Since I have an abundance (no, none for sale) of Rem 7 1/2 SR primers and have no longarm to use them in, I did comparisons in 38 sp and 9mm. Testing was done at 50ft at the North Olmsted (Ohio) Sportsman Club indoor range.
For 38sp I used a S&W M586 and a S&W M36, For 9mm I used a Beretta 92FS, S&W 3914, & S&W 3913.
Test loads were compared to my standard loads for felt recoil and paper impact location.
In both catergories, felt recoil and paper impact location was too similar to standard loads.
Chronograph testing would have been nice but probably not necessary because point of impacts didn't change as if they might have had velocities been different.
Yes they are fairly close in comparisons and may competition shooters have substituted SR for SP
It is also why I keep the 10mm and 45ACP cases with the smaller primer pockets for the current situations we are seeing!
Greetings oldman10mm
It?s always best to use what?s in the manuals and I am not recommending anything otherwise.
Last couple years I used SR in 9mm and such when I couldn?t find SP. I tested loads and chrono. I didn?t find anything different except a very slight maybe 10 fps difference. However I did find that the SR may be a bit thicker. Those were my experience.
Just to clarify, I was using CCI primers not Remington primers.
I 've tried SP, SPM, SR, SRM in moderate 9mm loads. The biggest difference between the 4 was that Small Rifle Magnum primers would not ignite in most guns. The only firearm I could get to reliably set them off was an old Luger. You can run into the same issue with magnum pistol primers if using a revolver with a reduced power mainspring.
I agree with Reddog81.
SRM have issues in 9mm handgun i found out but run fine in my AR 9mm.
A +power striker spring eleviates ignition problems in 9mm platforms.
Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk