I keep seeing references to the dreaded belt on the Mags. One guy said that the belt was prohibitive to getting more ammo in the magazine over a fatter cased WSM. That sounds like BS to me. I'm not getting caliber specific here, but what is the supposed downside to the Belt? I've reloaded and shot my mag a bunch, and I'm unaware of any problems or difficulties that it has as opposed to other non magnum calibers I reload for. So what's the problem supposed to be? I'd also be curious to know the reason for the belt. I assume that it is for more strength, but larger mags exist without one, so why? Thanks in advance.

The belt was originally designed to provide headspace in double and single shot rifles.

The early belted cases did not have a sharp shoulder to headsace on.

As bolt rifles became more common, and belted cases were loaded to higher pressure, and sometimes chambers became a little sloppy, and reloaders full length resized to near minimum specs, the belted magnum cases would stretch near the front of the belt until the case seperated. Since the case went from thick to thin there that was the weakest link.

I have only had one rifle where belted cases seerated there.

It was a Steyr 7mm Mag with the locking lugs on the rear of the bolt. This caused some case stretching. After I backed the die off just a tad the problem stopped.

I have not had any other problems with belted cased rifles and I have had a bunch of them.

Daniel,

As N E 450 No 2 said; originally for headspacing.

With the fatter WSM/RUM case, headspacing is on the shoulder.......theoretically better accuracy.

The only problem you will have re-chambering a belted magnum to a RUM is losing magazine capacity, as the RUMs are the same diameter as the belt on the magnum all the way on the case.........so you normally lose one round capacity.

Brownells sell magazine boxes with a cutout in them to enable you to load 3 rounds in the mag'.

Also the HS-Precision mags for the RUMs are extended and hold 3. And with the added benefit of in line feeding...........

Interesting post daniel77, I want to read the replies.

It has now become necessary for me to learn more about what head spacing REALLY is. If anyone would care to explain exactly what headspacing is, I will greedily read on. I have had no problems with case separation with my 7 mag brass. I even get quite a few (dozen or so) reloadings per case. I FLRS the first time and NS thereafter. Works well for me, though I am no expert by any means. Thanks for any replies.

A good article on headspace:

http://www.cruffler.com/trivia-October99.html

Bruce

very informative, I thank you. I can now say that my understanding of both headspace and the belted magnums was incomplete.

Hey Daniel, Just read an article the other day where the guy was writing about Dangerous Game Rifles and he mentioned he had heard of a Belted Case somehow jamming in a rifle. He said it as if a Non-Belted Case had NEVER jammed in a rifle. I didn't bother reading the rest of his trash after that.

There are some rifles out there with Headspace problems. Any competent Gun Smith has a set of "GO" / "NO GO" Gauges that can tell if the rifle has that problem as quick as you can read this.

If you are Hunting in Dangerous Game country, it is always best to Full Length Resize(FLR) to lessen the possibility of a Jam due to trash in the chamber if something is trying to squash or chew on you.

Otherwise, you can Partial-Full Length Resize(P-FLR) Belted or Non-Belted Cases and totally eliminate all Headspace.

As a couple of nice side benefits to P-FLRing, you get the longest possible Case Life and the best possible accuracy. The accuracy comes from the Case CenterLine being closer in alignment with the Chamber CenterLine than anyother Resizing method.

Best of luck to you.

A lot of factory chambers for belted cartridges are cut on the large side - presumably to deal with ample tolerances in belted brass. So, sizing for a belted magnum becomes more critical in terms of case life. As noted above, PFLR is a valid answer - making sure your cases headspace on the shoulder from the first reload.

That in turn makes the belt even more useless than it originally was (exception: cases with no or sloping shoulders needing the belt for headspacing). After all, a lot of belted magnums were made with a belt primarily as a marketing gimmick.

- mike

quote:

It has now become necessary for me to learn more about what head spacing REALLY is. If anyone would care to explain exactly what headspacing is, I will greedily read on.

It has long been my belief that discussions on headspace get too techical for many to follow and it really doesn't matter anyway.

It don't matter how it's explained, all headspace MEANS is, "How much room is there for the caartridge?" If the headspace is too large, the catridge will be a rattle fit and that ain't good. If headspace is too small, we can't close the action and that ain't good.

How much headspace is in the chamber is largely irrelivant to a handloader. He can and should size his cases to make them a snug fit in each chamber, forgetting anything about rims, belts or shoulders, as such. Doing that properly cuts down on the majority of case stretch and GREATLY reduces the chance of a head speration!

Ignore the "directions" for adjusting any sizer. Just set FL dies so the action will close on the ammo reliably, with just a tad of resistance. Then, for that rifle, the ammo IS full length resized, period.

Who cares what SAAMI says, he has just fitted HIS ammo to HIS rifle and that's what resizing and headspace is actually all about to any good reloader.

Going through all the contortions of how headspace is measured off case rims, shoulders, mouths or belts is irrelivant to anyone but a gunsmith or firearms engineer.

/

No problems here with a 7mm Rem mag. Feeding works, shoots accurately, good meat provider, good looking, etc...

Please bear with me, as each answer I get causes me to have another question. I thought that when reloading, it was best to FL resize any brass that had not been shot in that gun, but after firing the brass in a certain chamber, the brass expands to fit that chamber (fire forming it), and that brass can and should then be NS only as long as it is being shot in the same gun. I was under the impression that FL resizing frequently shortened brass life as it causes the brass to be stretched back and forth. Am I wrong here, or is the answer not a black and white one? I used to get 7 mag brass from a friend who doesn't reload. I can tell that my rifle has a much tighter chamber than his did, and I couldn't get his brass into my chamber without FL resizing. After Fl sizing once, I just NS, and have never had a problem through several hundred rounds.

Daniel,

You've got headspace and resizing figured out better than most. Everything in your post is accurate.

One nuance: Your friend's 7mm chamber may not necessarily be "larger" than yours, it may simply be slightly different in some dimension -- it could have a greater length to the datum line of the shoulder, or it could simply be wider at the shoulder. Either of these conditions could require you to resize his fired brass substantially to allow it to enter your chamber, but your chamber might well be of larger capacity (displacement) than his. Either way, his brass has to be forced most, if not all, of the way into your FL resizer in order to enter your chamber. This is not uncommon. How far it must be forced into the FL sizer will, in turn, vary with the dimensions of the sizer -- and believe me, regardless of SAAMI specs, they vary a lot.

An interesting demonstration: Since his brass doesn't fit in your chamber, you assume that your chamber is "tighter". Try going the opposite way and see what happens. Try brass fired in your chamber in his gun. Chances are that your brass won't enter his chamber, either. But both chambers can't be "larger" than the other.

quote:

Originally posted by daniel77:
...after firing the brass in a certain chamber, the brass expands to fit that chamber (fire forming it), and that brass can and should then be NS only as long as it is being shot in the same gun.

Close. You can NS brass fired in the same chamber, but it will get progressively harder to chamber. How much harder after how many firings depends on many factors such as pressure, brass composition, number of times reloaded, annealed or not etc. Eventually, the brass will get so hard to chamber it is worth running it through a FL sizing die.

I used to NS, but I tired of hard chambering cases. Now I only PFLR - as described by Hot Core above. This will get you close to max brass life, with smoothly chambering cases on every reload.

quote:

I was under the impression that FL resizing frequently shortened brass life as it causes the brass to be stretched back and forth.

Yes, working the brass more than necessary will have an influence on brass life. PFLR minimizes this effect.

- mike

I used to have a Model 70 .338 winmag. I could stuff 3 down in the magazine and almost get number 4 in. I sanded off the belts and what do you know i got number 4 in comfortably. From what I understand about belts, they were made for cartridges that had a minimal shoulder, thereby needing to headspace on the belt to support the blow by the firing pin. After awhile it came to be perceived that a magnum was supposed to have a belt on it by the shooting public. This is why you see a belt on the .338 winmag, 300 winmag, and 7mm rem mag, even though these have plenty of shoulder to headspace on.

Hey Daniel, There are as many ways to go through this process as there are people reloading. It seems each person selects certain aspects and rejects other ones. Even then Reloading still works well for the vast majority, as long as they follow the Safety Rules.

quote:

Originally posted by daniel77:
I thought that when reloading, it was best to FL resize any brass that had not been shot in that gun,

Maybe, it depends on if it will actually fit in the Chamber and have the Bolt Close. If it will, there is no need to FLR.

If it is a Lot of "new" Cases, I just run it through a regular P-FLR to straighten the Necks since there are normally a few buckled just a bit.

If they are "once fired" of course you have to watch for sand/dirt in the Case if it hit the ground and then they need to be tried in the rifle to see if they will allow the Bolt to close. If it won't fit, then time to P-FLR. If it does fit, then you need to get the spent Primer out and a P-FLR does that plus resizes the Neck. Or a person could choose to Neck Size and push the Primer out.

quote:

but after firing the brass in a certain chamber, the brass expands to fit that chamber (fire forming it), and that brass can and should then be NS only as long as it is being shot in the same gun.

Fire Forming can be done in a couple of ways, just Seating a Bullet "into" the Lands, or Necking the Case up a Caliber and then P-FLRing before actually doing the shooting.

Lots of folks NSand have fine ammo - for them. I still prefer P-FLR for me.

quote:

I was under the impression that FL resizing frequently shortened brass life as it causes the brass to be stretched back and forth. Am I wrong here, or is the answer not a black and white one?

FLR does shorten the Case life because it automatically induces Headspace(a loose Cartridge fit in the Chamber). Therefore the Case "stretches" with each firing and is "resized" more than is actually necessary to fit into the Chamber. However, this is a good idea when Hunting in Dangerous Game country. People just have to accept short Case Life as part of Hunting in those places.

quote:

I used to get 7 mag brass from a friend who doesn't reload. I can tell that my rifle has a much tighter chamber than his did, and I couldn't get his brass into my chamber without FL resizing. After Fl sizing once, I just NS, and have never had a problem through several hundred rounds.

As long as you are happy with the results, that is what you should do.

Best of luck ot you.

I have to agree, there are a few things that a hunter should avoid when reloading for an actual hunt for big game.
One is only neck resizing, it only takes once not being able to chamber a too tight round to convince you.
This can happen with totally clean shells in extreme cold temps as well.
A very cold rifle, and shells in a shirt pocket warmed by your body temp,, yes I know from experiance.
Also seating your bullet touching the lands sucks for a hunt, you will eventually stick one in the barrel when you unload and spill powder all through your action, as well as leave a bullet stuck in the lands.
And seating over a very compressed powder charge without a crimp,, damn things seem to grow without it.

There are probably many more but these are the ones that came to mind this morning, in my opinion it is a good idea to load for consistency, and reliability for a big game hunt.
Trying to eke the last ounce of use or performance out of a round is not good biz when your ass is miles from camp, and you have a lot invested.
Perhaps even your life.

Good advice, and I understand your points and thank you for your time and willingness to teach. I hope some others have also benefited from this post. I generally only hunt around here and the most dangerous animal I have to face is my Redheaded wife, but when I do get to head North and West I'll definitely choose reliability over a little more brass life. Thanks again.

"Point of order" you might say. History. The belt arose back when the brass case was brand new. Mr. Mauser had come up with the rimless. Otherwise it was "rimmed" which did not feed well in the rimless magazines until the Japanese engineers reworked the magazine design. 6.5 Jap is semi rimmed and action feeds rims o.k. Same for the Siam Mauser. Therefore H&H took the rim and moved it ahead, reduced percentage size which the greater strength of brass permitted over the copper cases of earlier era, ahead of extractor groove and put it on their new rounds, .300 H&H, .375 H&H, .244 H&H (that thing ate barrels per Mr. Ackley).

I suspect that the powders of the day needed the extremely funnel shaped case to burn best. 7x57. .303 Brit. Thus the belt was needed on the extremely funnel shaped, no shoulder .300 H&H etc. There was a .375 rimmed mentioned by Mr. O'Connor... One source claimed that the cordite stick powder of the Brits was loaded in the case before it was formed ...???... then the body taper, shoulder was added... I wasn't there.

Mr. Ackley wrote that once the factories started putting a shoulder on belted rounds, they stopped headspacing on the belt and headspaced on the shoulder just like the rimless rounds. This would contribute much to the tendency of a full length sized case to separate. It would stop on the belt and stretch when fired EACH TIME.

Your observations are correct. Neck sizing reduces the body stretch and the tendency to head separation. Works the body brass less. BAD idea for dangerous game, but otherwise... for one gun, slightly greater powder capacity... and when necks crack, anneal or pitch the cases... Enjoy your new knowledge... luck...

PS I always say that "headspace" is how the primer is supported against the firing pin blow. Gun that will take a military "field guage" has so much headspace that the firing pin will probably not reach the primer... heck of a thing to find your gun won't shoot when someone is shooting at you... (although soldiers are considered expendable...)

Quote from my friend George W. Starkweather for the 5-V Files

"The first cartridges developed had a rim at the back end of the case, just like the .22 rimmed fire cartridge still in use today. The original term, “head space”, referred to the space left for the rim (or “head”) of the case from the breach face to the back of the chamber. The space had to be a little bigger than the thickness of the rim to ensure reliable chambering, or space for a revolver cylinder to turn, even if there was a little grease or debris present.
The development of rimless shouldered cases confused the meaning of “head space” a bit because the head space had to be measured from the breach face to the shoulder of the chamber. For belted magnum cartridges, the head space is measured from the breach face to the part of the chamber against which the belt stops.
To avoid (or possibly to increase) the confusion, most people now refer to “head space” as the maximum thickness of shim stock that can be inserted between the breach face and the head of the cartridge with the bolt fully closed and locked. That seems to work for any cartridge and chamber."

The reason for the belt was to allow long sharp sloping cartridges that were fed with cordite powder to feed reliably with a positive head space stop. Not hoop stress related.

/

Lots of good info here, gents.

The REAL biggest problem with belts is the internet and the experts (ex spurts) it has created.

When the short-fats were being hyped, some of these new folks dived in and began parroting what the gun writers were being paid to say - some of which was to make the new rounds more desirable and therefore sell lots of rifles and ammo.

This industry-favoring hype succeeded to a certain point, but it has been proven the short-fat beltless phenoms really do not offer any real-world advantage. Unless of course you want one. Or feel an eighth of an inch less throw will save your life with a quicker second and third shot. Or believe everything the gun companies tell you. And enjoy making parroting "expert" statements as to how poor a design the belted cartridges are. Yawn...

Also, I absolutely refuse to believe anyone would be silly enough to sand belts off to get another round in the the magazine AND ACTUALLY TELL SOMEONE ABOUT IT!!!. This HAS to be a joke, right ? But, come to think of it, this was said to have been done by an expert on things belted

quote:

Originally posted by DARBY:
Lots of good info here, gents.

The REAL biggest problem with belts is the internet and the experts (ex spurts) it has created.

When the short-fats were being hyped, some of these new folks dived in and began parroting what the gun writers were being paid to say - some of which was to make the new rounds more desirable and therefore sell lots of rifles and ammo.

This industry-favoring hype succeeded to a certain point, but it has been proven the short-fat beltless phenoms really do not offer any real-world advantage. Unless of course you want one. Or feel an eighth of an inch less throw will save your life with a quicker second and third shot. Or believe everything the gun companies tell you. And enjoy making parroting "expert" statements as to how poor a design the belted cartridges are. Yawn...

Also, I absolutely refuse to believe anyone would be silly enough to sand belts off to get another round in the the magazine AND ACTUALLY TELL SOMEONE ABOUT IT!!!. This HAS to be a joke, right ? But, come to think of it, this was said to have been done by an expert on things belted

I sanded the belts off as experiment, not to fire, nor did I fire those cases.

Now genius allow me to quote a passage from the Speer reloading manual #14. I am sure that we can all agree that they know just a bit more about the subject than you.

"The belted case has become synonymous with the word "magnum." The original purpose of the belt was to provide positive headspace control on cartridges like the 300 and 375 H&H Magnums that have very little shoulder. Modern belted magnums like the 7mm Remington Magnum and the 300 Winchester are also bottlenecked but have adequate shoulders for headspace control. The belt is more a COSMETIC feature than a design necessity.

To get top accuracy from your belted magnum, use the method described above to assure that the case headspaces on its shoulder instead of the belt. Many rifles will also shoot better when this technique is used and the cases will last longer."

I reiterate a belt on the 7mm Remmag is unnecessary, and a waste of magazine space. If you deny it, then you are hopeless and an idiot.

I bought my first 7mm Remmy in 1969 and never got my arms around the fact that the belt was really nothing more than a decoration. Darn. I am frankly glad there wasn't an internet and the resulting experts around to enlighten me - maybe I wouldn't enjoyed using it or the 300 Winny or 264 or 300 Roy or --

Your "experiment" is puzzling to me - a simple measurement would have confirmed that more smaller cartridges will fit into a given space. The question here is WHY - ?? Perhaps you are destined to become the next P. O. Ackley.

Your reply that implies I am in order a genius, hopeless and an idiot is puzzling, but a solid confirmation of my thoughts about the likes of you internet experts.

As for quoting a Speer Manual, it really surprises me you have one on hand - you come off as more like the comic book and playstation type...

Enough of this inferior sport - - thanks for your sage enlightement, and good luck in your future bonehead experiments and quest for much-needed knowledge.

I know you wrote that you are done with this inferior sport, and your welcome for my sage enlightenment. But let me say that I don't dislike the belted mags they are very good at what they were intended to do, which is provide a bunch more room for powder. I just believe that modern non-belted mags are a better design. While I am not in the long range rifle competition shoots, I must say that I haven't read of any much less most using the belted cartridges. There must be a reason for this, I have read however that many dislike the belts.


You are still puzzled by my experiment. Well let me shed a little light on the subject. Firstly I was 19 and just beginning reloading. I was going on an Elk hunt in Wyoming where Grizzly Bears roam, and I felt that getting that extra cartridge in the mag would be good extra insurance. I had read that very passage that I quoted, and I was a little pissed that the useless belts were keeping me from getting that extra insurance. Of course now that I am older I realize that getting more than 2 shots at an attacking bear would be lucky, so 3 or 4 would make little difference.

Actually I have 5 reloading manuals and have read most of them cover to cover, not that having read them makes me an expert, far from it. I am happy to let the people at Speer, Nosler, Hornady, etc remain the experts. I have been reloading for the past 16 years, in fact in those years I have probably only purchased 3 boxes of factory ammo, that does not make me an expert.

Thanks for your blessing of luck in my future bonehead experiments. I hope you continue to enjoy your silly belts.

I just can't see how .018 x 3 equaling .054 would allow one to get another case in the magazine if that dimension were missing. If I were such a slob shooter that I needed more than 4 shots from my 7MM Remington magnum at any one time without making a good hit I would take up another sport. Bitching about the belts is proof that some will bitch without premise.

quote:

Originally posted by rickt300:
I just can't see how .018 x 3 equaling .054 would allow one to get another case in the magazine if that dimension were missing. If I were such a slob shooter that I needed more than 4 shots from my 7MM Remington magnum at any one time without making a good hit I would take up another sport. Bitching about the belts is proof that some will bitch without premise.

You just don't get it. I suppose that is ok, certainly doesn't matter to me.

So the problem with belts is What ?.

Magazine capacity , how many shots do you need ?. Maybe a Barrett Firearms - Model 98 BRAVO, .338 Lapua

or a Model 82A1 .50 Cal. would be just the ticket you're looking for !.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc224/375:
So the problem with belts is What ?.

Magazine capacity , how many shots do you need ?. Maybe a Barrett Firearms - Model 98 BRAVO, .338 Lapua

or a Model 82A1 .50 Cal. would be just the ticket you're looking for !.

Google my friend.

Here's a hint: case life, accuracy, mag capacity.

Let me turn the question back on you. What is the good of having a belt on the 7mm remmag?

quote:

Originally posted by Tech:
...Here's a hint: case life, accuracy, mag capacity.

Hey Tech, Google and the people it refered you to let you down.

Belted Cases held long distance Records for many years and in some places still do. Accuracy is not determined by whether or not a Belt is present. I can still shoot 0.6MOA with my Belted Cases and when my eyes were younger I did a good bit better.

1. Accuracy is fine with Belted Cases, anyone telling you otherwise is either pulling a clinton on you or is a fool.
---

I've had 33 reloads on a set of 3 Belted Cases using a Safe MAX Load when Testing for Case Life. A single Neck Split caused me to stop because I'd not bothered to Anneal during the shooting.

2. Case Life is fine with Belted Cases, anyone telling you otherwise is either pulling a clinton on you or is a fool.
---

Mine hold 1 up and 3 down. If the second shot does not Kill the Game, I STOP, because something is bad wrong. Never fired a third shot at Game in over 5 decades of Hunting.

3. Magazine Capacity is fine with Belted Cases, anyone telling you otherwise is either pulling a clinton on you or is a fool.
---

quote:

What is the good of having a belt on the 7mm remmag?

If a person is shooting rifles designed like a M70 or a Mouser, the excellent Belt Design helps prevent Case Head blow-outs. This is because the Internal thickness "next to" and "slightly above" the Belt is more than on a typical non-Belted Case.

The folks at Winchester realized the flaw with their rifles and Designed the WSM Cartridges with more thickness in the same area when compared with a 243Win, 308Win, 270Win, 30-06 and most all other non-Belted Cases.
---

One additional major Benefit for Reloaders is the Belt makes taking CHE readings with a standard 0.0001" capable Micrometer very easy compared to a non-Belted Case.
-----

That is reality. You might want to actually try one so you can speak with knowledge gained from first-hand experience rather than Googled up foolishness.

Best of luck to you.

Hotcore,

Really quick, the Utah Jazz are getting set to beat the Lakers. I had a belted mag, and the cases didn't last long before I was getting severe stretching around the head/belt. Of course that was max book loads, but if your going to shoot a mag, load them like a mag not a standard. The long range competition shooters have chosen the short fat cartridges, belted mags are not relevent any longer. Let's take a look at the 7mm mag for example. The 7mm saum, 7mm wsm, 270 wsm all meet or exceed the velocities of the rem mag, heck even the old .270 win nearly equals the rem mag and 160gr bullets with 150s. Of course the belted mags once held all the long distance records - they were the only magnum game in town.

I just got back from Cabelas where I was checking out the new Model 70 EW (nice), I asked the sales person how many of the belted mags they were selling recently. He told me that he had sold 1 300 winnie recently, but that was it. Fact is he is selling by a large margin the standard cartridges, and WSMs about equally.

Check this out: 7mm wsm


Take care,

quote:

Originally posted by Tech:
...I had a belted mag, and the cases didn't last long before I was getting severe stretching around the head/belt. ...

Hey Tech, That will happen if a person is either Overloading or FLRing(Full Length Resizing) any cartridge, Belted or non-Belted.

Overloads are just not needed at normal Magnum velocities and are a sure sign of a Beginner trying to sort things out. Most of us have done that at one time or another, but eventually realize it is not worth the negative issues associated with Over Loads.

FLRing creates a bit of excess Headspace and the next shot causes the Case to stretch slightly at the Pressure Ring. But if Hunting in Dangerous Game country, FLRing is what I'd select and just accept short Case Life as part of that type of Hunting.

If a person wants long Case Life, then they need to P-FLR or Neck Size. Since P-FLR always re-proves itself to be the most accurate for me in "Blind Comparison Tests", that is what I prefer. But I can see why people would like Neck Sizing.

I've got nothing against the newer non-Belted Cases. Glad to see them creating some sales. And I hope they can remain around for some time. If history repeates itself, there will be a good many that just don't survive.

Seems like a small Gun Shop would have trouble maintaining all the inventory required to feed everything available today. Not sure what "I'd" stock if I was in their position.
-----

All of the above is true for Belted or non-Belted, new Short Designs or old Longer Designs. Heap lots of praise on the new designs if you like them. But, anything negative about older Case designs is usually Full-of-Beans.

Best of luck to you.

quote:

Hey Tech, That will happen if a person is either Overloading or FLRing(Full Length Resizing) any cartridge, Belted or non-Belted

Sorry but no, I did and still do only partial resizing. I only set the shoulder back .002 with the help of RCBS precision mics on all of my rifles. Have always enjoyed 6 to 10 firings on them all but the .338 winny. There is the possibillity that is was a problem with the dies.

Do some research on belted magnums, you will find that most "experts" are luke warm at best. I know 6 guys that had the 7mm mag, 2 still do. It performed well for them for years, until we started chronographing loads. When they discovered that they weren't even coming close to the listed velocities most of them went to other cartridges.

quote:

If a person wants long Case Life, then they need to P-FLR or Neck Size. Since P-FLR always re-proves itself to be the most accurate for me in "Blind Comparison Tests", that is what I prefer. But I can see why people would like Neck Sizing.

Yes, but don't you see that by P-FLR or Neck Sizing that you are taking the belt out of the equation. Then it serves no purpose. So why have it?

Between the .338 winmag, 300 winmag, and 7mm remmag I would say the .338 is the one that doesn't really have a competitor in the short mag arena, which is going to keep its sales high with the people wanting a .338 cal.

take care,

Tech,
I really appreciate you hijacking this thread. The point of it was to have explained headspacing and the original purpose of the "belt". That was done in the first third of this thread, and I thank those individuals who actually do know what the hell they are talking about for expanding my knowledge. My 7mm mag holds three down. I've never had cause to use them. I don't think that sanding off the belt could come close to allowing another round. If you are just out to impress others with how much you know, you should first see to it that what you know is impressive.

quote:

Originally posted by Tech:

quote:

Hey Tech, That will happen if a person is either Overloading or FLRing(Full Length Resizing) any cartridge, Belted or non-Belted

Sorry but no, I did and still do only partial resizing. I only set the shoulder back .002 with the help of RCBS precision mics on all of my rifles.

Hey Tech, It is apparent you have been mislead again. Setting the Shoulder back so you have (what you think is) 0.002" Headspace is not P-FLRing. When done properly, P-FLRing has a slight "crush fit" or "snug" bolt close. There is no Headspace at all with P-FLR.

The compression of the Cartridge caused by P-FLRing, forces the CenterLine of the Cartridge to be in as close to a perfect alignment with the CenterLine of the Chamber as is possible. No other Reloading Method does that, and certainly not the actual FLRing you are doing with 0.002" Headspace.

quote:

most "experts" are luke warm at best.

Then your group of "experts" have a lot to learn.

quote:

I know 6 guys that had the 7mm mag, 2 still do. It performed well for them for years, until we started chronographing loads. When they discovered that they weren't even coming close to the listed velocities most of them went to other cartridges.

This can be said for many cartridges, not just Belted Cartridges. Experience will show you that is true.

quote:

Yes, but don't you see that by P-FLR or Neck Sizing that you are taking the belt out of the equation. Then it serves no purpose. So why have it?

I've already answered "why" the Belt is a good thing to have - in my first post to you in this thread.
-----

Lots of people believe foolish things about Cartridges. You should believe whatever you want. If you and your herd of "experts" somehow take pleasure in Bashing Belted Cases, then that is what you should do. However, it does not speak well for your alls combined firearms knowledge.

Best of luck to you.

Very interesting posts Hotcore. You’re hammering your points home with honey instead of vinegar.

Very enjoyable and informative as a watcher of the thread.

I’m starting to see a warm and fussy side of Hotcore.

Hey Mick, I know it is a shock to most folks, but I really do prefer a civil discussion.

As I look back at some of it, I can see where Tech would get the impression the "tone" is talking down to him - that is not my intent at all.

Feel free to jump in and use your Silver Tongue ability to clarify the points I'm trying to make. Unless you disagree with me!!!