RCBS .44-250-K vs .44-250-KT

[alamogunr]

Per the thread title, I'm interested in the practical differences(if any) between these two molds. I've got the .44-250-K. I found a couple of threads in archives addressing this issue but they kind of wandered all over. Because the threads were somewhat old, the pictures originally posted are no longer available.

Ever since I got my FA 97, I've been looking up articles on loading for the .44 Special. Both of these molds keep coming up. I guess I should have asked if it made any difference which boolit you used the load data for. I've also got the MP .432-256 mold which is also identified as H&G 503.

I've also got several other molds for .44 caliber but they don't present the same confusion.

[GLL]

John:

I posted a photo of the two bullets side-by-side on one of those old threads. I will dig it out tomorrow and post it again. They are distinctly different !

Jerry

[Bazoo]

Howdy, I have a 44-250-k. I’ve done some research on it as a result and I think there was no difference. I’d be glad to provide some samples if you want for reference.


I am interested though if all of the RCBS Keith bullets have the double bevel crimp groove. I don’t particularly care for it but, I guess I don’t hate it either.

Mine is square bottom lube groove. Is yours? I know lymans had both square and round lube grooves and I wonder if RCBS did too.

[Bazoo]

John:

I posted a photo of the two bullets side-by-side on one of those old threads. I will dig it out tomorrow and post it again. They are distinctly different !

Jerry
I’m very interested as well. I didn’t know that.

[Bazoo]

I also have some 44-245-SWCs for comparison. Though, I sold the mould sometime back. I regret it now because, well it cast good.

[alamogunr]

I have 3 more RCBS two cavity molds: 44-240 SWC, 44-250 SWC, 44-300 SWC. Somehow I acquired all of them in almost unused condition and let them sit for several years. In all there are twelve .44 caliber molds. The lightest is an MP 200 gr and the heaviest is the RCBS 300 gr.

I am curious about the 44-245 SWC. I suspect that it is almost a duplicate of my 44-240 SWC but that is just a guess.

I have one Lee GB mold, identified as 432250. It has 3 crimp grooves. Not sure why since I don't have any information from that GB. It casts a nice looking boolit. I haven't had an opportunity to shoot any yet. I tried to sell it awhile back but got no takers. Now I'm glad it didn't sell. It looks more interesting that I thought.

EDIT: I have to say that the RCBS molds are a joy to use. Bullets just fall out perfectly. These and a few Lyman molds are the only iron molds I have.

[GLL]

298683

298684

These are my original photos from the old post.

I have included the old IDEAL 429421 (unvented mold) for comparison.

The 44-250-KT is currently called the 44-250-SWC #82044
The 44-245-KT is currently called the 44-245-SWC #82043
The 44-250-K is still the 44-250-K #82080

Jerry

[Bazoo]

Here is

44-240-SWC 44-245-SWC 44-250-K
https://i.postimg.cc/7PnN22J0/0-AFCD338-C7-C7-464-F-9490-D9-B275-F893-E7.jpg (https://postimg.cc/G99Y09Qm)

Notice how on my 44-245-SWC, the bottom driving band is narrower? That’s why I got rid of it when I got the 44-250-k. If it had been more like gll’s pic I’d have kept it. It was a new production mould btw.

The 44-240-SWC shown is an old mould in a cardboard box. The 44-250-k I’m not sure of vintage but it’s in a new style plastic box.

[alamogunr]

Thanks to both GLL and Bazoo for the pictures. I've got the pot heating so I can cast examples of each(3) of my RCBS 44 molds. When I have those examples, I'll comment on how they compare to the pictures. I wish I had the confidence to post pictures but I'm not there yet.

[alamogunr]

OK! I've got my examples in front of me.

1. The boolit from RCBS 44-250-K looks exactly like both pictures.

2. The boolit from my RCBS 44-250-SWC is similar to GLL's picture except the bottom band and the top band look slightly narrower than the middle band. My eyes could be playing tricks though.

3. The boolit from my RCBS 44-240-SWC differs from Bazoo's picture in that all three bands on mine are narrower and somewhat rounded, None of my boolits have been sized, so that may affect the appearance of the bands. It never occurred to me to measure the as cast diameter.

4. The boolit from my mold marked Ideal 429421 has a rounded lube groove and the top band is slightly narrower than the middle and bottom band. The box this mold came in is marked Lyman/Ideal.

I'm not sure that this settles anything. Since I don't hunt with my handguns, I wouldn't hesitate to load any of the boolits from the 4 molds. My handgun skills are such, I'm not sure I could prove any are more accurate than the others.

I didn't include it in this thread but MP Molds 432-256(also marked H&G 503) casts a boolit that has 3 equal width bands and is 4 cavity. Unless it fails me someway, I will probably use it more than the others.

[Bazoo]

I use postimages.org to post pictures here. It isn’t the easiest but I can manage to do it. If you can email or text a picture, I can upload them on your behalf.

My 44-240-SWC had been sized but the driving bands were square beforehand. That was my sample bullet I keep on my shelf so I can compare the different versions when loading.

[Larry Gibson]

Let me add a bit of confusion to the conundrum......

In 2006 along with my acquisition of a Ruger 50th Anniversary BHFT 44 magnum I bought a new RCBS 44-250-KT mould. The mould came in this RCBS box.

298721

I thought, oh great, wrong mould. But the mould was marked 44-250-KT.

298722

It casts 250 - 255 gr bullets, depending on alloy, but doesn't look like the 44-250-KT as posted in the above post.

It has a round lube groove and is almost identical to my Lyman 429421.

298723

It is my opinion that RCBS, like Lyman, markets moulds based on current designs and cherries in use. RCBS has changed its designs as the market's needs, ideas and wants change.

[Bazoo]

Thanks for sharing Larry.

[pworley1]

I have all of those and like the 429421 best.

[Shuz]

I have over 50 years experience shooting cast boolits in the. magnum. During that time frame, I have tried nearly all the so called Keith designs, and could not find any significant difference in performance on either targets or game animals between any of them. I would like to see some evidence that shows one design is better than another. [smilie=s:

[GLL]

Larry:

The box part #82043, the bullet image printed on the box, and the profile of your mold seem to indicate the mold is actually the 44-245-KT.
This even though the mold is stamped 44-250-KT.
A "bit more confusion" indeed !

Jerry

[GLL]

Shuz:

I agree that there is very little difference in shooting performance in the majority of the various "Keith-style"bullets. I still tend to prefer the old IDEAL 429421 style shown in my photo simply because the mold drops bullets so nicely.

Interesting that you, alamogunr, and I all joined this site back in March of 2005.

Jerry

[Bazoo]

I’d like to have one of the original moulds for that 429421, like every Keith fan I guess. My question is, who makes a copy of that bullet? I mean, an exact copy.

[Shuz]

[QUOTE=GLL;5386740]Shuz:



Interesting that you, alamogunr, and I all joined this site back in March of 2005.

Jerry,
I and perhaps you and alamogunr were also members on the old "Shooters" website?

[JAC43]

Hi GLL,

This thread reminds me of all the differing designs for the Lyman 454424 mold. You had posted a photo many times before showing your comparison. Would you be so kind as to repost that photo in this thread? It doesn’t show up in any of the old threads. Sorry for the thread drift Alamogunner! Thank you.

[txbirdman]

[QUOTE=GLL;5386740]Shuz:



Interesting that you, alamogunr, and I all joined this site back in March of 2005.

Jerry,
I and perhaps you and alamogunr were also members on the old "Shooters" website?

As was I. My join dat shows as March 2005 also.

[alamogunr]

[QUOTE=Shuz;5386752]

As was I. My join dat shows as March 2005 also.

As I recall, I jumped over here because the old site was shutting down. I was really happy to see a site dedicated to cast bullets. Up to that time I got most of my information from the old CB_L(I think that is correct) email group. Unlike a lot of members here I've only been casting for a little over 20 years.

[376Steyr]

I’d like to have one of the original moulds for that 429421, like every Keith fan I guess. My question is, who makes a copy of that bullet? I mean, an exact copy.

You might like this one: https://noebulletmolds.com/site/product-category/bullet-moulds/432/432-255-swc-ay3/

[DBN]

The accurate 43-250j is advertised as an exact clone.

[Bazoo]

You might like this one: https://noebulletmolds.com/site/product-category/bullet-moulds/432/432-255-swc-ay3/
Thanks for the suggestion but,
No thanks. It doesn’t have three equal length driving bands. The bottom is .120 and the top and middle are .080.

I meant to say, I like the look of GLLs vintage 429421 and I’d like one of those.

[44MAG#1]

This. https://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=43-253K

[alamogunr]

Since a lot of this thread centers around what defines a "Keith" bullet and, aside from the equal drive bands, the square lube groove catches most of the attention. I recently read an article or comment, not sure where, that put forward the argument that the rounded lube groove is not as bad in actual practice as those who have set the square groove up as equal to absolute gospel would have us believe. In searching for that holy grail mold that is the one and only Keith mold, I understand the need to find an old Lyman 429421 with the square lube groove.

I don't remember the details but it centered around the behavior of the bullet when it obturates and compresses the lube groove. The explanation sounded plausible enough that, for my use, I wouldn't care either way. Also, for many who powder coat, it is completely unimportant.

[Alstep]

I would think that boolits from a rounded or tapered lube groove mold would release and drop easier than from a squared groove mold.

[Bazoo]

Round lube grooves are not a detriment that I can tell. Square grooves hold lube better through handling, just between the sizer and the case. But I also store my bullets lubed. Maybe not huge amounts, just several hundreds.

[danmat]

NOEs Keith mold is the 432-277 I believe, These were the signature Keith molds from the group buy here mines great equal drive bands.

[44MAG#1]

https://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet...bullet=43-253K

[44MAG#1]

Keith's 250 Keith never weighed 277 grains.

[danmat]

I don’t know what weight his mold dropped at, never got to borrow it!!!! ��

[44MAG#1]

I don’t know what weight his mold dropped at, never got to borrow it!!!! ��

Him saying 250 sure isn't 277. Unless he was using new math at the time

[danmat]

Maybe originally lineotype, much speculation on a “real” Keith mold.
The one thing most agree on is square lube groove, plain base, with equal driving bands.
My Noe is a fine mold I don’t mind the little extra weight though

[44MAG#1]

Maybe originally lineotype, much speculation on a “real” Keith mold.
The one thing most agree on is square lube groove, plain base, with equal driving bands.
My Noe is a fine mold I don’t mind the little extra weight though

I would say, at the time the chances of Keith using Linotype is very, very, very,very, very, very slim. Since he mentions 1-16 tin and lead as much as he does.

[Bazoo]

I’m sure Elmer used whatever he could get just like we all do. It’s just for his pet loads he wanted 16:1. But I magine he would use softer for the gallery or target loads and for other calibers as he had need and reserve the 16:1 for his pet loads whenever he was running a bit low.

He said in sixguns that during the depression things was tight and he couldn’t afford pistol powder and was using shotgun powder out of necessity for some light loads. I believe that’s what he shot the mountain lion with. I’m sure he did the same with lead though I’ve not seen that in his writings yet.

[Bazoo]

My 44-250-K weighs 265 with 50:50 ww: pb+Sn and lubed. I’d like a 250ish so I’m on the hunt. It that the heavy is bad, but, I don’t know I just want 250ish.

[44MAG#1]

I’m sure Elmer used whatever he could get just like we all do. It’s just for his pet loads he wanted 16:1. But I magine he would use softer for the gallery or target loads and for other calibers as he had need and reserve the 16:1 for his pet loads whenever he was running a bit low.

He said in sixguns that during the depression things was tight and he couldn’t afford pistol powder and was using shotgun powder out of necessity for some light loads. I believe that’s what he shot the mountain lion with. I’m sure he didn’t the same with lead though I’ve not seen that in his writings yet.

So with that being said, we can assume as humans do, he used 1-16.
Never in his writings about alloys he used in his earliest days can you find he said he used Linotype or Printers Metal as he called it.

[Larry Gibson]

I’m sure Elmer used whatever he could get just like we all do. It’s just for his pet loads he wanted 16:1. But I magine he would use softer for the gallery or target loads and for other calibers as he had need and reserve the 16:1 for his pet loads whenever he was running a bit low.

He said in sixguns that during the depression things was tight and he couldn’t afford pistol powder and was using shotgun powder out of necessity for some light loads. I believe that’s what he shot the mountain lion with. I’m sure he didn’t the same with lead though I’ve not seen that in his writings yet.

Pure lead and tin were a lot more prevalent back in Elmer's time, especially where he lived. He advocated the binary alloy in most all his cast bullets. Both my Lyman 429421 mould and my RCBS 44-250-KT moulds drop bullets of 16-1 alloy at 250 gr +/-. Keith's "classic" 44 Magnum load of 22 gr 2400 was with 250 gr bullet. Some, when they load that under 270 +/- gr "Keith" bullets complain Alliant 2400 is "hotter'. Ya think? I wonder why........

[Mal Paso]

The NOE Signature molds were newly discovered designs not produced during Elmer's lifetime. I had the 277g it was OK but I like the late 503 which may have come after Elmer passed, better.

It would be interesting to find out what Chamber Dimensions Elmer was working with. I suspect He was the reason 44 Mag chambers Got Longer. Only in my earlier Anaconda is the chamber short enough that the forward band of a late #503 is In the Throat. All the others, the forward band clears the throat by a good margin. I think it's Elmer's fault even though he was adamant about sizing .429".

[44MAG#1]

The NOE Signature molds were newly discovered designs not produced during Elmer's lifetime. I had the 277g it was OK but I like the late 503 which may have come after Elmer passed, better.

It would be interesting to find out what Chamber Dimensions Elmer was working with. I suspect He was the reason 44 Mag chambers Got Longer. Only in my earlier Anaconda is the chamber short enough that the forward band of a late #503 is In the Throat. All the others, the forward band clears the throat by a good margin. I think it's Elmer's fault even though he was adamant about sizing .429".

What worked for Keith worked for Keith. What works for us works for us.
I have said this before on here. I talked with him many times from the mid 1970's to just a few days before he had the stroke. He said the the bullet PICTURED in his Sixgun book where all the other cast bullets are pictured WAS CAST from an ORIGINAL mold from HIS DESIGN.
I sent him a 270 grain "Keith" that he liked and that Kent Lamont did the pressure testing on it for me.
Now whether anyone wants to believe me is another matter. He wrote up the bullet in his Gunnotes column and I have his letter about the bullet too.

[JAC43]

Those Prochko SWCs were the “steel masters” mentioned in the monstrous Keith bullet thread by LAH. They were most definitely designed during Keith’s last years since Prochko and a Salmon ID gunsmith were the ones involved in taking them to Keith for his approval. Pearce mentions this a bit in his 429421 article in HL#287. Walt Melander cut the original molds. NOE got involved due to the Keith bullet thread to facilitate the group buy. Regardless of whether they shoot better or not they have enough provenance to be signed off by the man himself I think.

[Mal Paso]

I was trying to make the point that the Signature molds were New Designs not versions of a previously released molds. Alloy won't cause a 27g weight gain unless you're adding Q metal.

[danmat]

I recomended the Keith NOE mold because the op was looking for Keith mold.
I have bought and read every Keith book long before Al Gore invented the internet, I know Keiths preferred alloy, and his 250 grain preferance.
I was poking the bear a little with the linotype suggestion, although Solomon had a paper starting in 1886 so I would guess linotype was around.
My NOE Keith drops around 275 with my alloy, my MP 503-265, MP 45-70 Keith around 400, I dont have an original H&G 503 to compare the weight
My point is the Keith bullet is not about weight, like saying a 30-06 spitzer is 150 grains not 180
44mag refers to 270 Keith after telling me a Keith 44 is 250 gr.
Mal Paso is the only person to mention the weight in the Long Keith thread, when he talks 44 bullets I listen and try to learn from his experience.
Larry mentioned overloading these heavier Keiths, I get it, but any caster reloader worth his salt would not drop a bullet without miking it for size and weighing it, if they did they probably are not aware of Keiths 2400 load anyway. When I open a new box of factory bullets first thing I do is grab a few and measure and weigh them so I know they are what the box says.
If someone wants a Keith of a certain weight Accurate can fix them up.

[44MAG#1]

danmat said. "44mag refers to 270 Keith after telling me a Keith 44 is 250 gr."

The reason it was 270 grains is it was designed BY ME and made by NEI and then copied by Wayne Gibbs of Hensley and Gibbs. Wayne got the H&G mold extremely close to the NEI going from dimensions of some NEI bullets I sent him.
The nose is LONGER that the Ideal/Lyman 250 Keith, the bands slightly longer.
I DID NOT MEAN that the 250's were 270 grains in weight.
As I said I still have the letter Keith sent me and he wrote of them in his Gun Notes column.
Oh well, another day in then saga of the elusive "Keith" bullet.
https://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=43-253K

[Onty]

I’d like to have one of the original moulds for that 429421, like every Keith fan I guess. My question is, who makes a copy of that bullet? I mean, an exact copy.
That one will be tough to find! From what I have read, the only real Keith's Lyman 429421 is a first batch, or some first batches. Since Lyman started fulling around with Keith's original design, he went to Hensley & Gibbs, and #503 was created. In that respect, I would forget "original" 429421, would rather look for #503, or exact copy of this design.

[44MAG#1]

As I said in post #26, which was probably ignored by most investigate Accurate Mold 43-253K. That is the closest to the original 429421 there is.

[alamogunr]

I'm still following this thread and about the only comment I have is that most available designs posted approximate or maybe closely follow Keith's original design. I wouldn't/don't have any problem with any of them. Since I have a few molds that approximate a Keith, I'm not in the market for any more.

Mold design like most things is not a static process. There are constant improvements(?) in just about everything. Each of us has to determine for ourselves what satisfies what we are looking for.

[Onty]

Just visited RCBS website, opened what they call .44-250-K https://www.rcbs.com/bullet-casting/moulds/bullet-mould-.44-250-k-421/355313.html

300333

Pardon my French...

Here is the illustration of the bullet with almost the same (no dot) bullet code 44-250-K from 2006 brochure https://www.acp-waffen.de/downloads/Produktinformationen/RCBS/RCBS_Kataloge/RCBS_Catalog_2006%20(E).pdf :

300334

Quite a difference, although, illustration is obviously sloppy photo-shop.

Also, here is something I snapped from handloads.com https://web.archive.org/web/20181220075804/http://handloads.com/ :

300332

From https://web.archive.org/web/20181125072903/http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=4

Is this something that was available (as a mold) from RCBS as 44-250-KT, or something similar?

The reason I was intrigued by this bullet was statement made by James Gates that conical nose bullets are more stable in transition form supersonic to subsonic velocity, thus more accurate on longer ranges, than LBT and other bullets with curved ogive. Could that small conical portion on bullet's nose be something to make noted bullet more stable than typical Keith with curved nose?

[Onty]

As I said in post #26, which was probably ignored by most investigate Accurate Mold 43-253K. That is the closest to the original 429421 there is.
Sorry, I might be wrong, but I am not convinced that "That is the closest to the original 429421 there is".

300336

First, on 429421 front band ends as a sharp corner, this one has a slope. Also, 43-253K has crimp groove more like grease groove, instead of sharp 30+60 degrees groove. As for dimensions, I cannot comment. Maybe somebody who has original, early, 429421.

However, it might be very good bullet, those how have this mold could say more.

[44MAG#1]

onty sent you a PM

[44MAG#1]

Again Onty another PM

[dogdoc]

I remember that in an old issue of handloader, Brian Pearce has an original early ideal 421429 mould that he compared to more modern Keith designs. I will try to locate that issue. I think he got from the family of Keith’s Alaska friend or something to that effect. I use a modern Lyman square groove in my mastercaster .

[farmbif]

ive been reading these debates and "experts" giving their opinion of "the" Keith bullet for decades, what ive taken away with it all is which bullet actually works best in your gun.
an I know a little bit about it too, probably just enough to make me realize how much I dont know, searching and finding the different designs of the molds. 429421 with both the round and squared lube groove, copies of the 503 mold, ive never had the chance to get an original.
but again it all seems to come down to what shoots best in a particular gun with a particular load.

[dogdoc]

The Keith bullet is a general concept not some absolute but it is interesting too see the mould from 1920s that more or less started it all.

[Bazoo]

Keith revised his bullets a few times at the beginning. Mostly the size of the meplat best I recall.

The accurate 43-253k lacks the square front driving band shoulder. It looks very similar to the bullet gll showed though, with that exception. The RCBS 44-250-k I have is closer to Keith’s bullet as far as I can tell, even though it weighs a bit more.

I think that some of not all of the Keith clones would satisfy Elmer, provided they had sharp front shoulder, square grease grooves, full diameter front band, and equal length driving bands. Wether or not it has a huge crimp groove or just a large crimp groove doesn’t really matter, as long as it has a sloped crimp surface and not just a smaller grease groove to serve as a crimp groove.

In sixguns, Elmer said his bullet wasn’t the end all, just the best so far. And he was pretty close to right.

[Onty]

Here is photo of of Accurate Mold 43-253K (left) and old Lyman 429421 (right), made by 44MAG#1. I am uploading it with his permission. Thank you Sir!

300391

For better resolution, see https://i.imgur.com/OCiwhhZ.jpg

[Bazoo]

Here is photo of of Accurate Mold 43-253K (left) and old Lyman 429421 (right), made by 44MAG#1. I am uploading it with his permission. Thank you Sir!

300391

For better resolution, see https://i.imgur.com/OCiwhhZ.jpg

Thanks for posting. The accurate appears to have an angled front shoulder, just like the drawing. Keith specified a sharp shoulder on the front driving band to cut full sized holes in both paper and flesh. I can’t tell if the 429421 has a sharp shoulder for sure but I think so. The imagine is a bit fuzzy.

[Bazoo]

I would like to offer, if anyone would like a few examples for comparison, of the bullets I have access to, I am glad to offer.

[Onty]

I would like to offer, if anyone would like a few examples for comparison, of the bullets I have access to, I am glad to offer.
I would suggest to snap nice pictures of bullets you have, same way 44MAG#1 did. Please make sure that picture is sharp and resolution high, so we can see details.

[Bazoo]

I would suggest to snap nice pictures of bullets you have, same way 44MAG#1 did. Please make sure that picture is sharp and resolution high, so we can see details.

I did just that, on the first page.

[Onty]

I did just that, on the first page.
Thanks! However, I was hoping that you could make picture parallel with axis, and closer, so profile of front driving bands (rounded or sharp), and bottoms of crimp groove would be clearly visible.

[Bazoo]

I’ll see what I can do.

[Bazoo]

Rcbs 44-240-swc 44-245-swc 44-250-k
https://i.postimg.cc/Yqt0TSNV/F620-FEA6-8899-47-C6-94-DB-F1776-C3-AD465.jpg (https://postimg.cc/qgZp345X)

The light wasn’t the best when I got to it. I’ll see if I can get better tomorrow.

[dogdoc]

Dec 2013 Handloader magazine has Pearces article on the the original Keith mould sent to a guy in Alaska at Keith’s request . It has good pictures of bullets cast from that single cavity mould. He compares ballistics of the Keith bullets as they evolved to present.

[AnthonyB]

I have enjoyed all of the threads we have had on the Keith bullets. No matter which is closest to the original intention, the RCBS 44-250K is the most “boolity” looking 44 boolit I have ever seen.
Tony

[alamogunr]

dogdoc, You beat me to it. I was looking for 2013 and skipped over the article. The copy calls it December-January 2014. I guess I ignored the months and focused on the year. I've got a 1½" stack of printouts of .44 Special articles that I accumulated after getting my FA97 in 44 Spec. Most are from Handloader, American Rifleman(as far back as 1953) and a couple of others. My interest in cast bullets is not what is the most faithful version of the Keith bullet, but what are the differences. The picture that Bazoo posted looks much like the RCBS 44-240 SWC and the 44-250K produced by my molds. At least RCBS didn't change them.

I've been looking at the Accurate site. 44MAG#1 posted a link to Accurate 43-253K. I have been looking at both 43-250J and 43-250K. I suspect that any of the 3 would satisfy me but others would pick all three apart for various deficiencies, even 250J which is noted to be a clone of Ideal 429421. I wouldn't disagree with any differences pointed out.

[Bazoo]

I am interested in the differences in Keith styles myself.

I’ll have to get that handloader. Unless someone knows of an online for it.

[Onty]

@ Bazoo,

Eagerly waiting for next picture. BTW, I am certainly not expert for photography, but seems to me that while taking picture above, camera focus was bit off, focusing on background. I had same problem many times.

[44MAG#1]

What you guys want is an EXACT copy of the ORIGINAL Keith/COBBLED UP Keith by someone accurate to the 1/1,000,000 or .000001" and it ain't gonna happen by anyone regardless of what the mold maker says.
As long as you look and critique every little difference, complain about every little difference and worry about every little difference no one will be satisfied.
Just get yourself a "KEITH" mold by whoever you want one from, work up yourself a good load for that "KEITH" bullet and get up off the bench and go forth and shoot.
That is how to be happy and most people you will be shooting with or who you show the bullet too wont know or care if it is an EXACT copy of the "KEITH" bullet or not.
I have both H&G 503 bullet designs, two of the RCBS designs and Lyman designs and the 270 Keith, Mr. Keith wrote up in his Gun Notes column and the H&G copy of that bullet Wayne Gibbs made of it in a 6 cavity.
It really doesn't make any real difference actually. Just in the mind of the shooter is all. Occasionally I shoot the Accurate Mold 43-253K when I get the flutters but mostly shoot two designs that are from Accurate Molds that are far removed from the "KEITH" bullet.
Have fun. May the "KEITH" be with you.

[44MAG#1]

I would say if you can't get a bullet mold from Accurate Molds that will satisfy you you will never be satisfied. He will work with you on dimensions.
Give it a whirl.

[Onty]

Here is the boolit that puzzles me:

300454

I copied picture from https://web.archive.org/web/20181125072903/http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=4 . In the article, author, John Knutson, mentioned it as "Leadhead's 250 gr LSWC", no other info.

Scaling picture, I tried to do reverse engineering, and I've got this:

300444

However, calculated boolit weight is about 265 grains. Anybody knows who made a mold?

NOTE: Corrected design and weight:

[Bazoo]

Here’s a better picture, I think. Mind you these pics are from a cellphone. And getting to to focus right is the hard part.

https://i.postimg.cc/kG6qgvHj/1776080-D-493-E-41-A1-8491-AAEB717-F309-F.jpg (https://postimg.cc/1VQLWws6)

I’m happy to do more pics as requested.

[Onty]

Thanks, looks like boolit on right side has sharp, or almost sharp corner in a crimp groove.

Going back to 429421, no matter what's original, Ideal 44MAG#1 presented, or another ones with sharp corner in crimp groove, if version you have is good in your handguns, keep it.

Back to Keith, he gave up on 429421, went to Hensley & Gibbs, and created #503. The rest is history.

When I was inquiring about 44 mold, I had in sight 432-640 and 432-256 https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?407894-44-Magnum-MP-Molds-432-256-v-s-432-640 . From what I could see in comments, 432-256 has the edge, so I purchased 6 cavity aluminum mold.

[Bazoo]

What worked for Keith worked for Keith. What works for us works for us.
I have said this before on here. I talked with him many times from the mid 1970's to just a few days before he had the stroke. He said the the bullet PICTURED in his Sixgun book where all the other cast bullets are pictured WAS CAST from an ORIGINAL mold from HIS DESIGN.
I sent him a 270 grain "Keith" that he liked and that Kent Lamont did the pressure testing on it for me.
Now whether anyone wants to believe me is another matter. He wrote up the bullet in his Gunnotes column and I have his letter about the bullet too.

Do you have (or anyone) copy of that gun notes article? I’m interested to read it.

[Bazoo]

Thanks, looks like boolit on right side has sharp, or almost sharp corner in a crimp groove.

Going back to 429421, no matter what's original, Ideal 44MAG#1 presented, or another ones with sharp corner in crimp groove. To make a long story short, Keith gave up on 429421, went to Hensley & Gibbs, and created #503. The rest is history.

And I agree with all of you saying that accuracy is what matters. So, if version you have is good in your handguns, keep it. When I was inquiring about 44 mold, I had in sight 432-640 and 432-256 https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?407894-44-Magnum-MP-Molds-432-256-v-s-432-640 . From what I could see in comments, 432-256 has the edge, so I purchased 6 cavity aluminum mold.

Yessir, the 44-250-k (mine at least) crimp groove comes down to a sharp corner. It appears as a 90 degree. When crimped, it leaves a bit of gap above the case mouth, below the forward driving band. If you like a few samples I’m glad to send them to you.

For some reason, I like the flat in the crimp groove like gll shows in his early 429421 pic.

[Onty]

Thanks for the kind offer. Problem is I am in Europe, not in USA.

[Bazoo]

Well, I’ll offer pics in any context you like then.

[405grain]

I've had a RCBS-44-245-SWC mold since 1982. The boolit looks exactly like the one in the middle of the picture on post #8. I've used this boolit in a 10.5" barreled Super Blackhawk and a 4" barreled S&W 629 to hunt hogs for ever. When powder coating came along I started shake-n-baking these slugs and never looked back. I've loaded these boolits with everything from 7.0 grains of Unique to 24.0 grains of H110 without issue. The thinner skirt on the lower driving band has never been a problem. The bullets have proven to be accurate and effective on game from 250 pound hogs to ground squirrels, and I have no complaints. IMHO minor differences in the design of "Keith type" bullets are of little consequence. The general design is so efficient that the performance on game is much more a matter of the marksman's skills than on some feature of the different choices of boolit. Of all the pigs that I shot over the years with this boolit only one got away, and one had to be shot multiple times. All the rest were bang - flops.

When the economic supply chain issues let up, and my wallet goes off it's diet and gets a little fatter, I'd like to pick up an RCBS 44-300-SWC. Not because I need it, but just because I think it might be fun to shoot.

[AlaskaMike]

Here is the boolit that puzzles me:

300454

I copied picture from https://web.archive.org/web/20181125072903/http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=4 . In the article, author, John Knutson, mentioned it as "Leadhead's 250 gr LSWC", no other info.

Scaling picture, I tried to do reverse engineering, and I've got this:

300444

However, calculated boolit weight is about 265 grains. Anybody knows who made a mold?

NOTE: Corrected design and weight:


Leadhead's was a company that sold cast bullets, but is no longer in business anymore. I still have some of the bullets in that top photo. Unfortunately I don't know who made the mold Leadhead's used to produce those bullets. They're very close to the RCBS 44-250-K, but there are some slight differences.

As 44MAG#1 points out, most if not all of the minor differences are completely meaningless when it comes to the actual bullet performance.

[Onty]

Leadhead's was a company that sold cast bullets, but is no longer in business anymore. I still have some of the bullets in that top photo. Unfortunately I don't know who made the mold Leadhead's used to produce those bullets. They're very close to the RCBS 44-250-K, but there are some slight differences.

As 44MAG#1 points out, most if not all of the minor differences are completely meaningless when it comes to the actual bullet performance.

I would appreciate a large, sharp photo of that boolit. The picture I have is mediocre, so when I enlarge to scale it, gets quite fuzzy. Please make sure that camera is perpendicular to boolit axis.

BTW, what's your experience with that boolit?

Thanks!

[AlaskaMike]

I'll take a photo with the good camera tonight.

My experience with them has been very good. They're a little on the hard side for my preference, though. I believe they're sized .430, but I'll verify that when I take the pics.

[AlaskaMike]

Here's a photo of a Leadheads .44 Keith bullet next to one of my RCBS 44-250-K bullets. The Leadheads is on the left with the green lube, and mine is on the right with the red lube.

As you can see, they are virtually identical. I'm not sure I could distinguish between them visually. However, the Leadheads bullet is a tiny bit longer in the nose, for an extra .013" total length.

Leadheads: .810"
My 44-250-K: .797"

As close as they are, it makes me wonder if the Leadheads bullet isn't an earlier RCBS 44-250-K mold.
300537

[Bazoo]

They do look identical. Thanks for sharing, AKMike.

[Onty]

Here's a photo of a Leadheads .44 Keith bullet next to one of my RCBS 44-250-K bullets. The Leadheads is on the left with the green lube, and mine is on the right with the red lube.

As you can see, they are virtually identical. I'm not sure I could distinguish between them visually. However, the Leadheads bullet is a tiny bit longer in the nose, for an extra .013" total length.

Leadheads: .810"
My 44-250-K: .797"

As close as they are, it makes me wonder if the Leadheads bullet isn't an earlier RCBS 44-250-K mold.
300537
Sir, would you please check weights of those boolits. When I designed that one shown in post #73, it's OAL is .800", and weight using wheelweight (specific density 11 grams per ccm), came calculated 265.5 gr.

[AlaskaMike]

Sorry for the delayed reply. I took a random sample of 5 of the Leadheads bullets, and also 5 of my own just for comparison:

Leadheads: 252.3, 252.2, 253.2, 253.3, 251.1
Mine: 258.4, 259.8, 259.5, 258.9, 259.8

As you can see, the Leadheads are a few grains lighter due to the harder alloy. The alloy in mine is clip on wheel weight, with about 2% added tin .

[Bazoo]

I can’t remember who sent me these samples. I think someone here but I can’t remember and I deleted the message I reckon. Anyways. Here is the samples I received and an OK picture. The center two are my own.

https://i.postimg.cc/N0GvdzLZ/351-B4865-1265-412-E-AAE4-C5-FF1-EEA5-F64.jpg (https://postimg.cc/3kqqR9XZ)

From left to right.
Ideal 429421 box marked lyman ideal (round lube groove)
RCBS 44-250-K
RCBS 44-250-K my version
RCBS 44-245-SWC
RCBS 44-250-SWC
MP 432-256 H&G 503 clone

I’m glad to offer comparisons any other way for folks. I don’t know the alloys of these so, I don’t weigh them. But I can weigh and make a guess of alloy if needed.

[Bazoo]

Here is the RCBS 44-240-SWC I have samples from, mine on the right. Left sample provided by the same person as the above Keith bullets.
https://i.postimg.cc/x1kZxVPk/0-B667-E55-E2-FF-4-CEB-9960-2-BB931-E808-A9.jpg (https://postimg.cc/Bj0Nbyks)