Ideal & Lyman Mold Markings

[bhn22]

Ideal and Lyman molds have had their markings changed many,many times over the ages. Does anybody know of any research material that might show the evolution of markings over the years? I'm trying to date a few old Ideals and the old manuals aren't helping, mostly because the old stuff used drawings instead of pictures, and the drawings aren't very detailed. Failing that, I suppose we could post pics of our mold markings and try to sort this out, However, it would be a monstrous task.

[Mk42gunner]

There is a chapter in "From Ingot to Target" that deals with dating the Ideal and Lyman moulds. Whether it has the info you want, I don't know.

Robert

[bhn22]

I'm afraid it was no help at all. I did go on ebay to look for Ideal molds with the same address markings. No joy there either. Well, I did find one, but it was an old one piece mold. I did ask Glen, but he's not familiar with the markings either. Lyman is no help at all of course. There has to be an answer somewhere.

[Bent Ramrod]

The Lyman Gun Sight Co. bought the Ideal Reloading Tool Company in 1925. The address on the moulds and tools changed from New Haven, CT to Middlefield CT at this time. I think Lyman continued to use the IDEAL stamping on the moulds until the early 1960's, when they replaced it with LYMAN.

You could probably get a more precise answer on the Antique Reloading Tool Collectors' web site.

[bhn22]

I've spent a bit of time there. All we've been able to come up with is that it's likely a first transitional model, and is likely one of the earliest molds with detachable handles. Lymans actual records are pretty vague as to exactly when certain changes were made. Brian Pearces article in the latest handloader shows a mold that is one of the earliest Keith molds known to exist (#2). His mold has the later style production markings than mine does. I was okay until I saw the pics of his prototype, now my mold is simply driving me nuts! Our bullet profiles seem identical, except that mine is a hollowbase and his is a solid. I wish there was some way to trace my molds history, but it came out of an estate sale in Idaho earlier this year.

[Catshooter]

Post some pics.


Cat

[GLL]

Is your mold an IDEAL 358431 HB?

Photos of the mold and bullets ? :)

Jerry

[williamwaco]

See if this helps:

http://reloadingtips.com/pages/lyman-mold-reference.htm

[GLL]

Here are the markings on my IDEAL 358431 HB.
Buckshot replaced the missing HB pin !

http://www.fototime.com/222AA9337625810/xlarge.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/D30A3ACDFC0C6F8/xlarge.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/B71046A5BB845CD/orig.jpg

Jerry

[bhn22]

It's hard to see in the pics, but in the address line, it shows the "CT" being different than on the other molds of the era I've seen. it does have the capital "C", but the letter "T" is smaller, and there's an "equal" sign underneath it. It amazes me that this tiny detail is driving me so batty.

88055880568805788058

[GLL]

I have never seen an HB pin design like that on an IDEAL mold before. Interesting custom modification that is somewhat similar to the RCBS HB molds

Is the screw going through the bullet base and into the HB pin actually a sliding pin?

Jerry

[bhn22]

This is the first style hollowbase design, which was also carried over from the one-piece molds. The base pin is held in place with a long screw that allows the plug to move away from the mold block so the bullet casting can be released. "NoZombies" has a 32 cal version of the one-piece hollowbase mold, maybe he'll add a pic if he gets time. This is very similar to the Cramer style setup, and I honestly don't know which came first. I believe Modern Bond used a different setup entirely, as did Yankee.

[GLL]

I was curious since they drilled right through the "E 438" for the sliding pin.
Do you have a cavity photo of the HB pin slid all the way in to the "bullet release" position?

Were these molds just prototypes or did they go into production?
Have you ever seen literature showing this design?
Did the removable single-pin predate the sliding pin and the design was just an experiment?
I wonder why IDEAL changed to the removable single pin design since the sliding pin seems better to me?

Interesting problem ! Please keep us updated !

Jerry

[bhn22]

The removable pin with the wooden handle is the later version, and Lyman continued with it until they quit making these molds in the late '70s or early '80s. The sliding pin version like mine does have a drawback. If you look at the my pic of the mold cavity, you'll see a small shiney spot about 1/2 inch below the bullet base. This is caused by the pin itself getting caught at an angle when the blocks were closed. I've seen this issue before, and if steps aren't taken to prevent this, the pin will actually wear the blocks down in this area. If you understand that this is a potential issue, all you have to do is make certain the pin is fully seated in the mold half before you close the blocks. Problem averted! BTW, Ideal numbered both block halves, and the hollowbase pin the same way they did with the hollowpoint pins on that style of mold. That's what that "E438" is about. All my numbers match on this mold, as they should. The molds a true survivor from the olden days.

[bhn22]

881498815088151

[bhn22]

88193

[NoZombies]

Sorry I'm a little late to the show here, but Bob is correct, I do have an early Ideal mold with a similar hollow base design. It is a very early mold, and was made before the numbering system was implemented. It is marked as being patented "Feby 10-91". I assume the patent is for the HB pin design, I'm not certain of that, but the other integral molds I have lack the patent info. The pin moves about 5/16" to allow release.

8845888459
8846088461

While the design is very similar to the early mold that I have, I suspect that Bob's mold is either a factory prototype that was made during a later production, or very good work by a machinist.

The Rorbacher and Yankee molds used a similar design, but had a wide flat base about 3/4" in diameter below the mold blocks that acted to stabilize the pin and prevent tipping. I believe it also added some thermal mass to the pin to make casting a little easier.

[bhn22]

Thanks Tony. That is easily the coolest one-piece mold I've ever seen. I hadn't considered that mine might be a prototype. I know the answers out there someplace.

[NoZombies]

Bob, Could you show us a picture of the top of the mold in question? Based on a closer examination of the photos, I'm assuming the handle screws attach through the top of the mold.

If that's the case then I retract my comment about the work of a machinist, it really could only be 1 of three things; Either a prototype, a very special custom order, or the work of a Lyman/ Ideal employee as a personal project. I make that statement based on the fact that the markings on the mold blocks are properly oriented compared to the mold cavity, and if the screw holes are from the top of the mold, then it essentially has to be a factory produced item in one form or another.

The reason I don't believe it's a transition from the design of the early mold I posted photos of is that it is simply too late a mold for that. The removable pin type molds started in the days of the integrals, and carried over into the separate blocks. The earliest removable pin molds used a friction fit for the pin, with the twist locking action being added later. Based on the address, the fact that it's a Keith design etc. it has to date from sometime no earlier than the late 20's. The removable plug molds had been in production for some time by then.

[bhn22]

It is indeed a nose pour mold, and the screws for the handles go in from the top. It does have the markings for 429422, so it was made after that cherry number had been standardized. The bullet design appears in the 1929 Ideal handbook, but I don't have access to any handbooks from 1927 to 1928. If I find them, my answer may be there.

[w30wcf]

It is indeed a nose pour mold, and the screws for the handles go in from the top. It does have the markings for 429422, so it was made after that cherry number had been standardized. The bullet design appears in the 1929 Ideal handbook, but I don't have access to any handbooks from 1927 to 1928. If I find them, my answer may be there.

I have the 1927 Ideal Handbook and neither the 429421 nor 429422 are in it.
There is an illustration for the standard mold but none for a hollow point nor hollow base mold.
The announcement for the new type mold with interchangeable blocks is shown on page 133.

w30wcf

[94Doug]

Having spent the past year buying and selling moulds as a sideline and a way to grow my never ending collection, this sounds like a big task....subtle changes seem like the way business was done. Sometimes I find a protruding screw holding the sprue plate screw in place, the lettering is all over the place, sometimes I swear the numbers were hand stamped, as they are bunched up tightly. Finishes are also varying from rough to almost hand finished and polished from the factory. I have a beautiful Ideal 280473 in my hands right now.

Doug

[bhn22]

Somewhere in my travels, I read where the 1928 & 1929 handbooks were the same, but I can't find any confirmation of this. As I mentioned before, Lyman seems to have no real hard information on the markings on mine. The numbers are stamped in the type from the old one-piece molds, and at this point, my best bet is to simply buy every mold I can find, and afford that has the logo stamped the same as mine. After a dozen or so, I may get a little clearer idea of some dates.

[94Doug]

..or not, you never can tell. But you'll have a lot of cool stuff.

Doug

[w30wcf]

I did a "bing" search on Ideal molds and found a few other examples of the early style hollow points but no mold identification numbers

http://ps-2.kev009.com/ohlandl/310/310op/ideal_8.htm

“On February 10, 1891 Ideals founder John Barlow patented a system for casting hollow based bullets into the #8 tool. Lead was poured into the nose-end, instead of the base, and a plug built into the tool produced the hollow base.”

Scroll down to bottom for additional mold pics.

Same mold later design
http://ps-2.kev009.com/ohlandl/310/310op/Ideal_other_tools/lyman%2035870%2038%20LC.jpg

w30wcf

[bhn22]

I'm all wrapped up in the (mainly) cosmetic differences in the molds. Notice the finish on the molds exterior. Mine doesn't have the marks from milling the blocks, it's all smooth, almost polished, and the bluing is deeper. Mold blocks are normally cold blued, but mine has a totally different appearance, smooth, and deeply blued. The address stamp for Lyman is different, as mentioned above, as is the mold model stamping, which is the older stamping style. When I get back to work I'm going to start buying every mold I find with that address stamping, and see what they all look like. Perhaps it will make sense somehow...

[w30wcf]

bhn22,
Perhaps Louis Ohland (email at the bottom of this link) might be of some help or know of someone who can. He is pretty well versed in the tong tools but perhaps he has other knowledge on Ideal mold blocks.
http://ps-2.kev009.com/ohlandl/310/310op/history.htm

Regarding the number 28 Ideal handbook which is shown dated 1927-1929, the one I have shows copyright 1927.

So.....perhaps the same number 28 was also used in 1928 and 1929 for updated versions of the 1927 handbook(?).

I had the opportunity to visit the Lyman plant back in 1983. Ken Ramage, V.P. had held a World Championship Cast Bullet Silhouette Championship over the weekend and we stayed over Sunday night and visited the plant Monday morning. It was a wonderful experience and just thinking about all the history within those walls made it extra special.:grin:


w30wcf

[bhn22]

Ahhh... the good days. My last call to Lyman was disappointing to say the least. Their focus is completely on their current product line, and the girl I talked with kept repeating my questions by yelling them across the room to somebody who was yelling responses back across said room. After the first minute, I realized I was on my own. I thanked he nicely for her help and moved on.

[ohland]

bhn22,
Perhaps Louis Ohland (email at the bottom of this link) might be of some help w30wcf

Sorry, that stuff from the 310 Outpost was sent to me so that it could be placed back on the web. Original site was on a private ISP, like Mindspring, and it was obviously long gone.

[Echo]

Wow! What an OUTSTANDING thread!

[bhn22]

There's a lot of information in the older Cast Bullet Handbooks, but much of their sequencing doesn't really line up with reports from other sources. Still, it's nice to have what is available. Hmmm... Jim Taylor, somebody I have at least a little access to. I don't know if he's still doing Missionary work in Africa or not. I suppose I could ask. I almost bought a mold nearly identical to the one shown in Johns post. It saddens me that I didn't do it. I won't make that sort of mistake again.

[Catshooter]

Jim is still doing his missionary work. Sounds like he's enjoying it too.

With the coming of the internet I have learned much about Ideals/Lymans that I didn't know.

We know of course that the first exchangeable block moulds were un-vented. I have several that have interesting sprue plate screw locking screws. On a couple the screw is a headed slotted 10 x 36. The 36 pitch was used long ago, but was dropped when the 32 pitch was standardized.

I also have some un-vented blocks that have a normal set screw (slotted) and they are the same as the ones used today: 10 x 32. I believe that the ones with the headed screws were earlier. Also, all the moulds with headed locking screws have match numbers that start with a letter.

Since we know that a headed screw is more expensive than a headless, I assume that Ideal followed the normal manufacturing path of always the cheaper way thus the headless are later. Also dropping the letter from the match numbers would save money.

I do love the old equipment, the history is fascinating. :)


Cat

[bhn22]

New stuff ain't got no soul... :grin: I do wish some of this stuff could talk though.

[Catshooter]

New stuff ain't got no soul... :grin: I do wish some of this stuff could talk though.

Ain't that the truth.


Cat