Received a couple of new moulds today.

Ben

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
1st one is an old NEI, ( It certainly cast well , making a nice round bullet, it just might have been made by Walt ? ? ) .44 cal. casting a .432 clone of the H & G 130 .
A common bullet design in .45 cal. but an unusual design in .44 cal.
The bullet weighs 198 grs. and has a very slight bevel base.









-----------------------------------------------------

My 2nd mould that I received today is also a .44 cal. mould.
A Lyman gas check , weighing 255 grs. 429244. This one drops a nice round bullet with my alloy at .432"







Notice that the mould Identification is stamped upside down.

 
Brad

Brad

Benevolent Overlord and site owner
Staff member
The 429244 HP is a great shooter, I'm sure the solid isn't an slouch either.
 
Ben

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
Brad,

I wish I had a friend that could remove the bevel base in the NEI ? ?

The 429244 has accuracy written all over it.

Ben
 
9

9.3X62AL

Guest
Ha ha! That NEI 198 grainer looks like it belongs in an autopistol! :) While I'm not sure how well it would feed in my '73 carbine x 44-40, the bullet looks like a natural-born pairing for the 44-40 revolver. Maybe a little OAL adjustment magic would let it run in the lever rifle all right.

I have at least 5,000 of the Lyman #429244 downrange, and that is likely a conservative estimate. In 92/6/2 alloy--checked with Hornadys--and lubed with 50/50 in the 2 rear grooves my bullets scale 251 grains. Many years of accurate shooting and decisive varminting have happened thanks to #429244. Ray Thompson did well with this one and his #358156.
 
Ben

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
Allen,

The 429244 is a mould that I don't see very often ? ?
Seems that the 429421 dominates the scene with .44 casters and shooters.
I knew that the 358156 was designed by R. Thompson , but I did not know that the 244' was one of Ray Thompson's moulds.
 
Brad

Brad

Benevolent Overlord and site owner
Staff member
The Thompson moulds are a design I prefer to the Keith moulds. The GC cost is a pain but the moulds sure shoot well.
 
9

9.3X62AL

Guest
The Keith designs got a whole lot more printer's ink devoted to them than did Ray Thompson's designs, and that continued after Mr. Keith went on to his reward. I like both designs equally, though the Thompsons work a LOT better in lever rifles than the Keiths do. The Thompson designs use a unique nomenclatural quirk via Lyman--the first three design digits are the spec'ed diameter like all Lyman designs use, but the last three ID numbers aren't "random" at all--they are the castings' spec'ed weight in #2 alloy. Lyman's nomenclature is usually a lot more poetic than that.
 
Brad

Brad

Benevolent Overlord and site owner
Staff member
I never knew that the Thompson bullets were designated by weight. Interesting factoid. I learned something today.
 
H

HARRYMPOPE

Guest
I had fantastic results with the Thompson 44 Gas Check bullets('215 and '244). That design is always shot much better than the Keiths.
 
KHornet

KHornet

Well-Known Member
Just me, but in 357's have had better luck with the 357429 than with the Thompson. Don't shoot much 44, and don't have a 44 Thompson mold. The Keith in 44 for what little I shoot 44 shoots very well.
 
H

HARRYMPOPE

Guest
Funny my guns all really like the Thompson 358156.I shoot in in 9mm luger as well sans check sized .357 with 3g of bullseye.but the Keith shoots good too.the 358416 is my favorite 357 bullet though.
 
Ben

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
George,

About 3 years ago, I obtained an old IDEAL, 358416 single cavity.
Makes good bullets. They drop at about .361 ", I've been looking for a mold that throws a bullet that I can feel safe with in my Marlin 1894, 38 Spec., CBC rifle.
I wanted a bullet with a slight meplat, but also needed a nose shape that would feed well through the lever action rifle.

This may be what I've been looking for ? I feel very safe with this flat meplat boolit resting against the primer in the mag. tube of my rifle.

I'm anxious to test some of these. I loaded a few " dummies " to see how they would fed through my 1894. They run through the rifle like water through screen wire.


Ben

PICT0006.jpg


PICT0003.jpg


PICT0004.jpg


PICT0002.jpg
 
Last edited:
H

HARRYMPOPE

Guest
My mold is an old single cavity ventless and beat up.I don't remember the exact load but in my handi rifle and 357 #1 it shot about 1.5" at 50 yards.in various 38 revolvers it shot great as well.can't get swc bullets to do that well.I wish it was a 2 cavity.
 
Ben

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
I think that a lot of casters over look the round nose bullet, as
not being " modern " in appearance.

They are , often times, over looking a great bullet.

Ben
 
9

9.3X62AL

Guest
That is an interesting old mould, for sure. As others said elsewhere, it is reminiscent of old-line Lyman designs intended for black powder, given the generous lube capacity and absence of a crimp groove to secure the bullet in place. Designs like these are meant to seat atop a compressed column of black powder and be crimped around the lead edge of the front drive band, or alternately (E.G. #311008 or #427028) around the bullet's receding ogive origin. In this manner, a loaded cartridge is "proof" against telescoping bullets, whether shunting down a levergun mag tube or jerking back under revolver recoil.
 
JWFilips

JWFilips

Well-Known Member
Just an observation: hope it doesn't shift the thread:
The reason I shot pistols is because I shot cast bullets.......The reason I cast Bullets is because I shoot rifles...hard to explain that statement...maybe some will be able to interpret it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.