357 Mag. WFN

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
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

Official forum enigma
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

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
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.
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
It IS a GC mould, Bret. Lee did a nice job on my example, it just RAINS castings and has since Day 1.
 

CWLONGSHOT

Well-Known Member
Good lookin Boolit Ben!!

I almost ordered one myself but remembered I have a LEE358-158 thats just too close and shoots real fine for me! 10g BD is a top Load in mine as well!! My only issue with the LEE is it drops smaller than I like but I powder coat so its not a huge consern as it shoots real Well.

CW
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
The 180 grain bullet takes both the 357 Magnum rifles and revolvers "up" a notch in game-taking capability. These at 1700 FPS/muzzle REALLY put the WHANG on downrange iron. I don't think I would extend the range past 100 yards on a deer, but that is seldom necessary where I hunt.

And DRAT THE LUCK--I didn't get to go deer hunting yesterday. Too early and too hot, anyway. 80% of the deer I have taken have fallen in the last 10 days of our 30-day season. 2-1/2 weeks left.
 
One thing I feel worth mentioning, bullets of Elmers design or reasonable facsimile punch straight through deer and other like sized game in a straight line but I've only shot a handful of called coyotes with a RNFP and that wasn't always the case. Haven't shot at deer sized animal with RNFP and probably won't . Elmers design has worked as he said it would. YMMV
 

Walks

Well-Known Member
I have the same Lee 358-158-RF. Mine drops .359 from my 6cav mold. I've shot a bunch of these in a wide variety of .38 & .357 Handguns.
But only in a couple of Rifles; B92 and 1894CS. Both worked over by Excellent Cowboy Gunsmiths. I have a bit of a feeding problem unless I cast of a bit harder alloy then I like. An alloy of 50/50 - COWW/#2
That blasted sharp nose corner always seems to catch. Don't have that problem with the #358156 which is my everything But Cowboy Shooting Bullet in Lever Rifles. Sold my Saeco # 398 TC before I tried the Lee bullet.

Here in CA, I never shot anything bigger then a Jackrabbit or Coyote with Lead alloy.
Violation of DFG rules. But it was over 20yrs ago.
The #358477 & #358429 SWC's went clear through, never recovered one. But they fell over dead anyway.

It's a great bullet, but I wish it was a bit cheaper to cast.
 

Walks

Well-Known Member
Very Nice.
I had a 16" bbl in .357Max for my old T/C. Shot the Lyman #358318, #358315 And the Saeco #354GC & #351PB.
The #351 gave best accuracy with 2400. Sorry it been some 20yrs since I had that bbl. So I can't give anymore info.
My reloading notebooks disappeared in a "burglary" by a "friend".
 

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
I never understood why Ruger discontinued the #3. To my eye it's a much better looking rifle than the #1, but maybe my eye is off. I've seen maybe 1 or 2 in person in 40 some years, neither was for sale. I can think of probably 20 or 25 variations in caliber that would look great in #3!
 

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
Hi Ben, can you share some details on your #1.

I recently did a #3 in .357 MaxView attachment 11224

My Ruger # 1 started its life as a .222 Rem.
I bought it new unfired at the Tulsa Gun show.
I shot it some in .222 Rem, but really never liked that combination.
I talked with JES at JES reboring.
He talked me into reboring the barrel to the 357 Max.
A very good decision.

Ben
 
Last edited: