358429 front band small

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Just my 2 cents but some times the bullets that you measure and fret over because the gun writers/internet/your barbers 2nd cousins best friends father say they shouldn't shoot- do. Other times what should shoot won't and other times by changing something the ones that won't will and the ones that did won't anymore. Some just plain won't shoot in one gun but seem made for another, and some that seem like great ideas fail miserably across every gun and with everything you try. That's part of the "art" of this game. I still hope to get the "30 Plinker" to shoot something other than washtub groups in at least one rifle one day!

FWIW I have a big ol' mess of St Elmers various SWC's and even more of Mr Thompsons and others designs, both PB and GC. I can't recall one that didn't shoot at least as well as factory if I messed with them enough. Logic says they shouldn't perform near as well as they do across a wide array of handguns and rifles, yet they do. Point is, ya gotta shoot 'em and see, simple as that.
 

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
Bret4207 ,

You speak the truth.
It all depends on what you'll take at face value and put faith in.

Ben
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
These bullet features can be kind of a trade-off, and some guns like some features or they don't. Until you shoot the bullet in your gun using your skills and your tools, it's all guesswork.

Example--One bullet that gets more than its share of bad press is the Lyman #358446. I have limited experience with this design, gained from about 300 samples sent to me c. 2010. I ran these samples using 357 cases from 850 to 1200 FPS, and they shot VERY well in all 3 of my 357 revolvers. I guess other folks aren't impressed with the design, but I can't carp about it at all.
 

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
It is interesting Allen that you allowed the revolver(s) and your test loads to tell you about the accuracy potential of the 357446 rather than listening to someone's comments who may have not evaluated the bullet as well as you.

As I said earlier, It all depends on what you'll take at face value and put faith in.

Ben
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
Part of the motive was "I don't believe that" about the 446. It is just a #358156 without a gas check, from all appearances. These shot right with the 156s, too. I dunno. There might be some self-fulfilling prophecies afoot here.
 

RicinYakima

High Steppes of Eastern Washington
I have seen many shooters who shoot well with a favorite bullet/powder and badly with another.
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
well when your dealing with different bullet/gun dimension combo's you can't help but have different results.
I'm sure if I searched around with different designs and guns I'd find I could better some of my groups, and blow some of them out to even worse than I shoot now.
of course I could then dick about with coatings, lubes, and alloys and make the bad some better, or simply change the timing by switching to another powder and get different results with what I already had in hand.

I guess it's depend on whether I wanted all of what I had to do okay with 100% function, or focus in on one gun and tweak things around until I found it's sweet spot step by step.
 

Mowgli Terry

Active Member
That bullet not shooting was news to me. Looks like I missed that message. I had run some of the 358477's. That batch went into making target loads. Bullets also shot very well in my 38 Specials and 357 Magnum revolvers. Like I say, somehow the word did not make it up here on the hill. I recall one bullet that was reviled as the worst ever for .429 bullets. That bullet sure looked like it was for the old time 44-40's.
 
Last edited:

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
As much as I respect the late Mr. Keith, I’m not sure minor deviations from his design are significant. Some changes are critical, and some are not. For example, Keith liked big square bottomed grease grooves. Now some manufacturers retained the flat bottom groove but added more draft to the mold to assist with bullet release and mass manufacturing. I don’t think that is a critical deviation from Keith’s intent. Same apples to the width of the driving bands. OK, most are not true Keith copies but I don’t think it matters to anyone other than devote followers of Keith.
 

STIHL

Well-Known Member
The 358429 I have is the same as yours it tapers ever so slightly, they shoot really good though.