belted cartridges

[Orange Dust]

Me too. I have both belted and unbolted magnums and enjoy them equally. Hard for folks to get that problems with either are user error and not design. Signs of the times. Personal responsibility???

 

[jpope02]

Please explain to me what people are talking about when they talk about potential problems with belted cartridges.

I have 7RM and have a 6.5 RM that's shot out....I'd like to be better informed before I build another 6.5 RM,

Yes 6.5 Rem Mag. The barrel is shot.....deep excessive fire cracking in the throat and a deep wide parallel crack in the riffling at the muzzle.
I bought the rifle used and believe the previous owner got it HOT. The rifle was also dropped muzzle down onto something hard. There is a dent in the barrel at the muzzle.
The rifling with the crack in it runs right up the the dent.
Pics attached....not the best resolution....but kind of tells the story

I built a 6.5 rem mag on a Tikka T3 action using a stainless Gary Schneider 1:8 twist 26"barrel and had over 2500 rounds before it began showing accuracy problems. Sounds as is the past owner abused a cheep barrel and dropped on you. If you like the rifle re-barrel it with hand lapped match barrel and follow the makers break in instructions to the letter.

 

[436]

If I'm not mistaken, and I could very well be wrong... The belt's on the US magnum cartridges is 99.99% marketing wank, one exception would have been the 458 Win Mag, who was the parent cartridges (commercial) for the .264 Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag, .338 Win Mag all the rest of the belted Magnums came off the .375 H&H seems pretty clear cut to me.

 

[Axl]

If I'm not mistaken, and I could very well be wrong... The belt's on the US magnum cartridges is 99.99% marketing wank, one exception would have been the 458 Win Mag, who was the parent cartridges (commercial) for the .264 Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag, .338 Win Mag all the rest of the belted Magnums came off the .375 H&H seems pretty clear cut to me.

The parent of the 458 Win is the 375 H&H

 

[436]

The parent of the 458 Win is the 375 H&H

Axl,
I agree'..., I was only trying to explain the usage of the belted case and the direction it took. The .458 Win was the parent for the "ones" I mentioned, and the longer magnums came from the standard length (longer) case of actually the .300 H&H (easier to fire-form) cartridges like the .300 Wby Mag, 8mm Rem Mag, but all are on the .375 H&H full-length, and all used the .375 H&H's "belt" design. Perhaps I could have said it better... I'm bad.

 

[wildcat455]

And in your explanation, you actually gave a reason and use for a belt... (easier to fire form)

And yeah, you're wrong... LOL!

The 375 and the 300 H&H needed the belt as well for the rest of the cartridge case design.

Every cartridge case that came from those cases, would defacto have it, being they were made from them, AND one of its purposes and uses is to headspace off of for the first fire forming of that new cartridge case in the chamber.

With that, there is also an inferred purpose and use of ease in manufacturing, no need to maintain tight tolerance on case neck headspace, because that will be resolved after the first firing by headspacing off the belt, (just like the originals) and that is a pretty easy headspace tolerance to hold in manufacturing.

Additionally, (Personal opinion coming here) I think a new belted case is more accurate when shot the first time, than a new shoulder headspaced case, which has a looser manufacturing tolerance.

(Another personal opinion here) If you shoulder headspace tight like .001", you are actually headspaced at both the belt and the shoulder, and I'm not saying that's why I (sometimes)get really tight groups, .16".17" from my 300 and 264 Sendero's, but it sure isn't hurting them any.

The last purpose or use for it I can think of, which was found by "wildcatters" was headspace off it to form new cartridges, or obtain another belted cartridge from one more readily available.

I think Sable Tireur should love that belt, even though he cuts it off for his finished product, because if not for that belt, his work to make the cases he wants to would be a whole lot harder, and a lot more inconvenient. Am I right, Sable?

There were uninformed people not believing a cartridge was a "Magnum" cartridge because it didn't have a belt. And THAT became "marketing wank" when advertisers decided to use it to their advantage. Stupid stuff like attributing strength to the belt, etc.
So uninformed people forming an uniformed incorrect conclusion. Guess what? Some of them were writers!

Back in those days, most of the magnum cartridges being developed were formed from a belted case... in a good percentage of those situations, using the belt to form the new cartridge case, or wildcat, which later got picked up by a manufacturer. There were actually magnum cartridges that did not use a belt back then, but there were so many more that did, due to their origin, the belt became synonymous with magnum.

Is that the fault of the belted case? Should a belted case own that? I don't think so.

People always seem to seek to blame the inanimate object for their own stupidity, gullibility, well anything really. Only have to look to the political left to find a very good example of this of which I'm sure all here are aware...

 

[Orange Dust]

Axl,
I agree'..., I was only trying to explain the usage of the belted case and the direction it took. The .458 Win was the parent for the "ones" I mentioned, and the longer magnums came from the standard length (longer) case of actually the .300 H&H (easier to fire-form) cartridges like the .300 Wby Mag, 8mm Rem Mag, but all are on the .375 H&H full-length, and all used the .375 H&H's "belt" design. Perhaps I could have said it better... I'm bad.

All of this can be very confusing to younger folks out there. Some belted cases were not called magnum and some non belted magnums are not called magnum. The 300hh was first called Holland's super 30, the .224 weatherby varmintmaster has a belt. The .240 mag is a 6mm-06 with an unnecessary belt for marketing. The .220 swift, 26 and 28 nosler are true magnums.it goes on and on. Dont get caught up in the marketing bs, enjoy each of them for what they are and capable of. Learn how to properly load for what you have and it will suit you well. Every year they come up with new cartridges to sell firearms. They say it is the cartridge, but in my lifetime, it has been powders and bullets. Many of the new cartridges are rooted in Wildcats of yesterday with modern powders and bullets.

 

[436]

And in your explanation, you actually gave a reason and use for a belt... (easier to fire form)

And yeah, you're wrong... LOL!

The 375 and the 300 H&H needed the belt as well for the rest of the cartridge case design.

Every cartridge case that came from those cases, would defacto have it, being they were made from them, AND one of its purposes and uses is to headspace off of for the first fire forming of that new cartridge case in the chamber.

With that, there is also an inferred purpose and use of ease in manufacturing, no need to maintain tight tolerance on case neck headspace, because that will be resolved after the first firing by headspacing off the belt, (just like the originals) and that is a pretty easy headspace tolerance to hold in manufacturing.

Additionally, (Personal opinion coming here) I think a new belted case is more accurate when shot the first time, than a new shoulder headspaced case, which has a looser manufacturing tolerance.

(Another personal opinion here) If you shoulder headspace tight like .001", you are actually headspaced at both the belt and the shoulder, and I'm not saying that's why I (sometimes)get really tight groups, .16".17" from my 300 and 264 Sendero's, but it sure isn't hurting them any.

The last purpose or use for it I can think of, which was found by "wildcatters" was headspace off it to form new cartridges, or obtain another belted cartridge from one more readily available.

I think Sable Tireur should love that belt, even though he cuts it off for his finished product, because if not for that belt, his work to make the cases he wants to would be a whole lot harder, and a lot more inconvenient. Am I right, Sable?

There were uninformed people not believing a cartridge was a "Magnum" cartridge because it didn't have a belt. And THAT became "marketing wank" when advertisers decided to use it to their advantage. Stupid stuff like attributing strength to the belt, etc.
So uninformed people forming an uniformed incorrect conclusion. Guess what? Some of them were writers!

Back in those days, most of the magnum cartridges being developed were formed from a belted case... in a good percentage of those situations, using the belt to form the new cartridge case, or wildcat, which later got picked up by a manufacturer. There were actually magnum cartridges that did not use a belt back then, but there were so many more that did, due to their origin, the belt became synonymous with magnum.

Is that the fault of the belted case? Should a belted case own that? I don't think so.

People always seem to seek to blame the inanimate object for their own stupidity, gullibility, well anything really. Only have to look to the political left to find a very good example of this of which I'm sure all here are aware...

Wildcat455,

Back up for a minute, I said: the .300 H&H was easier to fire-form meaning it was the whole case, not the belt, if you think I'm wrong, ask Weatherby how Roy first formed his .300 Wby Mag, try fire-forming a .375 H&H into a .300 Wby Mag, yes'.., I'm just being facetious. Oh, by the way; again if I'm not "wrong" in your rebuttal you mentioned head-space on belted cartridges with a shoulder, and again it's marketing wank as I said, I believe all the belted magnums come from the factory head-spaced off the shoulder, except for a straight wall cartridge case's. I don't feel like heading down a rabbit hole over hair spitting on the subject matter. Cheers!

 

[Axl]

Axl,

Back up for a minute, I said: the .300 H&H was easier to fire-form meaning it was the whole case, not the belt, if you think I'm wrong, ask Weatherby how Roy first formed his .300 Wby Mag, try fire-forming a .375 H&H into a .300 Wby Mag, yes'.., I'm just being facetious. Oh, by the way; again if I'm not "wrong" in your rebuttal you mentioned head-space on belted cartridges with a shoulder, and again it's marketing wank as I said, I believe all the belted magnums come from the factory head-spaced off the shoulder, except for a straight wall cartridge case's. I don't feel like heading down a rabbit hole over hair spitting on the subject matter. Cheers!

i think you have the wrong guy... that's not my post

 

[436]

i think you have the wrong guy... that's not my post

Axt,
You are correct, sorry... a busy day I'm jumping on and off the "confuser" I'll copy it and resend.

 

[436]

And in your explanation, you actually gave a reason and use for a belt... (easier to fire form)

And yeah, you're wrong... LOL!

The 375 and the 300 H&H needed the belt as well for the rest of the cartridge case design.

Every cartridge case that came from those cases, would defacto have it, being they were made from them, AND one of its purposes and uses is to headspace off of for the first fire forming of that new cartridge case in the chamber.

With that, there is also an inferred purpose and use of ease in manufacturing, no need to maintain tight tolerance on case neck headspace, because that will be resolved after the first firing by headspacing off the belt, (just like the originals) and that is a pretty easy headspace tolerance to hold in manufacturing.

Additionally, (Personal opinion coming here) I think a new belted case is more accurate when shot the first time, than a new shoulder headspaced case, which has a looser manufacturing tolerance.

(Another personal opinion here) If you shoulder headspace tight like .001", you are actually headspaced at both the belt and the shoulder, and I'm not saying that's why I (sometimes)get really tight groups, .16".17" from my 300 and 264 Sendero's, but it sure isn't hurting them any.

The last purpose or use for it I can think of, which was found by "wildcatters" was headspace off it to form new cartridges, or obtain another belted cartridge from one more readily available.

I think Sable Tireur should love that belt, even though he cuts it off for his finished product, because if not for that belt, his work to make the cases he wants to would be a whole lot harder, and a lot more inconvenient. Am I right, Sable?

There were uninformed people not believing a cartridge was a "Magnum" cartridge because it didn't have a belt. And THAT became "marketing wank" when advertisers decided to use it to their advantage. Stupid stuff like attributing strength to the belt, etc.
So uninformed people forming an uniformed incorrect conclusion. Guess what? Some of them were writers!

Back in those days, most of the magnum cartridges being developed were formed from a belted case... in a good percentage of those situations, using the belt to form the new cartridge case, or wildcat, which later got picked up by a manufacturer. There were actually magnum cartridges that did not use a belt back then, but there were so many more that did, due to their origin, the belt became synonymous with magnum.

Is that the fault of the belted case? Should a belted case own that? I don't think so.

People always seem to seek to blame the inanimate object for their own stupidity, gullibility, well anything really. Only have to look to the political left to find a very good example of this of which I'm sure all here are aware...

Wildcat455,
Back up for a minute, I said: the .300 H&H was easier to fire-form meaning it was the whole case, not the belt, if you think I'm wrong, ask Weatherby how Roy first formed his .300 Wby Mag, try fire-forming a .375 H&H into a .300 Wby Mag, yes'.., I'm just being facetious. Oh, by the way; again if I'm not "wrong" in your rebuttal you mentioned head-space on belted cartridges with a shoulder, and again it's marketing wank as I said, I believe all the belted magnums come from the factory head-spaced off the shoulder, except for a straight wall cartridge case's. I don't feel like heading down a rabbit hole over hair spitting on the subject matter. Cheers!

 

[436]

i think you have the wrong guy... that's not my post

Axl,

Yes you are right I am sorry for the mix-up, it's becoming a busy day, I'm on & off the "Confuser" with little time... in fact, I sent this reply the next thing I know it doesn't look like it went through... it one of those days.

 

[sable tireur]

I think Sable Tireur should love that belt, even though he cuts it off for his finished product, because if not for that belt, his work to make the cases he wants to would be a whole lot harder, and a lot more inconvenient. Am I right, Sable?

Either I have lost my ability to communicate properly with the written word or something has gotten lost in the translation of what I wrote.

I did not state anywhere that I was against the belt or belted magnums. In fact I wrote that this style is a significant part of my work. And yes, I have used belted magnum cases to create other cartridges for 30 years or more. I even used the fireforming technique to demonstrate to my students how to make 300 Weatherby from 300 H&H.

Without having to explain the entire case making process for one obsolete case in general, I cannot find a particular cartridge case at what I consider reason prices. It's an obsolete case (did I just write that twice?) but one of the current belted magnum cases has a good set of starting dimensions which will allow me to make those cases for myself. The first step is fireforming a slightly altered case body and shoulder configuration. This configuration now contains the headspace at the shoulder. The reamer for this chamber had to be ground with the belt intact.

After fireforming I turn the belt off because the original cases were beltless. A new reamer was ground specifically for the new case and final fireforming to become the obsolete cartridge case.

In reality, this recapitulation is tantamount to beating a dead horse. Totally unnecessary. I think I'll take a break and just let you all entertain me for a change.

 

[wildcat455]

Wildcat455,
Back up for a minute, I said: the .300 H&H was easier to fire-form meaning it was the whole case, not the belt, if you think I'm wrong, ask Weatherby how Roy first formed his .300 Wby Mag, try fire-forming a .375 H&H into a .300 Wby Mag, yes'.., I'm just being facetious. Oh, by the way; again if I'm not "wrong" in your rebuttal you mentioned head-space on belted cartridges with a shoulder, and again it's marketing wank as I said, I believe all the belted magnums come from the factory head-spaced off the shoulder, except for a straight wall cartridge case's. I don't feel like heading down a rabbit hole over hair spitting on the subject matter. Cheers!

Yeah, I think you're wrong...

Any belted case is easier to fire form into something else, because of the belt. If it's headspacing at the back of the case, it allows you to simplify the whole fire forming process. Why you think Roy used them and left them on there?

Belted magnum cases have a manufacturing tolerance in the order of .003" , I believe.
I also believe non belted cases have a headspace tolerance in the realm of .008".

Belted magnum cases DO NOT come from the factory headspaced off the shoulder. It's a good .016" back on that dimension, in most cases.
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

You don't have to head down any rabbit hole, but I would hardly consider it hair splitting.
We can get back to enjoying the discussion now. That's about all I got on it anyway.