos for us, much appreciated.
Great info Keith. I understand and appreciate your use of statistics. However I have a question. When you go to on paper performance measure and analysis, you only report extreme spread. I dont disagree that is one important measure, but I dont think that is very descrptive of performance. Imagine if you will one group with two 8s and eight 10s, versus a group of ten 9s. The first had the largest ES, and the better score. Now I am not saying that happens a lot, but it is possible. So in addition to ES when it comes to on paper hits, I also measure the X and Y dimension from any fixed point on the target (usually point of aim). Then I calculate the center, average, of both X and Y, and to eliminate any offset, I subtract them fromthe actual X and Y fir each shot. I then calculate a radius from that new center using square root of sums of squares. I then statistically analyze the average and std dev of each Radius. It sounds complicated, but is dirt easy with Excel. That gives me a better characterization of all shots, than just extreme spread. Then use normal T test processes to compare the “radius” of the two groups. I think that tells me more about the difference in on paper hiys, than simple ES. I dont ignore ES, I just use this process as another tool to help understand performance of all shots in two samples.
So after watching your video, my conclusion is that primer seating on uniformed primer pockets is done better by "force feedback" rather than by a "mechanical stop" to make sure to have "enough primer crush", that the primer could work consistently, but not too much.
This is the kind of experiment that truly helps advance what we do! As a counter point to your results, didn't Bryan Zolnikov Professional Shooter, show that primer pocket uniforming, or even just cleaning, at best, has no effect on SD, ES, and group size? Furthermore, I'm pretty sure his results on primer seating depth testing showed statistically significant improvements for certain depths. I think it was part of his witch doctor series. Not trying to poke holes in his or your research, I haven't meticulously scrutinized every detail of each one, and even if I did, I don't think my research skills are good enough to go poking holes in either of the projects, except for those things that might be glaringly obvious to anyone with minimal research experience. As for my FEELINGS on these issues, I FEEL like they shouldn't make a difference (pocket uniforming or seating depth). Probably partially because I don't want to add another step to my reloading lol😋. I also FEEL with every fiber of my being that concentrisity has to matter, however the evidence, from multiple sources, strongly suggests that it doesn't, therefore until proven otherwise, I don't pay any attention to it. Facts don't care about your FEELINGS!🤓 Please keep putting out these well thought out and well executed experiments, you and Bryan, et. al.. Thank you for everything you do and share with us. Respectfully, Joe
Never ever used the priming setup on the press. After case cleaning, pocket cleaning and flash hole reaming, will seat primers with a Lee hand Primer(or other) Thumb pressure lets you know. To smooth and discard the case(or plinking use) With bit of experience you get the feel. Unless you go for the Ultimate priming tool. If to tight, have a primmer pocket swage. Just a hunting reloader myself. BUT Ultimate Accuracy, Ok👍
testing primers in a loaded round is basicly useless. There are to many factors - and they affect the ammuntion way more then a primer does. Neck tension, case volume, bullet evenness, seating depth, temperature, powder temperature, humidity.. Primers needs to be tested in isolation.. And thats hard for anyone outside a lab to do. I cant imagine how really. It would be if you could sort the cup, anvil and primer seperately from each other. I would think proper ignition is the most vital part, and thats why small primers and flashholes are better then large for most bench rest shooters. This can be seen in 22LR where proper ignition of priming compound is a big part of why some rifle designs are more accurate then others. and why filing striking pins on systems like cz 455 is such a big deal.
After watching this again and another year of "thinking". Here is another factor is the variance of the anvil and the primer. How thick is the anvil, how thick is the primer wall itself and you could have a nervous break down thinking about all these variables and the statistical relevance. Lol you gotvto have some fun. 14:59 Not so much if they were all same batch/lot. This is still why I am more meticulous with the primer pocket and feel it touch. To me it is "craftmanship". The other part of the equation is flash hole variation in length. That is why my brass from case to case is dimensionally the same as i can possibly make it and let the other stuff around it fall in place.
Excellent Video!!!! Finally we get the true stats on primer seating. I personally Understand that one will always have variations b/w different calibers and rifles. But this helped incredibly.
I like you didn't know what type you were shooting. That has always bothered me on other videos. Great job testing! These primer get smacked pretty hard from the firing pin. Id be curious to see if a firing pin could seat an unloaded primer.
What about just using force instead of position. A seating device that accurately controlled the seating force seems to be a way to consistently seat a primer. (Like a hand seater.) The depth dimensions of the primer and pocket would not be a problem. The diameters could be but are probably more closely controllable by the manufacturer. Still, great video and good luck.
Consistent primer seating depth depends more on the primer pocket than the priming tool. Anyone can notice there's a difference between some cases, with the same depth setting on the priming tool. Less friction between the primer pocket walls and the primer cup means primer seated deeper. You can check on many reloadings by marking your cases. Since primer pocket uniforming tools dont solve the problem, the best way is to take a measurement of your primed cases. When I see that some companies selling some "special" priming tools at 600$, this is bullsh*t
OK, did you ever finish that tool? Actually looks like something a lot better than trying to adjust the plunger in the RCBS unit. THe Hollywood mod doesn't inspire me on it, but, yours looks pretty simple.
What is your mod for ram and shell holder on the RCBS APT used in this vid? (Is that your build??) I’m getting a .006 variation in primer depth, some, at least, due to my technique/feel (& I don’t have an Accuracy One tool). Only 200 primers into this unit do learning.
Very much appreciate the testing! I would like to encourage you to crush the primer so that the primer cup is touching the bottom of the primer pocket. Cup length will vary per brand/lot, etc. However, it it pretty darn consistent and using manufacturer spec is good enough. This is, in theory, the only way to know 100% anvil crush. You will see this is deep. I dont know anyone that does this....and in my thinking...would be the test to end all tests. If you have watched the Primal Rights/Cortina videos on this subject, they ended up around .007". That is still not 100% crush in most cases.
Thank you for using and reporting with applied statistics. The word “research” has to be one of the most mis-used terms in social media. Most (nearly all) are nothing more than mere demonstration and severely biased at that. Certainly “demonstration “ can provide direction for formulating a hypothesis, but to meet the requirements of an analysis of variance requires material, methods, results and legitimate data analysis. You are among a very few who understand, employ and educate. Like my stats teacher quoted many years ago, “Use statistics as a drunkard used a lamp post, for support-not illumination”. Keep up the credible effort! Merry Christmas.
Here’s a thought, on one of your plan of presentations, try helping the viewer learn to setup an experiment and collect unbiased data to analyze. Tall order but every journey starts with the first step. Oh yes, and keep it under 10 minutes per episode. 😂😅
I'm sticking with my 20+ year old Lee hand priming tool and going by feel. Remember primers do not act alone. You have flash hole diameter and flash hole lengths. From my reading an old Speer reloading book in my child hood . Flash hole lengths may have more effect than flash hole diameter. Do not diss guard firing pin protrusion and diameter on the effects of primer ignition. No use reinventing the wheel. I sure these experiments have been done before.
I like your absolute methods. I like probability and statistics. What you have proved, yes confirmations bias, I call it a mathematical proof. Lol My very first study of this in an old Lyman manual and what I did in my testing of varying the input, verified that Lyman's statement was correct. Make the primer pockets all the same depth. Deep enough for tallest primer for a .001 or 2 below case head and seat them when it just bottoms out. The best tool, a least expensive hand primer, Lee Auto prime hand primer. I have used others and always grab that one as first choice. I even called Lee last week and gave them the best product was their first and should make it the same way with maybe a more ergo fitting paddle instead of the flat one. Engineering, we still have a B52 flying and is effective. Wanted to add, reloading is part art and part science. Amazing what the human hand can feel. And also like sound, we can produce a perfect sound but can your ear tell the difference. Great videos you put out and appreciate the effort you put in them.
Good study! I am wondering how much the general perception that Federal primers are more sensitive than some others might factor into immunity to the need for crush, and the same with mainspring condition. In other words, would marginally energetic firing pin impacts start to produce more performance difference? A lot of the crush spec testing came from the military, which has to have functioning over a wide range of conditions.
I haven’t watched the video yet but I have crushed primers into case and I also have some that won’t detonate. I’m thinking if you have to crush em something ain’t right
Soo.. seat the primers via an arbor press with a mandrel pushing on the interior of the case against a flat surface for flush, or against an adjustable 'ram' that controls seating depth for below flush seating. No, I didn't see the Patreon video. Am I close?
Keith, So what I gather hear is, Greg's theory on crush and primer height being a factor does not prove out in this test. Your test doesn't test varying depths though, and I can't say that makes a difference or not, but I can maybe see that a consistent depth makes a difference, and maybe it has more to do with striker timing, or flame propagation timing. So I can't say forsure, but I think if your primer depth remains consistent through your tuning process and beyond, that may make a small difference. So don't count these tools out yet, not sure if a $600 adjustable unit its nessisary, but one that can index off the head and has a consistent stop maybe just the ticket. I also wonder how consistent the flash hole depth is, and how that effects the ignition.
I totally respect and appreciate everything you do but do you really think that we are able to isolate enough variables to test this in any meaningful way concentricity of the bullet brass the powder even the primer pockets would need to be tested to ensure uniformity what are your thoughts on this keith thank you.
Anyone know what the accessory is in his RCBS auto prime is? It's right at about 5:30 in, a knurling around the shell holder. Is that how he was setting primer depth?
great experiment maybe do it again to prove it but all in all thanks for this great test and results. maybe you stopped some people from spending 600 dollars on a primer seater. you did me
Thank you, I remember Bryan Litz testing seating depths and found no on target advantages.
It seems the only people who champion anecdotal advantages are those who have either sold expensive tools or those who have bought them.
Hmmm… maybe a 600$ primer seater is a waste of $. These are my favorite type of videos you do Kieth. Thanks!
Got to admit that $600-$700 priming tool looks absolutely marvelous though. I never got one, but if I did I would have simply set the thing to full depth and seated the primers by feel to the bottom of the priming pocket trying not to crush them, as that is what all the reloading manuals say to do [at least all the ones I have found that even mention this issue. Personally, I have over 60 different author's manuals. 30 from manufacturers and another 30ish from others in the industry.] So now there is a "Poorman's Competition Primer Seater" that cost $100-$200 (depending on if it has a micrometer or not) that looks marvelous enough, of which I am planning on getting and simply seating all primers flush with the bottom of the primer pocket. The only reason I want this tool is for fast efficient priming, period. th-cam.com/video/xPZFTrmJ6bs/w-d-xo.html&lc=Ugzrx7igbql7QheKEzJ4AaABAg.9yavDmUrDV5A4Q5l4yG2wV
Listen to everyone. Trust no one. Test everything.
Gotta say I respect your integrity. I'm sure a great deal of work went into designing the priming tool you were planning on selling. To then produce a video showing an in-depth test that demonstrates that the tool is most likely unnecessary for even high level shooters is impressive.
If you do end up producing it, I'm sure a lot of people would buy it just because it's cool. If not, can we have a video about how it works? I have an idea, but I am curious how you did it.
Thanks Keith!
I echo those thoughts regarding ‘integrity’.
X 1000! Outstanding video, and outstanding personal integrity.
I am not a competition shooter at all. Just a gun nut, gun builder, reloader, shooter and a hunter who is trying to learn about long range precision. There are so many aspects of reloading that I had no idea were so critical to accuracy, but in fact are! Clarity through testing is priceless. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. Your channel is great!
Outstanding.....
Just what I've been trying to tell all my reloading friends...
But Hell" why would they listen to me!
Great work Keith, I love your content, your humility and honesty with no bull. Would like to see a vid on what things reloaders should focus on in order of priority and what items should be discounted based on their actual affect on the target.
I started hearing about the math portion of this and I started looking around for a frat party to blow off some stress.
The only test I have seen yet is Witch Doctor's. He did a primer weight sorting test which showed a statistical difference and tighter group sizes when all the primers in a given set of cartridges weighed the same or within a small spread. There is a difference in crush on precision. You lose some velocity if the primer has to push itself back far enough to get a flame down the flash hole. Don't crush them to the point the anvil blocks the flash hole. I seat mine between .003 and .006 and never have a problem. Thanks for doing this, Keith. As a patron and a member of the F-Class community, I appreciate all the money, time, and effort all of the creators put into these tests. I believe it helps folks sort the tools they need from the ones they don't. Personally, I enjoy collecting precision measuring tools, and being a science guy in college, I enjoy gathering empirical data just about as much as I do shooting that data. Please, keep up the great work and keep teaching. You have a teacher's heart. I can tell how passionate you are about it, so no matter which direction F-Class ends up going, please continue to teach!
have you ever taken apart a primer? taken out an anvil? shot a puff load? fired a primer without powder or bullet? primer only backs out when chamber pressure pushes it out.
One thing that occurs to me is that primer seating depth is likely a small influence. If you're outside your node then the other factors may hide that difference in a larger amount of noise. If being in the node is 50% of accuracy and primer depth is 5% then it's going to be very hard to see the 5%. I think it would make more sense to do a test where everything is dialed in except the primer depth. In any case, Thanks for the extra data as always!
I like the hand primer for extra "feel" in the hand, but priming with the reloading press seems to be more consistent where it stops.
Call me crazy but I simply use a hand priming tool and stop when I feel the primer contact the bottom of the pocket. Seems simple, is simple, and it works for me because I'm a big fan of simple. That is not to say that I'm a simpleton, I just don't believe in unnecessarily complicating a simple task.
Lees hand priming tool is used by many bench rest shooters. Main take is that you can feel loose pockets easy.
I'm crazy too. A firm squeeze after it's seated and my groups are in the .1-.15" range at 100 yards and an SD of 5. I also use a cheap mechanical beam scale.
@@jmkhenka You can't measure "feel" something some people just can't handle (Like Kieth, I think! LOL)
The simplest solution is often the best one.
Agreed!!
Outstanding objective data results. Love your stuff, Keith. Truly do and a lot of your content settles many of the endless arguments on precision rifle formats that generally begin..."this is X common knowledge...." LOL Please do keep the content coming.
Amazing content!
I use a modified Lee ram primer system they no longer make because people were having bad problems with them, it has a feed tray on it and auto feeds primers. I put 2 mods to it. 1st I put a shell holder position adjusting set screws on it so I can insure better center of primer to pocket alignment as different brand shell holders can align different and next put the adjustment to the primer depth in the ram pin instead of the die, as it required to screw in or out the ram die to change depth. Using different shell holders changes the depth even when using the same brand holder. And yes, the base of the case even in the same lot can change a little bit which effects the depth of the seating , and believe your tool will fix this. I watched it's operating closely. Hope to see it soon on the market.
now that you have done all this Keith, you need to tell us about the Stop Priming Tool......I've been using an RCBS Bench Priming press since it came out, and I liked the looks of what you had there bud......OnWard.....
The major benefit of even primer depth below flush to the case base is more even firing pin impact timing on the primer between pin release (trigger let off) and impact. This is somewhat negated by very low trigger pull settings that can be used in games like F-class. It is very valuable where rules require trigger pulls to be in a more "normal" range like 2 to 5#s. Primers seated short can lead to some ignition SD/ES problems, and if too short can lead to miss fires as noted in the video. Primers crushed too much can also lead to ignition SD/ES problems because the pellet compound may fracture or push out of proper pinch between the cup and anvil. There is usually a .006" tolerance between primer seated to touch and primer seated to excess pellet crush. Different primers will have different tolerances.
Best blind test Ive ever seen/heard. You are far too advanced my brothrer.We need people like you for us common folks..LOL You do great work Keith.I hope your Life & Health is good and getting better each day.
Sharing information that may not be helpful to your project...that is integrity. Thanks for the great videos.
Amazing test, unbelieveable. Thanks Keith!!
Beautiful! Love your integrity and the high level of testing!
My 300 win mag Lapua brass (haven’t touched the pockets) is showing as mostly .125” deep on my Accuracy One depth gauge, yet my Federal 215M primers measure mostly around .1285”. I’m seating them about .002” below flush which sure seems like a lot of crush, and the pocket measurements seem shallower than what I’ve seen posted elsewhere. I’m shooting it through a new Bergara MG Lite that I’m working up a hunting load with Ramshot Magnum and the 175 grain Barnes LRX. In my sweet spot between 81.2-81.8 grains of powder it was shooting all .4”-.7” groups at 100 yards with a 5-6 SD without tuning for set depth, so it seems like they are igniting just fine. But after watching Erik Cortina and Greg Dykstra’s conversation along with some other testing I really want to get my primers set to precise depths to control as much as I can, but in the end I may not notice the difference with a hunting loads in a factory rifle.
You just saved a bunch of people 600 bucks. Ill stick with my hand primer and focus my time and money on shooting more.
the primer is the WILD CARD that we are all at the mercy of. Until we can charge our own primers we just have to hope they are all charged the same and create the same pressure. I like what your doing with your vids . keep up the great info
I enjoy your videos because I appreciate your attention to detail, imagination, and intelligence. These days, I simply want MOM (Minute-Of-Man) out to 1320 yards and 100% hit rate at 600 yards on a "12x24 inch target." You're ideas, test results, and thoughts are much appreciated.
In Excel, if you hold the cntrl key down and push the Tilde key it will show you formula view. (Shows you any formulas in each cell)
Also, if the spreadsheet is saved you can enter into a cell the following syntax. =CELL("FILENAME") and that cell will always display the location, book name, and sheet name of your spreadsheet no matter where you move it
Thank you so much. A test is better than 1,000 opinions.
I want to put a link there where Greg Dykstra talks to Erik on the subject. And there I simply lacked tangible facts. I use Lapua cases and it works. If something doesn't work, it's me. A lot of shooters say "if I make the ammo better and more consistent..." instead they should be spending their time on the range to get better...
Most people would never realize any improvements in primer seating beyond what we already have.
The primer still has to fit flush or below the surface. Cases vary, primers vary, powder weight varies, bullet weight and diameter differ. OAL varies. trigger pull varies, & mirage, no nobody will notice. Just make a tool that works well & is cheap and last forever.
Awesome video! This is the kind of info I’m interested in. It also shows that you have great integrity👍
Thanks for your time sharing this information Mate very interesting.
Nice information, I realized this when loading 10mm pistol at the hot end. Best velocities, sd, es were the worst groups at 25 yards. Best GROUPS were NOT the best es and sd.
Very interesting! By chance, I was doing some stats / number crunching not long ago and someone recommended the Levine test to me. Still on my 'reading list', so it's good to hear someone else using it at least a little!
That said... I wonder how the effect might change with case size, etc.? The people that have ran tests where it did were usually using something smaller - 6 PPC / 6 Dasher range. The .308 Win, especially with the 185 Juggernaut, is kinda like the honey badger of match rounds (relatively speaking) ;)
Thank you for taking the time to do this. Ignore any pushback you get. It was an honest test. It is what it is, results wise. I have a hard time believing anyone who has skin in the game when shilling a product. Although it may make a very miniscule difference, it's just another "feel good" process that is pretty much a waste of time and money imho.
Fantastic content Keith, your vids are worth every second.
Erik Cortina did a test on his Patreon. The loads really fell apart once he hit 0.010" seating depth.
Great work Keith. Let the data drive the answer. 👍 Always wondered about this one, now we know, thanks to you!
Crushed primers is why I started uniforming my primer pockets. My RCBS hand primer had a tendency to crush primers.
Thanks for doing this extensive testing. I like when the outcome goes as this one did. My simple squeeze type primer seater will do just fine in the future! Lol. By the way, I love how you mentioned getting the.”Yips”! Lol
Wow, I -KNOW- I don't know everything about precision reloading, but this level of primer seating is something that I've never heard of...
I'm going to have to reevaluate my "smash it until just before it detonates" approach to seating primers...
Two things: firstly, the point of anything other than a hand primer could be consistency. So a test of any consistent depth vs. priming with a hand tool, or deliberately constructed set of varying depths, would be great. Secondly, sample size is too small for asymptotic statistics. You need to use a randomisation test. But probably on groups defined by consistent vs. random seating. ;-)
I get reloading OCD sometimes, too. I think some of the things we do are more akin to the superstitious routines baseball players follow. Everybody should do whatever gives them the most confidence.
You mean that a $600 primer seating tool doesn't allow 103% prairiedog hit rate?
LOL
Thank you for the work and information you do. It's very much appreciated.
Great study. I love this channel.
While this test does a good job of showing that the actual amount of crush happening to a primer might not make a difference, I wouldn't go so far as to say it debunks the idea that primer seating doesn't have an effect on precision. Another round of testing where the primer depth (in relation to the case head) is actually changed would help settle the matter.
I love the effort that you put into making these videos for us, much appreciated.
Great info Keith. I understand and appreciate your use of statistics. However I have a question. When you go to on paper performance measure and analysis, you only report extreme spread. I dont disagree that is one important measure, but I dont think that is very descrptive of performance. Imagine if you will one group with two 8s and eight 10s, versus a group of ten 9s. The first had the largest ES, and the better score. Now I am not saying that happens a lot, but it is possible. So in addition to ES when it comes to on paper hits, I also measure the X and Y dimension from any fixed point on the target (usually point of aim). Then I calculate the center, average, of both X and Y, and to eliminate any offset, I subtract them fromthe actual X and Y fir each shot. I then calculate a radius from that new center using square root of sums of squares. I then statistically analyze the average and std dev of each Radius. It sounds complicated, but is dirt easy with Excel. That gives me a better characterization of all shots, than just extreme spread. Then use normal T test processes to compare the “radius” of the two groups. I think that tells me more about the difference in on paper hiys, than simple ES. I dont ignore ES, I just use this process as another tool to help understand performance of all shots in two samples.
Question now that we are on the subject. What about the Flash holes. Large VS Small or even over sized primer flash hole. Anything?
So after watching your video, my conclusion is that primer seating on uniformed primer pockets is done better by "force feedback" rather than by a "mechanical stop" to make sure to have "enough primer crush", that the primer could work consistently, but not too much.
Can you compare standard vs match primers.
Thanks
This is the kind of experiment that truly helps advance what we do! As a counter point to your results, didn't Bryan Zolnikov Professional Shooter, show that primer pocket uniforming, or even just cleaning, at best, has no effect on SD, ES, and group size? Furthermore, I'm pretty sure his results on primer seating depth testing showed statistically significant improvements for certain depths. I think it was part of his witch doctor series. Not trying to poke holes in his or your research, I haven't meticulously scrutinized every detail of each one, and even if I did, I don't think my research skills are good enough to go poking holes in either of the projects, except for those things that might be glaringly obvious to anyone with minimal research experience. As for my FEELINGS on these issues, I FEEL like they shouldn't make a difference (pocket uniforming or seating depth). Probably partially because I don't want to add another step to my reloading lol😋. I also FEEL with every fiber of my being that concentrisity has to matter, however the evidence, from multiple sources, strongly suggests that it doesn't, therefore until proven otherwise, I don't pay any attention to it. Facts don't care about your FEELINGS!🤓 Please keep putting out these well thought out and well executed experiments, you and Bryan, et. al..
Thank you for everything you do and share with us.
Respectfully,
Joe
Thanks for the time, effort, and data you share!!
Never ever used the priming setup on the press. After case cleaning, pocket cleaning and flash hole reaming, will seat primers with a Lee hand Primer(or other) Thumb pressure lets you know. To smooth and discard the case(or plinking use) With bit of experience you get the feel. Unless you go for the Ultimate priming tool. If to tight, have a primmer pocket swage. Just a hunting reloader myself. BUT Ultimate Accuracy, Ok👍
testing primers in a loaded round is basicly useless. There are to many factors - and they affect the ammuntion way more then a primer does. Neck tension, case volume, bullet evenness, seating depth, temperature, powder temperature, humidity..
Primers needs to be tested in isolation.. And thats hard for anyone outside a lab to do. I cant imagine how really.
It would be if you could sort the cup, anvil and primer seperately from each other. I would think proper ignition is the most vital part, and thats why small primers and flashholes are better then large for most bench rest shooters.
This can be seen in 22LR where proper ignition of priming compound is a big part of why some rifle designs are more accurate then others. and why filing striking pins on systems like cz 455 is such a big deal.
After watching this again and another year of "thinking". Here is another factor is the variance of the anvil and the primer. How thick is the anvil, how thick is the primer wall itself and you could have a nervous break down thinking about all these variables and the statistical relevance. Lol you gotvto have some fun. 14:59 Not so much if they were all same batch/lot. This is still why I am more meticulous with the primer pocket and feel it touch. To me it is "craftmanship". The other part of the equation is flash hole variation in length. That is why my brass from case to case is dimensionally the same as i can possibly make it and let the other stuff around it fall in place.
Excellent Video!!!! Finally we get the true stats on primer seating. I personally Understand that one will always have variations b/w different calibers and rifles. But this helped incredibly.
Excellent work, Mr.Wind!🇺🇸
I like you didn't know what type you were shooting. That has always bothered me on other videos. Great job testing! These primer get smacked pretty hard from the firing pin. Id be curious to see if a firing pin could seat an unloaded primer.
What about just using force instead of position. A seating device that accurately controlled the seating force seems to be a way to consistently seat a primer. (Like a hand seater.) The depth dimensions of the primer and pocket would not be a problem. The diameters could be but are probably more closely controllable by the manufacturer. Still, great video and good luck.
Cool and very precise is a good enough reason for me!
Keith
Love you're videos and have absolute total respect for all the time spent gathering info etc .
But mate I think you need to get out more.
Consistent primer seating depth depends more on the primer pocket than the priming tool. Anyone can notice there's a difference between some cases, with the same depth setting on the priming tool. Less friction between the primer pocket walls and the primer cup means primer seated deeper. You can check on many reloadings by marking your cases. Since primer pocket uniforming tools dont solve the problem, the best way is to take a measurement of your primed cases. When I see that some companies selling some "special" priming tools at 600$, this is bullsh*t
So, .... you're not going to proceed with your primer seating gizmo?
Great data (and I have no interest in competition). Thanks!
OK, did you ever finish that tool? Actually looks like something a lot better than trying to adjust the plunger in the RCBS unit. THe Hollywood mod doesn't inspire me on it, but, yours looks pretty simple.
Why don't you measure force required to seat primers, and stop when the pressure spikes, showing it’s seated?
What is your mod for ram and shell holder on the RCBS APT used in this vid? (Is that your build??)
I’m getting a .006 variation in primer depth, some, at least, due to my technique/feel (& I don’t have an Accuracy One tool). Only 200 primers into this unit do learning.
Great evaluation Keith. Thanks very much for sharing.
Thank you so much Keith!
Really enjoy your videos and topics covered..
Very much appreciate the testing! I would like to encourage you to crush the primer so that the primer cup is touching the bottom of the primer pocket. Cup length will vary per brand/lot, etc. However, it it pretty darn consistent and using manufacturer spec is good enough. This is, in theory, the only way to know 100% anvil crush. You will see this is deep. I dont know anyone that does this....and in my thinking...would be the test to end all tests.
If you have watched the Primal Rights/Cortina videos on this subject, they ended up around .007". That is still not 100% crush in most cases.
Thank you for using and reporting with applied statistics.
The word “research” has to be one of the most mis-used terms in social media. Most (nearly all) are nothing more than mere demonstration and severely biased at that. Certainly “demonstration “ can provide direction for formulating a hypothesis, but to meet the requirements of an analysis of variance requires material, methods, results and legitimate data analysis. You are among a very few who understand, employ and educate.
Like my stats teacher quoted many years ago, “Use statistics as a drunkard used a lamp post, for support-not illumination”.
Keep up the credible effort!
Merry Christmas.
I love your stats teacher's quote!
Thought you would 😉 …circa 1977.
Here’s a thought, on one of your plan of presentations, try helping the viewer learn to setup an experiment and collect unbiased data to analyze.
Tall order but every journey starts with the first step.
Oh yes, and keep it under 10 minutes per episode. 😂😅
Can’t send a picture but appears I deformed GM205m primers in Alpha 6GT brass when priming I think .008” crush.
Thanks for the content.
I'm sticking with my 20+ year old Lee hand priming tool and going by feel. Remember primers do not act alone. You have flash hole diameter and flash hole lengths. From my reading an old Speer reloading book in my child hood . Flash hole lengths may have more effect than flash hole diameter. Do not diss guard firing pin protrusion and diameter on the effects of primer ignition. No use reinventing the wheel. I sure these experiments have been done before.
I'm working on that too. It was going to be a surprise party!
@@winninginthewind I love what you are doing. You are the Sir Isaac Newton of accuracy reloading.
I like your absolute methods. I like probability and statistics. What you have proved, yes confirmations bias, I call it a mathematical proof. Lol My very first study of this in an old Lyman manual and what I did in my testing of varying the input, verified that Lyman's statement was correct. Make the primer pockets all the same depth. Deep enough for tallest primer for a .001 or 2 below case head and seat them when it just bottoms out. The best tool, a least expensive hand primer, Lee Auto prime hand primer. I have used others and always grab that one as first choice. I even called Lee last week and gave them the best product was their first and should make it the same way with maybe a more ergo fitting paddle instead of the flat one. Engineering, we still have a B52 flying and is effective.
Wanted to add, reloading is part art and part science. Amazing what the human hand can feel. And also like sound, we can produce a perfect sound but can your ear tell the difference. Great videos you put out and appreciate the effort you put in them.
If we only could get any Federal primers on this side of the pond!
The anvils are not seated all the same. And different operators seat high or low cause spec range is wide
Very good information, thank you😀
Good study! I am wondering how much the general perception that Federal primers are more sensitive than some others might factor into immunity to the need for crush, and the same with mainspring condition. In other words, would marginally energetic firing pin impacts start to produce more performance difference? A lot of the crush spec testing came from the military, which has to have functioning over a wide range of conditions.
Thanks for presenting facts…
Thank you
Great test Keith - thanks! :)
I haven’t watched the video yet but I have crushed primers into case and I also have some that won’t detonate. I’m thinking if you have to crush em something ain’t right
I use a hand seater too!
Do short range bench rest shooters use magnum primers?
But this does rely on consistent rim thickness so how close am I really getting it
Soo.. seat the primers via an arbor press with a mandrel pushing on the interior of the case against a flat surface for flush, or against an adjustable 'ram' that controls seating depth for below flush seating.
No, I didn't see the Patreon video. Am I close?
You did a good job of explaining some else's patent. Mine works differently.
Keith,
So what I gather hear is, Greg's theory on crush and primer height being a factor does not prove out in this test.
Your test doesn't test varying depths though, and I can't say that makes a difference or not, but I can maybe see that a consistent depth makes a difference, and maybe it has more to do with striker timing, or flame propagation timing.
So I can't say forsure, but I think if your primer depth remains consistent through your tuning process and beyond, that may make a small difference. So don't count these tools out yet, not sure if a $600 adjustable unit its nessisary, but one that can index off the head and has a consistent stop maybe just the ticket.
I also wonder how consistent the flash hole depth is, and how that effects the ignition.
The eventors had it right years ago. I'm Sure the military would have corrected that issue years ago or Greg would be retired.
I totally respect and appreciate everything you do but do you really think that we are able to isolate enough variables to test this in any meaningful way concentricity of the bullet brass the powder even the primer pockets would need to be tested to ensure uniformity what are your thoughts on this keith thank you.
Thank you for all the hard work to provide us with great information!
Great stuff!
Anyone know what the accessory is in his RCBS auto prime is? It's right at about 5:30 in, a knurling around the shell holder. Is that how he was setting primer depth?
Great video.
Great video thank you
Hey Keith that block that your scale is sitting on what is it and where can I get one? I've seen a similar one on f class John's bench too..
Lol I should've watched 2 minutes longer haha got one ordered! Thanks
great info!!!
I just uniform the primer pocket and bottom the primer out in that uniformed pocket...
great experiment maybe do it again to prove it but all in all thanks for this great test and results. maybe you stopped some people from spending 600 dollars on a primer seater. you did me
Thanks!
Odd question how safe or effective is it to use removed Berdan primers in a new reload?
I have no idea. Honestly, I wouldn't do it.
@@winninginthewind Ok that's what I needed to know. Since I'm cheap and had all these large Berdan primers I was going to load them in my 308 cases.