Not wanting to Hijack my own thread on the best 240gr 44 Mag ammo...

How about this...

Three loads for every reason...

All With a 240/250 Keith cast bullet

1. For practice 7.5gr of Unique

2. For 2 legged defense, and general field use, 9 gr of Unique.

3. For Hunting 22 gr of 2400, [with the new 2400, have not used any of it, yet, but it seems that 19 to 19.5 gr is what is a working max].

Unless you are going to Jurassic Park, what else would you really need???

I recently ran an extensive test comparing old Hercules 2400 and new Alliant 2400 in the 44 Magnum with RCBS 44-250-K bullets cast of WW + 2% tin. The test handgun was a TC Contender and an Oehler M43 was used to measure preasure and velocity.

The test was of 10 rounds of each powder using 20.5, 21, 21.5 and 22 gr of each 2400 powder. The Alliant 2400 did not cosistantly give higher pressures than the older Hercules 2400. Basically the variation between powders was very consistent and remained within accepted lot to lot variation. The 22 gr load of Hercules 2400 gave 27,000 psi(M43) and the 22 gr load of Alliant 2400 gave 27,900 psi(m43). The Technician I talked with at Alliant stated the formula for Alliant 2400 had not been changed from the original Hercules formaula. My testing confirms that.

This is just for your information only. When the newer Alliant 2400 came out one writer stated in a magazine that it "appeared hotter" than Hercules 2400. Since that time the load has been dropped to 21 gr and now down to 19/19.5? for what reason I don't know. I still use 22 gr under the 250 gr Keith bullet without any problems what so ever.

Larry Gibson

Thanks for posting the results of your testing Larry

Larry,

Thanks for posting the info.
I had been wondering about that, but haven't looked into it yet.

NE 450 No2, I would add one bullet style to your mix, that would be a Keith SWC hollow point.

For deer hunting and self defense these would be hard to beat and Elmer Keith used them a lot cast from 16 to 1 or 20 to 1 lead tin mix.

I have gone back to the Keith bullets for just about all my handgun shooting. They just flat out work.

quote:

I have gone back to the Keith bullets for just about all my handgun shooting. They just flat out work.

This is how I feel about the LBT designs. When I started loading for the .44 magnum many moons ago, I used Keith-style bullets and 2400 almost exclusively. I just think the Keith has too small of a meplat to be really effective on game -- JMHO.

Anyhow, Larry, thanks for posting your test results!

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

I have gone back to the Keith bullets for just about all my handgun shooting. They just flat out work.

This is how I feel about the LBT designs. When I started loading for the .44 magnum many moons ago, I used Keith-style bullets and 2400 almost exclusively. I just think the Keith has too small of a meplat to be really effective on game -- JMHO.

Anyhow, Larry, thanks for posting your test results!

I agree completely with Whitworth here. The true Keith SWC is a bit small on meplat IMHO. There are a number of SWC molds availble that have a much large meplat and are still refered to as "Keith style" which IMHO is an incorrect statement.

One can never go wrong with a LBT stle bullet
Also 2400 was once my powder for the 44 but I now use 296/H-110 exclusively


Thanks Larry for yor valuable informative post

jwp465 wrote: "I agree completely with Whitworth here. The true Keith SWC is a bit small on meplat IMHO. There are a number of SWC molds availble that have a much large meplat and are still refered to as "Keith style" which IMHO is an incorrect statement.

One can never go wrong with a LBT stle bullet
Also 2400 was once my powder for the 44 but I now use 296/H-110 exclusively"
---

Ditto for me. Other than some playing around and a bit of use and game-taking with the 250 grain Partition, LBTs and H110 have been my do-it-all combo for the various .44 Mags I have owned for a number of years now.

I like both styles, but am a die hard Keith fan.

Well the Keiths in .357 mag, .41 mag, .44 mag and .45 Colt have always killed dead anything I shot with them if I put it where it belonged. But I guess if you want to kill something deader than dead you can shoot more lead into it!

Have fun!

quote:

I just think the Keith has too small of a meplat to be really effective on game -- JMHO.

That's the kind of statement that you should save until you and a few of your friends board an 18 hour flight to Africa. One conversation could last the entire flight -- maybe even the entire trip.

Larry G, thanks for the info, good to know.

I have always cast all my bullets out of linotype, so when I want expansion I use a jacketed hollow point...

I am just too lazy to have 2 different "lead" casting alloys...

quote:

Originally posted by OldHandgunHunter:

quote:

I just think the Keith has too small of a meplat to be really effective on game -- JMHO.

That's the kind of statement that you should save until you and a few of your friends board an 18 hour flight to Africa. One conversation could last the entire flight -- maybe even the entire trip.

Meaning what? The last time I was in Africa was on Uncle Sam's dime and the boat ride lasted one hell-of-a-lot longer than a measly 18 hours --

I've never been all that enamored with the Keith-style bullets. We have made steps forward in bullet design. As the title of this thread suggests -- old, old, old school. No one should take offense to this statement. Hey, whatever gets you through the night........

I'm still using the 429421 mold and hve dropped to 20 grains of 2400--- thanks for the info on the alliant 2400.

I don't have a LBT bullet mold so I have laid up a good supply of Cast Performance 320 grain plain base bullets for taking to bear country. These are very hard bullets and need to be loaded stiffly to make sure they don't lead up the bore. For a gentler plinking load, I use Oregon Trail SWCers or the round nose flat pointers.

Well I can say that Garrett 44 Mag ammo, from a 4" S&W 44 Mag, will penetrate to the brain on a cow elephant, from the front or the side...

Sadly I did not have any of my Keith bullets to test...

I have found that Garretts bullets are harder than any other factory ammo.

Still I feel, baised on a fair amount of shooting, [since 1970] that my Keith bullets penetrate deep enough, for any reason, this side of elephants... And maybe even good enough for them???

I do think that 300gr LBT type bullets will penetrate deeper...

But, I have never found Keith bullets wanting, in accuracy or penetration.

As much as I like different bullets/loads for different needs, and different deeds...

Truth is a 240/250 Keith loaded "light" for practice and plinking, "medium" for 2 legged defense and field work, and "heavy" for the big stuff, would work in a most excellent manner.

IMHO of course...

At least it has for me....

Let me add that my first deer rifle was a Ruger 44 Mag Deerstakler.

Back then 240gr jacketed bullets were the only choice.

This rifle killed deer like the Hammer of Thor...

As did my 6.5" Mod 29.

Funny thing is my 4" S&W with my Keith bullets killed deer just as well.

Once upon a time I shot a cow elk in the head with a 240 gr Federal HP.

The bullet did not go all the way through the head.

Later I shot a cow elk in the head with one of my Keith SWC 2400 loads. Complete penetration...

No doubt the Keith will get it done. I just like the fact that the LBT-style bullets have larger meplats and thereby create larger wound channels. They are more "optimized" for lack of a better term.

I don't worry so much about the meplat as long as it is enough to do the job at hand. What I don't like about the Keith is the amount of effort needed to get them to shoot with accuracy. I have had a few like the 429421 and 358156 that shot pretty good but there are a ton of designs that just don't work. More mold makers have messed up this boolit then any other.
The nose does nothing to center a boolit in the forcing cone and the little shoulder is even worse. Take a Keith and stick the nose in the muzzle and you can rattle it back and forth. No guidance at all.
The shoulder does nothing to game and only cuts holes in paper, I will never understand why Elmer fooled with it.
Boolits are like pretty, shiny grips so if a loaded round looks pretty it just has to shoot good, doesn't it?
I can make a Keith shoot but you will not like to hear how and I don't want to argue.
It is a tricky boolit and needs specific things and loads plus it needs to be handled different for each gun so if it shoots good from one SBH or S&W with one load, that does not say it will work in another SBH or S&W.
Now I can take any LBT or Lee RNFP and many other good boolits, find a load for my gun and they will also shoot from any other gun with maybe a tweak in the powder charge to allow for the twist rate between guns.
The Keith should be allowed to die like the dodo bird, it is out dated.
The most accurate bullet made today is the XTP so why not make a cast boolit the same shape?
Can any of you shoot your Keith like this at 200 yards? How about posting some pictures.

bfr

As you have stated, there are Keith bullets, and then there SWC bullets.

The original Keith has a large shoulder at the front of the bullet.

All SWC, most actually, are not real Keith bullets.

Mine come from a H&G mold.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
bfr

As you have stated, there are Keith bullets, and then there SWC bullets.

The original Keith has a large shoulder at the front of the bullet.

All SWC, most actually, are not real Keith bullets.

Mine come from a H&G mold.

And I might add that most "Keith" bullets aren't really Keith bullets. There have been many pretenders along the way trying to to use the name.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
bfr

As you have stated, there are Keith bullets, and then there SWC bullets.

The original Keith has a large shoulder at the front of the bullet.

All SWC, most actually, are not real Keith bullets.

Mine come from a H&G mold.

And I might add that most "Keith" bullets aren't really Keith bullets. There have been many pretenders along the way trying to to use the name.

Yes, that is what I was trying to say.

Just because a bullet is labeled a "Keith" SWC does not mean it is of the original Elmer Keith design.

For practice, plinking and low to medium power field use, I buy cast SWC bullets, but for my more serious and powerful loads I use my own cast Keith Bullets.

Part of the issues with these bullets seems to be how we as shooters intend to use them.

People who see the handgun as a secondary arm, to be used when a long gun is not available, find the Keiths to be just about perfect as a "General Purpose" projectile. Capable of plinknig to hunting to self defense at traditional ranges.

People who see the hand gun as a primary weapon to be used in all circumstance, find the Keith bullets lacking in length to bore ratio (sectional density?) for longer range use, thus the developement of rifle bullets for traditional revolver cartridges. Longer is better for extended range.

I do not need more than the Keith bullets deliver and they are more accurate than these eyes of mine are capable of with open sights. I like the way they look. I like the way they hit.I like them.

So I do not think people who differ in the usage of a handgun are foolish or dodo's just that they have different needs to be filled by the gun-bullet combination.

70 yds is my self imposed limit for open sighted revolver shooting. If I need to kill something at 200 yds I will get my rifle and shoot a hole in it.

I have never shot paper at 200 yards but we did have a lifesize metal deer at 200 yards on our range...

Once you knew how high to hold hits were very easy with my ironsighted 6.5" S&W Mod 29...

Not that I would shoot at game at that distance. And this was with my Keith cast bullets over 22.5gr of [old]2400.

OK, here is a question [not to start a Hatfield and McCoy Fued].

At "Normal" say to 100 yards and under,and at what point, and on what animal,under what conditions, would, a 300gr LBT type bullet, prove to be significantly superior to a 240/250 Keith SWC under 22 to 22.5 of [old] 2400???

ALSO how about on a Brown bear at contact distance???

Express your experience, and your opinions, no need for a "H&M Fued".

quote:

Posted 05 March 2010 12:26 Hide Post
OK, here is a question [not to start a Hatfield and McCoy Fued].

At "Normal" say to 100 yards and under,and at what point, and on what animal,under what conditions, would, a 300gr LBT type bullet, prove to be significantly superior to a 240/250 Keith SWC under 22 to 22.5 of [old] 2400???

ALSO how about on a Brown bear at contact distance???

Express your experience, and your opinions, no need for a "H&M Fued".

That depends on the size of the animal and the penetration needed. Nothing wrong with a Keith except what was explained about so many changes and accuracy potential. If you have one that shoots good you are set to go. It is just a tricky boolit to work with and I feel the revolver must be perfect in alignment.
Now for the 300 to 320 gr boolit, they are just very accurate and will take very large or tough animals but since they also work so well on deer, I just stay with a heavy boolit.
For plinking with light loads I do use a semi wad cutter, the RCBS boolit and I have worked with it enough to get decent accuracy. I sold my original Keith 429421 long, long ago and wish I still had it. For quick accuracy workups, I will always choose an LBT or RNFP style. I still feel how the nose engages the forcing cone and rifling start is very important. The target I showed above has the nose as close as I could get it to the forcing cone angle. I made the mold and it came out a little heavy at 330 gr because it is guess work for me. Bioman shoots this boolit into 1/2" at 50 yards from his new SBH Hunter.
Here are some experimental targets with the RCBS boolit.
First is 25 and 50 yards using water dropped WW metal and the second is a very hard boolit of 25 to 30 BHN.

As you can see, making the boolit very hard has a very good effect on accuracy because it prevents damage at the cone.
Now these 50 yard groups were shot with a 265 gr RD boolit, Mold made by Lee for Ranch Dog.I use 22 gr of 296, Fed 150 primer and Felix lube on a tumble lube boolit.

I forgot to add that the RD boolit is just WW metal so you can see they shoot MUCH better then a WW Keith style.

Now let me show you what can happen to a Keith. Many love soft lead so I went back and found this picture in an old Handloader magazine.
Also notice the amount of skid on the rifling marks, they extend past the base making gas channels to lead the bore.
This is what you need to avoid and why my accuracy increased by using very hard lead.
You want a recovered boolit to look exactly the same as the one you loaded, not slumped out of shape.
It is very funny that slump made the Keith into a RNFP but that does not make it accurate because it can all be off center. Better to start with a RNFP.

Now fellas, you seen slump so please explain what the little shoulder on a Keith boolit does. Why is it there?
They just look pretty when loaded, just like the shiny grips on your pretty gun.
Do you want a gun that when you put the sights on an animal at any distance, the animal is dead or do you sit on stand and admire your fancy gun?

Some of you know but a few may not. My SBH that shot these groups has exceeded 57,000 heavy loads and has a sandblasted forcing cone edge. The barrel needs set back yet it still shoots better then I can hold it.
My BFR revolvers will out shoot it every tick of the clock. I consider my Ruger SBH the least accurate of all of my revolvers.
My question to everyone is "when does accuracy harm hunting?"

Elmer used soft lead, if I remember 16 to 1 lead, tin.
He is long gone so can't comment.
Just what exactly did his boolits look like when they left the muzzle?

bfr

Thanks for the slugged up bullet picture, many peole are not aware that this happens with soft cast bullets and powerful loads.

I always cast my bullets out of linotype, as it was easy for me to get, and was always consistant.

I have recovered only one from an animal, a wild pig that I shot as it faced away from me.

The bullet hit about the center of the spine and was recovered in the teeth of the jaw.

The pig never moved. The only real change to the bullet is some dings on the nose where it hit and broke some teeth.

An animals teeth have to be the ultimate boolit stopper!
Now the strange thing about a Keith boolit is I have never, in 56-57 years of shooting them, had very small 50 yard and farther groups. It seems to be almost impossible to get smaller then the groups I posted with any powder or load all the way to 24 gr of 296 in the .44. Once in a while but never to be duplicated.
I have found the same with a pile of different semi wad cutters in my .475.
Now long ago I DID get the 358156 to shoot awful small at 100 yards from a S&W 27.
Not saying someone isn't doing well with them but I would say on the average most will say they shoot good enough and they do.
But I have been a revolver accuracy nut too long, spending years finding what revolvers like so I just use a Keith design for plinking even though they work fine for hunting.
It is just a personal thing and I don't denigrate those that like the boolit and it CAN be made to shoot better but it takes more work and just seems to only get so good, like there is a limit built in.
But remember, I am still looking for a one hole group at 100 yards, been close at less then an inch many times but I don't think I am capable myself of ever doing it.
Cast boolits are a bugger to shoot for accuracy but I feel the brass is the limiting factor when tight groups are wanted. Case tension differences will just spray targets and there is usually one case to ruin a group.
One fella on another site said he used new virgin brass for every IHMSA shoot and I said he was wrong, they are the worst for being consistent. Hundreds of tests have proven it to me.
Now the 200 yard group I showed was shot just to measure drop and the brass was fired around 40 times.
Here is just one test made with new brass at 50 yards. You can see many different group positions, I think I counted seven. Each shot was spotted with a scope to try and sort cases.
This is ONLY brass variations, 50 rounds were fired.

Now I want most of you to stop blaming the boolit, the load and your shooting for those nasty fliers and poor groups and to start thinking about that little piece of brass.
Looks nice and shiny, clean, and made a nice crimp plus they are brand spanking new. Wrong on all counts. That thing might be the cause of all of your trouble.
The dies you use can make loads so bad that 6" at 50 looks nice to you.
Of all the things that can go wrong with a revolver, the brass will be the hardest thing to cure.

bfr

Have you tested the individual cylinder chambers on any of your revolvers to see if one or more of them is more acccurate then the others?

heres my take on it. Ive shot as much game with handguns as anyone here and ive shot game as big as a 1000 lb cow buffalo with 44 kieths and it did just fine. Ive shot a pile of pigs deer and bear with cast kieths, swcs, lfns and wfns and can honestly say ive never notice a differnce in killing power in any of them. I will concede that a lfn is a bit easier to work a load up for and a kieth will come in second in that catagory and the hardest one to work an accurate load up for is a wfn. Ill say one other thing. If you are looking for the best accuracy a GOOD gun will provide your wasting your time with soft alloys. Any alloy that bumps up dramaticaly is deforming dramaticaly and you will never get it to do it the same way exactly twice. the main problem with so called kieths is most arent even close to elmers design. A keith NEEDs a wide front driving band to grab the rifling and alot of the swcs out there have paper thin ones. Another mistake mold designers make is making the metplat to big on a kieth. In my experience swcs with big metplats or short noses dont fly for squat! Look for a long bullet with a medium metplat and a good front driving band and they will shoot great. this is the same reason that most 45 swcs under 300 grain dont shoot well. there just to short. To a point these same things go for an lfn. Take a 240 grain 44 lfn with a short nose and it will usualy not shoot well. take a 260 or heavier one with a bit longer nose and they drive nails. Wfns are just duds all around in my book and i think it basicaly comes down to the fact that there just to short for there weight. If you insist on believing that a wfn is superior on game at least do your self a favor and when you buy a mold buy one heavy for the caliber.

quote:

Have you tested the individual cylinder chambers on any of your revolvers to see if one or more of them is more acccurate then the others?

Only on a gun that refuses to shoot groups.
I use all chambers on my BFR's and five on my SBH because I shoot 5 shot groups. Now it does not matter which 5 I use, I have no marked out chambers.
I had to do it with a very expensive revolver that refuses to group after 2 years of load work with every cast or jacketed bullet made and all powders. I won't say which gun but it is fit up FAR TOO TIGHT. This is what you can expect, notice there is not one chamber that actually groups and most shoot to a different POI.
Once in a while you might find a gun with one chamber funny but I have never found one on any of the guns I have owned, been lucky in that way.
This gun locks up too tight in every direction.

Lloyd makes a few good points but the scary thing is when you buy a heavy Keith mold, you don't know how much the design was changed. I still think the original 429421 was the best.
Now here is what we call an almost WFN with an 80% meplat that shot the 5 shot, 50 yard group and two shots in the can at 100 yards. Then a recovered boolit, I did everything wrong making the cherry according to design. The base band is very small at .075".
Notice the large Keith to the right. I gave up on it because the best it will do is 2" at 50 and 100 is kind of a bust.
I made a mold for the .45 Colt with an 81% meplat and another for the 45-70, both shoot as good as the one in this picture. So I will not say a WFN will not shoot, I notice no difference between a WLN, WFN or a RNFP.
It may be that the one Lloyd tried was out of range of the twist rate. The WFN is engraved much longer with the rifling starting way up on the nose so they need to be driven faster for the boolit length. It is a waste of time to try and shoot them with light loads. If the weight it too high, the stabilizing velocity can't be reached with a safe pressure range.
Lyman makes the 452651 for the .45 and it is super. They came out with the same boolit for the .44, it flopped and was discontinued. The reason was the rifling was engraved for 85% of the boolit length and nobody could shoot it fast enough for stability.

Remember Lloyd, it is not the overall boolit length but the amount of drive area that engages the rifling so the twist rate can do what it needs.
A rifle shooter will go nuts matching a bullet to the twist or have special twist rate barrels made for certain bullets/boolits or to match the distance shot and velocity wanted.
The revolver shooter ignores ALL of it. Trying to shoot monster boolits slow or light ones too fast.
The one that makes me laugh is when someone gets a 2" or 4" barrel in a huge cartridge and wants to shoot heavy boolits. Can't burn a slow powder and can't spin up the boolit. A good poke the bear in the belly gun and the muzzle blast will make some meat ready to eat.
Ever wonder why the BFR's are so accurate with a wide boolit range? Why they can shoot very heavy boolits? They have a FAST rate of twist so a heavy boolit can be shot WITH ACCURACY without going over pressure.
Slow the twist and make the drive area of the boolit longer and you need to up the velocity.