Four Keith Type 44 Caliber Bullets

[44MAG#1]

Bullets

[derek45]

OK,...i'll bite

guessing the 2nd is RCBS 44-250-K ?

[44MAG#1]

Nothing to bite on it is a Lyman 429421. The next two are both H&G 503's.

[osteodoc08]

I personally like #3. Appear to have the most equal driving bands. #1 does as well but seems to have a bigger grease groove moving the balance point forward instead of back letting it ride nose up as originally designed. #2/4 have unequal driving bands. As far as I can tell on my iPhone anyhow.

[Shuz]

Perhaps some folks may not know that Lyman made several versions of429421 down thru the years.I am fairly certain that over the past 50 years, I have owned and loaded all of them. In my "accuracy testing", which has been with various revolvers, both Rugers and Smiths, I have never been able to claim that one version shot better than another.

[FISH4BUGS]

I shoot the #503 in all my 44 special and lighter 44 mag loads. It is acknowledged to be THE true Keith designed 44 bullet, not a "Keith type".

[44MAG#1]

I shoot the #503 in all my 44 special and lighter 44 mag loads. It is acknowledged to be THE true Keith designed 44 bullet, not a "Keith type".

Which one the 3rd or the 4th?

[FISH4BUGS]

I checked in the casting shed to see if I had any cast unsized #503's. No dice.
However, I would say, based on my memory and other photos of #503's it would be #4. The nose shape is the same one as those that I have cast.
#3 is a shorter fatter nose. I am not sure what mould the #3 is from. Are those BOTH from actual factory Hensley & Gibbs moulds? I hope you have the actual moulds to clarify this.
To me, #4 looks like the ones I cast. #3 COULD be a #243, or a plain base #140. Hey...I am just a H&G collector junkie and certainly NOT an expert. Tom Dugas certainly is the man in that regard.
Very interesting question and comparison however.

[44MAG#1]

Both are 503's. Ordered in the last half of the 1970's with Wayne Gibbs on the phone. The first I bought was the narrow front band bullet. The second was the wider front band bullet after I talked about wanting the wide front band. I know they had the cherry because I ordered cast bullets from Kent Lomont that was nearly identical to the wider band bullet in the early 70's.
Kent also did some pressure testing for me in the very early '80's for me with a 270 Keith.

[FISH4BUGS]

Interesting. Maybe a variation on the #503.
May I make a suggestion?
Please let TEXASFLYBOY know about this. He is the foremost authority on the H&G moulds.
It (#3) might be seen as a "custom' version of the standard #503....or maybe the other way around.
At any rate, an interesting variation of the #503. I think Tom would be very interested in learning more.
What is the unsized weight of the bullets #3 and #4 and the alloy at those weights?
Thank you for the information!
p.s. I THOUGHT I recognized the name Kent Lomont. I am a machine gun collector and shooter and Kent was very knowledgeable in the automatic weapons field. He did many conversions before the ban in 86. I owned one of his conversions.
He was truly a firearms and ballistics expert.

[osteodoc08]

There were several small minute changes over the years. All shoot well from my experience. I'd prefer #3 from what I can see on my iPhone.

[FISH4BUGS]

There were several small minute changes over the years. All shoot well from my experience. I'd prefer #3 from what I can see on my iPhone.

I agree but typically any changes got a new mould number. For instance, take a look at the 9mm moulds. There are a fair number of them and some are very close to one another except for a minor change.

[44MAG#1]

Every mold manufacturer that makes a Keith Type bullet says I have the true Keith bullet. Another maker says no, I have it. Then another one says, no no I have it. And on and on and on we go.

[Mal Paso]

Every mold manufacturer that makes a Keith Type bullet says I have the true Keith bullet. Another maker says no, I have it. Then another one says, no no I have it. And on and on and on we go.

Careful, one misstep here and it's up to Deep Theological Discussion or down to The Pit.

I like MP Molds #503 of current production molds. I think Dale 53 made his #503 available for that clone.

[bob208]

I have a lyman 429421 with hp and gas check. I used to load it over heavy loads of 2400 in the .44 mag. it was always very accurate and put down anything that was hit with it.

[jrmartin1964]

I have a lyman 429421 with hp and gas check.

I wasn't aware that Lyman ever produced No.429421 as a gas check... I guess you learn something new every day

[44MAG#1]

I wasn't aware that Lyman ever produced No.429421 as a gas check... I guess you learn something new every day

I for one aren't going to say there isn't a custom version of one. Lyman used to make a hollow point version of the 250 Keith if you have read Keith's work.
But a gas check and hollow point too on the same bullet???

[frank505]

I've got a 429 422 hollow base mold I got from Elmer Keith. I guess that's a Keith bullet...... I really like the Mihec #503. Shot lots of varmints with the Penta point with outstanding results.

[44MAG#1]

I've got a 429 422 hollow base mold I got from Elmer Keith. I guess that's a Keith bullet...... I really like the Mihec #503. Shot lots of varmints with the Penta point with outstanding results.

Yes, Keith did have a hollow base version. I'll ask again a HP-GC version??? Since he was against a GC my money is that it isn't a Keith. How about you?

[jrmartin1964]

But a gas check and hollow point too on the same bullet???

Oh, yes - they DO exist...

Lyman/Ideal No.431244 (later designated as No.429244), designed by Ray Thompson:
Attachment 209224

And for comparison, an early Lyman/Ideal No.431421 (later designated as No.429421):
Attachment 209226

The concept of a GC on No.429421 would be something of an anomaly... especially considering that Elmer Keith believed the GC to be unnecessary for use in pistols and revolvers, and that none of his designs for handguns... as he originally intended them... carried one.