close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Considering Wolf small pistol primers...need advice

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by Kwesi, Apr 9, 2010.


  1. Kwesi

    Kwesi
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    1,431
    4
    Location:
    TX
    After researching the archives I'm undecided. I've only used CCI or Winchester. I can't find any of those for sale but have found ALL BRASS Wolf.

    Seems like the nickel ones were creating problems. I was thinking of 5,000 to save on the hazmat fee. At $28/1,000 seems like a good price.

    Should I grab these while they are available? BTW: I will be using these in a smg full auto.

    Thanks
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. XDRoX

    XDRoX
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    6,126
    1,783
    Location:
    San Diego
    I have 5000 that I haven't tried yet, but I researched it before I bought them. Most people said they use Wolf primers without issue. A few people said that they failed to detonate and had to be put back in the gun a second time to fire. There was also one post about a bad batch that Wolf exchanged. After all my reading I figured they were fine to buy, and so I did. Also, I prime with a hand primer so I'm probably less likely to run into problems with different primers, YMMV.
    Hope this helps.
     

  3. XDRoX

    XDRoX
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    6,126
    1,783
    Location:
    San Diego
    BTW, CCI small pistol primers are in stock right now at Cabela's. They cost $37 per 1000 though:crying:
     
  4. Kwesi

    Kwesi
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    1,431
    4
    Location:
    TX
    Saw that. I bought CCI large pistol for $38 + tax at local gun show 6 weeks ago so I was a bit shocked at Cabelas prices + haz + shipping!
     
  5. fredj338

    fredj338
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    21,470
    818
    Location:
    so.cal.
    This biggest issue seems to be poor QC & primers that vary in size. Some are slightly oversize & require more effort to seat them. If not forced into the pocket, they will not reliabley fire, especially w/ striker fired guns.
     
    #5 fredj338, Apr 9, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2010
  6. BK63

    BK63
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    1,824
    0
    Location:
    CT
    I have been using Wolf for the past year now because thats all I could find. No problems so far.
     
  7. coal

    coal
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    311
    0
    All 5k+ of mine have fired... just like all the other brands.
     
  8. Jon_R

    Jon_R
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    5,508
    246
    Location:
    Central Florida
    I have used 15K Wolf Small Pistol. They work fine. I have had some rounds fail maybe one 1 of 300-400 or so but I can't say for certain it was because of the primer. I make range ammo for action shooting on a 550 with focus on output so occasionally a primer won't get seating just perfect or a piece of brass will be slightly out of spec. I just clear the round and carry on and seldom go back and check on it.

    Wolf is considered harder then some. If you have modified your gun so it will hit the primer softer you will have more failures with Wolf then you will with some others that are softer.
     
  9. D. Manley

    D. Manley
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    1,604
    0
    Location:
    Southern US
    If you're using them in stock pistols and, you take a little extra care to ensure they're seated well, you should have no problem. They "can be" a little harder to light in guns running tuned (lightened) triggers and some have found them a little tighter in seating. I had no such problem seating but I did have ignition problems in my tuned range guns however, they ran 100% in my stock Glocks.
     
  10. Shooter32

    Shooter32
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    49
    0
    Location:
    Louisville
    The only problem that i know of with the Wolf primers is the cups are shorter than the other brands so you need to adjust your press to seat them deeper . That came from the guys at Powder Valley when i ask them the same question you posted , they said the hardness test that they ran on the primers show them to be just as soft as Federal .
     
  11. D. Manley

    D. Manley
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    1,604
    0
    Location:
    Southern US
    While that *may* be a true statement, it is a bit misleading...they most definitely are not as easy to ignite as Federal or Winchester either, for that matter. There is more to primer sensitivity than thickness or hardness of the cup material. The priming compound used and anvil design/consistency is of at least equal importance. I've ran untold thousands of Federal and Winchester primers without a hint of a problem in my (tuned) range guns but with Wolf, had a 6% or so failure to ignite. I tested this repeatedly alternating back and forth with the same guns using all 3 primer brands on the same days. While Wolf primers are just fine in most applications they absolutely are not as easy to ignite as Federal.
     
  12. Kwesi

    Kwesi
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    1,431
    4
    Location:
    TX
    I'll shoot these mostly in the smg. I use a .308 hammer spring vs 9mm so I'm not concerned about light primer strikes. The other comment about the cup size requiring the primer adjustment has me wondering. Is this very difficult to adjust on the 550?
     
  13. Jon_R

    Jon_R
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    5,508
    246
    Location:
    Central Florida
    I loaded all of mine on a 550 and didn't adjust anything.
     
  14. D. Manley

    D. Manley
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    1,604
    0
    Location:
    Southern US
    I don't think you'll have any problem seating them. People use a lot of different methods and some have reported a difficulty but I had no problem whatsoever on a SDB and the few I loaded on a LCT were OK too. My shooting buddy loads them on a 550 and has no problems either. Having said that, I do prep all my primer pockets (just 'cause I can) so I would not expect any seating issues anyway. And you're right...you'll have none of the ignition issues with the sub-gun. Load 'em up & have fun. :supergrin:
     
  15. Glocks&Ducs

    Glocks&Ducs
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    4,051
    1
    Maybe they are just as easy to ignite, but you weren't seating them deep enough as Shooter32 was saying you have to, because the Wolf primers are apparently shorter.

    That was his point. Dimensionally speaking the "bad" Wolf primers were off. Hardness wise, there was nothing wrong with them. You testing them through your gun is proving nothing if you did nothing to seat the Wolf primers deeper than your other comparison primers.
     
  16. D. Manley

    D. Manley
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    1,604
    0
    Location:
    Southern US
    Please, I've been at this for over 40 years, I know how to seat a primer. I know this ain't your first rodeo either and you should know that my findings are similar to an awful lot of both good shooters and accomplished reloaders. When a primer's anvil is bottomed out, that's it...period. And yes, that's the first thing anyone should check when an ignition problem comes up...I did, loaded test batches that seated with "extra gusto" (any more would have crushed them) with the same result. It's not a mystery and Wolf are not bad primers in fact, I believe them to be very consistent providing accuracy to rival the best. It's just a simple fact they (at least, the nickle-plated SPP) are not as sensitive as are Federal or Winchester. There is a very good reason shooters using tuned revolvers use little but Federal.
     
  17. Glocks&Ducs

    Glocks&Ducs
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    4,051
    1
    How do you know that you simply hadn't reached the mechanical limit of your priming system? If that was the case, you could squeeze with enough pressure to break your finger bones, and it still wouldn't necessarily mean the primer had been seated to the max extent possible. Especially if it was too "short". Shorter than any primer system manufacturer had envisioned primers would ever be.
     
  18. D. Manley

    D. Manley
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    1,604
    0
    Location:
    Southern US
    It ain't rocket science G&D. First of all, every one of the 30,000 or so pieces of brass I have on hand for the calibers I load has been U-Die sized, primer pockets fully prepped, cleaned/polished, sorted & stored by headstamp. I never...and I do mean, never...have seating issues. These primers were going into cleaned, polished, shiny, cases and contrary to being difficult, seating primers (Wolf included) is glassy smooth whether using the Dillon or the LCT. Primers, irregardless of brand, provide a positive feedback as the anvil contacts the bottom of the pocket. Every round is individually case gauged and inspected before boxing. I spent a considerable amount of time experimenting with different priming setups and not only did I not have any of the problems some have reported fully seating them to the contrary, they seated both easily and fully for me using different priming methods.

    Now, could there be some abberation that can't be detected that makes them require a little more "whack"? Sure. If it is, I can't find it by visual means or by measurement, though. Some are a little "out of round" but that's not uncommon in other brands and should pose no problem. I do know that the problems with these arose with the first batches after Wolf switched from plain brass to the new, plated, version. An awful lot of people that had loaded Wolf for years and frankly, loved them now suddenly had these problems pop up when these nickle versions hit. I do have a theory (*read, a pure guess) that the problem may be in their anvil design allowing it to have a bit of "give" in it. The one thing that stuck in my mind when all this came up (now, months ago if not more) was that the unfired rounds "appeared" to have been struck hard enough to have lit but, didn't. You'd be hard pressed to whap a Federal or Winchester equally hard without it going bang.

    I don't see this as a big deal. Folks running stock guns will likely not have a burp using the new Wolfs...mine ran them 100%. My G-34 and G-35 are both pretty well tweaked out and had problems. On those, I found just switching back to an OEM FP with a reduced power OEM FPS (-5 or 6 coils IIRC) ran them in the range guns at the expense of a slightly heavier trigger. It did'nt take much, just a little more mass. I just accept the fact that they are harder to ignite and will leave the reason to others. I don't subscribe to the failure to seat thing for a couple of reasons. If this were the case, there would also be significant problems with stock setups and AFAIK, there isn't. Secondly, a high primer hit a second time will fire more often that it don't...only a very few of these fired with multiple hits. My experience convinced me that regardless of the factors involved they can be problems in tuned guns and should the cause be related to seating in some way then, it's just not worth the grief trying to correct a manufacturing flaw with brute strength trying to compensate by crushing them in. Life's too short and the god of good primers (Federal) is still in business.

    And just to put a point on the thread...I ran the rest of the Wolf-primed loaded test rounds with the OEM FP and modified OEM FP Spring setup boringly uneventful. Once gone, I went back to my preferred setup and have not failed one time...ever...to light a Federal or Winchester with them. The rest of that particular shipment of 5,000 was sold to a shooting buddy running mostly CZ's. He loads while sitting (due to a handicap) using a 550B and has no issues with them in his guns. I've no reason to try them again but if I needed primers and that's what I could get I'd just swap the parts, load 'em & shoot 'em and not think twice about it.
     
  19. GioaJack

    GioaJack
    Expand Collapse
    Conifer Jack

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    10,016
    1
    Location:
    Conifer, CO

    PSSST... 'irregardless' isn't a word. Common mistake... sorry, pet peeve, and I was bored. :supergrin:

    Other than that, very good post.

    Jack
     
  20. MrVvrroomm

    MrVvrroomm
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    3,233
    0
    Location:
    Shakopee, MN USA
    Pronunciation: \ˌir-i-ˈgärd-ləs\
    Function: adverb
    Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
    Date: circa 1912
    nonstandard : regardless

    "usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead."

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless

    It's like fingernails on a chalkboard every time someone says it, but it really is a word.

    back on topic: I've used 5K Wolf small pistol primers and every one has gone bang, first time.