358477, old/new?

[Guesser]

Lyman 358477, as near as I can find was discontinued in the middle 60's and then resurrected some 20/30 years later. I have grown suspicious of newer Lyman designs/redesigns so I sought out and purchased a DC Ideal 358477. My questions:
1. When was 358477 reintroduced?
2. How faithful is the new one to the original Ideal design?

[Echo]

Who cares? You have an Ideal mold that throws a danged good boolit. Cast & Press On...

[Guesser]

Thanks for the scolding, curiosity leads to understanding, allowed?

[BCall]

I believe the newer version of the 477 is a bit heavier than the older one, but according to Fryxell's article on the 38 swc's it was first cataloged in 1957. Cherries have changed over time, so minor variations occur. But the 358477 is listed in the 70's era catalogs and appears to have remained so until now. I don't see where it was ever discontinued for any length of time.

[Guesser]

BCall- thanks, Lyman 46 states that it was not listed in #44 but was in 43. 43 is dated 1964, that's what led me to think it had been dropped and reintroduced. I know there are differences in a lot of the 2nd and 3rd issues from Lyman, hence my curiosity.

[runfiverun]

the nose has changed,the drive bands slightly,and the lube groove has changed too.
i have two samples now and did have a third.
there was a discussion about these about 5-6 months back,and someone posted a line of pics.
might have been jerry or glynn.

[rintinglen]

Interesting question.

It was in the 47th edition, 1992 copyright. It was available in the 1980's, I have a Lyman catalog from that era someplace (though of course I can't put hand to it right now....)
It was not in the 45th or 44th editions, copyright 1970 and 1967. The 46th edition does not list currently available molds, but does include loading data for the 358-477, as does the 3rd edition Cast Bullet handbook, copyright 1980. The 3rd Edition Pistol and Revolver guide also has data.
I have seen samples in the black and white cardboard boxes that were used from the 60's into the 70's, but how long it was off the shelf and when it came back is unclear. Maybe some packrat with a collection of Lyman annual catalogs can help us out.

[Guesser]

That is exactly why I posted the initial question, thanks for exhibiting a curiosity much like mine. I wanted a 358477 but held the late issue in suspicion. Therefore I sought and finally acquired one from the late "Ideal" time period. Handbooks 41-43. Beautiful mold. I have cast a few hundred with it now to let them "cure" and weigh and measure.

[jbelder]

The newer version is 158grs and the nose is slightly different.

[liltatermae]

Hi guys. I just got a NOE 358/477. My wife has an 38 special in a S&W 14. I have the Lyman's 4th edition. When I looked up loads for the 38 I only found for the 357. Does anyone have load data for the 358/477 in the 38? Thanks Kevin

[MtGun44]

Older version looks like this, and is 150 gr nominal. Don't get too wrapped around the
axle on exact weight, none will cast dead on with your particular alloy unless you
happen to use exactly what the factory had in mind. Most of the time we are
using wwt alloy or a mix, so wts will be off.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=52350&d=1304396899

RCBS 358 150 SWC (old designation was 358 150 K) is a near perfect copy,
with a square bottomed lube groove. One boolit will almost perfectly fit in the
mold cavity of the other.

I can't personally vouch for the newer variant, but either the old 477 or the RCBS are
superb designs, and if you only had one mold for .357 Mag and/or .38 Spl you would not
be wrong to make it one of these.

And ignore the snotty comment, that is unusual and frowned upon here.


Bill

[Char-Gar]

I just happen to have a Lyman 38 (1951) here on my desk. 357466 is the only bullet listed for the 357 Magnum round and is described as the standard bullet for that round. IIRC this was a Phil Sharpe design.

At some point in time it was replaced with 357477 which is entirely different bullet than 357466. 466 has two lube grooves plus a crimp groove. 477 has a single lube groove and a crimp groove. 477 also has more rounded sides to the nose.

No 38 handbook lists 357466 as the only bullet for the 357 Magnum and several for the 38 Special among which is the Keith design 358429. It was not until later that the Ray Thompson gas check design 358156 was introduced and became the heads on favorite for the 357 Magnum round.

My bottom line take on this is that 357477 was not removed from the lineup and reintroduced at a later time. Folks are confusing 357466 and 357477 which are not the same bullet.

Phil Sharpe died in 1961 and this may have had an influence on the change from the Sharpe (466) design to a more Keithesque single lube groove (477) design. I have wondered if Lyman had some sort of license arrangement with Sharpe which expired.

It should be noted that Elmer Keith had no use for "little Phil Sharp" or his bullet designs, feeling his (Keith) single lube groove design was the nee plus ultra. About this time Keith was having a large influence on peoples thinking and purchasing of bullet molds.

All of Lyman designs have changed slightly from time to time with no particular reason, other than the change flat bottom lube grooves to round bottom lube grooves. It is inaccurate to call the flat bottom grooves "square" as the sides of the grooves are not at a 90 degree angle to the bottom. As cherries wore out, they were replaced and often there were minor differences. Somewhere I read many years ago, that Lyman didn't produce their own cherries, but used an outside source. Maybe that will explain the minor differences and maybe not. At any rate, Lyman didn't seem to feel that minor differences from cherry to cherry were not as important as some of us do today think. My feeling is that Lyman was probably right, and the differences made little or no difference in target score or game killed.

There a number of excellent SWC bullet designs out there for the 38/357 magnum round and there is not much to choose from between them except theory. Back in the early 60's I bought a three cavity SAECO/Cramer No. 12 which I am still using. It was a carry over of the old Cramer No. 12. Some time later SAECO discontinued the Cramer designs in favor of some of their own. I have convinced myself through long use, that the Cramer 12 is the best of all designs for this caliber, but that is just a self psych job that most likely has no basis in reality.

[Char-Gar]

liltatermae....

Sure, any 150 - 160 grain bullet in the 38 Special will like 3.5 grains of Bullseye and give standard pressures.

[gwpercle]

The 358477 was the very first mould I owned, bought to feed an old model Ruger Blackhawk in 38/357 mag., upon recommendation of the wise gun/reloading shop owner. A single cavity of course. That was near 40 years ago...my how time flies when your having fun. I think I will heat up the pot tomorrow and cast some with her...You alway's have a fond spot in your heart for your "first".

Gary

[skeettx]

Hello liltatermae
Welcome on your first posting
What Char-Gar said :) +1
If the 3.5 grains of bullseye is too much recoil at first try
you can drop down to 3.0 grains
Again Welcome
Mike

p.s. Wife + S&W Model 14 equals FUN!! You are blessed!

[MtGun44]

Char-Gar - there are 150 gr and later 158 gr versions of the 358477, both with single lube
groove. Nose shape change a good bit when they upped the weight. I don't think anyone
is actually confusing 358466. Also, I think you meant the 358446 not 358466.

Glen Fryxell knows a ton more about this than I ever will, and he says:
" For my money, the original 150 grain 358477 is the finest .38 Special bullet ever
designed. Loaded over 5.4 grains of Unique, it generates 982 fps from a 6" K-38 Masterpiece
with exceptional accuracy." This was quoted from his article on "The .38 SWC", here is
the link.

http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell38SWC.htm

Bill

[Char-Gar]

Char-Gar - there are 150 gr and later 158 gr versions of the 358477, both with single lube
groove. Nose shape change a good bit when they upped the weight. I don't think anyone
is actually confusing 358466. Also, I think you meant the 358446 not 358466.

Glen Fryxell knows a ton more about this than I ever will, and he says:
" For my money, the original 150 grain 358477 is the finest .38 Special bullet ever
designed. Loaded over 5.4 grains of Unique, it generates 982 fps from a 6" K-38 Masterpiece
with exceptional accuracy." This was quoted from his article on "The .38 SWC", here is
the link.

http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell38SWC.htm

Bill

I read the article and know Glen quite well. He also likes Cramer 12 as well. Glen is a Phd. Chemist with a number significant patents to his name. He is a hard science guy from the headwaters and his approach to bullet casting is along that same path. He is great guy any way you want to measure that and far more analytical than I am. I am just glad to hit what I am shooting at.

I am well aware that 477 morphed over time. But my response was to the OP who was thinking the design was discontinued for 30 years. 477 has not been discontinued, but morphed as time went by. I did mention these changes in my post. Lyman seems to like jacking with their designs for no particular reason. I have asked them why, but never got any kind of answer that made sense. Just some boiler plate.

You are correct, I did mean 446 and not 466. I have a peculiar form of dyslexia when it comes to numbers. The last two digits of a series of numbers seem to jump around. I can't tell you how many times I have tried to open the wrong hotel door room, or went to the wrong address. I have found there are quite a few other folks so afflicted. I did recheck Lyman book #39 and the bullet number is 357446. Anyway, thanks for the correction.

[MtGun44]

HA! I, too, have occasionally tried to get into the wrong hotel room. . . . . but fortunately, not dyslexic with numbers. That
would be VERY bad in my profession! (structural engineer)

Bill

[Forrest r]

This bullet design is extremely accurate, used to load these and h&g #50's (#50 h&g wc's seated/crimped in 1st lube groove) the same. Used the same powder charge & had the same accuracy for both bullets in a python & 2 different 586's.

I've owned several versions of this bullet over the decades & prefer the older/earlier molds, they tend to cast a fatter bullet in the .359/.360 range with nothing more than range scrap. Which always led me to believe that lyman brought out the 358477 to replace the old out dated 360271 (38s&w design). The 360271 cast a 150gr over sized swc for the older some larger bbl diameter'd pistols chambered in 38s&w. The 360271 mold is listed in the 1951 lyman catalog but not in the 1958/59 (57?) catalog, where the 358477 started showing up.

It is odd that lyman didn't have allot of reloading data for the 358477 in their different reloading manuals.

The 358477 makes an excellent hp that weighs in @ around 139gr/140gr.

97528

The 358477 has a bullet that is designed with a generous front drive band that has not been altered/narrowed like what lyman did to the keith 358429 & 429421 designs. A picture of the side view of some 358477's sized to .358, as you can see all 3 of the bands were sized down to .358.

97530

forrest r

[ddixie884]

An original 358477 over 5.0 gr Unique was my go to load back when I first started reloading, in the 70s. It was a great practice load in my M-19.

[liltatermae]

Thanks!