There's been soooooo many copies/influences over the decades on Keith's design. I'm glad to see people here trying to find the true design.
Some of my favorite "keith" 35cal's
[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...pssnsmczt2.jpg[/IMG]
Red/left:
h&g #51- The top band is .358 & the middle band is the longest, shallowest hp. 150gr hp
Lead/center:
cramer #26- The top band is .358 & the bottom band is the longest, it also has the shallowest lube groove, cone shapped hp. 158gr hp
Green/right:
Lyman 358439- The top band is .352, the middle band is the longest, rounded grease groove, deepest hp. 158gr hp
Not my picture, A couple of years back I was talking with a fellow member on this forum and he was kind enough to sent me this picture of recovered "keith" 44cals. We were talking about bullet design and bullet compression.
[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...psxceiicyb.jpg[/IMG]
His findings mirrored mine. In my limited testing round or shallow grease grooves are stronger (compress less) than their deep square counterparts. Longer/thicker bottom bullet bases/drive bands are stronger than skinny/narrow bullet bases/drive bands.
The cramer #26 pictured above will easily out perform the lyman and h&g versions of the keith 35cal bullet.
Interestingly enough I get the same performance with the h&g #51 that I do with the lyman 358477. The bullets are interchangeable & have the same poi and accuracy for the same load. The h&g #51 left/green and the lyman 358477/right. The only real difference between the 2 is the round grease groove on the lyman and lyman is around 4gr lighter (shallower hp). And the h&g has a longer middle drive band.
[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...psuh0cxwsm.jpg[/IMG]
Just more pics/idea's/likes about "Keith" bullets and their differences in designs.