358429

[Kevin Stenberg]

From the way you guys talk. There must be a lot more coyotes around where you live than here.

 

[358156 hp]

358439 is a production version of 358429HP. For the longest time, you could order a 358429 direct from Ideal/Lyman, order it as a hollowpoint, and your HP mould would be marked as a 358429, and the hollowpoint stem assy number would be stamped on both the stem and the mould. That is what the additional single digit you see on factory hollowpoint moulds is for, it simply makes certain the stem that was built for and fitted to the mould went with the correct mould, just like the second set of numbers on moulds helps keep the correct block halves together. 358439 was built as a hollowpoint mould from the start. Supposedly, the 358439 factory hollowpoint stem was a bit shorter than the one on 358429HP. I have copies of each mould, and at least in my late '50s, through the '60s versions, the stems are the same length on the factory moulds.

358429HP appears to have been introduced in 1935 as a catalog item for perhaps one year, and 358439 was introduced in 1936 as a production item. Since they were available concurrently, I'm inclined to believe that there was an intended difference between the two, so I believe there was a difference between the stem length at some point but with the lack of Ideal & Lymans actual production data, who can tell? The only information I'm aware of is from old copies of the Ideal & Lyman Handbooks, and they weren't produced every year. Lymans Centennial Journal additionally shows copies of many old Ideal & Lyman advertisements.

358439 is still available as a regular catalog item. My understanding is that Lyman quit doing special order hollowpoints long ago.

 

[358156 hp]

The original intention of the 358429 was for St Elmer to have a long range 38-44 bullet. Expansion had nothing to do with it as it was a solid. The HP version came later. the was the 358439 IIRC. The 439 fell by the wayside and HPing the 429 became the norm.

Thank you for pointing out my typo for me. I corrected the original post and added a bit more clarification at the end. Hopefully my post is clearer now.

 

[Bret4207]

From the way you guys talk. There must be a lot more coyotes around where you live than here.

You wouldn't believe it. I can have 3-4 or more different packs going at night all within probably 1/2 mile or a little more. In the winter there will be runs of tracks that look like deer in a deer yard. There's a reason you rarely see a feral or house cat more than 75 yards from a house or why lost Beagles from rabbit hunts never show up. I thought when the farms started shutting down (easy food) they'd diminish, but it seems just the opposite.

 

[Bret4207]

358439 is a production version of 358429HP. For the longest time, you could order a 358429 direct from Ideal/Lyman, order it as a hollowpoint, and your HP mould would be marked as a 358429, and the hollowpoint stem assy number would be stamped on both the stem and the mould. That is what the additional single digit you see on factory hollowpoint moulds is for, it simply makes certain the stem that was built for and fitted to the mould went with the correct mould, just like the second set of numbers on moulds helps keep the correct block halves together. 358439 was built as a hollowpoint mould from the start. Supposedly, the 358439 factory hollowpoint stem was a bit shorter than the one on 358429HP. I have copies of each mould, and at least in my late '50s, through the '60s versions, the stems are the same length on the factory moulds.

358429HP appears to have been introduced in 1935 as a catalog item for perhaps one year, and 358439 was introduced in 1936 as a production item. Since they were available concurrently, I'm inclined to believe that there was an intended difference between the two, so I believe there was a difference between the stem length at some point but with the lack of Ideal & Lymans actual production data, who can tell? The only information I'm aware of is from old copies of the Ideal & Lyman Handbooks, and they weren't produced every year. Lymans Centennial Journal additionally shows copies of many old Ideal & Lyman advertisements.

358439 is still available as a regular catalog item. My understanding is that Lyman quit doing special order hollowpoints long ago.

Read your Elmer Keith. I'll have to dig out "Sixguns", but the 429 was put forth as a solid and Elmer didn't say much about expansion. Of course he was shooting 1-20 or 1-30 lead/tin so they may have mushroomed with enough speed and if hitting enough mass, but Elmer liked the "Two hole solution". He did the hollow point and hollow base too. It's all in his books. What Lyman did with it goes off in a different direction. I was unaware Lyman still made the 439, although the pictures they show don't appear to be a SWC, maybe a bad photo?

 

[358156 hp]

Read your Elmer Keith. I'll have to dig out "Sixguns", but the 429 was put forth as a solid and Elmer didn't say much about expansion. Of course he was shooting 1-20 or 1-30 lead/tin so they may have mushroomed with enough speed and if hitting enough mass, but Elmer liked the "Two hole solution". He did the hollow point and hollow base too. It's all in his books. What Lyman did with it goes off in a different direction. I was unaware Lyman still made the 439, although the pictures they show don't appear to be a SWC, maybe a bad photo?

You said that before, and I addressed and corrected my typo, and added a bit more information at the bottom as an "ETA". Please also refer to post #23 where I acknowledged that as a separate post. And yes, Keith used hardcast alloys for solids, and 1-16 for hollowpoints IIRC, technically also a hardcast. It's a shame that S&W chose to hobble the then-new 357 Magnum with such a short cylinder, eliminating the Keith design from consideration for factory ammunition. Instead, they chose to have Phil Sharpe plagiarize Keiths design with a dimensionally reduced version that Sharpe and George Hensley received credit for. It was a 5/6th size of Keiths original IIRC, with a slightly shortened nose (H&G 51) at 160 grains as opposed to Keiths original 173 grain, which became 169 grain, then got bastardized from then on in many different and mysterious ways.

 

[Mainiac]

I have a 2 cav 429 lyman,,round grooves,and i have a noe copy,his first molds,,aint even a name on it,,,anyways,,these 2 molds are almost exact.noe has square grooves,,but nose and bands are the same.

 

[Bret4207]

You said that before, and I addressed and corrected my typo, and added a bit more information at the bottom as an "ETA". Please also refer to post #23 where I acknowledged that as a separate post. And yes, Keith used hardcast alloys for solids, and 1-16 for hollowpoints IIRC, technically also a hardcast. It's a shame that S&W chose to hobble the then-new 357 Magnum with such a short cylinder, eliminating the Keith design from consideration for factory ammunition. Instead, they chose to have Phil Sharpe plagiarize Keiths design with a dimensionally reduced version that Sharpe and George Hensley received credit for. It was a 5/6th size of Keiths original IIRC, with a slightly shortened nose (H&G 51) at 160 grains as opposed to Keiths original 173 grain, which became 169 grain, then got bastardized from then on in many different and mysterious ways.

Well, the N frame was the stoutest they had, so it makes sense they went that route. I don't know that I'd be too hard on ol' Phil or Mr Hensley, they were all walking in no mans land at that point. I suppose we should just be happy that it's worked out as well as it did!

 

[358156 hp]

I just figured Elmer may have gotten a little too aggressive with Doug Wesson and pissed him off.

 

[CZ93X62]

Gun hobbyists with strong views and opinions? Really?

Lyman's design integrity is poetic, at best. The last half-dozen Lyman moulds I've bought or received have all been older versions and/or obsolete designs. With the fine moulds available from NOE, Accurate, MP, SAECO, and RCBS I don't know how Lyman keeps the lights on.

 

[RBHarter]

Die hard brand loyalists. Daddy and Pappy swore buy them so that's what I'm running .

 

[Bigbore5]

My older Lyman molds cast fine bullets but if I didn't powder coat them, they'd be undersized. When cast they fall at .3565. After powder they are .3584 or so. I size to .3580". That's with 50/50 coww/soww.

 

[Brad]

I have a solid and the HP version by Lyman. Haven’t used either in years.

I don’t see a need for the extra weight when my guns do fine with a 158. I also detest single cavity Hp moulds.

 

[RicinYakima]

That is why I had a double Lyman 358156 mould modified for one solid and one HP. I shoot the solid in 38/44 and the HP in 357.