Sw 686 6inch. In 38/44Depends on what gun you're using it in and for what purpose. For hunting I'd go with the 429 IF it shot as well as the 156.
God bless those gas checksWhen both bullets properly fit the cylinder and bore, I've had more-consistent accuracy using the 358156 in 38 special/357 revolvers. The 358429 sometimes gave better accuracy in one gun or another, but it was never as consistent in multiple revolvers. OTOH, with the 358429 you don't have to mess about with gas checks.
Yes, and no GC to mess with, IF it shoots as good or better than the 156.Because it's heavier? I had a -429 years ago, but never got the tack driving accuracy it was reputed to deliver. OTOH, the RCBS/Lachmiller ~150 - 160gr. Keith did and still does.
I know that, what I meant was that in a 38 you could be shooting a J frame snubby or an N frame that won't let you load some long bullets (429) in Mag brass unless you seat deeper, etc.Sw 686 6inch. In 38/44
Of these two choices I'd still take 358156. I can lve with a few gaschecks here and there. I feel the quality of Ideal/Lymans manufacturing has been far more consistent with this design than their "version of the month" for Keiths designs. I think Lyman messed with Keiths designs simply to piss him off. Look at their .41 mag Keith design, 410459. Keith had nothing to do with it, and ended up designing his own version and giving the design to Hensley & Gibbs and SAECO.Ok. I basically only load for 38/357 now. Of the two molds 358156 or 358429. Which do you guys prefer. Thanks johnny
Yup. 100%Based purely on the bullet... I'd go with the 358429. It's just a great bullet and hits hard. The 358156 is more versatile with its double crimp grooves, and gas check. It'll feed through a levergun better, and fit more cylinders. But all else being equal, provided the 429 will fit the guns it's to be used in, I'd go that way. Hard to beat either one really.