.44 Magnum mould

[bcr]

Guys, I want to pick up one of Mihec's 434640 moulds because it looks like a heck of a boolit. Right now I've got a Browning B-92 which I'm fixing to slug in the next couple of days, but I have plans to get a Ruger Bisley and a Redhawk in .44 Mag in the forseeable future. If my rifle comes in wanting .432, should I still get the .434 to have some margin for the wheelguns? Can I size 434 down to 430 if need be, or is that too much?

Also, I'm trying to debate the GC/PB. I definitely want to be able to push this boolit, and I've never used GCs, but the PBGC I've read about here look highly intriguing. Any advice on that, or should I stick with conventional GCs?

[Blammer]

I would go with .434, you'll probably not need to size them that small (.430) but you can if need be. If you have to size them that small you may encounter other issues, deal with that later.

I would recommend the PB for Pistols as you can push them pleanty fast, I'd recommend GC for the rifle as you can push them faster and may need it, MAY being the operative word.

I have a 44 mag handgun and really like the PB's in it, but it shoots GC's well too. I have a 44 mag Ruger 77 and it tends to prefer the GC ones, but does shoot PB too, I just have to make sure I don't push them too fast.

[Blammer]

of course I have a few to choose from. :)

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g81/blammer8mm/Cast%20boolits/44list-1.jpg

[bcr]

Thanks Blammer! That picture will give me study material for a day or two :D

[schraubermani]

I got Mihec's #503, too.
it's a very fine mold and cast good looking and also very good flying bullets.
I can recommend this mold.

[bcr]

Yeah, I was looking at those two very closely. I really like the look of the #503, but I thought the 434640 might feed a little more reliably in the lever action.

[paul h]

I've shot plenty of bullet designs both pb and gc in the 44 mag, and while I'd agree a pb is generally fine for the 44, there can be an rgument made for the gc. Since you're looking at a hp mold and might want to try the softer alloys for maximum expansion, there is something to be said for considering a gas check design so that you have a more flexible bullet that will work well over a broader range of alloy hardness and velocities.

[Moonie]

I agree with paul however keep in mind that a gas check adds an expensive component to each boolit.

[9.3X62AL]

Blammer, thanks for the positively pornographic picture! :)

Having a similar Win 92-series rifle (Miroku-made Winchester from late 2011), I found its grooves to run right at .429" and throat is .430". .431" boolits are a draggy slip-fit in fired cases. Nicely enough, my Ruger Redhawk has .430" throats as well, making life with the 44 Magnum a lot less complicated.

Lyman #429421 refuses to cycle reliably--it is over-long when seated to crimp in the designated groove, and still hangs up when seated to the top of the front drive band and given a reasonable roll-crimp. Lyman #429244 (Thompson SWC/GC) is more tractable for feeding if seated short enough to work through the action (1.600" or less).

Soon after getting the rifle, I obtained an Accurate Molds #43-250-C, a somewhat short-nosed round flatnose design with gas check shank weighing 252 grains as-cast in 92/6/2. It feeds flawlessly through the 92's action, and falls easily into the Redhawk's cylinder from HKS loaders. It shoots well in both firearms, too. For less intense loadings, the 200 grain SAECO #446 initially obtained for my '73 Winchester in 44-40 casts wide enough to "clean up" in my .431" H&I die, and shoots accurately from the '92 at '73 speeds (1200-1300 FPS). Both boolits can be crimped into generous grooves that allow reliable feeding through both rifles.

[MtGun44]

I have a Browning 92 in .44 mag and it is clear that this gun was designed for the .44-40
and NOT the .44 mag as far as feeding and cartridge LOA is concerned. IME, I absolutely
cannot get a Lyman 429421 (Keith 250, same as H&G 503) to cycle at all - it jams up solid,
cannot move far enough out of the magazine to clear, tying it up tight until you jimmy the
round back into the mag.

SHORT is the name of the game. With short LOA it works fine. It has nothing to do with
the shape of the boolit, only length. After you get short enough, I'm sure that shape
will start to come into play, but unless you can mod the gun to accept longer cartridges,
the Keith designs are out except single shot.

A quick search shows .38-40 max LOA of 1.592", likely the same as .44-40, and likely
defined by the 1873 Win capabilities, and Win 92 likely the same since it was specifically
designed to replace the '73 with the same cartridges. I'm still developing loads for
the B-92, but can tell you for sure that the Keith design boolits will not work.

Bill

[blaser.306]

I don't know how much shorter you need but here is a mould that I just received from Tom @ accurate , it drops a ( fully dressed ) .432" ( ww+2% tin ) 266 gr truncated cone boolit with 2 loobe guves with gas check. The crimp to nose is a little shorter that the #503 , you can't realy tell in this pic but it is. The mould # is 431265c . So far it shoots very well from my 14" .44 mag contender and shows promise in .445 supermag.

[Shuz]

I have a Browning 92 in .44 mag and it is clear that this gun was designed for the .44-40
and NOT the .44 mag as far as feeding and cartridge LOA is concerned. IME, I absolutely
cannot get a Lyman 429421 (Keith 250, same as H&G 503) to cycle at all - it jams up solid,
cannot move far enough out of the magazine to clear, tying it up tight until you jimmy the
round back into the mag.

SHORT is the name of the game. With short LOA it works fine. It has nothing to do with
the shape of the boolit, only length. After you get short enough, I'm sure that shape
will start to come into play, but unless you can mod the gun to accept longer cartridges,
the Keith designs are out except single shot.

A quick search shows .38-40 max LOA of 1.592", likely the same as .44-40, and likely
defined by the 1873 Win capabilities, and Win 92 likely the same since it was specifically
designed to replace the '73 with the same cartridges. I'm still developing loads for
the B-92, but can tell you for sure that the Keith design boolits will not work.

Bill

Bill,
Have you tried the Lee 44 200gRNFP? I load both the Marlin 1894 and the Winnie Trapper with these at 1.600 OAL and they function perfectly in both guns. --Shuz

[quasi]

I have a B92, the original Commerative one. Keiths will not feed in mine unlessI crimp on the front of the shoulder. RFN's work fine, I have not tried my new Mihec 434640 yet. My Browning needs .434 bollit diameter for best accuracy, it has a large throat.