View Full Version : Belted Magnums?

April 23, 2005, 12:00 PM
OK, I feel like an idiot for not knowing this, but what is a belted magnum?

I have heard people on this forum talk about them (good and bad), but I have no idea what they are talking about.

Any of you want to give me some info on this? Thanks in advance.

April 23, 2005, 12:09 PM
I think the belt they are referring to is the metal band around the bottom base of the cartridge. My 300 win mags are belted and so are 7mm mags. When you see it you'll know it.

April 23, 2005, 09:49 PM
Yup, the reference is to the raised band or "belt" near the base of those cases. The belt is for setting headspace in the action.

April 23, 2005, 10:07 PM
Actualy only the 300 H&H and the 375 H&H magnums actualy use the belt for headspace. Several other magnum where developed using the 300 H&H case, but they (should) use the shoulder to set headspace. The H&H magnums used the belt becaues their shoulders couldn't provide the nessisary headspace.

Raymond Losli
April 23, 2005, 11:27 PM
Crosshair :
"Actualy only the 300 H&H and the 375 H&H magnums actualy use the belt for headspace. Several other magnum where developed using the 300 H&H case, but they (should) use the shoulder to set headspace. "

The Belt on the Cartridge Has, Nothing to do with the - Structural Strength - of a large belted Mag.

When machining a chamber in an aftermarket custom barrel / for example a 300 mag. that has a belted case.
does any body know if it is a more difficult job for the machine tech.to get that Ultra high precision tolerances in the Head space.
Because of the Belt. ???
The cartridge was a 300 HH necked-down to 6.5

I was told this from a couple of local guys who Lathe off the belts on some cartridges that they are Necking-Down.
They also had there chambers Bored without the belt cut. to Accommodate the now smooth wall cartridge.

Anybody know the specifics on this Theory. ??? Could this be True ??? about the Higher quality of tollerence being gained ?


April 23, 2005, 11:47 PM
The "belt" was originally used on the Holland and Holland cartridges to control headspacing in double rifles but was never needed for any of the modern belted mags derived from this case including but not limited to the .264 Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag, 7mm STW, .300 Win Mag, 8mm Rem Mag, .338 Win Mag, .358 Norma Mag, .358 STA, and .458 Win Mag.

The belt can be seen, somewhat, here; http://www.reloadersnest.com/frontpage.asp?CaliberID=82

The current trend is away from belted mags towards magnums based on the beltless .404 Jeffery case. However, this doesn't make the belted mags obsolete, at least for the handloader, as they can still adjust their dies to headspace off the shoulder instead of the belt.

April 24, 2005, 12:04 AM
The reason for the H&H belt was to provide a headspacing reference due to the tapered case --- it didn't really have a shoulder, so they needed something, hence the 'magnum ring'.
Just about every magnum made in the 20th Century was a variant of the H&H case, somehow. That's why the ring became synonomous with 'MAGNUM'.

As for the recent trend toward no-ring magnum cases, and the funny-as-hell comments by some of the Gunzine Writers about 'the death knell' for the belted magnum; Holland & Holland has recently introduced two NEW H&H Magnums, BOTH with 'magnum rings' --- and THEY are the company that started it!!!
I love the irony in that! :D

I wanted a .375 H&H for a very long time, and ultimately bought a .375 Remington Ultra Mag in a 700 BDL.
I decided to stay with the Remington brand of rifle because I liked it, and that it was '.375' that I really wanted, not the 'H&H'.
Also, I felt that the H&H might be more appropriate in a Mauser CRF-type action, whereas the Push-Feed in my Remington would be more appropriate for MY uses.
My plan was briefly interupted by a foray into the Browning A-Bolt II Medallion/Stainless Stalker with BOSS & Sights which would've given me a modern action .375 H&H Magnum with some really neat features, but I read that the gun could have some problems with some cheap pot-metal parts, so I gave up on that idea and stayed with what I knew.

I'm still waiting for the '.375 SHORT MAG' to appear from one of the mfg.'s.
Thanks for letting me ramble about 'magnums'... :D

April 24, 2005, 02:21 AM
I like the 300 H&H.. accurate, low recoil and equivalent to a 300 Win Mag...sure the ultras beat it at 400 yards, but im never gonna shoot a critter at 400 yards, I cant see that far...


April 24, 2005, 10:31 AM
Thanks for the info, guys...man, I love this site...

May 2, 2005, 04:25 PM
The belt on modern belted magnum cartridges (.300 H&H excluded) was first a marketing ploy, then it was a matter of economics.

Many people used to look at the belt and say, "Gee! It must be powerful if it needs and extra reinforcing ring of brass to make it stronger." Of course, you had to cut the corresponding amount of 4140 steel out of the chamber to make room for the belt, so in effect you were swapping steel for brass, and we all know which one is stronger.

Later, newer cartridges, like the 8mm Remington Magnum, had the belt most probably because the same production machinery churning out brass for the other magnums were already designed to make a cartridge case with the typical .532" magnum head diameter also made a belt, and everyone expected a belt on their magnums anyway, commonsense notwithstanding.

Cutting a chamber for a belted magnum would be no more difficult than cutting a chamber for a standard cartridge, since the chambering reamer determines these dimensions. (I used to make step reamers for almost a decade) Making the reamer would be a little more difficult in the old days, but not anymore with CNC tool cutter grinders being able to repeat better than sharp eyes and steady hands.

I think the big challenge with belted magnums is the variations of the belt on the brass itself, three areas of note being the diameter, location, and squareness of the belt. and if, how, and by how much they varied.

May 2, 2005, 06:01 PM
Hope your retinas are securely attached, busgunner. :)