"Real" Keith Bullets

[Cosmic_Charlie]

It drops them just under .358 and i size to .357. I should check to see if the front band is full width. I have yet to determine why they don't shoot well. My 587 shoots several other styles well, all sized to .357" I have tried harder alloy and light to medium loadings.

[Bob Fleming]

Any leading in the barrel? Where is the leading?
Light loads usually require softer alloy.
Keith was using what we consider today a fairly soft alloy. 20-1 lead-tin with no antimony or heat treating.
Soft lead and home made lube is why he insisted on giant lube groves.
I see that you probably already know all that, just staking out my positions and wondering where the lead is in your S&W.

[Cosmic_Charlie]

No leading, just poor accuracy.

[Bob Fleming]

Sorry to hear that, I guess I won't be any help. I have had great results with all of the real Keith design moulds and many of the sort of like but fake Keith moulds. That is why I asked about brand and would have asked for more details, some just don't have the magic. I am a total accuracy freak, NRA Bullseye High Master that enjoys banging on the 100 and 200 yard rifle gongs with Keith cast bullets with my 1911s and revolvers. Sometimes a good gun can be picky about what it likes and there is little we can do about it.

If I had a pistol that would not shoot proper Keith bullets I would sell it and buy another! I have not had to do that yet but I am not going to bother loading special ammo for a pistol unless it is one of my first line competition guns.

[HWooldridge]

It drops them just under .358 and i size to .357. I should check to see if the front band is full width. I have yet to determine why they don't shoot well. My 587 shoots several other styles well, all sized to .357" I have tried harder alloy and light to medium loadings.

I don't know how many people practice this but I always weigh 100% of my cast pills (no matter the caliber) to a standard of 1% from mean. A particular batch might have a different nominal weight from another lot but should be consistent within the group within 1%. It's one more variable that can be eliminated in the final load.

You might try pan lubing and not sizing at your drop size of .358 to see if that helps. An alloy in the 10-12 BHN range might also improve groups.

[Cosmic_Charlie]

Only thing irregular about the mold is that the front band ahead of the crimp groove drops at .356". Does not make much sense to build a mold that way. I was using 20/1 alloy which is good stuff. Did I read that Lyman made a mold like that?

[Bob Fleming]

That is not the way Mr Keith designed it. You need a different mould. Lyman did make the front band smaller, but not that much smaller that I remember and they made the lube groove much smaller. Keith was very upset about that. The lube groove is no big deal as we have very much better lube these days but the front band diameter is a problem.

[Cosmic_Charlie]

I will have to ask the mold maker about the small diameter of that front band. It make no sense to cut a mold like that. Could have been an error.

[Cosmic_Charlie]

I got to the bottom of it; the mold was made to Lyman specs......
So i got what i ordered. Not the mold makers fault.

[TurnipEaterDown]

I was going to comment on thread yesterday that I had read years ago that some mold makers changed Keith's designs not only for weight (obvious based on offerings) but also on lube groove volume, band width (prominently front) and front band diameter. I remember that the tinkering with front band diameter was stated to have been in an effort to ensure cylinder fit in a wider variety of guns. Of course, 'will it chamber' is important, but if the changes to the front band defeat the performance characteristics of the bullet, then those changes don't do much good.
My memory is that the front band on Keith bullets is 0.1" long and full diameter, or right close.
I will say that some really good guns don't like a front band like this. My Linebaugh guns don't chamber that long of a full diameter front band, so for one I had Veral at LBT cut the next mold with a shorter front band, and when sizing the bullets from molds I already had for both guns I bumped the nose down just to fit. This means sizing twice, but it is what it is.
I understand the whole reason for a full diameter front band which is long is really cartridge alignment in chamber, and bullet alignment in throat. The first relies on the band engaging the throat somewhat while chambered (engaging, not necessarily interference) which is again defeated somewhat if the base of cartridge to cylinder is sloppy. The second (bullet alignment to throat) is just better if the front band diameter is close in relation to throat ID, up to line-line fit. Of course a longer front band vs. tapered nose to crimp groove also increases full diameter bullet length somewhat and tends to reduce angular misalignment as the bullet passes from cartridge to forcing cone (in terms of a revolver). This is why it generally helps to have all throats same ID in a revolver, and in close relationship to groove diameter, so that the fit of the band to throat helps alignment in every chamber.

[Bob Fleming]

There have been several threads covering this issue. This is one of the reasons this thread is titled "REAL" Keith bullets. Somehow the design was simple common sense to Mr Keith but the salesmen at Lyman did not understand at all what made this design work so well.
Here is the first one I found:
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/sho...7-design/page2

AND, the beginning of this thread covers it in great detail including the history of the problem.

[Mal Paso]

I bought 2 Lyman 429421 4 cavity molds with .427" front bands when I started casting. Couldn't see how that was supposed to work with the Lyman Sizer. NOE came along with a full size 429421 that fixed the problem. Never bought another thing Lyman.

I finally lapped one of the molds to .432" even across all bands and it shoots well but I moved on to the #503 soon after.

Lyman used to advertise here but couldn't take the heat. No orange in my shop!

[LAH]

Lyman used to advertise here but couldn't take the heat. No orange in my shop!

And the think of the business they could have done by being open to suggestions & doing a little testing on their own.

[LAH]

My memory is that the front band on Keith bullets is 0.1" long and full diameter, or right close.

Believe you are correct on this.

[JAC43]

I'd sure appreciate if someone could point me to where Keith ever wrote his bullet was spec'd with 0.100" front band width.

[LAH]

I'd sure appreciate if someone could point me to where Keith ever wrote his bullet was spec'd with 0.100" front band width.

Not sure I could do that. Maybe could find where they were all to be equal lengths perhaps.

[alamogunr]

This thread plus the Brian Pearce article in Handloader on the 429421 bullet have been quite an education. I mentioned early on somewhere, but maybe not here, that after acquiring a FA 97 in .44 Spec, I found several .44 molds in my inventory. The MP copy of the H&G 503 sure makes a bullet that looks like what Mr. Keith would have liked. Visually, it has all three bands equal length.

[Mal Paso]

I used to trim my split mouth 44 Mag cases down to Specials and use them for light target shooting, likely with the H&G Late #503 boolit. I would get 7-8 great shots, then a flier. I think those fliers were hitting the chamber mouth slightly crooked and deforming.

I think getting that forward drive band into the throat without damage is critical in a Keith. I shoot the Late H&G 503 which when chambered in my Colt, the front band is just inside the throat. My other guns are close but not inside the throat. To my knowledge the Late #503 was the only 44 Keith with the longer .010" front drive band.

CBRICK a past member here was another fan of having the boolit in the throat before you pull the trigger.

[Mal Paso]

I'd sure appreciate if someone could point me to where Keith ever wrote his bullet was spec'd with 0.100" front band width.

I don't think he ever did. The gun makers have been moving throats forward too. Measure your chamber, I'll bet it is LONGER than SAAMI Spec! And for the same reason as bullet makers "Fit is King", if it don't Fit.......

The only 44 Keith I know of with a .010 front band is the Late #503 which came out around the time of Keith's death. The earlier #503s and all the 429421s were all narrower.

[Bob Fleming]

I think that the diameter of the front band is much more important. I don't have a magic number to tell your mould maker but it either is big enough or it is not. My test is if the sizer does nothing to the front band then it is not big enough and the pistol will not like it. Keith specified all three bands should be the same size but he was talking about diameter which is where we get the confusion on how "wide" each band should be. I think that the position of the leading edge of the front band and therefore how wide the band, be it 0.1" or something else is important for some revolvers but that does not seem to matter for others.