[locutus]

Originally Posted by jpattersonnh

I never could understand the dislike some have for a belted magnum. What is the difference whether it is rimmed, semi rimmed, rimless, or belted??

In the general case, non belted is more accurate.

Unless you mic the belts, and turn to uniform thickness, the headspace will be affected. Of course, you can fireform and then necksize to allow headspace on the shoulder, but that is a PITA. And I for one, will not trust neck sized ammo for anything other than target shooting at the range.

[bullet]

Don't buy into belted Magnums not being accurate or non belted magnums being more accurate because of the belted or the lack of it.

Out of the box 300Win Mag Savage


Three shot group 165gr Sierra


Nine shot group 165gr Sierra


Out of the box 7mmSTW Savage




Three shot group 130gr Seirra MK 3500fps

[locutus]

It's not a matter of "buying into it." It's simple fact. You can't change internal ballistics.

[bullet]

Originally Posted by locutus

It's not a matter of "buying into it." It's simple fact. You can't change internal ballistics.

I said nothing about changing interna ballistics, I just don't think people ought to buy into Belted magnums not being accurate. Example, how many national championships have been won by 300WSM as apposed to the 300Win mag, you might be surprised and I am talking about only during the time the 300WSM has been in existence.

Also, lets see some of your targets that you have posted before on forums or the web from your none belted magnums. My above targets have been posted before and these are only a very small percentage of target evidence I have posted through the years in articles, forums and websites for my belted magnums.

I also did not say none belted are not accurate, only that belted magnums can be highly accurate.

[locutus]

And I didn't say that belted magnums were not accurate. If you re-read my post, I said that consistent belts, or neck sizing can compensate the the potential headspacing problems.

But since not all shooters handload, a valid comparison must use factory loads. In that case, any inconsistency in the length of the belt will effect headspacing, bullet travel before engaging rifling and therefore accuracy.

My hunting handloads for the .300 WinMag (165 Speer BTSP) and .338 WinMag (250 Speer) are very accurate. Sub MOA. But I mic the belts, and turn them to uniform within .001.

If I ever get another magnum (doubtful, since I now use the .30-06 for everything) it will be .300 RUM, so that belt turning will not be necessary.

[bullet]

I have shot and loaded for my brothers .300Rum and it is a powerful and interesting cartridge, one to certainly consider for long range hunting with plenty of power to spare. I have two Mark V's in 300Weatherby so I would not have a need for the 300Rum, but my brother really likes his and it does knock down the game. I understand your intent in your previous post. Thanks for the response.

[jpattersonnh]

My experience w/ belted Magnums is limited. When I bought my 7MM rem mag nothing was said about accuracy by the belted detractors. They could not stand any belt period. I can see and understand why the people that don't like the 7mm Rem mag if you look at on paper compared to .30cal mags and even standard or metric cartridges. But, it is so damb accurate and does everything I want it too.

W/ Barnes XFB 140 and 160gr is is a 500 yard rifle for Elk. Both are on the lower side of energy, but still within 1400fpe that I use and penetrate better then most other bullets I've tried. 500 yards is a long way. 400 yards or less is more managable and practical.
If you look at our history, the .45-70 almost pushed Buffalo and Grizzly to extinction w/ 2016fpe on the max side w/ a 300gr lead bullet in a lever gun. That is at 100 yards.
The 7mm Rem mag at 300 yards w/ a 140gr Barnes XFB delivers the same energy. Call me silly.

[bullet]

The 7mm Rem Mag is a fine cartridge and two of my close friends it is their go to hunting cartridge for all that they hunt.