358429 COL question

[Jal5]

I am loading these for my 357 mag, S&W M66, 6" barrel.

I am working up a load using CCI sp and Alliant 2400.
I wound up with a 1.622 COL but the crimp appears to be on top of the shoulder of the boolit slightly and not in that first crimp groove. These are R-P brass.
I have loaded these before and don't remember the crimp being like that.

Is the boolit seated too far down or is this from some other issue?
Will they be OK to fire as is or is there a pressure risk from being seated that way?
Pictures of these reloaded here on other subforums show more of the boolit exposed above the case mouth than mine are I am sure.
Thanks for the help. Will post a picture later.

Joe

[Wally]

Yes, one needs to be concerned w/ the pressure if you load the 358429 "deep"...you have to in a S & W as you cannot crimp in the crimong groove as the bullet would be too long. I have trimmed some .357 Mag brass just enough so that I can crimp in the crimp groove with this bullet used in my model 27...I reduce a maximum powder chg a few grains to compensate for the shoter case. Ditto if you use the 358311 as well.

[Guesser]

My Ruger Security 6's and NMBH as well as all my Colt 357's can take the round with 358429 crimped in the crimp groove. My S&W 65 and 66 have to be crimped over the front driving band. Just the way it is with that bullet and S&W.
On the 358311 I have to do it the same way in a 357 case, just as stated by Wally.

[Maven]

Joe, Brian Pearce (Handloader mag.) recommends trimming .357mag. brass to 1.25" when using that CB so you can then crimp it in the proper place. However, I'd try trimming it to 1.26" and see whether you can crimp -429 normally, as the brass does get shorter over time.

[AZ-Stew]

I recall crimping mine in the crimp groove for the two M-19 Smiths I had. This also works for the Ruger Security Six. The Smiths that WON'T take the 358429 crimped in the groove are the N-frame versions, M-27 and M-28. I always crimped them INTO the front driving band for those model Smiths, so as to leave some of the band exposed to help the boolit center in the chamber mouth, as Keith intended. Crimping into the crimp groove also works with the Smith 586 and 686. Since it works in the M-19, I'm curious as to why it doesn't work in the M-65 and M-66, which should be stainless steel versions of the M-19. Maybe my memory is faulty and I had to load them shorter for the M-19. It's been too long.

As to pressures and seating depths, as others have told you, yes, it does matter. If you loaded max loads and seated the boolits so you could crimp over the shoulder, you will have really hot loads. It's better to disassemble them and start over than to shoot them.

Regards,

Stew

[fecmech]

The Lyman cast bullet handbook lists all it's loading for the 358429 with an OAL of 1.553 which is crimped over the front driving band. Their max 2400 load is 13.5 grs of 2400 @41100 cup. and if you are under 13.5 grs I would not worry about it.

[Guesser]

My 66 is a -5; 1999, cylinder is just short enough to not accept the 429 in the crimp groove.

[Jal5]

Thanks guys. I have loaded the 358429 before using Unique for mid range loads and crimped in the crimp groove so I know that COL fits my gun. I am just wondering why this lot of reloads regardless of powder crimped on the drive band a little ways? Maybe different length in the cases or I set up the seating die differently slightly?

"The Lyman cast bullet handbook lists all it's loading for the 358429 with an OAL of 1.553 which is crimped over the front driving band. Their max 2400 load is 13.5 grs of 2400 @41100 cup. and if you are under 13.5 grs I would not worry about it. "

Since mine are 1.622 and my max load of 2400 is 13.0 I am below the Lyman book max pressure I would think, is that a good assumption? In that case these would be OK to shoot as is.

Joe

[MtGun44]

358429 usually fits fine in K frame guns. I have one that I have used it in. It is very
close to the end of the cylinder, but works fine. I use it more in my 586 +1 and
Sec Six. Of course, it works great in .38 Spl K-frames - I use it in several of them.

If yours does not, it may be a non-standard variation, which Lyman - unfortunately - has
drifted to from time to time. I'd try seating it as deeply as possible within the normal crimp
groove.

Bill

[armed_partisan]

Just don't load it too hot! They aren't makin' those barrels for K-Frame magnums anymore, and when that forcing cone goes, it's done!

[fecmech]

Since mine are 1.622 and my max load of 2400 is 13.0 I am below the Lyman book max pressure I would think, is that a good assumption? In that case these would be OK to shoot as is.

Joe

I would not have a problem shooting them. I load 358429 to 1.638 oal taper crimped on the front drive band with 13.5/2400 in my Ruger gp100.

[9.3X62AL]

Mtn Gun 44 nailed it--not all Lyman #358429s are created equally. My own current mould casts at 163 grains, has a short base band, and its front band is longer than the rear one. I haven't tried these in 357 loads in my Model 19 x 2.5" yet, don't know if they'll fit. They do fine in the 686 x 4", though. The cylinder in the 19 is slightly longer than that in my pre-27 N-frame, which seems kinda lame--given their respective strength ratings. The L-frame/686 cylinder is longer than both.

S&W finally got all their 357 Magnum ducks in a row with the L-frame. It only took them from 1935 to 1980 to accomplish that. Meanwhile, Colt and Ruger didn't have these sorts of brain farts. To conclude, both Lyman and S&W have poetic ideas about the 357 Magnum and bullet/cylinder dimensioning criteria.

[Dale53]

Al;
>>>-not all Lyman #358429s are created equally<<<

I consider this almost CRIMINAL on Lyman's part. All loading data is based on a particular seating depth and their cavalier treatment of their OWN bullet designs makes a lot of their pressure data near worthless. There is NO reason to do this other than pure lack of responsibility. It is only because of the strength of most American firearms that has prevented any number of blown up handguns to result from this.

The caution that we all read from time to time is, "Be careful, and work up any new load in the firearm before using" is not much help when used in revolvers. Generally, by the time any pressure signs show up you will be WAY above allowable pressures for most revolvers. This IS a fact.

The only guns that "working up loads" have much validity for are bolt action center fires. In those, you can go a bit "too far" find sticking cases and flattened primers before exceeding yield limits. That is vehemently NOT SO with most revolvers.

Rant Off.
Be careful people, Murphy lies in wait for the unwary...

Dale53

[theperfessor]

My 359429 won't work in my GP100 crimped in the crimp groove.

[Jal5]

Thanks guys, I will try them and let you know how it goes.

Joe

[fecmech]

My 359429 won't work in my GP100 crimped in the crimp groove.

That was my reasoning for the use of taper crimp on the front band in my GP. It lets me seat the bullet out of the case as intended and I get no bullet movement from recoil. If I didn't have a taper crimp die I would just do a very light roll crimp, just enough to get rid of the bell in the case with the normal roll crimp die.

[Shiloh]

FIt the Security Six. A fine boolit. Nothing fater than mid-range loads for me.

Shiloh

[x101airborne]

I am working a load with 4227 and the 359429 and my 66-6 4 inch. I had the same issue and I trimmed my cases back just to where they would crimp in the groove. This moved my shoulder back to where it would just kiss the throat of the chamber. By water volume measurement, the loss of .004 of case length netted me around -.3gr. I reduced my max charges by .2gr each. I am just guessing this to be correct. I do not have any load software to prove my theories. Since my only 357 is the 66-6, I am not worried about mixing cases with another weapon, and even if I did, i have reduced my charges accordingly. just my procedure.

[Echo]

Thanks guys. I have loaded the 358429 before using Unique for mid range loads and crimped in the crimp groove so I know that COL fits my gun. I am just wondering why this lot of reloads regardless of powder crimped on the drive band a little ways? Maybe different length in the cases or I set up the seating die differently slightly?

Joe

Joe, if you have changed nothing, I suspect that the seating die is possibly clogged up a little w/lube, causing the boolits to be somewhat deeper seated. Have you checked?

[GLL]

Al & Dale:

Although LYMAN has been VERY bad about changing the 358429 they have been even WORSE with the 454424 ! All of the bullets in the photo are IDEAL/LYMAN 454424 except the one on the right and left ends. The right end is CAT's 454424 Group Buy and the left is a LYMAN 452424.

WHY ? :( :(

Jerry

http://www.fototime.com/82F143EDC5E6FEE/standard.jpg

[9.3X62AL]

Very good point, Dale. I don't mind the need to take responsibility and "ownership" of whatever combination I load in any firearm. We all can benefit from such caution and conservatism at the loading bench.

It IS irresponsible of Lyman to produce such egregious variations in many of their mould designs, and to presume upon the safety margins built into firearms we use. Again, if we are to go about reloading and casting safely and responsibly, we owe it to the hobby field (and to ourselves!) to go slowly and deliberately while working up our loads to suit a given arm.

I don't LIKE Lyman's tendencies in this venue, but understand them and accept them as one of the costs of doing business. I think we should bring attention to these quirks so that newer casters and reloaders are better informed and can derive safer loads from Lyman moulds.

[Jal5]

Joe, if you have changed nothing, I suspect that the seating die is possibly clogged up a little w/lube, causing the boolits to be somewhat deeper seated. Have you checked?

thanks I will check that out I hadn't thought of that possibility.

Joe

[NHlever]

Thanks guys. I have loaded the 358429 before using Unique for mid range loads and crimped in the crimp groove so I know that COL fits my gun. I am just wondering why this lot of reloads regardless of powder crimped on the drive band a little ways? Maybe different length in the cases or I set up the seating die differently slightly?

"The Lyman cast bullet handbook lists all it's loading for the 358429 with an OAL of 1.553 which is crimped over the front driving band. Their max 2400 load is 13.5 grs of 2400 @41100 cup. and if you are under 13.5 grs I would not worry about it. "

Since mine are 1.622 and my max load of 2400 is 13.0 I am below the Lyman book max pressure I would think, is that a good assumption? In that case these would be OK to shoot as is.

Joe

Quick Load gives the pressure of that load at 44,015 PSI, and the velocity at 1280FPS from a 4" barrel. I input 13.0 grs. of 2400 at a COL of 1.622. The SAMMI pressure max for the .357 is 35,000 PSI. They show 34,335 PSI, and 1166 FPS with 12.0 grains of 2400, and I would consider that the MAXIMUM with your boolit, and COL. Dropping the load to 11.5 grains only shows a velocity loss of about 50 FPS, but the pressure is better at 30,282 PSI. Hope this helps. I can't be responsible for Quickload data, but I do use it as a guide line myself.

[Jal5]

Thanks for that Quickload data. Based on that I will reconsider the MAX load for that COL. I may start from scratch and reload using a longer COL. Better to be safe than sorry.

Joe

[txpete]

no problems with the 357 redhawk ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v238/txpete/357%20mag/DSCF2562.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v238/txpete/357%20mag/DSCF2564.jpg

[Beerd]

I got my 358429 mould before I heard about this OAL dilemma. Not knowing any better I just crimped my 357 brass in the groove provided and went on my merry way. Loaded this way,I don't have any problem shooting them in a Ruger Blackhawk or a S & W Model 66.

fwiw
My Lyman manual lists 2 different over all lengths for this bullet loaded in 357 Mag.
One in the "Handgun" section and one in the "TC Contender" section.
Both sections have the exact same start and max powder charge data.
..

[Jal5]

The real issue here is not whether they will fit the M66 it is whether the pressure will be too much given the fact that they are set deeper in the case. From the picture, the bigger one fits and fires fine in my gun, its the shorter one with the deeper set boolit that I am concerned about. Top one in the pic is crimped in the groove the bottom one is not. The top one is loaded with Unique but that is not the real issue here it is just for comparison purpose on the length.

[Jal5]

I got my 358429 mould before I heard about this OAL dilemma. Not knowing any better I just crimped my 357 brass in the groove provided and went on my merry way. Loaded this way,I don't have any problem shooting them in a Ruger Blackhawk or a S & W Model 66.

fwiw
My Lyman manual lists 2 different over all lengths for this bullet loaded in 357 Mag.
One in the "Handgun" section and one in the "TC Contender" section.
Both sections have the exact same start and max powder charge data.
..

Beerd do you mind listing those over all lengths here?

[Beerd]

per Lyman Reloading Handbook #49
.357 Magnum & 358429 bullet:
Handgun - page 359 1.553" OAL
Contender - page 434 1.647" OAL
..

[casterofboolits]

The 358429 was the first Lyman SWC I cast and loaded and it worked well in three Mod. 10's (two four inch and a six inch) two Mod. 14's and a Mod 19 (six inch). I picked up a four cavity 358429 and a four cavity 358311 38-158-RNPB at a flea market for the outrageous price of $10.00 each which included handles without wood. This was almost 40 years ago!

The 358429 dropped at 168 grains with my alloy.

Then I bought my first Mod. 28 and got a shock when the cylinder wouldn't close with ammo that worked fine in my mod. 19. When I complained to my shooting shooting buddy that I thought I had a defective pistol, he sez "No dummy, the N frame has a shorter clyinder than the K frame mod. 19, what rock you been hiding under". Just crimp on the front driving band. This worked fine as I was a plinker and did not hot rod the .357 and 90% of the rounds loaded with the 358429 were 38 Specials.

The 358429 was designed for the 38 Special, not the 357. I actually acquired an H&G ten cavity mould in a trade for the H&G version of this boolit.