358-429 versions

[LucasL]

I have the Arsenal version, but I hadn’t much luck with accuracy.
I like to try the other mold company’s
Just wondering what other people had luck with.

[Recycled bullet]

I have had good results with the MP 358429 aluminum 8 cavity and brass 4 cavity hollow points, both plain based.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20231212/01d7e6f17fff1285b6c6e9e9bc02a7f2.jpg

[hc18flyer]

I have an older Lyman version. It hasn't been as accurate as my .357-150 Keith in my .38 Special. I have read that it needs to be pushed faster in an S & W? I haven't given up yet. hc18flyer

[lotech]

I have the Lyman version from about thirty-five years ago along with the Lyman #358439 HP version from the '60s. Both shoot well, but I think the HP may be slightly more accurate. I prefer the H&G #51 SWC at about 160 grs.

[20:1]

There could be other reasons for your accuracy issues, would you care to share your as cast dimensions, weights and other statistics like load info, etc? To be honest, Keith designs haven't been the most accurate for me either, but I do have them because there are some situations where they're still an excellent choice.

[murf205]

I have an older Lyman version. It hasn't been as accurate as my .357-150 Keith in my .38 Special. I have read that it needs to be pushed faster in an S & W? I haven't given up yet. hc18flyer

That little 150 gr Keith is hands down the most accurate boolit I ever shot in a 38/357 in 45 years. I have an Accurate Molds 160 gr that is a close 2nd but every gun I owned and a lot of others have took a big time shine to that boolit. The 173 has to be accurate for some people so I;m not going to bash it but my heavy boolit results have been better with the LBT 180 gr.

[rintinglen]

IME, the 358-429 was never quite as accurate as it was claimed to be. The 358-477, the 38-150 KT as well as the 358-311 all did better for me. Not to say it was a stinker--like the 357-446-- but it would generally print groups a half inch or more larger.

[gwpercle]

I have the Arsenal version, but I hadn’t much luck with accuracy.
I like to try the other mold company’s
Just wondering what other people had luck with.

I haven't had much luck with the Lyman 358429 either . I was interested in this Elmer Keith design and found a single cavity mould on ebay to test ... and I tested the heck out of it and was quite disappointed with accuracy ... I don't think it is the maker but maybe the design , maybe the weight / length of the boolit design isn't optimal ???
I get much better accuracy with boolits of 160 gr. / 158 gr.

The Most Accurate loads I have come up with use the strange WC / SWC hybrid Lyman #358432 boolit , now discontinued but being made by NOE ,
NOE #360-160-WC PB (360432)... this is a 160 gr boolit that loads out the case like a SWC but has a WC nose . Not seen very often now but a very accurate boolit !
Gary

[shooting on a shoestring]

LucasL welcome aboard.
Good question.
My experience with Lyman 358429 173 gr Keith type SWC has been poor groups unless driven hard. Then it almost gets decent.

I think it’s the worst in the slow twist S&W 1:18.75” revolvers.
It’s a little better in the Blackhawk 1:16” twist but still not wonderful.

I mostly shoot full wadcutters in my 35 caliber revolvers. I usually push them fast as in full throttle. They make good groups (under 50 yards) and smack stuff real hard.

I suggest you try a full wadcutter or at least move to a shorter (lighter) SWC.
If you shoot good enough to see the Aresnal version of 358429 is a problem, I’d expect you’d be equally unhappy with anyone else’s version because they are just too long for 18.75” twist barrels.

[20:1]

Honestly, they have worked very well indeed for me in 38/44 loads in 38 Spl cases. It's almost like they were designed for that use[smilie=1:

[Bazoo]

I'm interested in the design progression of the 358429. I only have 1 version on BulletMatch, it's and Ideal with a round lube groove. I'd really love to have an original with square grooves for comparison, and do a study on the design. Lyman has gone back to square grooves for the 358429. I wonder if one version was more accurate than the other?

https://i.postimg.cc/FRYLhjDC/Screenshot-2023-12-12-at-9-47-13-PM.png (https://postimg.cc/62N30GsC)

https://i.postimg.cc/FRbQd6WY/Screenshot-2023-12-12-at-9-49-49-PM.png (https://postimg.cc/7GLRjKy4)

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

I have the Arsenal version, but I hadn’t much luck with accuracy.
I like to try the other mold company’s
Just wondering what other people had luck with.

Lucas,
Welcome to the forum.
I have a NOE version, but it is a hollow point, I do have the flat point pins, but never cast any. It has shoot OK for me in my revolvers, but with a HP, there is less mass on the nose.

[Bazoo]

I have the Arsenal version, but I hadn’t much luck with accuracy.
I like to try the other mold company’s
Just wondering what other people had luck with.
I completely forgot to say howdy!

Howdy and welcome to cb.gl forum!

[20:1]

I'm interested in the design progression of the 358429. I only have 1 version on BulletMatch, it's and Ideal with a round lube groove. I'd really love to have an original with square grooves for comparison, and do a study on the design. Lyman has gone back to square grooves for the 358429. I wonder if one version was more accurate than the other?

Originals from the 1920s are rare indeed. If I read my Keith correctly, the production molds differed from the prototypes that Keith originally ordered. Keith mentioned that when Ideal/Lyman started cataloging his design that the went to the rounded grease groove and reduced the diameter of the front driving band, What he didn't specify was if these changes took place with the initial production, or if it was done as a running change later on. Also, the original Keith molds would have dated back to the late 1920s and so would have been the old style single cavity designs with one-piece handles. The interchangeable block system dates back to the 1940s so if someone has un-vented Keith designs that aren't one piece they're probably a re-release or special run of some sort. I have two nearly identical SC 358429 un-vented molds, one has a round groove and the other is square. To further confound things Ideals manuals and handbooks from the late 40s and early 50s show pictures of 358429 with square grooves only. Finding a fully original 358429 from the thirties would be the coup of a lifetime. The 358429 first showed up in Ideal manuals in 1931 so anything is possible, but it looks like they were cut in the one-piece mold design.

[Bazoo]

Originals from the 1920s are rare indeed. If I read my Keith correctly, the production molds differed from the prototypes that Keith originally ordered. Keith mentioned that when Ideal/Lyman started cataloging his design that the went to the rounded grease groove and reduced the diameter of the front driving band, What he didn't specify was if these changes took place with the initial production, or if it was done as a running change later on. Also, the original Keith molds would have dated back to the late 1920s and so would have been the old style single cavity designs with one-piece handles. The interchangeable block system dates back to the 1940s so if someone has un-vented Keith designs that aren't one piece they're probably a re-release or special run of some sort. I have two nearly identical SC 358429 un-vented molds, one has a round groove and the other is square. To further confound things Ideals manuals and handbooks from the late 40s and early 50s show pictures of 358429 with square grooves only. Finding a fully original 358429 from the thirties would be the coup of a lifetime. The 358429 first showed up in Ideal manuals in 1931 so anything is possible, but it looks like they were cut in the one-piece mold design.

Wow, thank you for the information.

[Bazoo]

Originals from the 1920s are rare indeed. If I read my Keith correctly, the production molds differed from the prototypes that Keith originally ordered. Keith mentioned that when Ideal/Lyman started cataloging his design that the went to the rounded grease groove and reduced the diameter of the front driving band, What he didn't specify was if these changes took place with the initial production, or if it was done as a running change later on. Also, the original Keith molds would have dated back to the late 1920s and so would have been the old style single cavity designs with one-piece handles. The interchangeable block system dates back to the 1940s so if someone has un-vented Keith designs that aren't one piece they're probably a re-release or special run of some sort. I have two nearly identical SC 358429 un-vented molds, one has a round groove and the other is square. To further confound things Ideals manuals and handbooks from the late 40s and early 50s show pictures of 358429 with square grooves only. Finding a fully original 358429 from the thirties would be the coup of a lifetime. The 358429 first showed up in Ideal manuals in 1931 so anything is possible, but it looks like they were cut in the one-piece mold design.

Wow, thank you for the information.

[curiousgeorge]

I have an H&G 4 cavity mold from the 1960's in their version of the 358429. I've loaded and shot thousands of them in a 4" model 10, 4" model 19, 4.625" BH, and 6" BH over 5.0 grains of Unique. Maybe not THE most accurate load or bullet, but it has handled everything I've run into for over 40 years. Disclaimer - no elephants, rhinos, grizzly bears, or mastadons were encountered by me when packing my lowly 38 special loads.

[20:1]

I have an H&G 4 cavity mold from the 1960's in their version of the 358429. I've loaded and shot thousands of them in a 4" model 10, 4" model 19, 4.625" BH, and 6" BH over 5.0 grains of Unique. Maybe not THE most accurate load or bullet, but it has handled everything I've run into for over 40 years. Disclaimer - no elephants, rhinos, grizzly bears, or mastadons were encountered by me when packing my lowly 38 special loads.

One thing about all things Kiethian, be it Elmers advice, or his designs. Everything works as described, it may not be the current "best" design, but it does perform as described. Elmer claimed his designs were accurate, they are, there have been newer developments since 1928 such as some of the RNFP designs. I particularly appreciate Veral Smiths LBT designs myself. I also appreciate Ray Thompsons & Hensley & Gibbs work as well. If you have an H&G 43 I hope you cherish it.

[6thtexas]

I currently own just the NOE version. On my last Lyman, the leading edge of the front driving band was radiused. The NOE looks very similar to the pictures I have seen of the original. It does seem to do better pushed a little hard and my Rugers do shoot a bit it better than the S&Ws but the latter give acceptable accuracy. Out of my 7 1/2" Ruger Bisley the 358429 on top of a heavy load of H110 shoots really, really good and hits hard, Plinking at longer ranges (200-300+ yds) accuracy holds up very well

[brassrat]

I have a Lyman 4c and havent shot them very much but they seem ok and get an orange color now. My 1959 Uberti quickly showed it was really happy. Would have to get up and see if .38 or .357. Crimped where it should even if shaving .030 or whatever off .357 cases.

[murf205]

This is the one that shoots better than the 173 gr Keith, for me any way. A LOT better.

[20:1]

This is the one that shoots better than the 173 gr Keith, for me any way. A LOT better.

I miss LBT. I have perhaps a half dozen of Verals molds. Had I know more about the future, I'd have many times that number. And I always favored the 180 LFN, I took my first handgun deer with one :)

[lotech]

I miss LBT. I have perhaps a half dozen of Verals molds. Had I know more about the future, I'd have many times that number. And I always favored the 180 LFN, I took my first handgun deer with one :)

I've had the plainbase version of that bullet for about twenty years. I've never gotten decent accuracy with it in the .38 Special. It does much better in the .357 if pushed hard, but it's never been among my most accurate moulds designs.

[Hickok]

One thing I can say about the #358429 (mine has the round lube grooves) is the greater the distance, the better it groups. Some cast and jacketed bullets may beat it at 25 yards on a target, but as the range gets longer, the Keith SWC seems to out shoot the others.

Using a S&W 686 6" it has grouped 6-7 inch groups from a bagged rest @ 100 yards for 5 shots for me,...(on a good day!!). I know others can do better, just my experience.

Others boolits/bullets (usually lighter and shorter) that out-group the 358429 @ 25 yds, seem to get wandering before they make it to 50 yards.

[fivegunner]

Good post, I have and used most of the bullets spoken here, but I have to say the Lyman 358156 is the most accurate out of my handgun`s I know it`s a pain putting on the gas check, but well worth it to me.

[murf205]

Gas checking is a PITA but the results usually are worth the trouble. I am a plain base guy normally but I've never had worse results when gas checking.

[20:1]

Gas checking is a PITA but the results usually are worth the trouble. I am a plain base guy normally but I've never had worse results when gas checking.

Gas check expanders take the fight out of them. I don't mind the expense, at $35.00/K it's like 3.5 cents each. 357 JHPs are around 20 cents ea.

[fecmech]

I've shot multiple thousands of 358429 Lymans from a 4 cav I bought in the late 60's. My mold had the round lube groove and when matched with max loads of 296/H110 six shot benched 50yd groups ran 2-2.5". My 94 Winchester .357 would do 3-4" 100 yd groups with the same loads. It was not at it's best with mild .38spl loads. My $.02

[20:1]

Originals from the 1920s are rare indeed. If I read my Keith correctly, the production molds differed from the prototypes that Keith originally ordered. Keith mentioned that when Ideal/Lyman started cataloging his design that the went to the rounded grease groove and reduced the diameter of the front driving band, What he didn't specify was if these changes took place with the initial production, or if it was done as a running change later on. Also, the original Keith molds would have dated back to the late 1920s and so would have been the old style single cavity designs with one-piece handles. The interchangeable block system dates back to the 1940s so if someone has un-vented Keith designs that aren't one piece they're probably a re-release or special run of some sort. I have two nearly identical SC 358429 un-vented molds, one has a round groove and the other is square. To further confound things Ideals manuals and handbooks from the late 40s and early 50s show pictures of 358429 with square grooves only. Finding a fully original 358429 from the thirties would be the coup of a lifetime. The 358429 first showed up in Ideal manuals in 1931 so anything is possible, but it looks like they were cut in the one-piece mold design.

Well, I appear to have gotten my hands on some bad information that I passed on here. The information I had originally received stated that Ideal didn't get into detachable mold blocks until the mid to late '40s and that is not correct. The real story is that Ideal copied the idea of detachable blocks in the late '20s, shortly after they were acquired by Lyman. I apologize for passing on bad information, I'll vet my sources better before trying to date the old molds. I should have known better.

Thanks!

[Wheelgun]

The 358429 I have is from an older Lee group-buy, and one of the NOE “True Keith” molds (360-172 swc) from the group-buy a few years back.

Most of my shooting is in 38 brass at 38spl and 38 +P loadings. They do ok, but do better when pushed harder, into mid-range to full snort 357mag loadings.

My most used/most accurate 38/357 boolits are the Lyman 358156 & Lee group-buy clone & the Lee 358-158RF. Fallowed but the Lee 358-125RF…

[Bazoo]

Well, I appear to have gotten my hands on some bad information that I passed on here. The information I had originally received stated that Ideal didn't get into detachable mold blocks until the mid to late '40s and that is not correct. The real story is that Ideal copied the idea of detachable blocks in the late '20s, shortly after they were acquired by Lyman. I apologize for passing on bad information, I'll vet my sources better before trying to date the old molds. I should have known better.

Thanks!
Thanks for the correction. I couldn’t remember when they made the change.

[20:1]

Thanks for the correction. I couldn’t remember when they made the change.

Ideal, in their infinite wisdom had chosen to keep recycling their "announcement" of the end of the one-piece mold production into the '40s and maybe even as late as 1950. I need to get a set of the very early manuals before I try to understand what they were talking about, and when. "When" is a very important factor to those who follow the old Ideals.