357 Mag. WFN

CZ93X62

Redlands, Kalifornistan
The wide flatnose bullet design has always "punched above its weight class" on animated targets, both two-and four-legged. I suspect that the success of the Winchester leverguns like the 1873 and 1892 and their Marlin spin-offs has as much to do with their decisive stopping power relative to recoil impulses as with their rapid-fire capability or rifle/revolver ammo commonality.

I am not one to get into "angels dancing on heads of pins" arguments over SWC vs. WFN bullet relative merits. IME, getting hit with any bullet never does anyone or anything much good at all.
 

KHornet

Well-Known Member
Wide flat nose bullets have always looked sort of cool.
That said, I shoot a fair number of them, in different
weights, but being a traditionalist, still prefer Kieth
originals.

Paul
 

CZ93X62

Redlands, Kalifornistan
This is "splitting hairs" a bit, but given my respect for the source (the late Ken Waters) I think it is worth mentioning. He made this remark regarding the 32/20 WCF in revolvers in his "Pet Loads" column in Handloader magazine in the early 1980s IIRC. He cautioned that in some revolvers with less-than-perfect "clocking" of cylinder throats with barrel forcing cones that bullets with sharp shoulders (wadcutters and SWCs) sometimes shot poorly. In that event, he advised to try "shoulderless" bullet designs like the Lyman #358311 or #311008. His theory was that shoulderless designs more readily "self-center" themselves in forcing cones than did the sharp-shouldered bullets.

FWIW.
 

Dale53

Active Member
Elmer Keith came from a time when most people did not have a lot of disposable income. Any bullet he was going to design had to serve many purposes. That is, cutting a clean hole giving full value on a target, have a decently large meplat for good terminal effect on game, and still be accurate at long range. Long range to Elmer meant several hundred yards. I, and several of my fellow club members have witnessed those qualities many times from genuine Keith SWC’s. All of this from a single bullet design.

However, like all designs of nearly everything, there are trade-offs.

One of the minuses, is that the SWC doesn’t feed well in lever action rifles (a round-flat design feeds much better).

A wadcutter bullet takes up more space in the case so small charges burn well minimizing powder position. It also offers maximum meplat, cutting a clean hole, giving full value on a target. However, it’s accuracy falls apart somewhere past 50 yards.

You can analyze each and every bullet design out there and each will have pluses and minuses. However, IMO, none will beat the Keith for the “All Around” title.

These days, I have over eighty molds and have a design for nearly every purpose,
But-t-t....

FWIW,
Dale53

P.S. i neglected to add my “qualifier”, I currently use the Lee 158 GR. RF in my .38/.357’s as they load “slick as grease” using speed loaders as compared to a SWC. It has a nice WF meplat for excellent terminal effect, as pointed out above. rdm
 
Last edited:

Bret4207

St Lawrence river valley, NY
The nose profile looks a lot like the Group Buy Lee C358-180 I have had for about 15 years, honcho'ed by "357 Maximum" on The Site Prior. It has been VERY accurate in all of my 357 Magnum revolvers and feeds reliably in my Henry Big Boy/steel as well. I have not tried it at moderate velocities, usually running it at 1100 FPS+ from the 686 x 4" to almost 1400 FPS from the Bisley Blackhawk. Gas checks and mid-range speeds are a waste of components.
If that GB mould is a GC design Al, then we may have the same moulds. Mine is a shooter for sure. Love it out of my Marlin 35 Rem.