Bottle-Neck vs Straight-Wall Cartridges

[Tequila jake]

Do bottle-neck cartridges, in general, feed more reliably than straight-wall cartridges in repeating firearms? I've read in several places that they do. Examples given were the .357 Sig in semi-auto handguns and the 38-40, 44-40, and 30-30 in lever guns.

Tequila Jake

 

[kd7nqb]

I have a buddy of mine who swears that my .40 will jam FAR more than his .357sig because of the bottleneck. I think it depends more on the make/ model of gun but it makes sense that the extra angle might help.

 

[loop]

Yes.

Provided all the parameters are met in cartridge and feeding system and chamber.

They require less tuning and fewer adjustments.

They also require more attention and work for reloading, but that is another issue altogether.

 

[lvcat2004]

I have read from a few sources that indeed is the case and it makes intuitive sense.

Having said that, I believe that having a reliable firearm/magazine/ammo combination is FAR more important in terms of feeding reliability compared to simply staright wall/bottleneck in itself.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

It depends on the design of the gun. A good example is Israeli "melted ball" that was semi-popular a decade or two back. In .45 ACP, the bullet configuration gave it the silhouette of a bottleneck cartridge -- and it was notorious for feeding problems.

On the other hand, any stock M1911 of reasonable quality will reliably feed straight ball ammo.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

There is truth to it, but it is far from the only factor.

 

[jrfoxx]

Isnt another purpose of the bottle neck to increase pressure, while using less powder than would otherwise be required if it were sraight walled, thus increasing velocity with less powder needed? I know thats not what the OP asked, but it is on the topic of the purpose of the bottleneck, so......Hope its not a thred-jack.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Isnt another purpose of the bottle neck to increase pressure, while using less powder than would otherwise be required if it were sraight walled, thus increasing velocity with less powder needed? I know thats not what the OP asked, but it is on the topic of the purpose of the bottleneck,

The bottleneck has no effect on pressure, because all the powder is burned about the time the bullet leaves the case. Bottlenecks were originally developed almost accidentally -- to reduce caliber without a major change in tooling, new dies and so on -- the British .577-.450 is a good example.

They really became popular with smokeless powder -- black powder burns best in long, straight cases, but smokeless likes a shorter cylinder of powder.

With the advent of military repeating rifles like the Mauser, which doesn't like rimmed cartridges, the bottleneck - or rather the resulting shoulder -- serves to headspace the case.

 

[HungSquirrel]

I've seen the bottlenecked 7.62x39mm cited as a contributing factor to the AK's feeding reliability.

 

[rbernie]

Actually, the 7.62x39's reputation for feeding well is attributed to its generous case taper from rim to shoulder.