Primers .. How they work ..

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 07:57 (2067 days ago)

On my single actions I use for hunting I shimmed the mainspring so it has more tension than factory. My old .45 Ruger Blackhawk will light off Large Rifle primers just fine. Not only does the harder smack light the primers better, I did not get unburned powder when using my favorite powder - 2400 - like a lot of people complain about.

Here is an explanation why .......
(The following is from an email exchange with Mic McPherson on primer strikes.)

"In the day, when ballistics labs used manually fired universal receivers, every ballistician eventually got bored and, instead of gently pulling the lanyard until the hoop slipped off the spur on the rotating hammer (very similar to a Colt SAA hammer design, when it rotated far enough, the spur would not hold the lanyard loop and the hammer fell), they yanked the lanyard. Every time, when they did that, they noticed two things:

They recorded higher velocity
They recorded lower extreme spread and standard deviation in any long string of shots

Note that the Universal receiver has a light hammer with a 90-grain firing pin and a hammer spring similar to a typical Ruger SA, give or take. It just does not have much striker energy. The Striker tip is, however, smaller than a typical gun -- about 0.625", as opposed to about 0.70" for a typical modern gun, so it always set off the primer, despite marginal striker energy.

Note also the testing that our late friend Terry did with revolvers where he tested progressively lighter striker springs and found progressively lower muzzle velocity.

These two are related.

When you yank the lanyard on a Universal receiver, it rotates the hammer fast enough so that as the lanyard comes free, the energy of rotation in the hammer causes it to continue to rotate against the spring and therefore compress the spring significantly more than when the hammer is rotated slowly until the lanyard slips off. And, the design allows the hammer to rotate much farther than the slip-off point.

So, we have proof that more striker energy results in more velocity and more ballistic uniformity. This is because of how primers work. Compression of the pellet compresses gas contained in microscopic pockets found throughout the pellet. Compressing a gas adiabatically heats it. If compressed fast enough, that heat cannot conduct and radiate into the surrounding material fast enough to keep the temperature of the gas below the ignition temperature of the surrounding material -- identical to how a diesel engine works. So, if you compress the pellet more violently, you get more ignition centers within the compressed portion of the pellet.

More ignition centers means that the pellet burns faster and that means that it burns in place more completely (less unburned material blown more-or-less uselessly through the flash hole). That means more hot gas is generated to do a better job of penetrating into the charge and directly igniting more of the granules."

Terry Murbach showed years ago that it is the hard whack that works the best. Primers that are hit harder light the powder better. He used a S&W revolver that has a leaf mainspring. He ran some loads through the chronograph with the spring set at full strength. Then he began lightening the spring tension. The lower the tension, the lower the velocities. After a point of lowering the tension you start getting misfires.

A snappy mainspring does not effect a good

WB
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 08:03 (2067 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

Trigger pull as one might expect. It can still be light and crisp. Wolff sells reduced power mainsprings in their kits. A crazy thing to me for many applications! I’m with Jim. Add a pound or two to the mainspring weight, go ahead and reduce the return springs, and focus on glassing the parts that rotate or rub. One extra lb. of trigger pull in the field that is smooth and crisp will not be noticed when ignition and consistency are ensured.

My 2 cents.

You answered my question before I could ask it

GregG
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 08:15 (2067 days ago) @ WB

My takeaway is a smoothing of the action to improve trigger pull by polishing, etc, won't impact the mainspring tension as JT described. That's really good to know. Thanks, Scotty!

Some folks doing a "trigger job" rely too much on springs

WB
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 09:45 (2067 days ago) @ GregG

They might install lighter mainsprings that relieve friction on the trigger/sear interface and notably lighten the weight of pull. But the difference between the literal 3# and 4# pull is much less notable if the let off is with minimal take up, crisp, and limited overtravel. You'd hardly notice it. Now on a sloppy "spring job" in place of a proper trigger and action job you'd notice it more.

A light pull and lazy hammer fall is a poor trade. It may feel good in your living room, impress your friends in the Gunshop. But in the field it may yield less stellar performance. Polishing the sides of the hammer, it's rotational parts, and the rubbing inside interfacing (hammer sides / frame) surfaces of the inner frame does wonders to a hammer's fall itself. As Jim's writing notes the firm snap of that hammer and firing pin hit is very important to cartridge performance.

Not to mention, lighter springs increase lock time

JD
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 17:23 (2067 days ago) @ WB

I've never understood putting lighter hammer springs in revolvers. The lighter springs substantially increase lock time as well as decrease ignition. The longer lock time decreases practical, usable, accuracy. If you shoot off a bench, maybe it doesn't matter, but when you shoot standing on your own two feet, it surely does. I want the fastest lock time that I can reasonably get, and have installed heavier hammer springs in many of my revolvers just for this reason...

This is interesting

GregG
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 08:12 (2067 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

Thanks for this as it's the first time I've been exposed to this info. It begs a question, though. How much velocity loss are we talking about, typically? 50fps or more? Trying to figure out if the velocity loss is significant enough to effect accuracy/consistency in a material way. Thanks again for he interesting intel.

Too many variables, depends on the gun,

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 08:30 (2067 days ago) @ GregG

the ammo .. the load ... my old .45 Colt 300 gr. load with 2400 and rifle primer misfired in the New Model Ruger. The primer strike was reduced by the transfer bar. The heavy hammer spring in my old model Ruger would fire them with no problems.

The rifle primer however was not needed and I quit using it fairly early on. Later testing at Hodgdon's showed that I wasn't gaining anything by using the rifle primer.

But .. if that is all a person had ...

Okay. Thank you, Jim.

GregG
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 08:51 (2067 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

- No text -

I'm worried about sporatic variations and misfires, not fps

WB
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 10:04 (2067 days ago) @ GregG

- No text -

Yes. Consistancy and reliability is most important.

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Friday, December 18, 2020, 10:36 (2067 days ago) @ WB

- No text -

powered by my little forum