Isn't it interesting ........

fiver

fiver

Well-Known Member
i got the GC version of that bullet.
it's about the easiest mold i have ever worked with.
it casts cold, casts hot, checks slip on like a glove, and it feeds in my lever rifle like butter.
throw some 2400 under it.
 
JonB

JonB

Halcyon member
Ben said:
I've noticed through the years, that you can mention any bullet mould and possibly show a photo of it and people will say......" I owned one of those and could never get it to shoot, so I sold it."
Click to expand...
Sadly, I am one that resembles that remark.
I have this deep ingrained trait of "buy-sell-trade", so a Mold (also applies to most anything), has to be something special for me to keep it around when I happen to get an itch to swap it...that usually goes hand in hand with my lack of desire to work out the bugs, if needed. There is always an exception to the rule, if I think I can fix something without making it worse, LOL.
 
4

4060MAY

Active Member
Ian
I can do one better, I bought one of "Aladin's" long range 30 cal pointed bullet
30-40 Krag No.3 Ruger, my Silhouette Rifle, 500M, never hit the backstop, 200M, you could at least see the hits on the ground about 4' groups, 43gr, IMR4350

with 314299, 34gr VGT, I could hold rams, reasonably well, although the recoil on a 6 pound rifle is something to behold
 
S

shuz

Active Member
Lyman's 429360 was the only design I couldn't get to shoot a decent group outta various .44 mag revolver and rifles.
I never figured out the cause.
I kinda chuckle every time I see one for sale on various forums. I figured they had a similar experience.
 
Bret4207

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Ian said:
Supposedly. Oldfeller's version did better, this is the Midsouth that's too heavy on the nose. I have both moulds.
Click to expand...
I think I have both also. Just haven't had time to mess with them.
 
B

beagle

Active Member
Well, Ben, I agree with you to a point. Some of my first moulds were the 357446 and 429360. I stumbled along with the 446 for years and finally let it go. Didn't spend as much time on the 360. Years later, I got both moulds in trades and decided I'd give them a real wring out. I went beyond a wring out on the 446 to the point of having my machinist shooting partner enlarge the bands and especially the front driving ban. No joy. Then I decided hollow pointing would move the center of gravity farther back and might work. No joy. I even tried Pat's PB gas checks and that didn't work. Now, this was with my Python and several 6" Blackhawks I was playing with. About this time, I said to myself: "stop beating your head against a brick wall because it feels good when you stop". About this time, I think I gave the mould to you or Shuz to get it out of my sight. I wuz tired of it.
The 429360 wore me out quick. Since I had a good 429421HP that was performing in a fantastic manner, I let it slide.
The 452423 is another problem child. Started shooting it in a M1917 Smith and Wesson. Did great in it because I was shooting short range.
About this time Elmer Keith taught me something. You can only tell the accuracy and consistent performance of a bullet at long range.
My test for accuracy was plinking off a rest at clay targets on a hundred yard berm. I'm not a great pistol shot but at least now I could tell easily when a shot I called as "on" hit 2 feet to the right and the remainder hit as called. The 423 in my Blackhawk convertible didn't cut the mustard on the "berm test". Old Elmer was right again.
Based on this theory, I revisited all these moulds again and found them lacking for my use. May be a mental block but I prefer to move on to something that "works" rather than wasting time and components on a bullet that won't shoot for me. Just my opinion./beagle
 
P

PED1945

Active Member
My first 44 mold back in 1963 was a single cavity 429336, an old semi-wadcutter designed for target use in the 44 Russian. I have had good luck with it originally in a single shot 44 Russian and later in a SBH. It did not work through the magazine of an 1894 Marlin as it's nose was too long and, I later learned, the diameter is too small for the microgroove rifling.
 
3

300BLK

Well-Known Member
Ian said:
Anyone who never met a bad bullet design never met one of THESE.

View attachment 37309

After shortening it by one groove and the gas check shank and running the bullets at 2700 fps in the next caliber up, wrapped in paper, it worked pretty well.
Click to expand...
Was that the 8mm Maximum?

I had one, and it shot OK at sedate speeds, but would make oval holes as speed increased.
 
358156 hp

358156 hp

At large, whereabouts unknown.
I have an untried 429360 around here somewhere. It's one of Lymans misstamped blocks, upside down and bacwards IIRC. I used to accumulate them but sold most of them in the last purge. My first observation of it suggests it's too light up front. The designer was only after the highest velocities he could attain and I suspect we have some balance issues.
 
D

dale2242

Well-Known Member
One of my first moulds was 357446 and i could not make it shoot well.
Maybe it was inexperience, the mould or the gun.
At the time I was busy with job, family, and friends and didn`t want to spend too much time with load development.
But, I`m not the only one saying that they had trouble making it shoot accurately.
 
M

Mainiac

Well-Known Member
dale2242 said:
One of my first moulds was 357446 and i could not make it shoot well.
Maybe it was inexperience, the mould or the gun.
At the time I was busy with job, family, and friends and didn`t want to spend too much time with load development.
But, I`m not the only one saying that they had trouble making it shoot accurately.
Click to expand...
I was never impressed with my 446,either.nice looking bullet,,drops at .360,,but its a dog.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.