Description of mould rather than mold number

[jameslovesjammie]

I always thought the "C" on a Lee mould number was for "Gas Check" style base

PB (Plain Base Lee) moulds have no prefix

Thanks for the catch!

[shootingbuff]

Well, after reading the posts above, I still think it's a non-issue. If you can't Google the number, or choose to ignore the post, who loses? Perhaps this is an attempt to "dumb down" boolit casting...(I use a 242.5 grain lead boolit of 96 percent lead with 3 percent tin and 1 percent antimony alloy that's a semi-wadcutter shape with one lube groove and a flat base cast in a lyman mold; for those who haven't the initiave to look it up Or for those that do, a Lyman 429421 of Wheel Weights)

spot on, right on, and exactly

[MtGun44]

Great pix!

[Bass Ackward]

Man O man. If this ain't the Internet age or what?

How dare some manufacturer give his product a recognition number. Government gave people one to distinguish between 1200 Harry Tudwells.

Who would meet a man's family and have the gall to say, I don't like what you named your kids, so we are just going to call fatty here, 212lb, round, blunt faced.

Who in football would say throw me the 14 oz, dual spitzer doohickey?

Only on the Internet.

[Dannix]

, I don't like what you named your kids, so we are just going to call fatty here, 212lb, round, blunt faced.

[Suo Gan]

Maybe its just me, but why does everyone use the moulds model number when refering to a particular mould rather than using a description of the boolit it produces??
I suppose I could pull out my book and figure it out but why not just say; " 240gr. SWC ,TL" or "200 gr. round nose" instead of; 29088-774630

Sorry for the rant, but this has been eating at me for some time.

Because its like saying that kinda big grey jet with the pointy nose and big scoopy looking thing below and one jet motor, when you could say "F-16". Or when your physics instructor asks about the acceleration of gravity and you tell him around ten feet a second squared. Do you see that calling a mold by its number is more exact than your system is...even though your system is correct?

The wife doesn't know the difference between a pair of side cutters or tin snips, but ya do don't ya, it taint that hard to learn em.

[Rocky Raab]

One of the first things I learned as a writer was to make it easy for the reader to understand what I'm trying to say. So if referring to an organization, one always spells out the whole name for the first usage and gives the acronym behind it. Example: "The National Football League (NFL) may soon go on strike."

Would it be so very much trouble for posters here to write "I like the Lyman 240 SWC (429421) design because..." ? If you want your reader to fully understand what you are saying, is it worth a tiny bit of effort to insure he does? Because if it isn't, then why bother writing anything at all?

[Bass Ackward]

Would it be so very much trouble for posters here to write "I like the Lyman 240 SWC (429421) design because..." ? If you want your reader to fully understand what you are saying, is it worth a tiny bit of effort to insure he does? Because if it isn't, then why bother writing anything at all?

Not to be smart, but lets look at how feasible it is to do what you ask. Question is, is there a benefit?

I know of 11 different cherries for the 429421 and I am sure that there are more. If you use lino, the weights can be from 227 grains to 248 grains. If you use pure lead, the weights can be from 246 to 269 grains just from the one's I have had my hands on.

So in a way, telling someone a 240 grain 429421 can be dead on or grossly inaccurate.

[Rocky Raab]

By your own description then, using just 429421 is eleven times inaccurate. Are you recommending that posters say "429421 cherry m-234B-2" every time?

All I'm suggesting is that if a poster wants to be understood, he should use a full description once. After that, a shorthand number is fine.

If only a mould number is enough, how would it be if we simply started using catalog numbers instead of descriptions? If I were to say that I prefer the 9356 to the 90588 would that be enough? Or should I have said that "I prefer the Rockchucker Supreme press to the Lee Challenger?"

[BruceB]

What I usually do is include a qualifier in my bullet description, saying for example "in my alloy, such-and-such bullet weighs X amount", or..." MY 429244s weigh this much".

I do this in hopes of avoiding unpleasant surprises for those who might use my load data.

There's certainly enough variation among moulds of "the same" design to warrant concern.

Remember that there's a very useful reference resource at Castpics (bottom of the page) which illustrates most designs from quite a few makers.

[Skipper488]

The wife doesn't know the difference between a pair of side cutters or tin snips, but ya do don't ya, it taint that hard to learn em.

Shoot, My wife doesn't know the difference between a screwdriver and a wood chisel. She done ruined my whole set.

[Bass Ackward]

If only a mould number is enough, how would it be if we simply started using catalog numbers instead of descriptions?

In the military, it was my responsibility to ask if I didn't understand your order. It wasn't your job to explain details down to the smallest detail to ensure I got it each and every time you issued one. These posts are not reference manuals, they are conversations.

I am not wasting time or insulting others that do understand by writing to the lowest possible experience level. That's why the posting privileges aren't limited to one post per subject. Why we also have PMs and email addresses.

You don't know or understand, then ask. That's your responsibility in a conversation.

How do I cover my poor writing skills? My signature line at the bottom of my posts and the reloader's creed which everyone should already know, start low and work up.

[unclebill]

In the military, it was my responsibility to ask if I didn't understand your order. It wasn't your job to explain details down to the smallest detail to ensure I got it each and every time you issued one. These posts are not reference manuals, they are conversations.

I am not wasting time or insulting others that do understand by writing to the lowest possible experience level. That's why the posting privileges aren't limited to one post per subject. Why we also have PMs and email addresses.

You don't know or understand, then ask. That's your responsibility in a conversation.

How do I cover my poor writing skills? My signature line at the bottom of my posts and the reloader's creed which everyone should already know, start low and work up.

i use google a LOT looking up all these numbers and stuff.


as in every single time i come here.

if i get skunked
i ask the OP what he is talking about.

[Rocky Raab]

Provided the poster ever comes back to the thread, and then provided that he reads the request for a better description and THEN providing he decides to answer and THEN AGAIN providing the questioner comes back and finds that description, I suppose asking what a mould number means would work. Maybe. Occasionally.

Whereas simply saying "240 SWC (Lyman 429421)" once in a thread staves off the whole improbable series. But if that doesn't make sense to you, I give up.

[unclebill]

simply saying "240 SWC (Lyman 429421)" once .

sure makes it easy to google...

[snuffy]

Lee #'s are descriptive?

That's one reason why I use Lee moulds: The mould number IS the bullet description.

Sure if you attach the box end flap to the mold somehow, otherwise the series of numbers on the side of the mold is meaningless. I don't have time OR mental capacity to memorize each 5 digit number. If lee wanted to, he could put that description on the mold half the same way as the number. I guess those stamps are real expensive!

What does 90373 say to you? If I had the ability to remember numbers like some do, then I would know it's a 457-340-F. Perhaps IF the numbers made sense, the way Lyman's do, then it wouldn't be so hard.

I got sick of trying to identify the bunch of lee molds I have in about 10 different calibers, and several different bullet styles in each caliber. Including 10 6 cav. I got my dad's vibro-tool out, engraved a practical description on the side of the mold, just under the 5 digit number, like 458 350 RF-#1, because I have two of them. One is lemented to .460

Try to tell the difference between the 429 310 grain lee SWC and the ,452 300 grainer of the same style, BY LOOKING AT THE CAVITIES! Good luck with that one.

[MtGun44]

"Ten feet a second squared" ? G is kinda close to 10 meters per second squared, I suppose.

I suppose this officially makes me a picky sucker.


Bill

[dakotashooter2]

OK define Roundnose!........... There may be a dozen or more variations of RN profiles...... which one do you want? it makes a difference

Some are even made in various weights which may overlap or be within a few grains of different RN design.

Define Semiwadcutter!...... Again there are many variations


Sometimes even the numbers may not give a clear picture as some manufactures have modified the design at one time or another... for example the original Keith SWC with wide bands and deep square grooves or the newer with the narrower bands and shallower round bottom grooves.

The numbers are a reference point we can use to research the exact design.

[Bass Ackward]

Provided the poster ever comes back to the thread, and then provided that he reads the request for a better description and THEN providing he decides to answer and THEN AGAIN providing the questioner comes back and finds that description, I suppose asking what a mould number means would work. Maybe. Occasionally.

Whereas simply saying "240 SWC (Lyman 429421)" once in a thread staves off the whole improbable series. But if that doesn't make sense to you, I give up.

Rock,

Come on, there is another major thing wrong with your description. A semi wadcutter's only requirement is to have a diameter step down from the shoulder of the first drive band with any nose shape. A 358383 is supposed to be a round nose, but in truth, it has the step down shoulder, so it is a semi wadcutter that just happens to have a round nose.

A 429421 is not just a semi wadcutter, it is a Keith design. That means it has certain requirements for nose length and shape, equal width drive bands, grease groove shape and depth. Thus why some 429421s aren't true Keiths either.

A bore ride bullet for a rifle is a semi wadcutter too, but describing it as a bore ride better describes the fit you are trying to accomplish to somebody else.

My point is that to be "helpfully" accurate for the less experienced, you need to write a dissertation for semi wadcutters for folks to understand the differences. And as you say, if you aren't going to go all the way, why post SWC at all?

If they research, they will often find WAY more info and insight into bullet design than they might have gotten with a simple SWC description. As they go along, it may mean something to them. Or it may not.

If they aren't interested enough to even ask, then .... it .... won't help them anyway.

[Rocky Raab]

I'm sure there are endless examples of bullet designs that might need further clarification if there's a need to do so. But (as I keep saying) a six-digit number tells a reader precisely nothing except nominal diameter. Most of the time, the only other thing a reader needs to know is an approximate weight and a general idea of the shape.

Providing that scant amount of info is a courtesy to the reader. Not doing so is discourteous. I can't say it any better and I decline to say it again.

Moving on.