Belted Mag vs. Rimless magnums and feeding problems.

25 March 2008, 07:58

Kosh75287

I've had cause to re-examine the notion that dangerous game bolt action rifles chambered for belted mag cartridges may suffer from feeding failures more than the rimless cased magnums. I don't want to start a pi$$ing contest as might happen in a "9mm vs. .45" or "autopistols vs. revolvers" or even "tastes great vs. less filling". But I would like to know if the belted mags experience feeling failures in bolt guns more often than rimless mags like, say, the .416 Rigby. If this situation is covered in publications, I'd appreciate it if you could direct me to it.

Thanks in advance for the replies and input.

25 March 2008, 08:09

JAL

Of all the reasons for rifles jamming, I think belted cases would be the last thing.

25 March 2008, 08:44

Dogleg

I'd like to see the cartridge that feeds slicker than a .375 H&H, belt or no belt.

25 March 2008, 10:26

Hog Killer

My Lott will feed even empty cases slick as a whisle.

If a rifle will not feed good ammo correctly, then the RIFLE needs to be fixed.

Keith

25 March 2008, 14:44

Will

I'd fully agree with all the above posts.

Warnings about feeding problems of the belted magnums seems to be more of a justification for trying to sell the latest and greatest non-belted magnum than anything real.

Salesmen. You have to watch them rascals.

-------------------------------
Will / Once you've been amongst them, there is no such thing as too much gun.
---------------------------------------
and, God Bless John Wayne. NRA Benefactor, GOA, NAGR
_________________________

"Elephant and Elephant Guns" $99 shipped.
“Hunting Africa's Dangerous Game" $20 shipped.

red.dirt.elephant@gmail.com
_________________________

If anything be of note, let it be he was once an elephant hunter, hoping to wind up where elephant hunters go.

25 March 2008, 16:07

jetdrvr

quote:
Originally posted by Dogleg:
I'd like to see the cartridge that feeds slicker than a .375 H&H, belt or no belt.

So would I. My model 70 is slick. My Dakota is equally slick.

25 March 2008, 19:41

MacD37

All the crap press about belted rimless cartridges being hard to make feed is just that CRAP! The 375 H&H has been feeding like quick-silver for 96 yrs whitout any complaint that is based on fact! I've owned almost every belted cartridge ever made and have not had one miss feed, but I certainly can't say that for rimless un-belted cases!

In any event, the miss-feeds can almost always be traced to the rifle, not the cartridge!

25 March 2008, 19:57

Atkinson

Depends on who you talk to and even some of the most famous or infamous of gun smiths are belt bashers..

That said it's all bsflag

the 300 H&H and the 375 H&H, have been performing to perfection for several decades, later came the .416 Rem and all the short magnum cartridges, and they too perform and feed as well as any beltless round..

The .375, 300 H&H, .416 Rem have a good deal of taper in the case and many claim that is for ease of feeding, but actually its best attribute is for extraction and a lack of jams when things go a little South with your hot load or whatever...

Long live the belt and it will....

25 March 2008, 20:25

jorge

Great posts here from very experienced individuals. I'll just add this as a question does a bottle necked cartridges like the 450 Dakota or 460 Weatherby are easier to make feed properly than a straight walled big bore like a Lott? jorge

26 March 2008, 00:45

Russ Gould

As someone who has personally done feed mods on belted ctgs on many Mauser actions, I can say that the issue with the belted ctg, if any, is that you need a box slightly wider in the rear to allow the ctgs to stack properly, than you would for a ctg like the 375 Ruger. Then too, that belt, esp on a straight ctg, tends to point the bullet over a bit (left or right)toward the feed rail. If this is not ameliorated, the ctg will jump the box prematurely as the bullet bumps into the side of the action walls when you start to close the bolt.

It's also necessary to relieve the follower a bit, both the transition at the rear and the angled wall, to allow for the extra width of the belt.

With regard to straight vs. bottlenecked, it's easier to get a bottleneck ctg to feed because there is less chance the bullet nose will catch the mouth of the chamber, and it's also less likely to get shoved over too far left or right by the feed ramp/slot.

Having said that, if the feeding mods are done properly, belted mags even straight ones like the Lott and the Capstick, can be made to feed reliably.

26 March 2008, 02:58

kudude

The slickest feeding cartridge I have ever shot is the 300HH, which, the last time I looked, is a belted magnum. It feeds like sh!t thru a goose. I have sent more 375HH down range than I like to remmeber, most at paper, and I have never had a jam or failure to feed. If the rifle is set up right, it will feed 'em if you put them in right. Kudude

26 March 2008, 11:25

Kosh75287

Thanks, Fellas. Sounds like I had it all wrong.

26 March 2008, 20:05

MacD37

quote:
Originally posted by Russ Gould:
As someone who has personally done feed mods on belted ctgs on many Mauser actions, I can say that the issue with the belted ctg, if any, is that you need a box slightly wider in the rear to allow the ctgs to stack properly, than you would for a ctg like the 375 Ruger. Then too, that belt, esp on a straight ctg, tends to point the bullet over a bit (left or right)toward the feed rail. If this is not ameliorated, the ctg will jump the box prematurely as the bullet bumps into the side of the action walls when you start to close the bolt.

It's also necessary to relieve the follower a bit, both the transition at the rear and the angled wall, to allow for the extra width of the belt.

With regard to straight vs. bottlenecked, it's easier to get a bottleneck ctg to feed because there is less chance the bullet nose will catch the mouth of the chamber, and it's also less likely to get shoved over too far left or right by the feed ramp/slot.

Having said that, if the feeding mods are done properly, belted mags even straight ones like the Lott and the Capstick, can be made to feed reliably.

As I said it is the rifle not the cartridge! If the rifle is properly made, they will all feed well!

26 March 2008, 22:07

Stonecreek

The belt offers no advantage in terms of case strength, and is no better at controlling headspace for a bottlenecked cartridge than headspacing on the shoulder, so many people regard the belt as superfluous.

Difficulty in feeding is NOT an issue with belted cases. On the other hand, the "short magnums" can be a bit contrary to make feed right, although proper magazine and feed ramp geometry will allow them to feed to perfection.

27 March 2008, 03:39

MacD37

quote:
Originally posted by Stonecreek:
The belt offers no advantage in terms of case strength, and is no better at controlling headspace for a bottlenecked cartridge than headspacing on the shoulder, so many people regard the belt as superfluous.

Difficulty in feeding is NOT an issue with belted cases. On the other hand, the "short magnums" can be a bit contrary to make feed right, although proper magazine and feed ramp geometry will allow them to feed to perfection.

The belts were put on the case origenally, because the cases needed to be tapered so as to only have to move less that .005 inch to release from the chamber walls for extraction. The cartridges like the 375 H&H with a very tapered case, and very small shoulder needed for the extraction in tropical climes,made the belt a better way to headspace, than the shoulder! The belt was never place there for strength, but for proper extraction. On cases like the 375 H&H, with it's taper, and small rounded shoulder, the belt is a needed feature.

I have found that cartridges without the belt are no better than cartridges with a belt, in any case, and those that need the belt, have to have the case re-shaped if the belt is removed!The belt is a necessity on a straight case with no shoulder at all. Headspaceing on the case mouth of a straight case is not a good thing with high power defense cartridges like the 458 Win Mag, or the 458 LOTT.

It's not a big deal! Use what you want, but lets not make claims that simply don't hold water! Both have their place, depending on the shape of the case,and method of extraction!