Re: What do you find to be the most consistant primer?
Different propellants do better with different primers.
In large part, propellant deterrent coatings are to blame here.
Deterrent coatings achieve two gaols.
They conduct static electricity charges, preventing voltage buildups that lead to discharges, igniting the stored propellant.
They also moderate ignition, thereby providing a means to manage propellant burn rate.
As propellants go, ball powder deterrent coatings tend to be harder to ignite.
For example Winchester powders are ball powders, and Winchester primers have greater brisance (roughly translates as 'flash'). They work well together, but unless I missed it, Winchester also does not make any primers that they label as match primers.
Other brands make Match primers, and other brands have generally less brisance. 'Match' is a nebulous term, but generally, it denotes primers with more consistent construction factors. Otherwise, they are much the same, if not identical, to their basic, non-match, brother and sister primers on the production line.
What is less important here is the consistency of the primers, less than the tolerance of the rest of the load to primer variance. A load which is especially sensitive to primer variances is going to be more fickle and unreliable than one which has no such sensitivity.
My approach to dealing with this is to develop my loads with non-match primers. Modifying this load after development by substituting match primers will either render more consistent results, or not. If not, I can get by without the Match primers.
I use CCI, Winchester, and Federal primers. All my hunting and ball-equivalent (i.e. Garand) loads use Winchester primers. They are more reliable, whether they are or aren't as accurate. I use CCI standard primers for match load developement, and then substitute either CCI BR or Fed Gold Medal Match primers, if and when their inclusion indicates improved load performance.
Greg
