41-SWC: tangent nose v/s conical nose

[Onty]

Thinking about getting into target shooting and again half scale silhouette (25, 50, 75, 100 meters). Considering my experience and preference, ideal revolver is 41 Ruger Bisley. Don't have it now (unfortunately, sold it when moved, was going all stainless, a big mistake), but considering getting one.

Now, what would be right bullet for it? Since I am more recreative shooter, I would like to have a single cast boolit for both; target shooting and again half scale silhouette. WC would be very nice on a paper, but beyond 25 meters I doubt that it could compare with SWC. Keith new what works, so as final design, he created H&G #503; all driving bands equal diameter, and all driving bands and grease groove equal length. Many folks consider this boolit as the finest plain base SWC, ever created. However, I had notice that SWC boolits do not make a nice cut in paper as WC boolits do. Looking further what was designed as SWC boolit, I noticed that some do not have tangential nose, but rather conical one. What is the reason for conical nose, does this boolit cut nicer hole in paper, similar to WC?

Anyhow, using #503 features as a starting point (all driving bands equal diameter, and all driving bands and grease groove equal length), I created 41-503 , but two versions; one tangent nose (TN), another conical nose (CN):

https://i.imgur.com/xnbBEV4.jpg

Please let me know what do you think about these desings. Would conical nose have any edge on paper and longer ranges over tangent one?

Also, if you have a 41 Ruger Bisley and Ransom Rest, and willing to experiment, send me PM.

Thanks

[Onty]

Well, just found that I am not the only one thinking that way. Folks from Arsenal molds already done exactly the same thing, but on original #503, for 44 cal:

http://arsenalmolds.com/image/cache/catalog/H&G%20503%20clone-500x500.JPG

http://arsenalmolds.com/image/cache/catalog/arsenal/HG-503-TC-MFG-2-600x438-500x500.jpg

[mdi]

Interesting. For me it's six of one, half dozen of the other. I have cast/fired a ton of Lyman's 429421 (Tangent nose) in my 3, 44 Magnum Handguns. In my thinking, uness someone has experiential experience and is seeking the ultimate accuracy (+/- 1/2" @ 100), not mch difference in performance, if any...

Waiting to see posts from those more knowlegable...

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

I had Arsenal make a Custom 41 caliber lightweight SWC using the Basic design of the 503, but had them move the crimp groove for best OAL in my Henry, as well as having the Nose edge and leading edge of driving band radiused for smoother cycling in leverguns. I also shoot this in Revolver, it does very well.

[Onty]

Jon, how much they charge for a custom mold? Also, did you order 4 or 5 cavity mold, and is material aluminum or brass?

[megasupermagnum]

It comes down to weight and balance. Weight is obvious. As you can see both bullets from Arsenal are almost identical dimensionally, however, the Keith is around 264 grains, and the TC nose is around 250 grains. As a result, the balance of each bullet is also going to be effected, but I have no idea which way is better.

A TC nose makes sense in things like auto loaders, as they allow designs that feed really well, where a shorter tangential nose might not. Along those same lines, they would be the choice any time you want to increase bearing surface, without increasing bullet weight, say 45 acp.

In a 41 magnum, I'll take the Keith easily. I want that weight.

[gwpercle]

I'm a big fan of the 41 magnum/special ... my avatar is my model 58 S&W 41 magnum.

My favorite boolit moulds:

1.)NOE 413-215-WC (413432) PB ... this is an interesting cross between a SWC and WC design
very accurate because of the front driving band ... it centers the round in the chamber mouth .

2.) NOE 413-220-SWC (Keith) PB ... this is your standard Elmer Keith SWC design , my mould is a Keith Signature Series and has EK's signature engraved on the blocks .
This is a good all around design .

Take at look at the drawings @ www.noebulletmoulds.com
Gary

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Jon, how much they charge for a custom mold? Also, did you order 4 or 5 cavity mold, and is material aluminum or brass?

I ordered a 5 cav Aluminum. I suspect current custom prices vary due to complexity. I could mention the price, but I probably shouldn't. I ordered it at a time when Jared wasn't busy, so the price he quoted me was barely more than a standard mold...and maybe the alterations I requested were a simple edit of CNC code?

[Onty]

I ordered a 5 cav Aluminum. I suspect current custom prices vary due to complexity. I could mention the price, but I probably shouldn't. I ordered it at a time when Jared wasn't busy, so the price he quoted me was barely more than a standard mold...and maybe the alterations I requested were a simple edit of CNC code?

That's enough Jon, thanks. At the first moment I was thinking about getting a mix; 2 cavities tangent nose, 2 conical nose, and test them so I can order 4 or 5 cavity mold in that particular design. However, since we are talking about two molds, better solution would be to get one mold of each configuration, cost will be the same. But, that will be a long shot. I am facing uphill battle getting 41 Bisley Magnum from USA to EU. Unfortunately, very few 41 Magnum revolvers here. 41 Bisley even fewer. Those few lucky who have 41 Magnum revolvers keep them.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

That's enough Jon, thanks. At the first moment I was thinking about getting a mix; 2 cavities tangent nose, 2 conical nose, and test them so I can order 4 or 5 cavity mold in that particular design. However, since we are talking about two molds, better solution would be to get one mold of each configuration, cost will be the same. But, that will be a long shot. I am facing uphill battle getting 41 Bisley Magnum from USA to EU. Unfortunately, very few 41 Magnum revolvers here. 41 Bisley even fewer. Those few lucky who have 41 Magnum revolvers keep them.
I agree.
While I've only had a few molds with mixed cavities, I have learned that I am not a fan. I want the mold to cast all the same boolits.
I had a NOE two cavity 460 mold (for 45-70), both cavities were same, but one was plain base, the other GC. The GC design was less than desirable, so all my casting was with only one cavity. Also, I have a vintage H&G mold, one cavity was 40 cal, the other was 38...I wish they were both the rarer 40 cal.
Oh, I also have a Arsenal 5 cav 41 cal 220 RF mold from a GB, 4 cav was PB and one was GC...I wish I would have had it made with all 5 as PB.

[rintinglen]

My experience is with the 429-421 (TN) and the 429-360 (CN). The Keith design has been much more accurate than the Boser designed 429-360. For that reason. I would be more inclined to purchase a tangent nosed .410-.412 SWC, with three equal width and equal diameter driving bands.

[Onty]

My experience is with the 429-421 (TN) and the 429-360 (CN). The Keith design has been much more accurate than the Boser designed 429-360. For that reason. I would be more inclined to purchase a tangent nosed .410-.412 SWC, with three equal width and equal diameter driving bands.
I have feeling that with Lyman 429360 issue is not conical nose, but rather whole bullet is poorly designed, starting with very short font driving ban, and it's undersized. Some folks reported anywhere from .424" to .429"

Here is link for a picture https://i.ebayimg.com/d/w1600/pict/373459755497_/Lyman-429360-Double-Cavity-Bullet-Mold-Lead-Bullet.jpg .

Interesting article about it, here is short extract:

The 429360

.44 Magnum guns came and went over the years and the 429360 mould stayed. Finally, I acquired other moulds and found that moulds like the Lyman 429244 and 429421 shot a lot better so the 429360 kind of went to the bottom of the pile. Later, I bought a scoped Contender with a 10” bull barrel and decided I’d try the 429360 again using the Contender as a test bed. Man, what a surprise. It didn’t shoot worth sour grapes. All along, I’d been thinking it was my less than normal skill with a pistol. Having several other .44s at the time, I tried it in all of them again to no avail. It just wouldn’t shoot...

Based on my extensive experiments and the experiments of others, you’re better off to pass on the acquisition of a 429360 for your main .44 Magnum bullet. Of course, there are probably those that swear by this design and they’re welcome to their opinion but I’m not one of them. Give me Elmer’s old 429421 and no hassles

Author even tried to fix driving bands diameter, but no avail.

Talking about front driving band, one gun writer complained about poorly designed boolit; front driving band is oversized, and he couldn't load round into revolver.

I wander did he ever hear about sizing boolits, before assembling ammo.