Thanks for the replies on my other thread, and not wanting to hijack my own thread I have another questionj for discussion.

What is gained by going from a Keith SWC to one of the "new generation" 300 grainers?

I have seen some SWC's in the 280/285gr weight, Garrett used to load them, but they seem to have been replaced by the LBT style @300gr.

Lets leave out the ultra heavyweight 330 grain bullets suitable only for the long cylinder 44's for this discussion, as they are not suitable for all 44 Mags.

I'm curious about this too, I've got two S&W 629's a 6.5" Classic Hunter and 4" Mountain Gun that would like to go onto the woods.

Which of the new bullets would be appropriate for deer/black bear/boar from these pistols?

They both shoot Keith style swc (and plain commercial swc) as well as I shoot, but are the new bullets better?

To over simplify, I like bigger meplats and heavier weights. The Keith is a bit on the light side -- I know you can get heavier "Keith-style" bullets, but in the traditional weight they will work well enough on thin skinned game like deer. I don't think there is any benefit to the shoulder of the Keith either. I have a few M29s that I don't like to feed really heavy bullets to as I am trying to preserve them, but in a Redhawk or SRH, I wouldn't hesitate to run the 300 + grain LBT style bullets. Nose profile is everything and bigger meplats (like those offered on an LFN or WFN -- particularly the WFN) do more damage. Plus, all things being equal, the 300 grain bullet carries more momentum and will generally penetrate more deeply. JMHO.

I am also with the WFN and LFN in the 300 gr. weight for the 44 Mag. I have never been a real fan of the Keith SWC bullets.
I know the accuracy of the WFN and LFN bullets in my handguns is very good.

My thought on the WFN or the LFN is, when you hit an animal, you are hitting it with more surface of the nose with the WFN or the LFN over the Keith SWC bullets. You can't argue with the success of the WFN or LFN bullets.

There is an article in Handloader about how great a killer the Keith is. I won't dispute that as they do kill. However he kept saying how the little edge cut perfect caliber holes and that drives me nuts.
If you watch ultra slow motion movies of a projectile hitting and exiting an animal you will see the skin is push way in before the boolit breaks through and on exit, the skin will bulge way out before the boolit breaks out. That causes a larger hole in the skin then the actual boolit diameter.
The skin is not held flat against a piece of wood!
I have even seen slow motion of a razor sharp arrow on exit and the skin stretched a good 2" to 3" before the arrow broke through. That is why the arrow holes are actually larger then the width of the broadhead.
Inside the animal there is a shock "wave" ahead of the nose, keeping flesh from the side of the boolit.
He shot into sand to show the whole boolit was in contact and rubbed the boolit sides---WOW, did that prove ANYTHING?
That little shoulder is useless except to cut a nice hole in paper. (I even dispute that.) The nose does all of the work.
Since the base of the nose on the Keith is smaller then boolit diameter, the first thing to contact the forcing cone is that little edge and if it doesn't stay in alignment due to the boolit being a tad smaller then the throat, it can tip.
Since the edge is the first thing to hit the forcing cone it is swaged down to bore size and loses most of it's shape.
My most accurate boolit has the truncated nose cut to 11* to match my forcing cone.
My WFN .475 boolit contacts the forcing cone close to the nose.
A better mechanical fit to the forcing cone means better accuracy.
The Keith shows me nothing because no part of the nose will even touch the rifling, it is free floating down the bore.
The full wad cutter can be more accurate because the whole boolit is in bore contact but can still be a problem with alighnment if the forcing cone does not guide it perfectly.
A Keith design is not as accurate if the base of the nose is too small and the edge too large. The best is to have a very small edge with the base of the nose engraved in the rifling.
Again, the edge does not aid the killing power.
That is why there is so much of a problem, making a boolit "pretty" when held in the hand will not say it will shoot or kill better.
Every single jacketed handgun bullet is a truncated cone design and all of you will admit that they are accurate.
If you get good accuracy from a Keith, don't assume everyone can. You are just lucky!

NOW we know the truth. Elmer Keith didn't know anything and all the nonsense about how good the Keith bullets are can be laid to rest
The experts have spoken once and for all.

quote:

Originally posted by Me_Plat:
NOW we know the truth. Elmer Keith didn't know anything and all the nonsense about how good the Keith bullets are can be laid to rest
The experts have spoken once and for all.

There have been improvements in bullet design since Elmer Keith developed his bullet, therefore Veral Smith's contributions shouldn't be dismissed. At the time, there certainly wasn't anything better.

Keith was way ahead of his time in my opinion but one of his greatest strengths was his power of observation, particularly how game reacted to being shot and studying bullet performance.

Whitworth wrote:

quote:

To over simplify, I like bigger meplats and heavier weights. The Keith is a bit on the light side -- I know you can get heavier "Keith-style" bullets, but in the traditional weight they will work well enough on thin skinned game like deer. I don't think there is any benefit to the shoulder of the Keith either. I have a few M29s that I don't like to feed really heavy bullets to as I am trying to preserve them, but in a Redhawk or SRH, I wouldn't hesitate to run the 300 + grain LBT style bullets. Nose profile is everything and bigger meplats (like those offered on an LFN or WFN -- particularly the WFN) do more damage. Plus, all things being equal, the 300 grain bullet carries more momentum and will generally penetrate more deeply. JMHO.

Well said. I have been using the 320 grain Cast Performance WFN for years in a few .44 Magnums and have grown fond of their utter reliability in terms of on-game performance. It doesn't matter it it's vermin or varmints, big game or exotics, they always do the job.

Me_Plat wrote:

quote:

NOW we know the truth. Elmer Keith didn't know anything and all the nonsense about how good the Keith bullets are can be laid to rest
The experts have spoken once and for all.

What in the world is your problem??? No one said Keith "didn't know anything." We all concur that he was a pioneer in the field and that his work and developments set the tone for today -- including improvements, if you will, over the Keith design.

Every time I see you posting, it seems you are being hostile and looking for a fight. Do you have nothing better to do with your time??? And whatever happened to common courtesy and respect toward others?

quote:

There have been improvements in bullet design since Elmer Keith developed his bullet, therefore Veral Smith's contributions shouldn't be dismissed. At the time, there certainly wasn't anything better.

Keith was way ahead of his time in my opinion but one of his greatest strengths was his power of observation, particularly how game reacted to being shot and studying bullet performance.

But after all is said and done since his bullet design was bad does that not negate his observations and his studying bullet design?
His observations based on poor design etc. will not have any affect on what most are using today like LBT bullets so on and so forth etc. etc. etc.
So shouldn't Keith be laid to rest finally and his studies be relagated to the dust covered piles of history that has gone wrong?

No, it was a step in the right direction, but we have taken even more steps forward. His basic design and philosophy are correct, we have just improved open them. The LBT-style bullets put more weight in nose of the bullet allowing for heavier bullets that are shorter thereby not eating up as much case capacity and allowng for stabilization at slower speeds. Why would his findings be dismissed?

I guess i have to ask it the other way. If a keith driving band doesnt cut so what. its stil got as big of a metplat as a lfn and lfns kill well. I have nothing against lfns. As a matter of fact i use as many of them as i do keiths. There both hands down better then any wfn or wlfn. the only advantage i see to lfns is that they can sometimes be easier to find accurate loads and all of them seem to fly good at long distance. Kieths usually do too but to many people call a swc a keith and most are far from it. The major problem i see in kieth bullets is to many idiots that think they know more then elmer try to change it. Odd driving bands, different nose profiles, differnt lube groves. As to the weight you can buy a lyman mold that casts a 320 swcgc. this is a good bullet its accurate and it flys well at long range. It will hammer game as well as any wfn or lfn.

Me_Plat wrote:

quote:

But after all is said and done since his bullet design was bad...

NO ONE said his design was bad. Please re-read and try and comprehend the posts.

That is correct and Lloyd said it well! Too many hands in the pie. Too many that thought they could make a boolit that just resembled a Keith and it would sell and shoot.
Elmer knew what he was doing but I bet he still went through a lot of designs and molds before he found what worked. It is a touchy boolit and anything wrong will ruin it. Even Lyman fiddled with the 429421 too much over the years. It is also a hard boolit to extend to a heavy weight or to shorten for a light boolit.
A truncated cone can do it all, I am sure if elmer would have gone the extra step in removing the shoulder, there would not be a semi wadcutter today.
Back in the day, there were only two designs for revolvers, the wad cutter for target and the round nose. Elmer tried to combine the two and knew a flat nose was better. The thoughts back then were that the wad cutter was only good real close and you needed a round nose for distance. Something proven wrong every day now. Even Elmer knew the thinking was wrong. He just didn't go far enough. It was merely a case of him finding what he liked and ending his research.

............. I,m doing alot of thinking on these points .. bfpshooter , what is the dia. of the meplate on your 475 WFN bullet ?? I don,t mean to hijack the thread , so to get back on track ,. Hunters up here started using heavier than 240 gr 44 bullets as soon as they were available ....

If I get good accuracy from the Belt Mountain Punch bullet I will start loading them . so far they have out penetrated the cast bullets I have shot by 3 " or more and they are reloadable , where as the casy bullets pile up at the nose some ....

those punch bullets are simply amazing. Hands dow the best projectile you can hunt with out of a handgun or even a levergun. They leave even hardcast bullets in the dust when it comes to penetration. Cost is the only downfall to them. Ive got a bunch of 44 300 grain bullet that kelly gave me to try and wants me to shoot a buffalo with. Weve done a bunch of penetration testing for him with other calibers and weights and they have never failed to amaze us. If i had to load a handgun for a once in a lifetime hunt on a large animnal or to carry in a gun for protection in an area that made me nervous they are WHAT WOULD BE IN MY GUN! its as simple as that.

quote:

Originally posted by gumboot458:
............. I,m doing alot of thinking on these points .. bfpshooter , what is the dia. of the meplate on your 475 WFN bullet ?? I don,t mean to hijack the thread , so to get back on track ,. Hunters up here started using heavier than 240 gr 44 bullets as soon as they were available ....

If I get good accuracy from the Belt Mountain Punch bullet I will start loading them . so far they have out penetrated the cast bullets I have shot by 3 " or more and they are reloadable , where as the casy bullets pile up at the nose some ....

quote:

Originally posted by Lloyd Smale:
those punch bullets are simply amazing. Hands dow the best projectile you can hunt with out of a handgun or even a levergun. They leave even hardcast bullets in the dust when it comes to penetration. Cost is the only downfall to them. Ive got a bunch of 44 300 grain bullet that kelly gave me to try and wants me to shoot a buffalo with. Weve done a bunch of penetration testing for him with other calibers and weights and they have never failed to amaze us. If i had to load a handgun for a once in a lifetime hunt on a large animnal or to carry in a gun for protection in an area that made me nervous they are WHAT WOULD BE IN MY GUN! its as simple as that.

quote:

Originally posted by gumboot458:
............. I,m doing alot of thinking on these points .. bfpshooter , what is the dia. of the meplate on your 475 WFN bullet ?? I don,t mean to hijack the thread , so to get back on track ,. Hunters up here started using heavier than 240 gr 44 bullets as soon as they were available ....

If I get good accuracy from the Belt Mountain Punch bullet I will start loading them . so far they have out penetrated the cast bullets I have shot by 3 " or more and they are reloadable , where as the casy bullets pile up at the nose some ....

Lloyd, do you think there comes a point where there is to much penetration? Or should I rephrase that to say, is there a point where that much penetration is not needed? I am not saying penetration is bad, it is a good thing, you have to be able to get to the vitals on game. But if a good hard cast bullet shoots through must animals, what is gained with more penetration?
Unless you are trying to go from tail to head or vice versa.
Now if I was hunting in Africa and needed the extra penetration on heavy bone or thick hide, I would most differently would use the punch bullets. But for North American game is it needed?

I will have to agree with MePlat on this one. I really do not think either one of us on this board has enough experience "with both" the LBT style and the Keith style to form an educated opinion solely based on our own experience from what I am reading.

Being that in the field there are no duplicated shots added with the fact that a bullet would not enter and exit the animal at the exact same spot twice there is really no way to get an exact answer as to which kills better.

I personally like and use the keith style bullets and have had success with them. Mostly because a friend of mine casts a dang good one.

That said I also believe everything new kills better. That idea is what is brainwashed into us by the magazines and hunting shows which is a phenomenon that is also supported by the gun manufacturers. If something new doesnt kill better it will not sell better.

Gumboot, my meplat measures .380". That is close to 80% of the boolit diameter. The boolit weighs 420 gr's. It has proven super accurate out at extended ranges, clear to 500 meters.

Builder, is not 53 years of shooting the keith boolits enough experience? I have had some that were just fantastic and I was shooting 200 yd's back in 1956 with the .44 and a few times to 400 yd's. That was before most shooters knew a revolver would shoot more then 10 yd's. (Yes, I followed Elmer and I am still a believer.)
I also shot the Keith in a .357 before the .44 came out and 100 yd's was standard shooting for me.
However there are so many now that will not shoot as good and I no longer have the molds I had, I don't bother with them much.
You just can't fiddle with the nose shape! Part of the nose has to be a bore ride. That means the edge should be no larger then rifling depth. Not much of a game cutting edge, is it?
I can design one and make my own mold to equal the accuracy of the original but it is just as easy to make the truncated cone.

quote:

Originally posted by builder45: That said I also believe everything new kills better. That idea is what is brainwashed into us by the magazines and hunting shows which is a phenomenon that is also supported by the gun manufacturers. If something new doesnt kill better it will not sell better.

Actually, the magazines are often pushing jacketed expanding bullets for handgun hunting and you'll be hard pressed to find too many handgun hunters on the forum who will use an expanding bullet on anything other than thin-skinned game like deer.

No one is saying that the Keith bullet isn't good or doesn't work, but to ignore progress is foolish particularly for nostalgia's sake........JMHO

The original Keith style semi wadcutter meplat size was indeed smaller than the LBT LFN's. There are many semi wadcutters on the market today with Meplats as wide are wider than the LBT LFN's, but these are not Kieth's original design. Kieth's design was light years ahead of any other design in it's day. The LBT style puts more wieght in the nose and allows the same wieght bullet to be shorter and that's a good thing for a heavy revolver bullet.

Elmer Keith could have really been a whiz bang of a shot had he had the designs we have today.
I would say he could have done better on that mule deer if he would have had the projectiles we have access to today.
He died to early or was born too early or something along that line.I wonder if he could keep them in 3 inches offhand at a hundred and ocassionally hit a pop can to at that range with the designs we have today?

quote:

Originally posted by Me_Plat:
Elmer Keith could have really been a whiz bang of a shot had he had the designs we have today.
I would say he could have done better on that mule deer if he would have had the projectiles we have access to today.
He died to early or was born too early or something along that line.I wonder if he could keep them in 3 inches offhand at a hundred and ocassionally hit a pop can to at that range with the designs we have today?

Dripping with sarcasm........

quote:

Originally posted by Me_Plat:
Elmer Keith could have really been a whiz bang of a shot had he had the designs we have today.
I would say he could have done better on that mule deer if he would have had the projectiles we have access to today.
He died to early or was born too early or something along that line.I wonder if he could keep them in 3 inches offhand at a hundred and ocassionally hit a pop can to at that range with the designs we have today?

The Kieth style semi wadcutter is an extremely accurate design and especially so at long range.

quote:

THE WART OF THE SHOOTING WORLD.
ALSO THE ONE WHO DOESN'T HAVE A CLUE

This says it all I guess!
I really think you are bi-polar and need to seek help and medication.
Maybe you should just have a beer after a shooting session! But I have to question if you ever shoot.

bfrshooter ,,, Thanks ... The meplate on the .452 punch bullet measures .370 , as does some of the .452 wln and wfn designs ....

..... Back to the 44 mag ., I,ve shot the 300 and 320 gr bullets in several different ones .. as I,ve never been a very good pistol shot I never noticed the accuracy difference but I do notice alot of penetration difference ...between the 240 gr and the 300 gr .. and the 300 gr arn,t any harder to control in recoil ...

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Thanks for the replies on my other thread, and not wanting to hijack my own thread I have another questionj for discussion.

What is gained by going from a Keith SWC to one of the "new generation" 300 grainers?

I have seen some SWC's in the 280/285gr weight, Garrett used to load them, but they seem to have been replaced by the LBT style @300gr.

Lets leave out the ultra heavyweight 330 grain bullets suitable only for the long cylinder 44's for this discussion, as they are not suitable for all 44 Mags.

What are you hunting? If you're hunting whitetails and hogs, I'd guess you'll find the 240/250 @ 1500 fps will be at least as good if not a tad bit better than the 300's @ 1300 fps. Once you get consistant exits, the only way to increase terminal performance is to increase velocity.

But if you are hunting elk, moose or the great bears you might find the 240/250 just isn't heavy enough to get consistant exits on angling shots or through heavy bone.

One thing most people don't mention when comparing swc's to ogival flatpoints ie lfn's and wfn's is that the lfn/wfn is a much shorter bullet than the same weight swc. This has two affects, the shorter bullets take up less powder space in the case, so you can get a bit more velocity, and they need less barrel twist to stabalize.

The downside of the lfn/wfn's is that with more case capacity they sometimes won't provide the same level of accuracy as the swc's when loaded at the lower velocity levels.

So what is the advantage of the 300 lfn or wfn? It depends on your application, might be no benefit, might be some benefit.

For me, with the Cast Performance WFN 320 grainers, I have enjoyed excellent -- sometimes spectacular -- accuracy in several .44 magnums (all using top-end loads w/ H110).

To be honest, for my needs, I really wouldn't need any other bullet type for the .44s. I've tried basically everything out there over the years, and if I ABSOLUTELY had to use a jacketed bullet, then it would the the 250 grain Partition. Otherwise, the majority of my revolver shooting is going to be with Cast Performance projectiles.

They have never let me down, and anything shot with them suffers an immediate loss of blood pressure and quickly loses interest in any worldly matters...

quote:

Originally posted by Paul HOne thing most people don't mention when comparing swc's to ogival flatpoints ie lfn's and wfn's is that the lfn/wfn is a much shorter bullet than the same weight swc. This has two affects, the shorter bullets take up less powder space in the case, so you can get a bit more velocity, and they need less barrel twist to stabalize.

The downside of the lfn/wfn's is that with more case capacity they sometimes won't provide the same level of accuracy as the swc's when loaded at the lower velocity levels.

Hey, I did mention that! To quote myself: "The LBT-style bullets put more weight in nose of the bullet allowing for heavier bullets that are shorter thereby not eating up as much case capacity and allowng for stabilization at slower speeds. Why would his findings be dismissed?"

Sorry,

Shallow reading on my part.

If I may inject my 2 cents worth. . . . I hunt with LBT style bullets in my lever actions and handguns. I have done extensive testing for a lot of years, and even had my own cast bullet business for awhile. That said; when I hunt at close range (within 150 yards) with a handgun, I use LBTs. However, if I am dead set on hitting a target at long range, say out at about 500 yards with a handgun, it will be with a heavy Keith style every time. The blunter meplates tend to cause a little unstability once they reach about 200 yards. When Elmer was alive, good friend of mine watched as Elmer took a bet from a guy at a Idaho range that called bull shit on Elmer for his 500 yard shot claims. Elmer was hammered on some fine whiskey. He had a kid run a plastic plate out at about 500 yards. Elmer took out a 4" handgun, lay back in the creedmore and popped the plate! Keith knew what he was doing then, and at present I have not found a more accurate long range cast design available. The LBTs do put a bigger hole in game for sure. But, if you can't hit it, it does no good. Elmer knew that fact.

One of the main problems is that too many people have tried to improve the Keith design, when leaving well enough alone would have been the best thing to do.

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
One of the main problems is that too many people have tried to improve the Keith design, when leaving well enough alone would have been the best thing to do.

You make a very valid point. There are many versions of the Keith bullet -- "Keith style" doesn't make it a real Keith bullet.

How much penetration does one need I've seen my 315 cast lees shot into the front of a blk bear and come out he other end about 4 feet.

If one can drive any bullet in one side out the other. What is gained by a bullet that goes another ?? inchs penetration in a test.

If one drives the bullet thru the front of the chest destroys the lungs ect what is gain by the bullet driveing into the guts.

Once the bullet penetrats and exits the animal it does no more damage then any other bullet that does the same thing.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
How much penetration does one need I've seen my 315 cast lees shot into the front of a blk bear and come out he other end about 4 feet.

If one can drive any bullet in one side out the other. What is gained by a bullet that goes another ?? inchs penetration in a test.

If one drives the bullet thru the front of the chest destroys the lungs ect what is gain by the bullet driveing into the guts.

Once the bullet penetrats and exits the animal it does no more damage then any other bullet that does the same thing.

Very valid point. How much is enough? Personally, I like my bullets to exit and proscribe to the two holes are better than one philosophy. This is why I don't buy into muzzle energy. If two identical bullets with significantly different muzzle energie both have enough penetration to exit, what is the difference? Aside from recoil.......

The main difference is this. The faster a bullet exits out the other side, the larger the wound channel thru and thru, which is what does the damage that kills the animal. If a bullet exits at a slower speed; which is created by less energy, the wound channel surrounding the hole is smaller. The animal bleeds out slower, and may travel further before it drops. Think of how an animal would react if the bullet was capable of very slowly going in one side and out the other, without the large channel that is created by the higher velocity. The higher the energy (created by high velocity), the larger the wound channel, the faster it bleeds out. And the exit hole because if it's size, has more capibility to let out more blood, and let in more air than the entry hole, doing more damage. That my fellow hunters, is the difference.

The meplat size dictates the size of the wound channel more than anything else. Yes, you can go too slow, but when they are fast enough, more speed doesn't matter. If a bullet hits faster, it will not necessarily exit faster. It may scrub off speed at a much higher rate. Because you impact with higher velocity, does not mean that it will exit faster than a bullet that has a lower impact velocity. This assumes that the bullet has enough velocity. I have never seen an animal impressed with ME, but they do seem to notice large diameter, heavy flat-point bullets, regardless of the speed. We are talking about weapons (revolvers) that are incapable of generating a lot of velocity relative to rifles. My Casull loaded to max velocities with 300 grain bullets generally generates more ME than my .475, but it certainly doesn't hit harder.

Breifly as well, regarding the Keith design; Elmer had a good reason for every detail of his design. LBTs have basically one purpose; to add bullet weight and a large meplate to do damage once they connect with an animal. And that they do. Keith designed a thick bullet base below the lube groove in order to maintain correct shape during obturation to correctly fill the forcing cone while prventing blowby, and maintaining proper shape for accuracy. The lube groove itself was made deep with square corners in the bottom and a smaller bullet shaft at this point, so that it would compress, thereby hydrolically forcing the lube into the rifling. Something a LBT will not do. Then there's the thick front driving band he designed to grab hold of the rifling quickly in order to reduce skidding and maintain stability. The nose was reduced to it's semi wadcutter shape to help keep it's forward stability at extreme long range. Which it does. Most of todays so called Keith bullets have been bastardized because the original is a very difficult bullet to cast. It's deep square lube groove, holds on the the mould tightly, making it tough to drop from the mould. Some add a bevel base which reduced the correct amount of obturation for a tight gas seal. The thick, sharp edged driving band also grips tightly to the mould. All adding up to casting difficulties. Keith was not concerned with all that; he wanted a bullet to work, and at looong range where he had the capibility to connect with his game. The difference in the REAL Keith bullets and LBT in my guns are amazing. At 300 yards my LBTs will produce about a 2 foot group, where with the Keiths; if I do my part, no pop can sized object is safe!And then farther then that, it becomes even more apparant. Again, that's the difference.

Can someone show a picture of THE Kieth style? Also who makes a mould of the original? Thanks John

I think the Lyman 429421 has gone full circle and is again made like the original Keith.