Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Do CCI 400 primers flatten easily

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    387
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DG23 View Post
    Care to cite any reloading manual that states CCI 400 primers are NOT safe to use in an AR type rifle? (Cause none of my Speer manuals say any such thing...)



    About your picture - A firing pin with the proper (within spec) protrusion length (as measured in your bolt) does not do that. Aside of that, You could have corrected the pin that did that in less time than it took you to post the picture of the so called 'problems' the primers were giving you. A .005 thinner cup did not do that...

    I am about 1000% certain that if CCI primers were somehow unsafe to use in AR type rifles that are within spec CCI would have told us long ago and there would be a special warning on the boxes.
    Read the book below it covers the primers used during the development of the M-16 rifle. The Remington 6 1/2 primer with a .020 cup was used on the first batch of test ammunition and it caused slam fires. The Firing pin was lightened and the 7 1/2 primer with a .025 cup was used thereafter. The greatest chance of a slam fire is if a single round is loaded without the magazine in the rifle. With the magazine in the rifle and the cartridges feeding from the magazine it slows down the bolt velocity and firing pin inertia.

    Bottom line you will not find any CCI 400 primers in Lake City 5.56 ammunition. And the Remington 7 1/2 primer was used at Lake City until Winchester/Olin took over production in 1985.


  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    2,193
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bigedp51 View Post
    Bottom line you will not find any CCI 400 primers in Lake City 5.56 ammunition.

    Bottom line - You can't provide any source from the people that make them and / or sell them that says they are not 'safe' to use in an AR-15 pattern rifle.

    Aside of the fact that many, many people DO use them regularly in their AR pattern rifles without poking holes in them every time their rifle goes bang...



    Guessing that was not a pierced primer picture you got from one of your rifles with respect to CCI 400 primers as you dodged the firing pin protrusion question entirely. Before you can blame with half-way reasonable certainty the one particular part for failure - You really need to at least casually look at the other parts that were in the mix as well.

    I will say it again: A .005 thinner cup did NOT cause / do that stuff you posted in that picture.

    The same screwed up firing pin that did that to a CCI 400 is going to also pierce a CCI 41 even though it is a whopping .005 thicker down there.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    5,286
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    I stand corrected. I thought Remington 6 1/2's were equivalent to CCI 400's. I went to the Speer website and their reloading data for the .223. They in fact provide loading data using the 400 for multiple loads. There was no caveat concerning the AR-15.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in the back of your mind
    Posts
    163
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Call CCI. They'll inform the experts here. CCI 41 has the thicker cup and the anvil is spaced out farther to stop slamfires. And I am still right about the wrong info in the sks board info being wrong. The small pistol mag primers used to be the same as the small rifle. Now they are different. So it makes that info false. Call CCI and talk to them .

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •