Short Neck Question...

AllenJ · December 11, 2009, 05:22 PM

Looking for opinions on short necked cartridges. I have owned and reloaded for 30/06, 300 Savage, 300 Winchester Mag, and now a 300 WSM. The 300 Win Mag gets a bad rap for its short neck but I have never had a problem. Now I am looking at getting a 7 WSM, but again the neck length issue comes up. Can anyone tell me why the short neck is so bad other than the obvious reason that the bullet has less brass to hold it in place?

**Bud Helms** · December 11, 2009, 05:28 PM

Well, for one it is easier to avoid variations in neck tension with a longer neck (more area of contact). And some reloaders don't like the bullet to sit back into the powder. In a situation where you have a full case of powder and a heavy bullet (long) and a short magazine or chamber, that could conceivably happen. Several things, like the twist rate to stabilize a heavy bullet with these other factors can make a short neck something to avoid. That said, if these conditions don't conspire against you, there's really no reason I know of why it is just an inherently bad thing, alone.

David Wile · December 11, 2009, 05:43 PM

Hey Allen,

Bud covered it pretty well I would say.

Over 40 years ago, I got a Remington 760 in .243 Winchester, bought the dies and reloaded for several years. Then I got to looking at the 6mm Remington cartridge which is essentially the same as the .243 except it has a longer neck. I started to think about how I had to seat certain bullets so deep in the .243, and I got the bright idea that I would be better off with a 6mm Remington. I sold my 760 Remington in .243, and I went out to buy a new Remington 760 in 6mm Remington. While on the way to get the new rifle, I did some thinking about how I already had the dies for the .243, but I would have to now buy new dies for the 6mm Remington. When I walked out of the door, I had a brand new Remington 760, but it was another .243 Winchester chambering.

Now I am absolutely positive that the 6mm Remington is a better cartridge than the .243 Winchester even though they are virtually the same other than case neck length. In spite of that, however, I was too cheap to buy a new set of dies for 6mm.

That wasn't the only mistake I ever made, and it wasn't the last mistake I ever made, but it is one mistake I knew I was making as I was doing it. Oh well.

I never did get a 6mm, and I have long since sold my .243, but I still have those .243 dies that I never use anymore.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

AllenJ · December 14, 2009, 12:27 PM

Thank you both for your replies. I have been doing a lot of thinking on the subject prior to posting this and your opinions reflect what I was thinking. I have never had any problems with my 300 Win Mag and I don't crimp the bullets. That 7 WSM is looking better and better!

FrankenMauser · December 14, 2009, 02:04 PM

Quote:

I have never had any problems with my 300 Win Mag and I don't crimp the bullets. That 7 WSM is looking better and better!

See... that argument would have gone a different way, for me. I would have talked myself into forgetting about the 7mm, and keeping the .300... with maybe some new loads to play with.

wncchester · December 14, 2009, 04:52 PM

Decades ago, conventional wisdom said long necks would hold a bullet straightter in the case and, therefore, make straighter ammo. Sounds good, right? So, most bottle neck cases of the early period had long necks in deference to that idea. The few new cartridges with short necks, such as the .300 Savage, were considered "inherently" less accurate.

Eventually, at least by the early 60s, many accuracy shooters put the idea to test with short necked, blown-out cartridges and found it invalid. Almost immediately the factories produced a run of short necked new rounds, including the .300 Win Mag. Users found them to be fully as accurate, on average, as any other case of simular size. In fact, long-range competitive shooters quickly started winning matches with the .300 Win! But, the legend of a long neck being automatically "better" for accuracy lives on.

Then the idea was floated that a bullet only needed to be seated to it's own diameter to be accurate. That too has been shown to be incorrect, but it does make it harder to mess up cartridges carried loose in a hunters pockets.

How far a bullet must set back into the powder charge depends on a LOT more than the length of the neck, perhaps magazine and throat length being the greatest factors. Factory rifles have long had long throats so the magazine length seems to be the most common OAL limiting dimension.

Yankee1 · December 16, 2009, 02:02 AM

Don't worry about short necks. The U.S. military has recently adopted the 300 Win Mag for use in sniper rifles. 'Nuff said!

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot · December 16, 2009, 04:15 PM

The shot neck thing is, IMHO way over played!

I have loaded for "short neck" rounds for years, since the 60s - with never a problem.

300 savage, 243Win., 7mm rem. mag, 300win mag, and 30 Gibbs to list a few.

The shortest was the 30 Gibbs, which because of the fellow who reamed the chamber allowing the reamer to cut the chamber overly long, was very, VERY!! short.

NOT A PROBLEM!

This is not say that a problem might not crop up, but just to say there has been too much press given to what is mostly a non-issue.

Keep em coming!

Crusty Deary Ol Coot

December 11, 2009, 05:22 PM	#1
AllenJ Senior Member Join Date: December 11, 2009 Location: Northern California Posts: 1,766	Short Neck Question... Looking for opinions on short necked cartridges. I have owned and reloaded for 30/06, 300 Savage, 300 Winchester Mag, and now a 300 WSM. The 300 Win Mag gets a bad rap for its short neck but I have never had a problem. Now I am looking at getting a 7 WSM, but again the neck length issue comes up. Can anyone tell me why the short neck is so bad other than the obvious reason that the bullet has less brass to hold it in place?

December 14, 2009, 12:27 PM	#4
AllenJ Senior Member Join Date: December 11, 2009 Location: Northern California Posts: 1,766	Thank you... Thank you both for your replies. I have been doing a lot of thinking on the subject prior to posting this and your opinions reflect what I was thinking. I have never had any problems with my 300 Win Mag and I don't crimp the bullets. That 7 WSM is looking better and better!

December 11, 2009, 05:28 PM	#2
Bud Helms Senior Member Join Date: December 31, 1999 Location: Middle Georgia, USA Posts: 13,198	Well, for one it is easier to avoid variations in neck tension with a longer neck (more area of contact). And some reloaders don't like the bullet to sit back into the powder. In a situation where you have a full case of powder and a heavy bullet (long) and a short magazine or chamber, that could conceivably happen. Several things, like the twist rate to stabilize a heavy bullet with these other factors can make a short neck something to avoid. That said, if these conditions don't conspire against you, there's really no reason I know of why it is just an inherently bad thing, alone.

December 11, 2009, 05:43 PM	#3
David Wile Senior Member Join Date: June 14, 2001 Location: Mechanicsburg, PA Posts: 585	Hey Allen, Bud covered it pretty well I would say. Over 40 years ago, I got a Remington 760 in .243 Winchester, bought the dies and reloaded for several years. Then I got to looking at the 6mm Remington cartridge which is essentially the same as the .243 except it has a longer neck. I started to think about how I had to seat certain bullets so deep in the .243, and I got the bright idea that I would be better off with a 6mm Remington. I sold my 760 Remington in .243, and I went out to buy a new Remington 760 in 6mm Remington. While on the way to get the new rifle, I did some thinking about how I already had the dies for the .243, but I would have to now buy new dies for the 6mm Remington. When I walked out of the door, I had a brand new Remington 760, but it was another .243 Winchester chambering. Now I am absolutely positive that the 6mm Remington is a better cartridge than the .243 Winchester even though they are virtually the same other than case neck length. In spite of that, however, I was too cheap to buy a new set of dies for 6mm. That wasn't the only mistake I ever made, and it wasn't the last mistake I ever made, but it is one mistake I knew I was making as I was doing it. Oh well. I never did get a 6mm, and I have long since sold my .243, but I still have those .243 dies that I never use anymore. Best wishes, Dave Wile

December 14, 2009, 04:52 PM	#6
wncchester Senior Member Join Date: December 1, 2002 Posts: 2,832	Decades ago, conventional wisdom said long necks would hold a bullet straightter in the case and, therefore, make straighter ammo. Sounds good, right? So, most bottle neck cases of the early period had long necks in deference to that idea. The few new cartridges with short necks, such as the .300 Savage, were considered "inherently" less accurate. Eventually, at least by the early 60s, many accuracy shooters put the idea to test with short necked, blown-out cartridges and found it invalid. Almost immediately the factories produced a run of short necked new rounds, including the .300 Win Mag. Users found them to be fully as accurate, on average, as any other case of simular size. In fact, long-range competitive shooters quickly started winning matches with the .300 Win! But, the legend of a long neck being automatically "better" for accuracy lives on. Then the idea was floated that a bullet only needed to be seated to it's own diameter to be accurate. That too has been shown to be incorrect, but it does make it harder to mess up cartridges carried loose in a hunters pockets. How far a bullet must set back into the powder charge depends on a LOT more than the length of the neck, perhaps magazine and throat length being the greatest factors. Factory rifles have long had long throats so the magazine length seems to be the most common OAL limiting dimension.

December 16, 2009, 02:02 AM	#7
Yankee1 Junior Member Join Date: September 13, 2009 Location: Santa Clara, California Posts: 7	Don't worry about short necks. The U.S. military has recently adopted the 300 Win Mag for use in sniper rifles. 'Nuff said!

December 16, 2009, 04:15 PM	#8
Crusty Deary Ol'Coot Senior Member Join Date: November 19, 2009 Location: Deary, Ideeeeeeho Posts: 531	The shot neck thing is, IMHO way over played! I have loaded for "short neck" rounds for years, since the 60s - with never a problem. 300 savage, 243Win., 7mm rem. mag, 300win mag, and 30 Gibbs to list a few. The shortest was the 30 Gibbs, which because of the fellow who reamed the chamber allowing the reamer to cut the chamber overly long, was very, VERY!! short. NOT A PROBLEM! This is not say that a problem might not crop up, but just to say there has been too much press given to what is mostly a non-issue. Keep em coming! Crusty Deary Ol Coot