I don’t have any problems with what you’re saying. I just find the way you’re saying it, refreshing. You don’t need my help (limited as that is). As usual, you have it under control.

Last post on this thread, I promise. Daniel 77 doesn't like what I have had to say on the subject. Apparently we are too hard headed to have our minds changed. I must say that those in favor of a belt on a cartridge with an adequate shoulder are in a very small minority, but to each his own.

HotCore,

I hope that you will indulge me for once again quoting the Speer Manual. If you have one handy you might refer to the section titled - Resizing for Maximum Accuracy and Case Life.

"If resizing returns the shoulder to its original position, the case will again stretch enough to fill the chamber on the next firing, thus reducing the life of the case. Instead, you can use the Precision Mic reading to set the sizer die to move the shoulder back only .002 inches to get a custom fit for that rifle". It goes on to say that this method is best suited for target loads, and that for hunting loads they recommend a FULL LENGTH resize reliability. I have used this method with all of my loads, target, and hunting alike and have never had a problem.

It's been real, it's been fun....



"

quote:

Originally posted by Tech:
Last post on this thread, I promise. Daniel 77 doesn't like what I have had to say on the subject. Apparently we are too hard headed to have our minds changed. I must say that those in favor of a belt on a cartridge with an adequate shoulder are in a very small minority, but to each his own.

HotCore,

I hope that you will indulge me for once again quoting the Speer Manual. If you have one handy you might refer to the section titled - Resizing for Maximum Accuracy and Case Life.

"If resizing returns the shoulder to its original position, the case will again stretch enough to fill the chamber on the next firing, thus reducing the life of the case. Instead, you can use the Precision Mic reading to set the sizer die to move the shoulder back only .002 inches to get a custom fit for that rifle". It goes on to say that this method is best suited for target loads, and that for hunting loads they recommend a FULL LENGTH resize reliability. I have used this method with all of my loads, target, and hunting alike and have never had a problem.

It's been real, it's been fun....



"

It's not what you have to say, although I think your ignorance on the subject is apparent. Your notion that another round would fit into the magazine if only that belt wasn't present is ridiculous and shows how little you understand. You have gone on and on and on and on and on. I keep checking back to see if something relevant has been said and it's just more of your BS. We all realize that you don't like belts. We get it. Let's move on. You act like anyone who likes a cartridge that has a belt is ignorant. That is not the case in many instances. I would argue that most of the owner of any WSM are the guys who don't really know much (which is fine, they buys guns and ammo too after all) and are talked into the purchase by the hype of gun rags and salesmen who don't know their ass from a hat. The 7mm mag and 300 win mag are two of the most popular rounds of all time, and they haven't exactly been killed off by the WSMs, but again, that is another thread. None of that matters relative to the question at hand. Thanks to those posters who actually do know what they are talking about, I, and hopefully some others, have a much better understanding of the interaction between the chamber and the cartridge and headspacing. Again, Tech, we get that you don't like them. That wasn't the question.

quote:

Your notion that another round would fit into the magazine if only that belt wasn't present is ridiculous

I think some folks are missing the boat here.
Most magazines are designed for 5 .30-06 rounds.
When that space is taken up by belted magnum rounds 3 rounds fit easily with room left over but 4 will not quite fit. With some combinations of after market magazine springs and followers it is possible to get 4 rounds down in a M70 Win with a .375 H&H.
I am not surprised at all to see the turning the belts off of magnum rounds gives you the little bit of extra room to allow a 4th round to fit.

My rem 700 7mm mag doesn't come close to allowing a fourth case in the mag. Those cases aren't FLRS'd, but I don't see the possibility or the need for the fourth round down. I certainly don't want to trade sanding off the belt and risking an exploded case to get another round down. I do have pockets after all, and I've not yet needed more than two shots. Other models may have more room, but I don't really view it as a problem.

I've owned many guns chambered for belted rounds but today only two remain.....a .300 H&H and a .375 H&H.....all the rest are gone.....not because of the belt....because they just didn't offer me much more than the same caliber in the old .30-06 case......

In some guns it's conceivable that one could squeeze another round in the magazine if the round was beltless.....but this has never been of consequence to me as I've never been dangerous game hunting and if one really needs more than four shots at an elk or moose then maybe he should have spent more time at the range practicing.....

I've never had a belted case refuse to feed well or extract or eject.....they have always performed quite nicely.....

That said.....if Ruger/Hornady started making .300 magnums on the .375 Ruger case I'd be delighted.....it just has more capacity and might make a .300 magnum what it should be.....a real step up from a .30-06....same with the 7mm and .338

While I prefer a beltless case it's not at all because of some failing of the belted design.... it's simply of personal preference.

Like vapo I am not particularly in love with the belt on a case but it doesn't bother me. If they offered a caliber that matched the ballistics of the 300 win mag without the belt I would be interested. The 300RUM is too much and the 300WSM is too little when the longer bullets start taking up powder capacity in the case.

Now the 7 mag belt problem I have solved with the 280AI where I shoot 160 gr Accubonds at over 3000 fps and still get 6 in the mag.

The biggest gripe I have with the belted mags is that the brass manufacturers put so much space between the case shoulder and the chamber shoulder. The case headspaces on the belt which allows movement of only .003" to .007" in my measurements but the brass has to grow as much as .020"+ to expand to the chamber shoulder. Of course you can headspace on the shoulder after firing as has been discussed here but the damage of excessive case stretching has already been done with the initial firing.

Love my 300 win mag though, belt and all!

daniel77, I got my first 7mag back in the mid 60's it was headspace like any other mag rifle. Over the years I got to dislike the belt for no other reason and I was glad to see cases like the WSM,RUM.

It's never bother me trying to get max rounds in a magazine in my deer/elk rifles I like one in the chamber 2 in the magazine.

I solved the problem of my dislike for the belt don't get me wrong I like the calibers same as I like my 2 WSM and 300RUM. The 257WBY I had build is headspaced on the shoulders.

I remember all the Hype when the 284 hit the market how the gun writer etc hated that case rebated rim case same with the 300mag short neck. If every one believed those guys back then we would of lost 2 good cases. I've never purchased or build a rifle based on what some gun writer likes or dislikes. I know what I like and it may be different from yours and thats why we all don't shoot the same caliber.

Just to muddy up the stream; I only once needed three shots, and a few times two shots at Deer. Mostly one shot get's the job done. Personally, if a rifle only had capacity for one up, and two down, I'd never bitch.
YMMV

Don

quote:

Originally posted by DMB:
Just to muddy up the stream; I only once needed three shots, and a few times two shots at Deer. Mostly one shot get's the job done. Personally, if a rifle only had capacity for one up, and two down, I'd never bitch.
YMMV

Don

Don, I'll tell you one better than that. For many years my deer/elk rifles I use a Ruger #1 about 1/2 my elk were taken with one. I've got a nice 30-338mag and 300Wby may take the Wby on a bull hunt this year. I started in the 70's hunting with one and talk about some of the comments I got if I ran across another hunter. Some won't say anything other ask why and I just tell them only need one shot better make it good. I've got a tight neck 6ppc and 22Br build on #1 talk about fun rifles. I just enjoy shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by Tech:
Last post on this thread, I promise. ...I hope that you will indulge me for once again quoting the Speer Manual. If you have one handy you might refer to the section titled - Resizing for Maximum Accuracy and Case Life.

Hey Tech, No need to limit yourself, feel free to participate. I'm hoping you are learning as you read, otherwise, I'm wasting my time posting. Most everyone else knows what I'm trying to get across to you. Not to argue with you, but to correct what you have incorrectly learned.

Yes, I happen to have a Speer Manual(actually a good many).

quote:

You are referencing the below from Speer #14 on page 104:
"If resizing returns the shoulder to its original position, the case will again stretch enough to fill the chamber on the next firing, thus reducing the life of the case. Instead, you can use the Precision Mic reading to set the sizer die to move the shoulder back only .002 inches to get a custom fit for that rifle". It goes on to say that this method is best suited for target loads, and that for hunting loads they recommend a FULL LENGTH resize reliability. I have used this method with all of my loads, target, and hunting alike and have never had a problem.

Got some more bad news for you - the majority of that is a "cloaked"(disguised, misleading) pile of marketing bologna for an "RCBS Precision Mic" device(as they call it) or totally useless Thingy.

What the marketing group has done is told you a partial truth in order to make their "Thingy" look as if it is useful.

In fact, they trap themselves at the top of the next page(105). There they tell you, "the next firing will again stretch the case to fill the chamber, reducing the life of the case." I completely agree with that. This is a key element in understanding the following PT Barnuming.

And the next sentence says , "Instead, you can use the Precision Mic reading to set the sizer die to move the shoulder back only 0.002 inches to get a custom fit for that rifle." Well..., that is not a custom fit, it is a specific amount of Full Length Resizing. P-FLR is a true custom fit.

Had they included all the truth they would also have said - "Instead, you can use the Precision Mic reading to set the sizer die to move the shoulder back only 0.002 inches to get a custom fit for that rifle and the next firing will again stretch the case to fill the chamber, reducing the life of the case."

By intentionally creating 0.002" Headspace with the Thingy, you automatically reduce Case Life to maybe 5-10 reloads before you have Case Head Separations.

quote:

You mentioned:
I have used this method with all of my loads, target, and hunting alike and have never had a problem.

I'm glad you are having what you consider acceptable Case Life and Accuracy with that Method. And as long as you are happy with it, you should stick with it.

If on the other hand you decide you want better Accuracy and longer Case Life, you could learn about P-FLRing. But, if you are in Dangerous Game country, I'd agree that what you are currently doing is the best way to go.

Good Hunting and clean 1-shot Kills.

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?


Tech

Well for starters without that belt mine won't headspace properly !. Does a Hornet have a belt ?.

As the accuracy of my 7 mm Rem or any of my other Belted Mags has never been in question !.

I can live with #4 shots !. It's the single shot which bothers me personally

( Psychologically speaking ) especially hunting dangerous game !.

See the reason I mentioned a Hornet is it doesn't have a belt and in my experience of owning

and shooting not one not two but three of them from two different manufactures .

With Lord knows how many different powder bullet design and weight combination's , I nor two

very experienced shooters were EVER able to get a sub MOA on ANY OF THEM at a 100 yd.

Yet I've heard people swear by them they are tack drivers !. Just perhaps I misunderstood them

and they may have said Rail Spike drivers !!!. Either way you nor anyone else could ever give

me one of those worthless pieces of crap again !. I'd just as soon use a club as a Hornet cartridge !.

So I guess it's all in ones experience isn't it !.

quote:

Originally posted by Tech:
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.

No, this is incorrect. The three cited rounds have belts because they are based on the 458wm case, which is in turn based on the 300 & 375H&H case. Perhaps if another relatively common case with similar potential had been availble back in the 1950's none of the three would have been based on the 458wm/300&375H&H brass. Only the 458wm needs a belt

Don't overlook the fact that only very recent (in the scope of firearms or general manufacturing history) IT developments make it relatively easy and reletively efficient to offer many variations of the "same" manufactured goods.

JPK

And as for the beltless wonders it looks like a bunch of them are already going extinct.

The belt less wonders are not going extinct because they are bad, they are going extinct because there is already an abundance of rounds that they are equal to in performance. I have one of each and other that the fact that my model 7 saum fits ME better than the 7mm rem in a 700 I don't find any great difference between the two. That may change when the 700 comes back from the smith with a proper 26" Shilen barrel affixed to it.

I personally think it would be a shame for these short-fats to go extinct - after all, they might well have rewritten the laws of physics that apply to ballistics.

When the 300WSM came out (IMHO the pick of the litter) gunwriters lept upon it with glassy eyes. They proclaimed it did the following in comparison to the cranky old 300 Winchester Magnum - More velocity achieved with less powder and lower pressure in a shorter barrel, shot from a rifle that kicks less and was of course more accurate. This was in part attributed to the lack of the antique belt. A class of instant internet experts arose and proclaimed "Yeah verily - this be doctrine!"

I nearly bought a half-dozen before prices rocketed up when everyone found out what a terrific breakthrough these short-fats are!

Now you folks are telling me they might vanish? Better grab a safe-full, eh?

With a mite less tongue in cheek, the cartridges all seem to be well designed and functional - and - IF there would have been a 6.5 WSM I might have tried one just for S & Gs.

Of interest to note it seems the belt here is angled to what seems to be 45 degrees and to be about 20 thou in height like a rear shoulder.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
iiranger:

The honour for the belt lies not with H&H but is the work of an American inventor ! Long before messrs H & H got their hands on it.

Purely made in the USA

The case :



And the gun: