Stupid question of the week: What's the purpose of belted cases?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The .450 Marlin is belted because it is a serious magnum 45 70 round. It is not possible to load one in, for example, a Trapdoor Springfield.

So there is a commercially viable 45 70 magnum that can not be used in an action that is not up to the pressure.
 
You will also get bolt peening with excessive cartridge headspace. Peening is a shock loading that will set the receiver lugs back and damage the bolt. Which is why there are minimums to cartridge/chamber headspace. Inexperienced shooters can easily peen out their rifle bolts because they don't know enough to control the headspace of their cartridges.
Excess bolt thrust is what causes lug setback, such as from having oil or grease in the chamber.
An inexperienced shooter using excessive loads with an undersized case will certainly peen his action. Excessive bolt thrust from over pressure loads will certainly strain the action. Since actions are designed to carry a load ignoring case friction, your understanding of the subject is incomplete.


Ancient texts from a service rifle that now is not to be fired in the rain. Water is not a good lubricant but it is a lubricant nether the less. Get water on your cartridge and the friction between case and chamber will be less than if it was dry. The Lee Enfield is so weak and so sensitive now the British NRA is recommending not to shoot them in the rain.

British NRA Spring 2010, page 11
http://www.nra.org.uk/common/asp/general/downloads.asp?site=NRA&category=14
Owners of Enfield No 4 actioned rifles in any calibre are strongly advised
not to use them in wet weather or without removing all traces of oil from
action and chamber prior to shooting.



Headspace settings on military rifles are greater than civilian counterpart chambering and this has nothing to do with lug setback.
?

Are you attempting to provide an explanation of why military specifications are different from commercial?
 
Since actions are designed to carry a load ignoring case friction, your understanding of the subject is incomplete.

For some reason I would trust the United States Military before I would trust someone without any pressure testing equipment. :eek:
(who's knowledge is non existent) :rolleyes:

dontlube.gif

Or could the Springfield Armory be wrong also? :what:

oilcover.gif

Since actions are designed to carry a load ignoring case friction, your understanding of the subject is incomplete.

You were saying something about "MY" understanding being incomplete? :scrutiny:

oilinchamber.gif

So many myths and misconceptions, so little time.........................:banghead:

clean-3a.gif
 
Ancient texts from a service rifle that now is not to be fired in the rain. Water is not a good lubricant but it is a lubricant nether the less. Get water on your cartridge and the friction between case and chamber will be less than if it was dry. The Lee Enfield is so weak and so sensitive now the British NRA is recommending not to shoot them in the rain.

The "ancient" proofing standards and requirements have not changed since 1929 and have become NATO standard. An oiled proof round is fired to simulate military combat conditions in the field. Civilian proofing standards do "NOT" require an oiled cartridge to be fired nor are civilian commercial rifles built to military standards.

MOD.gif

NATO EPVAT testing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_EPVAT_testing
 
I put a light bevel on the edge of the belt to prevent further rim lock on my reloads, something I've encountered several times. Unfortunately it took missing a shot at a nice buck to address the issue.
 
For someone who was a 30 years a Government Inspector you don’t know from which Command Army fire arm designers are assigned to. ATEC’s chicken little bulletin was not written by a firearm designer and certainly not a mechanical engineer. There is no data and no reference to data. When a four star signs the thing then it will represent the Army’s Opinion . ATEC does not address firing their rifles in the rain, it will be interesting to find their opinion on that. If oil is bad so is water.

This is just another example of you Googling up something and you not having the ability to evaluate your sources.

This is from a Army Report on the Stress Analysis of Steel Cases: ARF Report No K70

OiledCasesReportARFNoK70.jpg


This is from AMCP 706-252. Cases don’t take load.
AMCP706-252CartridgeCartridgenotstrongenough.jpg

As for a manual from Springfield Armory. This is just another customer service representative protecting the company from liability. SA also does not warranty their rifle arms with reloads. And for good reason.

SA did not design the M1a and I know from a book written by one of the SA designers that cartridge friction was not a consideration in the design of the Garand/M14 bolt.

I have no idea of where your bolt is hard to open came from. I think it is just example of you Googling up junk science. This is a technic of yours, as the real experts in this thread found. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=601376&page=3 You really think you know more about revolvers than 1911Turner, OldFuff, or Triggerman770?

After reading your posts in that thread, the funny part is that you do.

Lubricated cases will give a better indication of true cartridge pressure, which is a possible reason the British used lubricated cases in their proof tests. There is parasitic friction between case and mechanism which will disguise overpressure conditions. Of course wet or oiled cases are not to be fired in a Lee Enfield as that is a very weak action.

If you are really worried about pressure, cut your loads.

I also trust Varmit Al's decades of structural analysis at a National Lab more than your ancient texts. http://www.varmintal.com/a243z.htm A place you have been, have read, and discounted.

If you want to know what real design books say about breech loads these are real design books:

Brassey’s Essential Guide to Military Small Arms, Design Principles and Operating Methods.” Open to page 115 and there are the calculations for designing a bolt. No cartridge friction assumed.

Small Arms” by DF Allsop and MA Toomey. Pages 70 and 71, a very nice analysis of the unlubricated case and the lubricated case with a statement that modern designers have stopped using lubricated cases in favor of employing a fluted chamber. A fluted chamber provides gas lubrication to break the friction between case and chamber and is used in many weapon systems, the FAMAS, G3 weapons systems are examples.

One very good book is Ballistics by Carlucci and Jacobson. They clearly state in their book that the cartridge is too weak to carry load. This is an extremely advanced book, written by real Army designers, and they do not work at ATEC.

Like I said, if oil is bad so is water. The British NRA are recommending not to fire the Lee Enfield in the rain, I have not seen similar warnings for M14’s and AR’s.

So, don’t fire your Lee Enfield in the rain.
 
;)
This is just another example of you Googling up something and you not having the ability to evaluate your sources.

Your ARF Report No K70 is stating steel cases are less likely to rupture if oiled, this means steel cases are less elastic than brass. This means you Googled up the wrong response. :eek:

AMCP 706-252. Cases don’t take load.

You are for once partially correct, they don't make barrels out of copper because it begins to flow at 60,000 psi. You need to read more about the British base crusher method of testing chamber pressure, water, oil or grease in the chamber will double bolt thrust or the pressure exerted on the bolt face.

You also need to read about P.O. Ackley tests firing a 30-30 Winchester with the locking lugs removed and the cartridge case gripping the chamber walls with NO adverse affects. You also need to read about Ackley improved cartridge cases having "LESS" bolt thrust because they have more surface area to grip the chamber walls. ;)

So, don’t fire your Lee Enfield in the rain.

How many times have you read that the British Army or American army called a time out during a war because it was raining. And why do you think they proof test NATO small arms with a oil proof test round as the British have done since the turn of the century. :banghead:

I also trust Varmit Al's decades of structural analysis at a National Lab more than your ancient texts.

Varmit AL didn't do any ballistic testing at a national lab, he bought a computer program that gives "THEORETICAL" answers, have you heard the computer term "garbage in, garbage out". Varmit Al doesn't have "ANY" actual pressure pressure measuring test equipment and "MANY" people are questioning his theoretical computer generated information.


And last but not least, what does your Googling up garbage information have to do with belted magnum case design and headspace. :confused:
 
Last edited:
AMCP 706-252. Cases don’t take load.
You are for once partially correct, they don't make barrels out of copper because it begins to flow at 60,000 psi.

So Ed, lets assume you are designing an action. Starting from a clean sheet. Just how much structural load are you assuming the cartridge case carries, and how much structural load will the action carry?

You can put it into numbers, such as case carries 50% of the load, action carries 50% of the load.

I would like to read your analysis and reasoning behind your design. To date, all I have read is material you copied from others. Let your voice be heard.
 
I would like to read your analysis and reasoning behind your design. To date, all I have read is material you copied from others. Let your voice be heard.

I do not design firearms SlamFire1 and neither do you or even Varmit Al.

What I have posted are the printed written words of the firearms manufactures, the ammunition manufactures, the reloading industry and the Military. (this means it isn't a opinion or guess work) ;)

If you want to lube your cartridge cases and tell the rest of the world you know more and are smarter than the entire fire arms industry, the United States Military and NATO testing standards then go ahead and lube your ammo. :rolleyes:

In fact if you want to smoke cigarettes and lube your ammo at the same time and ignore the warnings just go right ahead.

Cigarette_Warning.gif

lyman-1a.gif

Now I guess your going to ask me about the analysis and reasoning behind the cigarette warnings. :banghead:

"BUT" I do have a very good book to recommend that you might want to read................................

boltthrustfordummies-a.gif
 
Last edited:
Vern Humphrey
Keep it up, guys. This squabble is more entertaining than pay-per-view.

My personal favorite of SlamFire1 and the merry band of cases greasers is his statement "The ancient proofing standards" when NATO uses these very same standards for proofing military small arms with a oiled proof cartridge to this day. "AND" if the headspace increases a given amount after proofing with an oiled proof cartridge the rifle fails military proofing due to excessive lug setback. Gee now why would headspace increase when the bolt thrust is doubled with an oiled proof round? :rolleyes: And why does the firearms and ammunition industry tell you to keep your ammunition and chamber free of all grease and oil. :eek:

LIMEYSLUT.gif

boltthrust.gif

These facts and instructions above are so simple even a cave man should be able to follow them.
(excluding a few hard headed Neanderthal types) :eek:

geicocavemen.gif
 
You have got to control your headspace. It is fundamental.
Of course...which is why H&H went with the belt for their .375, rather than depend on shoulder head-spacing. I thought I'd just said that. :)

But while it's an elegant, time-proven solution, it's not the only way to go. The only bolt-action (rimless) cartridge that is as storied (perhaps) as the .375 H&H is the .416 Rigby. The Rigby, of course, uses an abrupt (45 degree) shoulder that seems to assure correct headspacing every bit as dependably as a belt; and it still has a good taper (better than the various Ackley Improveds) to aid feeding and extraction. Certainly, I've never heard anything bad said about the .416 Rigby!

For you Francis Macomber fans, the .505 Gibbs also uses a steep shoulder.

Oh, sticky bolts: that prize went to the .416 Remington Magnum in Africa; the very hot temps apparently led to high-pressure loads and bolts that had to be hammered open with boots. Past tense. I understand that in its current loadings, the .416 Rem Mag is well thought of.
 
Last edited:
Coltdriver said:
The .450 Marlin is belted because it is a serious magnum 45 70 round. It is not possible to load one in, for example, a Trapdoor Springfield.

So there is a commercially viable 45 70 magnum that can not be used in an action that is not up to the pressure.

Ok, so why is the belt on the 450 Marlin twice as wide as the belt on the H&H based cases?
 
Because the .450 Marlin is based on the .375 H&H case, but much shorter. So, without the wider belt, a .450 Marlin could have been loaded into the chamber of any .375 H&H-family cartridge having a longer case but smaller bullet diameter. And boom.

Remember how many cartridges use the .375 H&H as their "parent." That would have been an awful lot of potential booms out there, so they (or their lawyers) prudently widened the belt. Similar to why the .454 Casull is longer than the .45 Colt, although that danger has to do with pressure, not bullet caliber.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top