357 Mag. Mould

[Ben]

I don't shoot a lot of " full tilt " .357 Mag. loads.
However, this bullet, The Lee 158 gr. SWC, G/C would probably work well.
It looks very much like Lyman's 358156 .
I cast a few hundred yesterday.

Ben

 

[Brad]

I have the same mould but with no check. Wish they still listed that mould, I would buy another.

 

[uncle jimbo]

That is the same bullet that I use in my 357 mag revolver. They shoot well. It was the first mold I used for the 357. You will like it.

 

[Ben]

I have the same mould but with no check. Wish they still listed that mould, I would buy another.

Me too !

 

[JWFilips]

I have a 6 hole Bevel base TL version of this First mould I bought. Shoots well in the 357 Mag and 38 special as well as my 35 rem
I load this bullet ( with a beagled mould) for my wife's CC load in her 38 S&W Terrier

 

[462]

I have a two-cavity version that I removed the gas check shank from.
The Blackhawk and Vaquero shoot is as accurately as the Lee 358-158 RF, but for some reason neither the Rossi 92/EMF Hartford nor the Uberti 1866 find it at all accurate, much preferring the RF design instead. Weird.

 

[Maven]

I don't shoot a lot of " full tilt " .357 Mag. loads.
However, this bullet, The Lee 158 gr. SWC, G/C would probably work well.
It looks very much like Lyman's 358156 .
I cast a few hundred yesterday.

Ben

That certainly is an accurate CB, Ben. It was very accurate in my Ruger BH, sized to .358". .359" may have been even more accurate, but I didn't know that then.

 

[CZ93X62]

It is a pretty close copy of Lyman #358156. The Lyman's nose is a bit longer, and the effect is to get just a tiny bit more bullet weight outside the case. I have fired LOTS of both the Lee and Lyman versions, and while a better shooter might be able to discern one to be better than the other, I sure as BLEEP cannot.

 

[StrawHat]

Loaded over a good dose of 2400 in a magnum case or seated long over the same charge in a Special case worked when I was shooting the small bore.

Kevin

 

[dale2242]

I have been shooting that bullet for some time.
While I normally use 358477 for most of my 357 loads , this bullet works great in rifles..dale

 

[Walks]

It is similar, but not quite a copy.
The lee has 2 grease grooves of equal proportions below the crimp groove.
The Lyman has a narrow crimp/grease groove below the crimp groove and a wider grease groove below that. Since the Lee bullet photo does not show a Gas Check in place I can't tell how "long" the GC shank is to compare.
And all the #358156 I have are GC'ed & lubed.

 

[CZ93X62]

Like every mould cherry Lyman has ever produced, not all #358156s are created equal. Design poetry is expected with Lyman cavities. My "156" hails from the late 1970s/early 1980s, has two angled crimp grooves of similar size atop a radiused lube groove. The upper crimp groove was meant for 357-length cases, the lower groove for 38 Special case usage in large-frame 38s like the S&W Heavy Duty and Outdoorsman N-frames. Loaded long = a bit more room for 2400, don't ya know? I read this VERY early in my reloading-hobby years, c. mid-1970s, probably from Skeeter Skelton or Bob Milek. Bias alert--I have a strong preference for SWC-design castings in revolvers, and for Ray Thompson-designed SWC/GC forms.

My old shop carried the W-W Super-X 158 grain JHP from 1994 to about 2016, and I cobbled up a practice load with #358156 using 13.5 grains of 2400, CCI #500 primers, and W-W or Starline brass that duplicayed the load's performances in my 357 carry guns. E.g., both the factory loads and the handload run a 158-grain-class bullet from a 4" barrel about 1225-1235 FPS and about 1275-1280 FPS from a 6" tube. It is a SAAMI-level load, and apparently K-frame-friendly.

 

[Walks]

CZ,
Apparently your eyes are better then mine. I used a good light and a 3X magnifier while wearing 2.75 reading glasses.
Couldn't be sure if my cast bullets had a tiny lube groove or another crimping groove.

My pair of #358156 2cav Molds were bought in 1975 and about 3-4years later.
I do remember checking both molds and their bullets very carefully back in the day. Couldn't find any difference between the 2 molds.

Except that the front cavity of the 2nd mold had a very slight undersized GC shank.
Didn't seem to make a difference in accuracy. Back in the day (40yrs ago) when I was shooting hundreds of rounds a week.

 

[CZ93X62]

Thompson's #429244 for the 44 Special and magnum follows a similar format--two angled crimp grooves and one radiused lube groove. All of mine have pretty pronounced grooves, no subtleties to them.

 

[Walks]

Got some #429244, #429215 & #452490 buried somewhere. I'd like to take a close look at them. See if they are easier to examine, being bigger. And in a better light.

 

[StrawHat]

Got a cell phone?

Take a photo and enlarge it. I do that to make out stampings and etching.

Kevin