Reloader's Nest Forum
Reloader's Nest Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Reloading General
 General forum
 Straight Case Vs. Bottle neck
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

Wee_Man
New Member

27 Posts

Posted - Aug 05 2012 :  04:40:10  Show Profile Send Wee_Man a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Myself i have found that i generally favor straight wall rimmed case cartridges over bottle necks. The reason is basically simple, because i'm a super big bore and lever action fan. So i tend to favor such cartridge's as .357 mag, 44 mag, 45 long colt, 38-55 win, 375 win, 444 mar, 45-70 gov, and 450 mar for example. Now i have absolutely nothing against bottle necks but just generally favor straight walls more and i was wondering if anyone else did or i stand alone. lol! So i'm sure some favor both for different reasons but which do you favor and why?

n/a
deleted

339 Posts

Posted - Aug 05 2012 :  10:55:01  Show Profile Send n/a a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I prefer bottle necks. Why? Speed and accuracy.
7x57guy
Go to Top of Page

Wolfgang
Advanced Member

3319 Posts

Posted - Aug 05 2012 :  21:39:25  Show Profile  Visit Wolfgang's Homepage Send Wolfgang a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 7x57guy

I prefer bottle necks. Why? Speed and accuracy.
7x57guy



Just keep reading them gun rags Joe ...


Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
Harry S. Truman
mark@fire-iron.biz


Go to Top of Page

Wolfgang
Advanced Member

3319 Posts

Posted - Aug 05 2012 :  22:02:23  Show Profile  Visit Wolfgang's Homepage Send Wolfgang a Private Message  Reply with Quote
WM,

There's no real difference between a BN, straight or tapered in function through the action provided the action is properly built for said cartridge. When it comes to loading, absolute straight-wall cases do afford a lot more versatility than tapered or BN as far as seating depth and ability to use filler wads for reduced loads. Semi-BN cartridges like the .32-40 Ballard do pose the concern where they can bind at the base of the neck if they're not sized exactly right for the chamber. With true BN cartridges like the .40-82win and .577-.450, one must pay close attention to both the sizer die setting as well but it's really no different than a straight wall where the attention must be placed on case length and rim thickness to assure the case does not bottom-out on the mouth or neck instead of the rim. The pure tapered cases like the .40-70 Sharps are the most problematic because there's extremely limited bearing surface between the case and bullet which is why true-taper cases never caught-on.

I'd tend to favor straight-walls for common lever actions simply because of the limited bolt throw length, I don't care for any action, lever or otherwise, that limits my OAL making me sacrifice either projo length or powder charge ... probably why I have a particular affection for falling-block actions.


Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
Harry S. Truman
mark@fire-iron.biz



Edited by - Wolfgang on Aug 05 2012 22:11:29
Go to Top of Page

Mike70560
Senior Member



USA
308 Posts

Posted - Aug 06 2012 :  21:47:02  Show Profile  Visit Mike70560's Homepage Send Mike70560 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang

quote:
Originally posted by 7x57guy

I prefer bottle necks. Why? Speed and accuracy.
7x57guy



Just keep reading them gun rags Joe ...




Yep, those new fangled rounds like the 30-06 and 7 by 57 will never catch on. Straight wall cases continue to dominate accuracy where it counts, long range sniper rifles, Camp Perry, bench rest matches...........

Mike
New Iberia, LA
Go to Top of Page

Wee_Man
New Member

27 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  06:31:07  Show Profile Send Wee_Man a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I wouldn't never argue one was actually better than the other in know way, shape, or form! They are extremely accruate and fast cartridge's with both shapes! Infact anyone could make strong arguement with either claiming the exact same, i was just stating the obvious!
Go to Top of Page

n/a
deleted

339 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  08:16:16  Show Profile Send n/a a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang

quote:
Originally posted by 7x57guy

I prefer bottle necks. Why? Speed and accuracy.
7x57guy



Just keep reading them gun rags Joe ...




No, I'll just keep reading forums. The guys on forums know so much more and their grammar is so much better.
7x57guy
Go to Top of Page

Wolfgang
Advanced Member

3319 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  10:41:23  Show Profile  Visit Wolfgang's Homepage Send Wolfgang a Private Message  Reply with Quote
All talk but not one taker on my offer of putting cash on the barrel head from the other thread on bullets. Speed means nothing for accuracy or performance, anyone who thinks it does, please bring plenty of cash. Ain't it funny how all them boyz long ago were shooting 1,000+ yard matches and every kind of critter on the earth with muzzleloaders and iron sights but now we needz one dem loudenboomer megamagnums with a super duper premium plastic-tipped bullet and a 24x scope just to knock a 70 pound deer over at 50 yards.

Maybe someone should have told the Russian army how they can't possibly get their butts kicked, twice, by some muslims with some old and quite poorly made flintlock muzzleloaders?

Maybe someone should have told Forsyth all this before he went off busting the topknots of Indian elephants with a round ball in his flintlock?

Good thing the we didn't have BN cased nitro-burners pushing sexy bullets back in the day or we may have killed the crap outta the American bison herds.


Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
Harry S. Truman
mark@fire-iron.biz


Go to Top of Page

Mike70560
Senior Member



USA
308 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  11:21:17  Show Profile  Visit Mike70560's Homepage Send Mike70560 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Wolfgang,

I have no issues with you living in the past. I repsect the efforts of the guys from the 1800s but the equipment and bullets we have today are far superior in terms of accuracy and terminal ballistics. Hands down, no doubt.

If you believe speed does nothing for accuracy or performance maybe you need to update your equipment. I will take a big bullet moving at a higher velocity for big nasty animals any day of the week. This is from experience. Why is it every professional hunter switched from the huge bore rifles of the 1800s to more modern cartidges like the 450 NE, 470 NE, 375 H&H, 7 by 57, etc? It is because they worked better. More velocity, better bullets, less recoil, quicker follow up shots. You reference Forsyth. That is fine, but an Indian elephant is not an African elephant. Read Ian Nyschens book. IMO the best book out about hunting elephants. He like the 450NE, not some obscure BP round. He would have been quickly killed using a muzzleloader. The same goes for Taylor, Sutherland, and even the small bore hero and maybe the best shot ever, Bell, along with many others.

In regards to accuracy a high BC bullet at higher velocities will give you better ballistics down range. Shoots flatter less issues with wind. This is fact. I have shot at Camp Perry enough to understand this. The 30-06 replaced the 45-70, the 308 replaced the 30-06, the 223 replaced the 308. The best scores ever are being shot now at Perry. Years ago they changed the targets from a 5V to a 10X to make it more difficult for the shooters as the rifles became better. Just checked the scores from the PA 1000 yard benchrest heavy rifle class. All modern cartridges or as they are called loudnboomers.

In the field where it really counts snipers are able to consistently make shoots in excess of 1500 yards. Even 50 years ago that was not possible. Again high BC bullets high velocity.

As far as some Muslims beating the Russians, do not know the details. In battle I would take an M-16 or M-14 over any muzzleloader or blackpowder rifle ever produced under any circumstance. There may be a reason there is no army using any of those old weapons, it may be that the new technology is far superior.

Most of the rounds I shoot are at least 100 years old. I like iron sights. I do like the new bullets, it is my ass on the line. We were damn near killed by a buffalo wounded three days earlier by a 45-70 a couple of years ago. The bullet pencilled through with no expansion. I believe a modern round with a good bullet would have put him down or at least hurt him enough to have quickly dispatched it.

The PHs I know cringe when somebody talks about bringing a 45-70 for DG and some will not let anybody hunt with a muzzleloader unless the PH fires a backup shot immediately.

I am not sure what thread you are referring to about the cash challenge, surely it is interesting.

Mike
New Iberia, LA

Edited by - Mike70560 on Aug 07 2012 11:53:53
Go to Top of Page

paparuger
Senior Member

USA
236 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  11:32:45  Show Profile Send paparuger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
They are all like a good looking women, I like them all!
Go to Top of Page

Mike70560
Senior Member



USA
308 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  11:38:59  Show Profile  Visit Mike70560's Homepage Send Mike70560 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I also like them all. Rifle/cartidges are like tools, the proper tool for the job.


Mike
New Iberia, LA
Go to Top of Page

Sensai
Junior Member



USA
68 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  13:15:10  Show Profile Send Sensai a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I like boffum !! Seriously, they both have advantages in differnt situations. As Mike70560 said "the proper tool for the job". I do like reloading bottlenecks more, though. That's just personal preference with no objective reason.

Gary

Gravity, it's not just a good idea, it's the law.
Go to Top of Page

Wolfgang
Advanced Member

3319 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  16:14:17  Show Profile  Visit Wolfgang's Homepage Send Wolfgang a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Mike,
It's not about "living in the past", well some of it is nostalgia but you're making arguments where there need not be any and some are not historically or scientifically accurate. The real difference between yesteryear and today is the trigger nut, not the hardware.

Pardon that I don't have the exact quote handy but at a match in 19th century New England, quite a number of shooters printed groups a Hand or smaller (4") at 80 Rods (440 yards) and they eventually settled the matter with the final round being shot at 120 Rods (660 yards). Thing is, most of the shooters were not "professional shooters" nor did the majority have any kind of special hardware - it was iron sights and black powder and I do dare say that few non-professional shooters of today's time could do anywhere near as well even with their modern hardware.

Downrange eh? Obviously you never read about the Sandyhook, Oceechobee or Vessing tests.

I'm not trying to pick nits with you Mike (or anyone else) but there's a whole lot more to accuracy and terminal performance than speed and sexy bullets. The facts are what they are be they historical from centuries ago or yesterday. Physics does not change with the latest round of gun rag ads, nor does terminal performance, a gut-shot with a loudenboomer megamagnum is no more effective than a gut-shot from a muzzleloader.

The Russian army got their butts kicked in Afghanistan and Chechnya, both recent history.

Billy Dixon, one shot, one kill at 1538 yards with a .50 Sharps.

1864 General John Sedgwick said to his troops in reference to the 800 yard distant Rebel sharpshooters, "What are you dodging for? They couldn’t hit an elephant at this distance!” Seconds later he fell dead upon taking a chunk-o-lead from a single shot fired by a Rebel.

A Rebel with a Leonard rifle was well known for his multiple one-shot kills at 1000+yds.

quote:
We were damn near killed by a buffalo wounded three days earlier by a 45-70 a couple of years ago. The bullet pencilled through with no expansion. I believe a modern round with a good bullet would have put him down or at least hurt him enough to have quickly dispatched it.


Arbitrary example not identifying the bullet, obviously the shot placement wasn't very good either. I counter with two examples, both involve a 7mm Rem Mag where the modern sexy bullets punched right through yet both deer, one with four holes in it, went over 400yds before dropping. Also seen several whitetails hit with numerous varieties of speedy BN case nitro burners and sexy premium bullets run off to suffer and/or die much later and way far from where they were hit. As I said earlier, the biggest difference between "works" and "don't work" lies with the trigger nut, not the hardware.


Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
Harry S. Truman
mark@fire-iron.biz


Go to Top of Page

Mike70560
Senior Member



USA
308 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  17:36:15  Show Profile  Visit Mike70560's Homepage Send Mike70560 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Wolfgang,

First of all I respect your views and do not entirely disagree with a lot of what you write. IIRC you are a gunsmith also. That is something I have zero talent to do. But your are the ultimate modern day Luddite.

Modern firearms at 600 yards are shooting .25 MOA groups at 600 yards with scopes. Without scopes shooting with a sling a good shooter will clean a 600 yard target with 15X. That is common and basically minute of angle. Put them on a rest and 5 shots and 4" groups are easy. Thousand yard groups are ridiculous also. Very sub MOA.

We can cite whatever we want. A buddy of mine has tested thousands of bullets recently and his testing shows velocity is your friend with modern bullets. He is proving terminals on a 50 buffalo hunt in Australia right now. We anxious to see the results.
Truthfully I not a speed freak. 2150 FPS is the sweet spot on my big bore. 2400 FPS on 7 by 57 and 375 H&H. Match rifles I go for accuracy, did not even own a chronograph until about 6 years ago.


I will never change your mind, you will never change my mind. I will leave it at that.


Mike
New Iberia, LA

Edited by - Mike70560 on Aug 07 2012 18:55:26
Go to Top of Page

noylj
Senior Member



USA
289 Posts

Posted - Aug 07 2012 :  19:33:35  Show Profile Send noylj a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Bottleneck is a lot more finicky to reload. There are advantages, but there are negatives (all the trimming and neck reaming and neck annealing).
A bottleneck's only accuracy advantage is in bolt actions. I know that bottleneck and straight-wall are equally accurate in a single shot like a T/C Contender. For single-shots and other actions that can't torque a tight case into the chamber, bottleneck cartridges must have about 0.002" headspace or more--thus, the accuracy of a tight fitting case with a body tightly aligned with the chamber is lost.
Bottleneck do have a huge advantage in terms of powder capacity compared to bullet caliber--however, this has never been a huge advantage in a handgun where magazine capacity and limited powder are limiting variables.
If one is shooting at longer than 200 yds, then a bottleneck case has the advantage. If shooting at less than 200 yds, then it becomes much less important.
Yes, the .357Sig has a velocity advantage over the 9x19, but you give up magazine capacity. Thus, for action shooting, a .40 is a better choice than a .357Sig and the puny 9x19 has the magazine advantage--with the .45Auto still, in my book, being better for my purposes.
This leads me to the FBI and their specification for handgun ammunition. I do not believe that my self-defense needs will be met by their need for over-penetration and will never involve shooting through a car or barriers, so a big slow bullet still has my preference.

Then said he unto them; But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
Luke 22:36

My gun and I know that what counts is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. We will hit...
Go to Top of Page

Wolfgang
Advanced Member

3319 Posts

Posted - Aug 08 2012 :  10:54:24  Show Profile  Visit Wolfgang's Homepage Send Wolfgang a Private Message  Reply with Quote
First you call me a Luddite then a gunsmith ... you're gonna get smacked! Affection for nostalgia but hardly a Luddite, I designed and built custom industrial machinery for more than two decades ... and I'm a "gunmaker" not a "gunsmith".

quote:
Modern firearms at 600 yards are shooting .25 MOA groups at 600 yards with scopes. Without scopes shooting with a sling a good shooter will clean a 600 yard target with 15X.


So you’re saying I can pick any modern rifle off the rack at Walmart and print a 0.25” group @ 600yds?

The match I referenced were not “professional shooters” nor did they have “match rifles”, they were common every day folks (butchers, bakers and candlestick makers) with their hunting rifles ... thus, I do dare say that if you were to hold a match today that was open only to common folks with their modern hunting rifles, very few would be able to print <4”@440yds and I highly doubt there would be a need for a tie-breaker round at 120 Rods (660yds).

1. What do you think the outcome would be if we were to swap a 21st century BR shooter with an early 19th century shooter on the same 1000 yard range with each using the other’s hardware?

2. What do you think the outcome would be if we were to swap an average 19th century hunter with an average 21st century hunter with each using the other’s hardware?

3. What do you think the outcome would be if we were to put an average 19th century hunter against an average 21st century hunter with each using their own hardware? (500yd aggregate match with 5 rounds/100yds)


Some years ago I was accused of “cheating” when I took third-place in a meat shoot ... I was shooting against scoped modern centerfire rifles with my .62 flintlock.


Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
Harry S. Truman
mark@fire-iron.biz


Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Reloader's Nest Forum © 2013 ReloadersNest Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.25 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.06