usmc1974 Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 I was wondering if Federal started crimping some of their 40 Smith & Wesson brass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haywizzle Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 1 hour ago, usmc1974 said: I was wondering if Federal started crimping some of their 40 Smith & Wesson brass I've found the NT (non-toxic) loadings all seem to have tight primer pockets across multiple brands. I usually ditch them to the recycling bucket. .40 non NT cases should all be without a crimp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
392heminut Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 I've never seen a crimped 40 case. As a rule, crimping was/is a military cartridge thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Notice the larger flash hole too. Non-Toxic (NT) primers act differently and try to back out way more, so they crimp them in and enlarge the flash hole to try and keep the pressure down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Yeh I ran across some Fed 9’s and WW 45’s that way. The WW 45 didn’t say NT, just had the giant flash holes. Used to drill them out for blanks and plastic bullets to keep the primers from backing out. I also heard that the NT primers don’t have as much uuummph so they need the larger holes. I’m going to do a test and see if it makes any difference with a std primer and normal flash hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usmc1974 Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 WOW this is all news to me, what exactly does non-toxic even mean. I miss the days when all the brass 45, 9's and 40's just used the appropriate primers. Thanks for filling me in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haywizzle Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 35 minutes ago, usmc1974 said: WOW this is all news to me, what exactly does non-toxic even mean. I miss the days when all the brass 45, 9's and 40's just used the appropriate primers. Thanks for filling me in. Yeah me too! Having to hand sort 45 ACP for large and small is a pain, but that's another subject to complain about. I found this article on the subject. Here's the gist: Quote Primers have a history of being made from toxic chemicals such as mercury fulminate, barium nitrate, and lead. Army researchers have developed a new, non-toxic primer composition and method of manufacturing at scale. The primer mix completely replaces heavy metal compounds and gum binders while maintaining stringent military performance requirements. The new primers are lead, barium, and antimony-free. Those toxins are replaced with copper boron carbide, aluminum, and potassium nitrate in the primer mix – all of which are non-toxic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 1 hour ago, Haywizzle said: Yeah me too! Having to hand sort 45 ACP for large and small is a pain, but that's another subject to complain about. I found this article on the subject. Here's the gist: I don’t remember the exact formula for the very old primers that were corrosive but I thought those also contained potassium nitrate (Salt Peter) that also attracted moisture. Hopefully this new formulation doesn’t cause problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Neill Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Non-toxic is heavy metal free for the priming compound. No lead, no strontium or such. Federal started crimping the NBT primers as a further guard against their backing out, along with the enlarged flash hole. The NT priming compounds have more brisance than the older priming compounds. When CCI first developed their Cleanfire lead free priming, there were instances in testing where the primers dished the breech face on guns only having case hardening of the slide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Neill Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Priming compounds were early on, fulminate of mercury that destroyed the brass casing. Then were the potassium chlorate prim ing compounds (so called corrosive primers) that left a salt in the bore that needed to be cleaned out to avoid rust. That was replaced with the lead styphnate priming mixes, that are still in use, with the non-toxic also being used. The non-toxic, to really mean anything need to be used indoors on a range dedicated to non-toxic. If lead styphnate priming has been used previously, the NT won't reduce the shooter's exposure to lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigarmsp226 Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Just learned something new myself. Great to know about this because I have a lot of 40S&W range pick up brass that eventually one day I will reload. I will be on the lookout for this - now. Thanks for posting and providing the pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braxton1 Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 I wouldn't use this brass, just because of the enlarged flash holes. Putting a conventional primer in there, with the equipment that you're likely using, is just asking for trouble (forced out primers and weird pressure spikes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVC Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 On 2/29/2024 at 8:22 PM, usmc1974 said: WOW this is all news to me, what exactly does non-toxic even mean. Same as crayons - approved for use by the Marines... ...Couldn't resist based on your username Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Neill Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Tests at the ammo factories showed no notable problems coming from the enlarged flash holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigarmsp226 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 (edited) Ok Guys - Hear me out on this thought process. The primer hole is larger and we understand why. We remove the crimp with a swage or cut it out so that we can successfully reload this piece of brass. By doing so are we eliminating the “fail safe” that was put onto that piece of brass because the primer hole was larger than normal because it was loaded as a non-toxic round. If this brass is loaded with a medium to high power factor, are we in fact setting ourself up for a possible problem. Thoughts? Edited March 5 by Sigarmsp226 Spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Not unless you're loading NT primers as well. Those, as Guy posted, have more "brisance" (ballistician term for "more boom") and want to back out more. Regular SuperToxicDeathLead primers should be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Neill Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 They should not present any problems reloading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 (edited) @Guy Neill Thanks for the correction on the Potassium Chlorate VS the Potassium Nitrate that I posted earlier. One question I had for you was that early on I was told that the first NT primers needed the larger flash holes because they actually had Less Brisance or weaker flame travel than a regular primer. Did they change or was that just a bunch of BS from a magazine writer? Edited March 6 by Farmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Neill Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Sounds like erroneous info. When the initial CCI Cleanfire primers were first made, there were instances of peening slide breech faces, dishing them. This was with case hardened slides. Through hardened did not present to problem. Those gunmakers with case hardened slides didn't seem too receptive to changing their slides. A less brisance primer would not have done that. The original did, however, contains some strontium, so the later totally heavy metal free priming compounds may be different, but I have no information on them That they continue to use small primers and crimp them suggests the brisance is still high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 14 hours ago, Farmer said: @Guy Neill Thanks for the correction on the Potassium Chlorate VS the Potassium Nitrate that I posted earlier. One question I had for you was that early on I was told that the first NT primers needed the larger flash holes because they actually had Less Brisance or weaker flame travel than a regular primer. Did they change or was that just a bunch of BS from a magazine writer? If you fire primed-only cases, you can see the primer backs out by itself. I'd guess a larger flash hole allows more pressure to go forward into the powder and less into backing out. It's also possible there's more 'brisance' but less 'ignition' with the NT primers so they needed a bigger flame channel. What that means on the other side once the powder ignites IDK, but I'd guess it's not that big a deal with the 9mm-diameter hole on the other side of the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 (edited) 3 hours ago, shred said: If you fire primed-only cases, you can see the primer backs out by itself. I'd guess a larger flash hole allows more pressure to go forward into the powder and less into backing out. It's also possible there's more 'brisance' but less 'ignition' with the NT primers so they needed a bigger flame channel. What that means on the other side once the powder ignites IDK, but I'd guess it's not that big a deal with the 9mm-diameter hole on the other side of the case. I know from years past when we would make blanks or use those Speer plastic bullets we would drill the flash holes out to keep the primer from backing out and locking up a revolver. The reasoning there was that there wasn’t any pushback from a heavy projectile to re-seat the primer. I do know that I had some Norma 270 brass that had small flash holes (smaller than WW) and once I uniformed them to standard size I gained around 40 fps and my ES dropped. When I get a chance I’ll test some 9 and 45’s with the larger holes just to see if there’s any difference. Edited March 6 by Farmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Neill Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 The enlarged flash hole was specifically to reduce back thrust of the primer against the breech. Going to a small primer also reduced that thrust, and crimping it pretty well removed the primer bearing against the breech. That was the original lead free Cleanfire mix. Later compounds I don't know. The Cleanfire worked well enough with a standard flash hole other than the back thrust. Cleanfire was named because there was no black residue in the fired case. The aim for NT primers is indoor use. To be effective at protecting the shooter from lead exposure, the range must never have used lead based primed ammunition, or undergo a rigorous cleaning, more than mopping and such, and then be dedicated to NT ammunition. Outdoor exposure to lead from lead-based primers is not a risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsjac Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 I had a bunch of the NT primer 9mm Federal brass. I ended up getting rid of it. I ran it through the 1100 and couldn't get the primers to go in constantly. To much of a hassle. I have lots of military brass go through the press with no problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now