B.C. of .431 keith SWC?

[Oklahoma Rebel]

does anyone know the actual ballistic coeffiecient (sp) of the noe 432-277 keith SWC? I was looking up the ballistic calculator at handloads.com and the BC calculator there says .182, but that's just from choosing the SWC/HP option, which might be close, but I'm not confident on how close. also, has anyone had experience with these boolits (E.K's not just noe) with a cup point? seems that it would help some, while not limiting penetration too much, and also not as likely to shatter on impact. thanks!

[Artful]

Have you checked here?

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?94638-Cast-Bullet-Ballistic-Coefficent-Table

[mehavey]

G1: @Lyman 429421

0.210 > 1,300fps
0.250 <1,300>800
0.200 <800

[Artful]

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach him to fish and he can feed himself for life.

[mehavey]

in that case... get, learn, use QuickLoad [smilie=w:

or just Google < Lyman 429421 ballistic coefficient >
(Google knows everything)

[Oklahoma Rebel]

thank you, I just thought that the choice of SWC/HP was kindof a broad range of boolits, thanks for the 429421 specific info,artful, I know how to fish, especially catfish!

[Oklahoma Rebel]

I would love to have quickload, just can't afford it at the moment:cry:

[stubert]

According to the noe website .1953

[Oklahoma Rebel]

oh, I looked, but didn't see where they say that. Thanks!!!

[Minerat]

oh, I looked, but didn't see where they say that. Thanks!!!

FYI,

I'v been there too, look at the lower right hand corner for his drawings. It lists the estimated BC for each mould he makes. Here is a link for all of the 0.434's he has. Looks like the 432277 Keith is 0.2052 for the solid.

http://noebulletmolds.com/main/category/432/

[Artful]

oh, I looked, but didn't see where they say that. Thanks!!!

See, you just found a new fishing hole :bigsmyl2:

[mehavey]

They're both fireplugs (well maybe the Lyman is more the "Keithy" in profile).
I'd sorta average things out at closer to the Lyman, say BC ~ 0.2093356 :bigsmyl2:

https://s9.postimg.org/n18aok04f/Lyman-v-_NOE_44_Cast.jpg

[sw282]

How do the above Boolits compare to the Hensley & Gibbs #503 Keith??

[mehavey]

The 429421 and the 503 are fraternal twins.
http://arsenalmolds.com/image/cache/catalog/arsenal/HG-503-TC-MFG-2-600x438-500x500.jpg

The usual Demosthenesonean statement is "... the 503 is a Keith, while the 421 might still be a Keith...."
Lotta history involving Elmer w/ both companies and both bullets. And we can't ask him anymore.

[44MAG#1]

Real Keith??
Who makes one??
Demosthenes didnt know anything about a Keith bullet regardless of his oratory capability.
Let me know who make a TRUE Keith and I'll buy two molds.

[Oklahoma Rebel]

yep, that did make a difference in the ballistics, in fact about 1.5in less drop at 100 yards, artful, I could always use aa new fishing hole! by the way, I think I have asked before, but what is that B-A-utiful car on your profile? I love those older cars, my favorite is the 1950 ford 2 door sedan, with the round "boolit" in the grill!

[Artful]

artful, I could always use aa new fishing hole! by the way, I think I have asked before, but what is that B-A-utiful car on your profile? I love those older cars, my favorite is the 1950 ford 2 door sedan, with the round "boolit" in the grill!

1938 Delahaye 165 Cabriolet
http://www.car-revs-daily.com/2014/01/25/iconic-classic-car-1939-delahaye-165-v-12-cabriolet-at-mullin-auto-museum/

https://www.supercars.net/blog/1938-delahaye-165-cabriolet-gallery/

One interesting feature is that the front wind screen cranks down with the top off
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/416367.jpg
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/417008.jpg
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/416368.jpg
Note the foot step built into the trunk
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/416370.jpg
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/416371.jpg
The way it sits - it remiinds me of a floating car/speeder out of buck rogers
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/874926.jpg
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/874927.jpg
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/875074.jpg

Don't own one but if my lottery ever comes in them maybe
https://www.cnbc.com/2014/03/10/66-million-french-mistress-tops-amelia-island-car-auction.html

https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/cars-for-sale/delahaye/135/1792713.html

https://www.prewarcar.com/232918-delahaye-streamlined-135-competition-disappearing-top-convertible-figoni-falaschi-1936-for-sale

Someone loved these enough to try and bring them back
http://www.delahayeusa.com/delahaye-build-your-own.php
https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/cars-for-sale/delahaye
https://assets.hemmings.com/uimage/60683524-770-0@2X.jpg?rev=63
https://assets.hemmings.com/uimage/60683526-770-0@2X.jpg?rev=63
Location: St. Louis, Missouri, 63146
Seller: Hyman, Ltd. Advertiser since 1990
Phone: 3145246000
$275,000

Still not the panache' of the older ones.

[mehavey]

Let me know who make a TRUE Keith and I'll buy two molds.First, you gotta decide WHAT a "true" Keith is.
(FWIW: Lyman's 429421 is the "Keith".)

Rounded lube groove vs original squared is seems now to be the debate,
with rounded arguably better able to function at higher pressures.

On that last note, I add
Every advantage in the past... is judged in the light of the final issue.
https://s9.postimg.org/od3xwu7hb/Demosthenes.jpg[smilie=s:

[44MAG#1]

First, you gotta decide WHAT a "true" Keith is.
(FWIW: Lyman's 429421 is the "Keith".)

Rounded lube groove vs original squared is seems now to be the debate,
with rounded arguably better able to function at higher pressures.

On that last note, I add
Every advantage in the past is judged in the light of the final issue.
https://s9.postimg.org/od3xwu7hb/Demosthenes.jpg[smilie=s:

In the years from '75 till shortly before his Stroke I talked with Keith an average of three or so times a year on the phone.
He said in his book"Sixguns" the bullet picture on the page with all the other cast bullets was from an original Keith mold from Lyman. Unless he was delerious it looks nothing like the "Keith" bullets of today.
On page 286 in my Sixguns book.

[mehavey]

post a pic?
(ordered book. `had HIWT for close to 40 years)


postscript: I'm looking at a 1970 (effectively half century ago) Lyman 45th. The 429421 in that volume is by my eyes identical to the one in post#12 above. It is most definitely not anything like the NOE or H&G referenced therein.

Look also at http://www.lasc.us/fryxell44swc.htm Fig. 2.
That is the original "Keith" shape

[TomAM]

Real Keith??
Who makes one??
Demosthenes didnt know anything about a Keith bullet regardless of his oratory capability.
Let me know who make a TRUE Keith and I'll buy two molds.

With the Keith design, people search for specifics which don't exist.
Keith's own description of the design requirements are rather vague, simply because tiny details are insignificant.

He simply specified maximum flat frontal area, a full diameter front band to fill the ball seat, and plenty of lube.
The large meplat was to be flat, and the shoulder atop the front band was to be flat.

He is known to have approved lathe turned prototypes which met these requirements, but that does not mean that they contained any magical formula which must be adhered to in every detail.

He did NOT specify equal length bands and perfectly square lube grooves.

He also did NOT kill a deer at 600 yds with one. That was done with a Remington factory load containing a factory RNFP with gas check.

[white eagle]

And i might ad Tom here has made me plenty of Keith SWC
and they were perfect and shot very well

[44MAG#1]

With the Keith design, people search for specifics which don't exist.
Keith's own description of the design requirements are rather vague, simply because tiny details are insignificant.

He simply specified maximum flat frontal area, a full diameter front band to fill the ball seat, and plenty of lube.
The large meplat was to be flat, and the shoulder atop the front band was to be flat.

He is known to have approved lathe turned prototypes which met these requirements, but that does not mean that they contained any magical formula which must be adhered to in every detail.

He did NOT specify equal length bands and perfectly square lube grooves.

He also did NOT kill a deer at 600 yds with one. That was done with a Remington factory load containing a factory RNFP with gas check.

While I am sure you are correct in you assertions When I say there are NO true Keith bullets I am basing that on what he told me about the bullet IN THE PHOTO of his SIXGUN book. That it was cast in an original Lyman Keith mold.
So unless yours or anyone else's bullet looks like the One In His Book it is not an original Keith.
Why not say "I produce a close copy of the Keith Bullet" instead of "this is a Keith Bullet". How simple would that be?
I am smart enough to know that subtile differences make little or no difference.
I know the 600 yard deer was with the first Remington ammo that Remington sent him.
Anyone that proclaims to be a student of Keith knows that.
The 3 flying eagles with 5 shots all around 100 yards were with his "Keith" bullet.
No what version of his Keith bullet he was using is up to debate.
Does anyone know what his 4 inch M29 was loaded with that day???
I am sure his ability was more important than subtile differences in his Keith bullet.
So what is wrong with saying "my rendition of the Keith"?

[TomAM]

Any bullet in my catalog which resembles a Keith is not true to his design, because I don't offer a flat front shoulder.
None of them are labeled as a Keith.

I was not in any way trying to promote my product with my post. Just trying to put some perspective on this issue. There simply is no blueprint, no formula which defines a "true" Keith. That's all I'm saying.

[Victor N TN]

To get the true ballistic coefficient of a bullet you have to fire it across one of the new type chronographs with the built in computer. Even if you change the bullet alloy the BC will change. That's partly why different books state this number different in each one.

[44MAG#1]

post a pic?
(ordered book. `had HIWT for close to 40 years)


postscript: I'm looking at a 1970 (effectively half century ago) Lyman 45th. The 429421 in that volume is by my eyes identical to the one in post#12 above. It is most definitely not anything like the NOE or H&G referenced therein.

Look also at http://www.lasc.us/fryxell44swc.htm Fig. 2.
That is the original "Keith" shape

I have two of those manuals.

[44MAG#1]

Any bullet in my catalog which resembles a Keith is not true to his design, because I don't offer a flat front shoulder.
None of them are labeled as a Keith.

I was not in any way trying to promote my product with my post. Just trying to put some perspective on this issue. There simply is no blueprint, no formula which defines a "true" Keith. That's all I'm saying.

You sir, are correct and I appreciate your honesty. Until the bullet looks like the one in his book SIXGUNS it is not a Keith.
Just like the ones that say H&G 503 is a Keith. Their last one looks more closer but I have a H&G 503 that has a narrow front band and two wider bands after it. They don't look the same.
So the quest goes. Who is going to solve the quest???

[TomAM]

To get the true ballistic coefficient of a bullet you have to fire it across one of the new type chronographs with the built in computer. Even if you change the bullet alloy the BC will change. That's partly why different books state this number different in each one.

This is absolutely true. I've been using LabRadar for a couple of years now. Measuring velocity of a shot at distances 100 yards apart allows accurate calculation of BC.
It's surprising how much bullet slump occurs when firing, and relative softness and velocity both have a very big effect.
True BCs turn out to be far lower than estimates based upon static bullet shape.

[mehavey]

https://s9.postimg.org/qdvek56kf/Lyman_428421_Keith_sm.jpg

[44MAG#1]

https://s9.postimg.org/qdvek56kf/Lyman_428421_Keith_sm.jpg

Look on page 286 in his SIXGUN book and you will see. That is as far as I am concerned as far as what I was told by Mr Keith.
Now we will hear from the experts of which I am not one.

[Artful]

http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell_Book_Chapter_12_KeithSWC.htm

http://www.lasc.us/fryxell45keithswc.htm

[mehavey]

I think that you've convinced me that "Keith" bullet
is (and was always) a state of ever-changing mind.

[44MAG#1]

I think that you've convinced me that "Keith" bullet
is (and was always) a state of ever-changing mind.

You are correct. Mold makers will always be saying "I have the Keith." Another one will say "no I have it over here". Another one will say "no no they are wrong I have it here".
And so the story will continue.
Demosthenes Would be proud of you.

[mehavey]

https://s9.postimg.org/oc45r2tyn/Lyman_428421_v-_Keith_6-_Guns_et-al.jpg

[44MAG#1]

The second from left.

[mehavey]

TOM: Can you make the #15 ?

[TomAM]

TOM: Can you make the #15 ?

No. Can't make square grooves or bands. My tooling requires a bevel. No horizontal surface except the meplat and base.
Elmer wanted maximum cutting edge for the frontal surfaces, and so a sharp, square shoulder on the front band.

If you can find a mold with deep, square lube grooves you will regret it because bullets won't release without a fight.
The 90 deg front band shoulder might not cause too much of an issue, but I just can't make it.

[outdoorfan]

I'm not sure why you need an exact BC of that bullet, but I'm going to guess that the posted .2 or so is pretty close. This is based upon firing other bullets over the chronograph at various distances, and extrapolating those results.

[sw282]

TOM: Can you make the #15 ?

My Hensley & Gibbs #503 California address mold is exactly like #15.. Square grease groove example

[44MAG#1]

My Hensley & Gibbs #503 California address mold is exactly like #15.. Square grease groove example

Show us a picture, please.

[mehavey]

See Post #14 (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?354606-B-C-of-431-keith-SWC&p=4291102&viewfull=1#post4291102) here.
Uuuuuhhh...

See also http://arsenalmolds.com/image/cache/catalog/432-250%20Gr%20TC%20H%20and%20G%20503/H&G%20503%20BULLET-500x500_mod-500x500.jpg
Appears to be a TC (?)

I'm seeing a lot of 503 "clones' that obviously "aren't"
But I am unfamiliar w/ "California address" term. Can OP(cit) post ?

[44MAG#1]

215287Really, when we come back down to earth there is no true KEITH bullet being made today. It doesnt make a bit of difference what was made back in the way yonder years. Only what is made today. We know a true KEITH bullet was made at one time because Lyman made one. They dont now. That is all that matters in reality.
Who knows what KEITH bullet Elmer Keith had in his M29 when he carried it last? Does anyone? I would say not. Was it a Lyman, an H&G? What alloy? What was it sized to. Did he cast it? What lube did it have?
Does it really matter? No.
He was my favorite. Still is my favorite. No matter whether I, you or probably anyone else, even if we were using a TRUE KEITH BULLET wouldn't be able to duplicate him or what he did.
That is the bottom line. Use the TODAYS Keith, load with 2400, use standard primers and be happy with it.
We are just us is all we are.

[Oklahoma Rebel]

I think most "keith type" boolits will work fine today, athough I can say I don't like the looks of the round grease groove, really, the differences arew so minute that I don't think any animal you shoot is going to hate on you for not using" the original keith"!!!:-D

[KVO]

Another 70 years from now people will be debating if a real Keith bullet is supposed to be a bevel base or flat base slick-side for powder coating. I can already imagine Elmer by the campfire with his airsoft BBDT bowl...

[pmer]

From what I gather here you can tell if it's a Keith from how it looks on what is sticking out of the case mouth and not so much what is under the crimp?

I have a Mihec 503 mould and I'm not so sure it's the same as a 429421 (as some say). Its OAL is longer 1.690 and it weighs 261 grains which is about 15 grains heavier. The Mihec 503 IMO is a great projectile.

Is the Mihec 503 the same as the H&G 503?

[44MAG#1]

From what I gather here you can tell if it's a Keith from how it looks on what is sticking out of the case mouth and not so much what is under the crimp?

I have a Mihec 503 mould and I'm not so sure it's the same as a 429421 (as some say). Its OAL is longer 1.690 and it weighs 261 grains which is about 15 grains heavier. The Mihec 503 IMO is a great projectile.

Is the Mihec 503 the same as the H&G 503?

Could you, or me, or anyone else on here tell the difference between any of the so called Keith bullet in shhoting them?
No.
It justs gets my goat that these mold makers say I make the Keith bullet. Another will say no, i have it here. Another will say no, no, I have it over here when they know they dont have the true Keith. They may have a very close copy but that is all.
Just say I make a close copy of the Keith. Even the Great Hensly and Gibbs had at least two versions of the 503. Keith himself was a big fan of the 503 H&G.
I have both versions. Which did Keith actually like of the two? Did he like both? Did he shoot both?
Who knows?
Does it really make any difference in ones shooting?
I dont think so. Why not just say "i make a close copy of the Keith". And "I shoot a close copy of the Keith".
We all say we shoot a Keith. Why, we just arent precise in our description just like the mold makers arent.

[Oklahoma Rebel]

I agree with you, that is why in most of my posts, if I remember, I always say "keith style" boolit, so as to not ruffle any feathers, lol

[pmer]

Well I was just asking because I thought I'd try a low charge of Blue Dot for my 503 using 429421 data and my model 29 slapped my hand like a nun with a ruler.

I think the mould cutters of old could've made things easier if or when they decided to make a change by adding a -X to the end. If they wanted to keep the same number, like 429421-1 or 503-2 unless they were always making slight changes. Maybe that why there is no solid info on grove location shapes and sizes to make an original Keith bullet? I would take it then that Mr Keith was more a shooter than a designer. I haven't read his book. When does a round flat become a WFN, maybe its best to not worry about it and go out and shoot. :Fire:

[44MAG#1]

"Well I was just asking because I thought I'd try a low charge of Blue Dot for my 503 using 429421 data and my model 29 slapped my hand like a nun with a ruler."

ME: Ive shot all kinds of loads in a 44 Magnum. There isnt anything you cant handle if you put your MIND to it.
Just hold and let it do its thing.

"I think the mould cutters of old could've made things easier if or when they decided to make a change by adding a -X to the end. If they wanted to keep the same number, like 429421-1 or 503-2 unless they were always making slight changes. Maybe that why there is no solid info on grove location shapes and sizes to make an original Keith bullet? I would take it then that Mr Keith was more a shooter than a designer. I haven't read his book. When does a round flat become a WFN, maybe its best to not worry about it and go out and shoot. "

ME: Study is the key. You will find out about LFN, WFN, WLN and many others. Most of us, or I should say at least a few, study. We take our time and read, investigate, think and try to get information.
Mold makers are doing a business. They make money. If they arent into money let me know who he is and Ill order maybe three or four molds. They try to keep clients by giving a sales promotion by "SELLING" their product to stay ahead. Nothing like orders stacking up to be sure one has either mad money coming in or a second income to help pay the bills.
So on and so forth.