It's NOT 1-2 thou because the bullet is lose. It's because the book OAL would put the crimp in the bullet grove. If in some twisted way he managed to crimp in the grove, the case neck would be ripped into shred when he pulls the trigger.
Problems reloading .300WSM
- Thread starter Chuckbuster
- Start date
It's NOT 1-2 thou because the bullet is lose. It's because the book OAL would put the crimp in the bullet grove. If in some twisted way he managed to crimp in the grove, the case neck would be ripped into shred when he pulls the trigger.
Chuckbuster
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Yes, this is true, he is quite knowledgeable, but the problem is as VinnyQC describes it below. Recommened OAL from the Barnes manual puts the top relief groove at the case mouth.
Since seating the bullet a bit deeper to above the first groove will apparently not result in my having a rifle turned into a jigsaw puzzle which includes a couple of fingers and an eye, I will seat them to 2.795" with the test loads and see how they perform.
Barnes has no issue with crimping in the grooves. Their factory ammo is also crimped and guess what? The neck doesn't get ripped to shreds. The grooves on the solids are sharp instead of rounded and nary a sign of shredding anything either.
What do they use to crimp? Cause a factory crimp won't get you there, neither will the normal crimp of a seating die.
Just for fun I measured the difference in diameter between the grove and the land of an LRX bullet. Land diameter is 0.017'' more than grove. Land is 308, grove is 291. My Lee FCD wouldn't even come close to applying a crimp in the grove.
The crimp on the Barnes Vortex ammo looks the same as any other factory crimp. It's loaded by Remington if you care.
If you need a crimp to try to tighten up a bullet in the case, there's wasn't enough neck tension in the first place.
No, as long as he doesn't forget to register it.
Seriously, the 'short fatties' (the wsm cartridges) are presenting some unique problems to reloaders which I'm sure that they and the manufacturers will overcome.
I also think the ole standby standard rounds will outlast the ultra magnums and the wsms.
If I was a futuristic fly on the wall of a gun shop in 2040 I would expect to see boxes of 30-30, 03, 06, 08, 7mm rem mag, 300 win mag but no to few boxes of utra mag or wsm cartridges.
In our big sell off 3 years we only kept non-restricteds and firearms that fired standard rounds for roughly the same reason - to avoid the inconveniences of future obsolescence.
Do you have a picture of a vortex ammo where we can see one or part of a grove? Like one crimped on the groove? Google image doesn't, they're all crimped above the first gove, and I'm seriously curious to see how it's possible to even do that.
Of course there isn't eniugh neck tension to hold a bulet a diameter of 291 is part of the bullet is 308.
Cameron SS
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ground Zero
I heard a similar argument about a decade ago while I was considering the 300wsm. This guy had been in the wild catting business and commercial ammo sale business for about 40 years. He predicted that all the WSSMs, and MOST of the WSMs, would fall into obsolescence within a decade or two, but he did think that the 300 WSM would hold up, based on its almost 300WM performance on a short action. He went through each of the other wsms one by one and had examples of how they weren't sufficiently distinguished from other comparable calibres in their weight class, but that the 300 WSM stood out as the one that would stand the test of time.
In any event, I bought enough brass to last me a life time, and 30 cal bullets aren't going anywhere so I won't have to worry about not finding ammo.
I can text or email you one if you want. Picture quality sucks though.
In any case, throwing out a perfectly good rifle in 2017 because it might be hard or even impossible to find ammos or brass in 2040 is nonsense.
Anyone who wants to get rid of their (functionning) rifle because it might be obsoelete some day, feel free to send them to me.
