Hey guys so as we all know with the increased purchase of ammo due to COVID/civil unrest, most SR primers have gone directly to the factory line for mass production of .223/5.56 ammo, and the rest have fallen into the hands of opportunist that are price gouging upwards to 10x the original price.

About a month ago I got notified about an in stock sale of CCI #400 with such rarity in primers I went ahead and bought them for the price of $150 for 5k primers.

I have previously done research on primers and there was some negative feedback on the #400 primers in regards to slam fire. But all the post were dated about a decade or so.

So has anyone have had recent experience with the CCI #400 primers as of lately? I know CCI strives to update their items so I am guessing that these primers have been updated to have a stronger cap to prevent or minimize any failures.

My reload is going to consist of a basic .223 load for plinking with a 55gr bullet and H335 powder.

If you don’t mind running primers that are 0.010” THINNER than the primers normally used for that caliber, you will be fine until you start piercing primers, and torching firing pins and bolt faces.

You couldn’t pay me to load another CCI 400.

CCI primers, in general, are the thickest cups of all the brands.

I exclusively load 400s in my AR cartridges that call for a SR primer.

If it were a Federal, Winchester, etc, I'd not do it...but CCI is acceptably hard to not have slam fires or pierced primers.

If you don’t mind answering what is your load data for your reloads.

I believe the CCI 400 is at 0.20” and the #450 is at 0.25” I just figured for plinking and loading for a .223 round not a NATO load would be alright for plinking and well honestly saving in case STFH.

I have been using CCI 400's and H322 for about a year now.
Ive heard the same as you about slam fires but I have yet to have that issue.
I know that CCI 400's and H322 are not the best match. However my SD's and extreme spread seem to be better with 400's than with 450's  

I would say try them, start low and work your way up. if you start to notice any cratering of the primer, stop!

Good luck

For load date with H355, check out hodgdons website. select caliber, bullet weight , and powder fro the drop down list.
https://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle

This.

I have never had a slam fire and I load exclusively 400s in all of my AR cartridges.

I run 25gr H335 with the Hornady 55gr (fmjbt or SP) loaded to 2.200" and CCI 400s.

I'm switching to CFE223 b/c I snagged 16lbs of it a while back for a good deal.

I've loaded tens of thousands of the load above and have never had a slam fire and never had a pierced primer. If youre loading extremely high pressures you might run into issues, but I hope you think every retailer uses CCI 41s. Hell, for the load above that I'm using Hodgdon recommends WSPs, which have thinner cups than CCI400s.

I load 223 loads toward the upper end to match 5.56 performance for my reticle.

Load is 62gr Armscor FMJBT over 26.9gr (I think, going off memory) of CFE223 at 2.26". Develops just over 2,900 FPS out of a 16" barrel.

They're good if you don't need to push the envelope. Just clean your pockets.

Thank you. As for high pressures no I figured it would be too risky in both damaging my bolt, or worst case scenario injuring myself. These loads will be exclusively for plinking and storing if I have no resort for STFH back up rounds. But yeah not meant for high pressure loads that of NATO specs.

I've never had problems with CCI 400's in an AR.

You'll be fine then.

As I said, my load is straight from hodgdons website for 223 and they recommend WSR. No need to go with 41 if you're loading lower pressure plinking loads.

Attached File

I have 15K of CCI 400 and having other SR primers don't need to use these in .223, been using WSR almost exclusively since started reloading for .223.
No problems ever with WSR.  I'll experiment with the 400's next time I do .223 but the CCI 400 are supposedly identical to the CCI 550 SPM primers, so I can use the 400's for 357 magnum, etc

The 400's are my go to non magnum primer and I've never had an issue. If you are overly concerned you can uniform the pocket so the primer will seat deeper, my K&M tool actually removes a good amount of material.

Seat primers sub flush and slam fire risk all but disappears, regardless of primer brand.

I’ve loaded a lot of cci 400’s and I’ve never had a problem.

I’ve loaded thousands of #400 primers with everything from 27gr of BLC2 with 55gr fmj to 80gr smk’s with 24gr of RL15

Never a slam fire or pierced primer. Flatten the shit out of them, but that’s it.

I've run thousands of cci 400 in 223, almost exclusively fired from ar rifles with no problems.

Never had a problem using CCI 400s in loads for various ARs over the years. No slam-fires, no pierced primers but I load mid-range only.

I’ve loaded tens of thousands of 55gr FMJ, 69-77gr SMKs with CCI 400s in various ARs and .223 bolts over the last 8 years

Load with confidence

CORRECTION

0.005” thinner

Not 0.010”

See http://www.jamescalhoon.com/primers_and_pressure.php


I’ve had failures with 400’s, as did other members of my rifle team.

23.5 N540 (correction: N-135 - I was driving when I posted this afternoon) with 80 SMK @ 2.400” OAL

No flattening of primer. Just piercings and blankings.
Torched firing pins and bolts.
Primer metal in the trigger group.

Good luck with your experiment.

Remember, they don’t make THICKER primers just for no reason.

5.56 SAAMI spec is 62,000 PSI

Seems like mostly good experience. Although one member did say he and his team have had some issues in regards to piercing. I am going to try it out at lower than 50k psi loads. I know some of you have done higher loads than that, but I want to take precaution, just a preference in my behalf, I’m still looking for primers either magnum or nato spec primers.

Does anyone have news of when primers will be in stock? Seems like they will not be in stock in a very long time. But for now the 400’s will be what I’ll be using for plinking and stocking aside until if and when the primer shortage ends. I will not pay 10x the price there’s sellers are offering them for.

CCI 400 are made for 22 Hornet pressures. 45K psi. Blanked a lot of them in my Savage bolt gun. Switched to WSR and never had another issue. Have not used to many in the AR's as WSR have always done great. I have used about 5K of them in 9mm though. They work great for that.

Interesting.
I have heard that the Remington 6 1/2 were for low pressure rounds like the 22 hornet.
Never heard of CCI #400 having this limitation.  Do you have a source you could share?

You aren't going to find that on the manufacturer's website.

But a thinner-cup primer is easier for old guns with weak hammer springs to ignite. Presumably if you are shooting an old gun with a weak hammer spring, you also understand that loading it to 62,000 PSI is unwise.

There probably aren't many antique .22 hornet guns that will reliably ignite a CCI 41.

Seat below flush as mentioned above and you will be fine. Loaded many thousands if them wuth zero probs.

Remington 6.5 are same thickness of cup, .020. Burned thru 1k of them without issues.

Fwiw my preferred are 400 or 450, whatever I can find.

Good read here: http://www.jamescalhoon.com/primers_and_pressure.php

W_E_G, have you sent samples of your ammo out for lab pressure testing?

Been using CC-400 & WSR in 223 since late 1987...

What am I missing ?


Ever buy 223 at the store and find a AR-15 / M16 warning on the box ??  Neither have I

I've used cci400 primers when nothing else is availible but in my loads worked up with 205m or wsr primers they look like butter spread on toast with no rounded edges at all. Never have pierced one or had a slam fire though but have only used about a thousand cci400s in my lifetime

No.

Why would I?

Why would the all the other members of my rifle team who were having the same problem with standard small rifle primers of various brands, and with other various loads?

We solved the problem by simply switching to CCI 450 (magnum) primers.
Chronograph data with the magnum primers was indistinguishable from the chronograph data with the 400's.

Run pressures up to SAAMI limits for 5.56 in an AR-15, and I promise you will have primer problems if you use standard-thickness small rifle primers - including any CCI 400.

After several members of the team experienced the same problem (this was about the same time we were all transitioning from M1A to AR15 for competition) the team all switched to MAGNUM primers, and the problem went away completely, with all loads and all guns used by the team.

This is CCI 400 with 23.5 N-135 with 80 SMK @ 2.400” OAL
Brass was new Remington brass.

Attached File


Below is the load that kept damaging my rifle in Quickload. Yeah, I know somebody will be along promptly to admonish, "Weeelllllll, that's Quickload, you can't go by that,.... you gotta do this, that and such-and-such."
Frankly, I don't think any of us even had computers except maybe one or two guys with an INTEL 486 for word-processing and playing "DOOM"  when we discovered CCI 400's were unsuitable back in the mid-90's. We weren't getting our load data from Quickload. We were using loads recommended by Sam Dayton - the gunsmith who assembled many of the rifles used by the team. But mind you, Sam did not tell us what primer to use - or if he did, it didn't register with me at the time. I do not know what primer Sam used to develop the loads. Sam had access to a lot of military materiel. One might surmise that Sam was using some sort of "military" primer way back then. Likely pull-down Lake City. But I really don't know for certain.

I believe our short-line load was 26.3 grains N-540 with a 69 SMK. I don't recall specifically having problems with that load with CCI400 primers. I was always the N-135 and 80's that played hob with standard small rifle primers.

What's more, in the years that followed, I've seen AR-15's with pierced primers multiple times with other shooters since I went through this a quarter-century ago. I always ask them what primer they are using. To my dismay, most of them tell me they "don't know." I mean WTF. Shooting handloads, and they don't even know what primer. Scary.  Of the ones who were able to tell me what primer, it was always a CCI 400. But, don't take my word for it I guess.

Notice that there is no flattening whatsoever of the primer. Just extruded, thin and soft primer cup. CCI 400.
If you trust Quickload at all, this load is actually on the mild side for 5.56.

Sorry for the blurry numbers on the purple pressure field from the screenshot. If you can't make it out, Quickload says the pressure is 53,446 PSI. That's 9,000 PSI below SAAMI maximum.

Attached File

Loaded thousands of them. Never a problem.

Used to be on their website. Back when they were in a white and blue box. And I know I read it in a manual but not sure which one.

Looking at that load, I wonder if the projectile added to the issues.  I have only loaded 55gr bullets and never that powder.  It is odd you and your friends were getting pierced primers with no other pressure signs.  Those look like unfired primers with a hole punched in them. I have never seen anything like that.

I wished I knew how many thousands of CCI 400's I've loaded and shot in AR.  I've also never heard of anyone having a slam from them either.  Wives tale??!!

Ditto.

Never had a slam fire.

I did have blanked primers, pierced primers and trashed a single firing pin.  

I use wolf (old stock), Rem 7.5, and Cci 450s.  

I am not worried about a firing pin so much but bolt face erosion is my financial line in the sand.

To me ball powders, summer heat and CCI 400s is just a risky combo.  BTDT

They (6.5s)  are.  I have not heard CCI say that, they are for standard loads.

My CZ hornet has a bit too much firing pin protrusion for Rem 6.5s.  LilGun and the combo put pin holes in them.   Reading on the interweb I wasn’t the only one with overly generous protrusion on the CZ 527s.

ETA.  I wonder if longer free headspace is a contributing factor.  I know my older loads were done at die cam over with standard RCBS FL dies.  When I got more tooling to measure shoulder set back those dies were shoving shoulders a ridiculous amount back more than the chamber needed.

That's what I was thinking. I run 5.56 pressures myself with 400s, and the primers flatten long before they pierce. Hell, the even crater before the pierce.

Something with that is screwy.

Wonder if they are all using the same bolt? He did mention custom builds.  

The first bolt I klled was  a COLT bolt. From one of the versions of the "SPORTER" that had the fat front takedonw pin with screw-heads, but before they made it even worse with the fat trigger pins.

Barrel was Krieger.

I'm not sure what the other guys were running back then. But remember, it was the 90's. The majority of the competition guns I saw at the time were some flavor or another of COLT.

I'm not sure where I sourced the second bolt I killed. Probably Fulton Armory. I know I was buying stuff from Fulton back then. I don't recall any other source. Probably killed several Fulton firing pins too. Of course, when I say "Fulton," we well-know Fulton does not make AR parts in-house. So your guess is good as mine where Clint sources the parts he sells. Must be satisfactory, because his stuff is top-shelf (and priced accordingly).

Trigger was a Krieger-Miliazzo trigger. Other guys on the team were running either that, or the Armalite two-stage trigger.

I allowed the CCI 400's to kill two bolts, and several firing pins until I solved the issue.


Here's what the failed CCI 400's did to the bolt face (and firing pin channel).

Attached File


Attached File


Attached File

Typical firing pin damage.

Attached File

I saved the bolts, and the firing pins, and some of the cases with failed primers until the mid-2000's.

After I photographed them in the mid-2000's with my fancy Nikon 1-megapixel digital camera, I sent the junk down the road.

G2G

More primer pics

Attached File


Attached File


Attached File

That is flat out strange. I have never seen or heard of this before and never experienced it.

CCI 400s are the goto primer for many book loads.

I primarily use 450s because I also load Grendel and don’t like keeping primers of a dozen flavors.

I'm new and don't know anything, but just curious if you have tried them again and/or have they changed since then?

The data you have is from 30 years ago. Back then cell phones weren't a thing, now they are and do crazy stuff the computers back then couldn't even dream of.

I ask cause so many others say they've had no issues.

Shot HP from the 80's to 2011, used nothing but 400's, even with 540 and 80 gr bullets. In all that time I only wasted 1 firing pin. The cases that look like no pressure, look more like firing pin problem,, if it's got a flat, it will blank or leak. Also bolt face damage looks like under pressure when the FP blanked it.
Have gone through more that 100 K of 400s'probably more like 200 K

I have used CCI 400's for years, never had an issue with pierced primers/slam fires.  I have noticed them getting flatter than the 450's or magnum primers.  But its on the higher end of loadings near max.  

You won't have any problems with plinking loads.

Yes they are still the same and are still blanking primers. 2 years ago I had to have savage replace a firing pin and bolt head because of this. They told me they see it all the time when using cci400 primers. And I was not running them anywhere near a max load for 223.