accuracy article

[Rocky Raab]

There's probably a bit of truth to both sides of the "belt" issue.

The superior system for headspace and extraction in doubles and singles is clearly the rim. But when they went to a rimless round, they had trouble with both headspace and extraction (actually the problems were with consistent manufacturing of ammo and chambers re headspace, and in extractor design with extraction). The change from England's climate to Africa's didn't help, either.

So they created a "rim" on a rimless round - and called it a belt.

Here in the good old USA, anything bigger is better, and so for decades, if it didn't have "Magnum" in its name, it didn't sell. And if it didn't have a belt, it wasn't a magnum. So they designed belts onto everything, it seemed.

In fact, with the standards of today's machining (both chambers and ammo), the belt is worthless or even less than worthless. It makes feeding a challenge, makes resizing a chore, and is hell on case life.

Writers? Heck we have opinions, too. We spout 'em to anyone who'll listen. It's just that when we spout a dumb one, it's right there in print for folks to laugh at for years. (Kinda counters that small and long-ago spent check.)