H&G 6 cavity #503

[Mal Paso]

Great Post! Thank You!

Just got lost for a while on https://www.hensleygibbs.com/

[FISH4BUGS]

Many thanks Tom!
Lots of good info.

[bushytail man]

Back when I was a teen, I wrote to Elmer Keith concerning the #503 vs the Lyman 429421. His return letter (which I still have) states he thought the #503 H&G was the truest to his design.

[44MAG#1]

Back when I was a teen, I wrote to Elmer Keith concerning the #503 vs the Lyman 429421. His return letter (which I still have) states he thought the #503 H&G was the truest to his design.

Which 503?

[MT Chambers]

I have read about what Elmer liked and wanted and concur on most things except that load of 22 or more grains of 2400, I drop it to 21 or less for my hand's sake. I bet many Smiths have loosened up with that 22 gr. load. If I need more speed I go to H110 or better still Mp300 ( I think that's what it's called).

[Mal Paso]

Which 503?

We know he was around for the early 503 with the narrow front drive band. The wide front drive band appeared about the time Elmer passed. Elmer's last wish or now he's gone, we'll fix it? I like the late #503 and choose to look at it as an evolving bullet style.

[Mal Paso]

Here are the hand drawn catalogue pictures from the indicated years.

[cowboy4evr]

I have H&G 503 , all 3 driving bands are the same size . I have always been under the impression that was one of Elmers beefs with Lyman , that they shrunk down the size of the front driving band . I personally am not aware of EK's designs having a smaller front driving band . I have H&G 258 for my 41 magnum , another EK design and it has the wide front driving band and that bullet was designed about 1964-5 . So even back then he wanted a large front driving band . Regards Paul

[curioushooter]

I have two Keith-type SWC 44 molds and two Ray Thompson-type SWC 44 molds

H&G 503 MP Molds clone in brass

Lyman 429421 Arsenal Molds clone in Al

Lyman 429244 MP Molds clone in brass (also, a hollow point mold)

Lyman 429215 Ohaus molds clone in Fe\

The front driving band varies widely in these, with the 503 having a very wide driving band. I size everything .431 as both my Blackhawk and S&W624 have .431 throats. Using starline brass (which seems on the short side of spec) none of these designs has had trouble chambering, though I am pretty sure that the 503 is actually pushing into the throat a little. So the stuff about one being for 44 special and one magnum seems sort of moot to me. What seems to matter is throat diameter.

The best accuracy for me has been obtained from the 503, but all seem to work well. Much better than I can deliver.

I suppose if I could pick just one it would be the 503 as it casts so well and is so simple and easy to work with. My least favorite is the 429421. The grease groove is enormous and it uses about 2-3x the grease of the others. It also seats deepest into the case of the 4. I use load ata for the 429421 for all of these, even the 429215, and it has worked well.

[Mal Paso]

My least favorite is the 429421. The grease groove is enormous and it uses about 2-3x the grease of the others.

I always thought it was designed to sell more Lyman Lube.

[Dragonheart]

When someone sounds praise for H&G, I am right there with you because as far as I am concerned H&G is second to none. H&G is for more than a lifetime, so you have an investment that will continue to pay dividends.

I am 72 and I have H&G molds older than me and they cast just as well as the day they went out the door. I have mostly 4 cavity molds, but a few 6 & 10 cavity and I have to say it takes a better man than me to pour & tap those big molds all day long. Even with a mold shelf to take the weight the opening a 6 and especially a 10 cavity is a chore. I finally had to have help so I built "Ram Tapper" and open the mold with a push of a button. Now my problem is feeding the 10 cavities a 20 pound Pro Melt pot goes down really fast.

[curioushooter]

Very cool device Dragonheart

I always thought it was designed to sell more Lyman Lube.

I thought the same thing, though Keith seemed to like lots of grease. Another explanation I have is that in Keiths days of experimentation (the interwar period) bullet lube was probably any available grease that would remotely work. Tallow, parrafin, petroleum jelly, straight beeswax, and a lot of other things were probably used and I think they tried to make up for lack of performance with extra quantity. With our carefully formulated lubes today it seems you don't need as much. I can say for certain that I find lube deposits on the muzzle from even the 429215 (which has narrow half-circle grooves). The 429421 is simply excessive and since I recover virtually all my bullets in a sand trap I see that about 80-90% of that lube on the 421 ends up in the sand.

[curioushooter]

I have read about what Elmer liked and wanted and concur on most things except that load of 22 or more grains of 2400, I drop it to 21 or less for my hand's sake. I bet many Smiths have loosened up with that 22 gr. load. If I need more speed I go to H110 or better still Mp300 ( I think that's what it's called).

I think Keith's original Heavy 44 Special load (the 429421 cast of ~20:1 w/ 17 gr 2400 in solid head brass) is more than is really needed. I prefer the load with the H&G503 to the 429421 (which affords more case volume and weighs slightly more since it puts more wight in the front driving band and nose and has a wider meplat). It clocks 1250 FPS from my 5.5" blackhawk, and I knock it down to 16.5 grains just for some safety margin. This is more or less equal to reduced loads in 44 mag with the same bullet that burn 20 grains of 2400. The lesson is that the extra case volume is pretty much just waste in a handgun. You can get equivalent performance from lighter charges in the smaller case.

When people think of Keith's loads, they always seem to think of the powerful proto-magnum loads using 2400. For my money I think his loads using Unique are more useful and certainly more fun. 6 to 6.5 grains of Unique pushing a 358429 in a Special case or crimped over the driving band in a magnum case is an excellent load. In a 4" revolver it will push to around 1100 FPS. This is for 357 magnum or heavy framed 38s only. It trails 13.5 grains of 2400 with the same bullet by about 100 FPS.

The so called Skeeter load of 7.5 grains of Unique pushing a 429421 in 44 special case pushes to around 950 FPS in most revolvers. This load as far I can know was actually discovered by Keith and promoted by Skeeter. It is much milder than the so called Keith load yet will hit to the same POI supposedly (I have not found this to be the case in either my 624 or my Blackhawk).

Some of Brian Pearce's data shows that the 429421 can be pushed by as much as 8.5 grains of Unique and come in under 22,000 PSI. In my messing around I've found that 8 - 8.5 grains with the H&G503 can be a real sweet spot for these heavy 44 special revolvers. I get around 1050 FPS from 8.5 grains of Unique pushing a 260 grain 503 cast of 96-2-2 alloy. No leading, new formulated Unique burns as clean and meters as well as any other handgun/shotgun powder I have, and stunning single digit velocity spreads, which are better than anything I've gotten from 2400.

This lower velocity load, as far as I can tell, retains nearly all the terminal efficacy of the Keith load at 75 yards or less...it makes a caliber sized hole in whatever critter it hit and will probably pass through anything smaller than a moose. It uses half the charge weight of powder, is more consistent, and is much more pleasant to shoot lacking the violent recoil of the Keith load. These loads are just subsonic, and are substantially quieter than Keith loads.

Powders between 2400 and Unique have a lot of potential I think. I've found promise in BlueDot, Herco, and PowerPistol. Herco was availabe in the 1920s and I am surprised that Keith never reported (asf far as I've read) useing it. It can get 1100 FPS with 9 grains and a 255 grain SWC, just about 100 FPS less than almost twice the charge weight of 2400. Longshot is another powder that seems to have a lot of potential, but I've not tried it.

H110/296 and 300 MP are both slower than 2400. They are dense ball powders. They are even more wasteful, noisy, and violent. The one thing they can do is push the same bullet 2400 can to a slighlly greater velocity with an equivalent chamber pressure. It is a case of diminishing returns, especially in a handgun.

I did an extensive test of 2400 vs 296 vs 300MP in 357 Magnum two summers ago. I found what Keith did. The gains are minuscule in normal barrel length revolvers (<6"). 300MP generated about 30 FPS and at most 50 FPS more than 2400 with the same bullets (I used cast, gas checked, and jacketed) in my 5" 686. To keep everything fair I used all new max load data from the same manual (the Hornady#10, which has all these powders listed for 158 XTP). Now in the Marlin the 300MP pulled away bigly, besting the 296 and 2400 by hundreds of FPS. Considering that shot to shot deviation in the revolver approached 30 FPS this "performance improvement" is nearly within the statistical range of variation; I consider it inconsequential.

For my money I'll take Unique in revolvers. It generates almost as much velocity (usually only 10-15% less) as a magnum class powder with half the charge weight with the same bullet. If I feel like I need more power then I will increase the caliber of the cartridge. I suspect Unique would rock in 45 Colt, 454, 475, and 500, too. It would be interesting to see what QuickLoad would say but I suspect just take the max load of 2400 and reduce by 66% would be a place to start and work up to about 50%. I know that Linebaugh had 12 grains of Unique with the 250 Grain SWC in 45 Long Colt as safe for SuperBlackhawks.