That Accurate Mould bullet looks like a winner. That basic design/profile has not failed me in 22 caliber, 30, 35 and 44. It is very versatile, feeds well through levers and is accurate in whatever I shoot them in.
I agree on the 210 grain bullet too though. Same basic profile - RFN, and easier on the lead stash by a significant amount. Makes just as big a hole in paper too. I have an Arsenal 200 grain RFN (traditional lube groove, but I tumble-lube it) and was able to specify .433" minimum. It arrived in just a few weeks and has been a marvelous mould.
Can't argue with the 429421 either, and I did just order one from Arsenal (4C for under $100 shipped), again specifying .433" minimum. I'll be here in a few weeks too. I DO NOT know if it will feed in a lever, because I never tried a 429421 in my 1894 (long gone), but it's a no-fail shooter in any revolver I've ever owned in 44 Mag or Special. Just can't get away from the design.
I have an original Ranch Dog 265 grain RFN, which shoots well in anything, but is heavy for anything but actual hunting and takes a GC. I really only use it to cast for a friend who shoots it in a 1894 and he is very, very pleased with the design. Same basic profile as the one
@waco suggested, just heavier.
If I could only have ONE 44 mould, I'd probably defer to the 429421, but that 210 grain RFN, which really shoots well in anything I currently own. Saving 40 or 50 grains per shot is a real benefit when conserving a finite resource - lead. In a ten-pound lead pot, the difference between casting 240s and 200s is SIXTY extra bullets.