Belted cartridges——is there really a difference with their accuracy

I think for hand loaders belted cartridges require a little more care but other than that I doubt it makes much difference to most people. The military chose the belted 300 WM for their long range cartridge so they must have thought it was accurate enough for their needs.

I will say this, the non-belted 300 WSM broke most all of the 300 WM long range accuracy records after it was introduced. I don't know if the belt was a factor or not. But most of us aren't concerned with shooting sub 3" groups at 1000 yards. And the records set by the 300 WSM have since been broken with a group of just over 1" using a smaller 6mm cartridge. I think the lack of recoil does play a role.

I've owned some 7mm and 30 caliber belted magnums in the past. I'm past the point of wanting any magnum, belted or not. Especially the smaller calibers. The 7-08, 308, 6.5 CM class of cartridges will kill anything I'll ever hunt at ranges farther than I have any business shooting. But if I had a need for a 375 or 458 then I'd buy one regardless of the belt.

If you’re reloading and set your sizing die to headspace on the shoulder instead of the belt, then there’s no difference - short of other issues, for example, the 300wm’s short neck and shoulder which places the base of the bullet below the shoulder junction. If you’re sizing to minimum spec and headspacing on the belt, life is about chances...

I’ve got a 6.5 Rem Mag and have always sized based on headspace. I wouldn’t let a belt stop me from getting a chamber I really wanted.

The function of the belt was originally to insure headspace for the then popular 'sloping' (low angle) shoulders. As demonstrated by hordes of reloaders, resizing the case to headspace on shoulders makes the 'belts' useless.

With the advance in machining and case making, the belt is even more obsolete - other than being a status symbol. I flat will not own a rifle with a belted case. Other than a .458 Winchester; I'm not sure the chamber will work as head spacing on the forward rim of the case, like a .45 ACP.

The long and the short of it is a belt should not affect accuracy at all. Should the cartridge body and neck be undersized and depend on the belt for headspace, the sloppy fit of bullet to bore probably has much more deleterious effect on accuracy.

The belted cartridge is an anachronism. If I have a choice (which I do) between 2 cartridges with similar performance potential, one with a belt and one without, I'm choosing the beltless cartridge.

Because, as we know, men of action always choose to go sans a belt, and I'm a man of action

Archie said:

I flat will not own a rifle with a belted case.

Click to expand...

Then you'll never know the joy of a 257 Weatherby.

(In fairness, the minute that a non-belted magnum 25cal comes along that can chuck 120gr bullets at 3400fps, well, I'm ready to switch.)

I don't think a belt makes any difference in the accuracy for hunting purposes. Maybe it matters for long range target shooting, but I imagine the recoil would be a bigger detriment if you're comparing accuracy to a lower power non-belted round.

rbernie said:

Then you'll never know the joy of a 257 Weatherby.

(In fairness, the minute that a magnum 25cal comes along that can chuck 120gr bullets at 3400fps, well, I'm ready to switch.)

Click to expand...

I agree!!! Barrel life is for wimps! Necking down the 6.5 leopard or 26 nosler should get you there in plenty of time! Actually......with a fast twist barrel, that could be fun for the Uber longs too......

Archie said:

The function of the belt was originally to insure headspace for the then popular 'sloping' (low angle) shoulders.

Click to expand...

I prefer it to think of a way to keep some of the advantages of the superior rimmed cartridge in the novelty German magazine.

Archie said:

The function of the belt was originally to insure headspace for the then popular 'sloping' (low angle) shoulders. As demonstrated by hordes of reloaders, resizing the case to headspace on shoulders makes the 'belts' useless.

With the advance in machining and case making, the belt is even more obsolete - other than being a status symbol. I flat will not own a rifle with a belted case. Other than a .458 Winchester; I'm not sure the chamber will work as head spacing on the forward rim of the case, like a .45 ACP.

The long and the short of it is a belt should not affect accuracy at all. Should the cartridge body and neck be undersized and depend on the belt for headspace, the sloppy fit of bullet to bore probably has much more deleterious effect on accuracy.

Click to expand...

Belts make sense for rounds used in high rate of fire auto-cannon. Due to the violence of ramming a positive forward stop is required and the belts allow for deeper extraction grooves.

But, I suppose this is a rather limited field . . . (See the Nudelman-Rikter NR30, MK-103, ADEN, DEFA and a lot of other automatic cannon)

Jim Watson said:

I prefer it to think of a way to keep some of the advantages of the superior rimmed cartridge in the novelty German magazine.

Click to expand...

I've always considered "the belt" as just a thick rim with an extractor groove in it.

rbernie said:

Then you'll never know the joy of a 257 Weatherby.

(In fairness, the minute that a magnum 25cal comes along that can chuck 120gr bullets at 3400fps, well, I'm ready to switch.)

Click to expand...

I'll book an appointment with my therapist post haste. In the meantime, I'll just have to cope. Did I mention 'bowling pin finishes' make me nauseous?

lysanderxiii said:

Belts make sense for rounds used in high rate of fire auto-cannon. Due to the violence of ramming a positive forward stop is required and the belts allow for deeper extraction grooves.

But, I suppose this is a rather limited field . . . (See the Nudelman-Rikter NR30, MK-103, ADEN, DEFA and a lot of other automatic cannon)

Click to expand...

We were discussing 'belted' cases in shoulder fired weapons. However, one would think the bolt thrust would be stopped by the mechanism itself rather than the case. Locking lugs and the push arm of the bolt - should normally limit travel of the thrust.
I notice the 30mm cannon round fired from the A-10 Warthog are NOT belted. From the photos, it may be semi-rimmed. The 40mm cannon round is not belted but has a rather simple rim. The 30mm Vulcan round is rimless and beltless.

Archie said:

Did I mention 'bowling pin finishes' make me nauseous?

Click to expand...

Ha! You only get that if you buy a Weatherby. Building a Weatherby chambering on another action, on the other hand, lets you pick and choose the bits that you like.

It stands to reason that cartridges with belted cases can be accurate. If you look at the long range records you will see many belted calibers represented. Most of them are older records but records just the same. The trick to loading a belted round is to headspace it on the shoulder. The rim is moot and serves no purpose.

Even with beltless rounds giving similar ballistics, if I had a rifle chambered for a belted round I would not sweat it.

Archie said:

We were discussing 'belted' cases in shoulder fired weapons. However, one would think the bolt thrust would be stopped by the mechanism itself rather than the case. Locking lugs and the push arm of the bolt - should normally limit travel of the thrust.
I notice the 30mm cannon round fired from the A-10 Warthog are NOT belted. From the photos, it may be semi-rimmed. The 40mm cannon round is not belted but has a rather simple rim. The 30mm Vulcan round is rimless and beltless.

Click to expand...

The GAU-8 is a multi-barrel, rotary cannon. The ramming process is much milder than a single barrel, high rate gun.

And, big cartridges are heavy with a lot of momentum, you aren't stopping the bolt, you're stopping the cartridge.

You guys got it all wrong. The belt was just easier to machine/swage onto the case than suspenders. Suspenders were also found to be much less accurate.

Ugly Sauce said:

You guys got it all wrong. The belt was just easier to machine/swage onto the case than suspenders. Suspenders were also found to be much less accurate.

Click to expand...

Uh, point there.

I currently have four rifles that shoot a belted cartridge including one .375 H&H and three .300 Win Mags and accuracy is excellent and they all feed well from the magazine. I've never had a problem with belted cartridges, factory or handloads, whether it's function in a rifle or accuracy/precision downrange.

I used to shoot a custom Remington 700 .300 Win Mag in F-Class that had a Krieger barrel. I was able to work up a load for it that was consistently sub 1/2 moa before really good bullets were available from Hornady and the like. Last year I bought a Tikka T3 TAC .300 WM from a friend that will shoot Federal Trophy Copper into sub 0.65 moa 5-shot groups without much effort at all. Once I get around to working up a load for it I have little doubt that sub 0.5 moa will be the norm.

Nature Boy said:

The belted cartridge is an anachronism. If I have a choice (which I do) between 2 cartridges with similar performance potential, one with a belt and one without, I'm choosing the beltless cartridge.

Click to expand...

Any reasonable person would agree with this, but by the same token, a mechanical watch is an anachronism but some of us prefer them to more accurate digital watches. That's probably a bad example though since a mechanical watch is going to be less precise than a digital watch whereas a belted cartridge isn't less precise than a rimless or rebated rim cartridge.

The difference between a belted case's accuracy, and a non-belted case, may be less than the inconsistency of the position of the butt on the shoulder, heartbeat, breath control, trigger squeeze, body position, and right and left hand grip pressure from shot to shot.

"Snack Sack"?

For certain, if you setup cartridge sizing so headspace is on the belt (ilo the shoulder), I can see the front of the cartridge lacking the concentricity provided by an appropriate shoulder position. This is trivial to set as a handloader.

Additionally, since sizing immediately above the belt is difficult, there may be additional sizing steps. In my experience a carefully cut, not oversized, chamber and good dies makes this a non-issue. My .375 H&H has contentedly eaten partial FL sized brass for ~10 cycles without issue.

MCMXI said:

Any reasonable person would agree with this, but by the same token, a mechanical watch is an anachronism but some of us prefer them to more accurate digital watches.

Click to expand...

I also happen to be an aficionado of a fine Swiss movement. I guess I’m in conflict