The problem wasn't really feeding as I remember the aricle, but more with shot to shot variations in speed due to poor neck tension on the bullet. Poor neck tension translates to inconsistent ignition which means large variations in pressure and speed. Nothing dangerous, just not conductive to what I would consider as good performance.

Mike altered his ammo to a long - original type neck, from the new short neck design that has been chambered in the new rifles. He did this to increase the shot to shot uniformity of his ammo. He never complained about poor feeding that I remember.

There are also custom dies now made for handloaders to re-introduce the long neck when reloading these cases, from the short neck that is fire formed into the brass. They seemed to feed just fine. I think Winchester's advertizing bunch are blowing smoke.

I just don't like the idea of producing a lot of slop between the rifle's chamber and the case. Slop - or looseness in that area promotes case head stretching, which leads to case head separations early in life.

I can see the point about straight line feeding, however that might only be with the M92's, feeding off an angled loading ramp, (also making 92's), as the 73's and 66's feed off the lifter platform which is aligned lined well with the chamber. Even if the ctg. was tilted, the nose should still enter quite easily, into the chamber due to the ogive. I cannot see how feeding would be effected with the parent case at all in those earlier designs.

I say this while considering that the old original rifles never seemed to be criticized for being poor feeders yet they were used with the originally shaped, quite tapered cases with long neck. The round and the preceding .44 Rimfire were wonderful inventions for those people having to use them for protection. Had there been feeding problems with the tapered,longer necked cases, we'd have heard about it.

I wonder if Winchester fixed a here-to-for non-existent problem. Did the chamber dimension change 'happen' through a screw-up in reamer mfg'r so now with thousands of rifles produced, they've had to developa excuse for the change? That would not be the first time this sort of 'event' happened, leaving it up to the advertizing/propoganda department to come spin a positive on a screw-up. I can think of a number of other examples of that, both commercial and political.