Hensley & Gibbs #502 2 Cavity Mold

[Texasflyboy]

Purchased this mold through an estate sale and received it last week. It's new in box, unused. A very nice, late production, Hensley & Gibbs No. 502.

The factory ledger has this entry:

#502-.45 Auto Rim (S&W Model 1917 Revolver) 240 grains. Similar to #45 in .44 Caliber, except has square grease groove instead of #45's rounded grease groove.

I think it's interesting in that its the model immediately before #503, the classic Keith bullet in .44 caliber.

I've owned the companion mold in .44 caliber (No. 45) which was actually my very first Hensley & Gibbs mold I acquired, and what started me on the path to collecting and documenting information on Hensley & Gibbs. I still have that #45 mold, it's a great bullet for .44MAG since this model is a gas check style.

But, back to the #502. I am absolutely amazed that this mold was never used. From the companion items for sale in the estate sale I can say that I think this mold was made around 1985, and was left unused.

When I get time, I plan on casting up a few of these big thumpers, and seeing what it does in my S&W 625 Mtn. Gun, and my Uberti SAA clone.

Enjoy....



Click the link for an enlargement of one cavity (super close up):

Large Photo of Single Cavity

[hammerhead357]

Tom, did I send you a picture of my 8 cavity num. s502 mold? I thought I did. Mine has a nominal weight of about 260 grs. and I really like it in either the 45 a/r or the 45 long colt or 45 colt which ever you prefere to call it.

You picked up a great mold though and that is a great picture.

I used to have 2 different num. 45 molds one that was the standard weight and one that was about 20 grs. lighter. Had to be real careful not to get them mixed up. Wes

[475/480]

Hi,
That mould looks perfect.,as big as the meplate is on that bullet,you could hunt with it..


Sean

[Texasflyboy]

Tom, did I send you a picture of my 8 cavity num. s502 mold?

No, I have not received a photo. I would love one for the website.

I used to have 2 different num. 45 molds one that was the standard weight and one that was about 20 grs. lighter. Had to be real careful not to get them mixed up. Wes

Yep. Wayne and I were chatting via email about mold numbers having the X prefix, or S prefix. I thought I had it all figured out until Wayne emailed me a response the other day. Here is an excerpt from that email:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Okay, Tom, here's "the rest of the story" (I hope) on our numbering system.
First I should mention that over the years we may have made other attempts
to come up with an intelligent system to designate different bullet designs
and their variations, so there could be some odd-ball designations out there
that I am not familiar with or just don't recall.

George Hensley didn't like the idea of a string of numbers showing the
designated number with the sizing diameter included in it, as it was often
not the actual sizing diameter requested for that particular mold. In other
words "#402429" didn't seem right to him if the mold was made to size .430",
so he just gave a number to a new design usually in the sequence it was made
up and left it at that. As you know this series jumped around for who knows
what reasons, probably a good one at the time, hopefully, but the reason now
lost to time.

I wrestled with a better system for years, and finally settled on another
less than perfect system-- The design gets an arbitrary number, all it's
own, of course. Then I would add the customer's preference of sizing
diameter that the mold was made for. The problem with that system is that if
the alloy is changed from the original preference it can be sized to a
different diameter, so if the mold was purchased by another person, it would
still be of little use to know the original preferred sizing diameter,
unless the original alloy were known. I couldn't see us stamping something
like "#50BB.358-1-12 ALLOY" on a mold, so gave up on the sizing diameter
being included.

I finally decided on the last system we used-- the designated design number
and a serial number, which could in turn be traced to the original specs for
that individual mold. (Note from me: What Wayne is saying that is on later molds, the serial number is the same number as the invoice number, and all the notes for that mold design were recorded on the invoice. One copy went with the mold to the customer, and Wayne kept the other in his factory ledger).

Then to the X and S stuff-- We would have a design, say #55 for instance. It
would be for (including) .38 Special. Then someone would come up with the
idea of a design for the .380 Auto. Turns out the #55 would work just fine
if it were simply cut shorter on the base. (Cut shallower in the mold
block). Rather than give the design a whole new number, since it was really
the same bullet but just made to size smaller and be shorter than standard,
they (George and my dad in those days decided these things--(I was just a
"little tad")-- called it "S55" or S55BB if bevel base. Since this was in
common use, when someone wanted a heavier (longer) base band on #503, for
instance, I called it "#503S" for "special length". I only designated this
way if there were enough interest in this particular length to make it
"officially" a certain length. In other words if a customer wanted a "#503S"
it would be cut to this "standard" extended length.

Okay for that, but what if an individual customer thought it would be a
good idea to have a #503 bullet that would cast a slightly lighter bullet
than this extended length S503? --That's where the X came in. X could mean
"experimental" and designate a mold cut not to any specific predesignated
length, but to this customer's individual preference, yet clue in another
person that it was not cut standard. You see why most Lyman just shipped
ready-to-purchase molds to stores and you bought it or you didn't? Much
easier to make One-Shoe-Fits-All!

End of email.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As you can clearly see, I still have a lot of work left to do to try and make sense of all the different mold numbering schemes out there, from the early Geo. A. Hensley designs, all the way through to the late 1990's when Wayne was matching invoice numbers to serial numbers.

Phew...And I thought I was close to getting this all figured out...

[Texasflyboy]

Hi,
That mould looks perfect.,as big as the meplate is on that bullet,you could hunt with it..Sean

Yep. That is if I still hunted. Maybe one of these days....

[hammerhead357]

Tom, after reading what Wayne has written I guess I need to go back and look at my mold. Because it is supposed to be heavier that standard. From trying to compare one of my bullets to the picture mine look as if they have a longer base. Well next time I get a chance I will get the mold out and check the number.

If my wife will ever let me have the didgital camera I'll take some pictures and e-mail them to you. I also have quite a selection of sample bullets that Wayne sent me over the years if I took pictures of them would you like to use them for the molds that you don't have pics. for. I would just have to see what I have.

Later Wes

Oh hey Sean how did the linotype do for you???????

[Texasflyboy]

I also have quite a selection of sample bullets that Wayne sent me over the years if I took pictures of them would you like to use them for the molds that you don't have pics. for.

I would love photos. Send any you want to share to:

tdugas@hotmail.com

[GLL]

I have always enjoyed looking through the photos on your H&G site.

I have a few of the newer 4-cavity Ballisti-Cast versions of the old H&G moulds. Just for comparison this photo shows the B-C #1102 (H&G 502) on the left, the B-C #1101(H&G 501) center, and the recent Catshooter Keith 6-cavity GB 454424 on the right.

Jerry

[Texasflyboy]

Seems to be about the same bullet....

Ballisticast on the left, H&G #502 mold on the right....