Okay Then Five Keith Type Bullets

[44MAG#1]

208865

[DougGuy]

I filed for the "K" exemption when I started using only the RF and WFN style boolits. The sides of these are parallel to the forcing cone more or less so when they exit the front of the cylinder they are much less deformed than the K style with the front driving band. Not that they don't shoot any better it just makes sense the smoother the transition from case mouth to muzzle and the less disturbed the boolit is, generally the better the results.

[44MAG#1]

I have LBT molds from Veral even before he moved to Idaho.
I like his bullet designs. Especially his LFN designs. But how many in here can tell the difference in accuracy between the Keith bullets and the LBT when shooting from field positions at normal game shooting ranges?
If I were to shoot Looong range in some type of competition where I could shoot semi creedmore all the time I would choose an LBT-LFN bullet. But minute of deer, bear, boar, come on now especially at normal ranges.

[stubshaft]

I too have been shooting Veral's boolits for over 30 years. There was a time way back when he would cut a K type boolit.

[osteodoc08]

I'll take #4 for the same reasons I chose #3 in the other thread.

H&G as well as Lyman, et al; make small changes, have worn cherrys, etc changing the shapes.

I've also seem to have more consistency with WFN/LFN designs but at practical distance I've seen none. This was anectdotal at best for me.

[44MAG#1]

From left to right.
1. My 250 gr.
2. RCBS 250 gr.
3. Lyman 429421
4. H&G 503
5. H&G 503

[osteodoc08]

So 44Mag, if you had to chose one casting, which would it be?

[44MAG#1]

Right now I am casting the first one. With Lyman #2 it weighs 250 grains with a dukes mixture it weighs 255.
I cast all five. It just depends on what I want to shoot.

[alamogunr]

I think it is interesting that #4 & #5 are both H&G 503 but are obviously different. Since you shoot both, can you see any difference in performance? If I were choosing I would choose #4 but I can't tell you why except for the wider driving bands which makes for a shorter nose.

I wonder which one Elmer would have picked?

[44MAG#1]

I cannot tell any difference in the two.

[kidmma]

The RCBS 250 comes out at 268 gr with range lead I have on hand!

[44MAG#1]

I just listed the RCBS bullet at the weight they list in manual #14. Most casters know the stated weight is rarely met. Too many alloy variations.

[white eagle]

my vote goes the 4th from the left

[Bigslug]

I have LBT molds from Veral even before he moved to Idaho.
I like his bullet designs. Especially his LFN designs. But how many in here can tell the difference in accuracy between the Keith bullets and the LBT when shooting from field positions at normal game shooting ranges?
If I were to shoot Looong range in some type of competition where I could shoot semi creedmore all the time I would choose an LBT-LFN bullet. But minute of deer, bear, boar, come on now especially at normal ranges.

And that's the conclusion I've come to - that which makes for easiest production of ammo that delivers acceptable results. Ability to make the gun and ammo consistently swat a milk jug at a hundred yards when the operator does everything right is not hard to come by. Anything more than that, I really have no desire to more than half-heartedly attempt with handguns, for that, to my mind, is not the handgun's purpose.

I think the only way to put the nose design debate to rest would be to take an N-frame or Redhawk chassis, and build a heavy, revolving benchrest rifle on it with a 10 to 20x scope on it. Eliminate all possible human error and reduce it to the variables of driving band interaction with cylinder gap. And what will we have learned at that point? That one might make a difference at a level that almost no humans can achieve, and that each revolver's internal dimensions vary enough that your mold might not work as well for me or vice versa. I think we've got that figured out already.

[44MAG#1]

It is good for people to believe in themselves enough to think that an inch difference in accuracy from the sandbagged benchrest will make a real difference in their field shooting. Truth is most people will vary enough from time to time they go shooting they will never tell the difference. Even on the same day most vary from cylinderfull to cylinderfull that it would be hard to tell the difference. Being a member of a local range has taught me that there are few really good handgun shooters. Maybe from a rest but not shooting from less than dead steady rests.

[Wayne Dobbs]

It is good for people to believe in themselves enough to think that an inch difference in accuracy from the sandbagged benchrest will make a real difference in their field shooting. Truth is most people will vary enough from time to time they go shooting they will never tell the difference. Even on the same day most vary from cylinderfull to cylinderfull that it would be hard to tell the difference. Being a member of a local range has taught me that there are few really good handgun shooters. Maybe from a rest but not shooting from less than dead steady rests.

Amen to that.

[ironhead7544]

There are several versions of the Keith 44 bullet from Lyman over the years.

The second bullet in the picture has the tapered crimp groove that Elmer designed.

[44MAG#1]

The second from left is an RCBS bullet the second from the right is an H&G 503.
All five have tapered crimp grooves just different angles and widths.

[white eagle]

It is good for people to believe in themselves enough to think that an inch difference in accuracy from the sandbagged benchrest will make a real difference in their field shooting. Truth is most people will vary enough from time to time they go shooting they will never tell the difference. Even on the same day most vary from cylinderfull to cylinderfull that it would be hard to tell the difference. Being a member of a local range has taught me that there are few really good handgun shooters. Maybe from a rest but not shooting from less than dead steady rests.


Nice to bang on your chest once in awhile to
I see no harm in using whatever means it takes to determine
what load bullet and gun combination shoot the best
why is taking a dead steady rest a bad thing
in the field or otherwise

[44MAG#1]

White eagle said,
"Nice to bang on your chest once in awhile to
I see no harm in using whatever means it takes to determine
what load bullet and gun combination shoot the best
why is taking a dead steady rest a bad thing
in the field or otherwise".

No where did you see where I said it was a bad thing. Ones shooting in the field may not be able to utilize a dead steady rest. If someone are one of the shooters that always shoots from the bench and almost never shoots offhand, sitting, resting the arms over a low limb, fence rail, top of post or with the arms braced against an object one never gets used to he sights moving. Hence the shooter then does something they shouldn't do and then they make a bad shot.
If you have both well mastered then I am happy for you. As I have said before. What one can do on the sandbagged bench rest has little to do with how good a handgun shot you are in reality.

[Shuz]

I guess a "Keith type" purist would never consider the Lyman 429421 that has a smallish FDB and a round grease groove as a "Keith type"?

[44MAG#1]

I guess a "Keith type" purist would never consider the Lyman 429421 that has a smallish FDB and a round grease groove as a "Keith type"?

I would agree. It would be good to have a mold that cast the 429421 that is in his "Sixgun" book that has all the bullets listed would be good. At least for nostalgia reasons.
I would say that will never come about as mold makers have their ideas that they have adopted is what a Keith is.