Old H&G #73 mold?

[yondering]

I just acquired what I think is an H&G mold, but the maker is not marked on the blocks or sprue plate anywhere I can see. It is a 6 cavity iron mold, stamped "73" on one block. The cavities match other pictures I've seen of H&G #73 molds, but without a maker's stamp, I'm wondering if other companies also made these (Ideal maybe?) or is this maybe a very early H&G mold?

The handles are the type with the pivot at the far end of the blocks. The sprue plate has a flute or groove between the holes, like other H&G sprue plates, but it's flat on top, without the slight ridge around the groove that I've seen in other pictures.

A final question is about cleanup. I'm tempted to clean the blocks in my ultrasonic cleaner to get the old gunk out. I know that would remove any bluing left on the blocks though, so I'd have to re-blue them (just cold blue). Not knowing anything about the value of this mold, though, I'd hate to find out I ruined the value of it, as I'll probably sell it once I finish casting from it. (I don't own a .38, and don't have much need for this one.)

Thoughts?

[Outpost75]

Texas Flyboy has the straight dope on cleaning up molds:

http://www.hensleygibbs.com/casting/cleaning.htm

[captaint]

I can only pass along my limited experience with H&G molds. Never seen one that wasn't marked
Hensley & Gibbs. I'm certainly no expert on the H&G molds, but I've never heard of one not marked. That groove between the pour holes on the sprue plate doesn't mean that much. Lots of folks have made that modification on their own. I will say that pictures would be a huge help.
Mike

[jsizemore]

Very early Geo. Hensley molds were stamped on the handles with the boolit design number stamped on the blocks. Sprue plates can have a ridge around the sprue trough to lighten the overall weight of the mold by thinning the outer surface of the sprue plate.

[Texasflyboy]

Post a photo before you clean it and I can probably answer all your questions.

Tom in VA

[yondering]

Thanks guys. I'll get some pics soon. I'm working on at least getting the outside of the blocks cleaned up, could barely see the #73 with all the dried brown stuff. Looks like a layer of thick oil or maybe cosmoline-ish stuff that dried on the mold. Fortunately it's mostly not rusted. Only have one block cleaned off so far, it's marked #73 but has no other markings. The blocks appear to be in great shape, although the sprue plate and screws have taken a bit of a beating, with nicks and gouges in them.

[yondering]

Post a photo before you clean it and I can probably answer all your questions.

Tom in VA

Sorry it's taken so long to post pics of this mold, but here they are. I cleaned the blocks and small parts in an ultrasonic cleaner, with a solution I determined does not remove blueing; it cleaned up well and the blocks appear to be in reasonably good shape, except for the female mold alignment holes. Those were dented and egged out, so the blocks weren't held in alignment any more; I repaired them by indexing center of each hole on my mill, and chamfering the edges of the holes, then tapping the alignment pins out to the correct spot.

The mold is in perfect alignment now, and casts very well, although it's pretty heavy! There are no identifying marks on the blocks, handles, or sprue plate though, other than "73" stamped on the left block. It sure seems to be an H&G #73 mold, but I'm curious why it's not marked with H&G's info.

Pics below, any input is welcome.












The mold wasn't hot enough when I cast these:

[fivegunner]

Yep, that`s a H&G 73, and it looks like its in good condition.

[Texasflyboy]

It's a Hensley & Gibbs #73. I've seen maybe three or four in 5,000 that didn't have the factory name stamped on the blocks.

Tom in VA

[yondering]

Thanks for the confirmation. Any idea why the factory name isn't stamped? Really early mold, or just an odd one? Doesn't matter too much, as I probably won't keep it, but it is a curiosity.

[hammerhead357]

Beautiful mould. Someone has replaced the sprue stop screw with a standard commercial bolt though.. I had a 10 cavity number 73 years ago and wish I would have kept it..

[hammerhead357]

Why did you smoke the cavities? I never had to smoke an H & G mould. I have had to smoke some aluminum moulds to get them to cast good bullets but never had to a meehanite mould.

[FISH4BUGS]

Thanks for the confirmation. Any idea why the factory name isn't stamped? Really early mold, or just an odd one? Doesn't matter too much, as I probably won't keep it, but it is a curiosity.

Hold up getting rid of it and use the mould and cast some with it. The #73 is a very accurate bullet and if you size it to your gun it will shoot circles around anything else. I have a 4 cavity #73 that I really like. Kind of a cool bullet shape if you ask me.
As for the weight, use a mould guide like they have on the Lyman 20 lb pots. Even a 10 cavity H&G or Lyman Armory mould is usable with those mould guides.

[yondering]

Hold up getting rid of it and use the mould and cast some with it. The #73 is a very accurate bullet and if you size it to your gun it will shoot circles around anything else. I have a 4 cavity #73 that I really like. Kind of a cool bullet shape if you ask me.
As for the weight, use a mould guide like they have on the Lyman 20 lb pots. Even a 10 cavity H&G or Lyman Armory mould is usable with those mould guides.

It does seem to cast really well, and seems to be a good bullet design. I don't have anything designed to shoot it though. I loaded some in 9mm for a heavy subsonic load, which worked OK, but I don't have a 38 or 357 anymore.

The mold works on the guide in my Lee Pro 4-20 pot, but is a little long with those handles, I have to angle the mold to use all the cavities.

BTW, hammerhead357, I'm sure you're right about smoking the mold; I just didn't feel like spending a lot of time with it, and smoking lets me get good bullets within the first couple casts.

Thanks to everyone for all the input. Old molds like this are fascinating. As a side note, from the same lot of stuff I got a 3 cavity H&G #20, which has quickly become my favorite .30 cal cast rifle bullet for semi-autos in 308 and 300 Blk, and a 3 cavity Cramer #10, which is a 158-160gr .358 RN that works really well for heavy subsonic 9mm. Both were in similar shape to the #73 above, but cleaned up well and cast beautifully.

[sagamore-one]

If you are serious about it being too heavy I have the same thing in 4 cavity I'd swap you for it.
Heck, mine is even stamped H&G.

[yondering]

If you are serious about it being too heavy I have the same thing in 4 cavity I'd swap you for it.
Heck, mine is even stamped H&G.

Thanks, but, the weight isn't a problem. I just don't have anything to shoot it in; no point in swapping for another mold I wouldn't use.

[FISH4BUGS]

Thanks, but, the weight isn't a problem. I just don't have anything to shoot it in; no point in swapping for another mold I wouldn't use.

Well....the answer to this is simple: A S&W Hand Ejector post-war target or maybe even better; Colt Officer's Model post-war Target....or maybe a Heavy Barrel Match target?
You mean you never have bought a gun to fit the mould?

[yondering]

Well....the answer to this is simple: A S&W Hand Ejector post-war target or maybe even better; Colt Officer's Model post-war Target....or maybe a Heavy Barrel Match target?
You mean you never have bought a gun to fit the mould?

Well, I have been wanting a .357 lever gun...

[FISH4BUGS]

Well, I have been wanting a .357 lever gun...

That bullet would feed wonderfully. I have a Rossi 92 that sort of lets SWC's feed, but this bullet is next on my list to try in that gun.
Now all I need is the time to play around with it.

[sagamore-one]

Fish.... send me your address and I'll send you a handful to try.