Talking about Elmer's original 1928 design for the .44 Special, the Lyman 429421, which he loaded over 18.5 grains of 2400 in balloon-head cases.
I'll be casting from the RCBS version, but would love to hear how this old classic has performed in the hunting fields from YOUR sixgun -- either .44 Special or .44 Magnum.
Particularly interested in the alloy you are using. I believe Elmer liked 16:1 lead to tin.

Not handguns, but I have been using that load for close to 50 years now in a 788 Remington Bolt Action and an 1894 Marlin Lever Action and it works.

There's a Facebook group called the 44 Associates where you'll see several applications of that bullet on game. The same over on the Single Action forum.

That's the only bullet I use in my 44 Special but to date it has only been used to finish off a cow moose with a head shot. I cast a 12 BHN bullet for 99% of my shooting.

I cast the 429421 mainly from wheel weights. It does a number on deer, or anything else it hits.

No reason why it shouldn't work very well. The original of course is much better than most of the copies ! The sharp shoulder for example does cut a clean hole !

I shot a couple of deer with my 41 and Keith type bullet. They both died.

I use a WFN 315 in my 44s

Place the 250 in the right spot and the game you shoot well die.

Thanks fellas. Mart, I have asked to join that Facebook group.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Talking about Elmer's original 1928 design for the .44 Special, the Lyman 429421, which he loaded over 18.5 grains of 2400 in balloon-head cases.
I'll be casting from the RCBS version, but would love to hear how this old classic has performed in the hunting fields from YOUR sixgun -- either .44 Special or .44 Magnum.
Particularly interested in the alloy you are using. I believe Elmer liked 16:1 lead to tin.

Bill
I have used the same mold for several years.
44magnum and 44 special. I have tried others but they don't work as well. I powder coat all my bullets, and run about 16:1 for the magnums and a little softer for the special. with my mix the bullets come out to about 264 grains. Works for me.

Slenk: Kewl! I have some 20:1 alloy I will try.

Bill
I use a lot of 20:1 work real good. in my SBH and BH 44 special as well as my NV 44 mag.3 3/4" birds head.
Again I powder coat everything so they can be ran a little softer. 900 to 1200 fps.

In my humble opinion, there are better options available. I personally prefer a larger meplat -- a much larger meplat. I would look to the LBT designs over the "Keith." While they work, there are a number of reasons I don't drive a Model T to work every day. JMHO.

Max, I hear you. If the game were any bigger than deer I would likely go with an LFN. But then I still wear red plaid in the hunting woods.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Max, I hear you. If the game were any bigger than deer I would likely go with an LFN. But then I still wear red plaid in the hunting woods.

Bill, deer will also “benefit” from the bigger meplat.

Point well taken, Max. I tended to think of the LFNs as heavy for caliber, but I see that Beartooth offers one at 250 grains, which ought to work just dandy in the relatively stubby .44 Special case.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Max, I hear you. If the game were any bigger than deer I would likely go with an LFN. But then I still wear red plaid in the hunting woods.

Bill not to hijack this discussion but I have my grandfathers Abercrombie and Fitch red plaid hunting jacket and jodpher style pants that Lace from the knee down to go inside tall hunting boots I’m thinking late 40’s. Still in great shape unfortunately too small for me.

Zeph, I have a red plaid Filson Mackinaw, a green wool Filson Forester -- and a pair of jodphur-style pants I tuck into my 16-inch L.L. Bean hunting boots. Trouble is, now I live in the desert and lack an excuse to wear the stuff.
If you ever got to wander around a genuine Abercrombie and Fitch store back in the day, it was like being in the Vatican to a Catholic.

I shot a big mule deer buck with that bullet in a hollow point persuasion, I aimed at his neck as he faced at 75 yards, missed but the bullet took him in the spine and ran down his back took out a lot of spine, and most of the back strap opened him up I could have almost gutted him..I did almostthe same with a 41.

I think I prefer hard cast HP or solid simi wadcutter Keith type bullet for hunting big game, have not really shot more than a few deer with revolvers, and none with automatics..soooo?

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Max, I hear you. If the game were any bigger than deer I would likely go with an LFN. But then I still wear red plaid in the hunting woods.

Bill, deer will also “benefit” from the bigger meplat.

Prolly not in the deers opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by mart:
There's a Facebook group called the 44 Associates where you'll see several applications of that bullet on game. The same over on the Single Action forum.

That's the only bullet I use in my 44 Special but to date it has only been used to finish off a cow moose with a head shot. I cast a 12 BHN bullet for 99% of my shooting.

I tried joining that group twice and now they must have me blocked. I can't even search 44 associates.

I wonder why that is.

RMiller,

If you PM me your information I'll send a FB message to the group admin to see if the problem can be resolved.

Mart

Bill,
As I remember, the Lyman version of the 429421 underwent several revisions. Some with square lube grooves, some with round lube grooves. I'm not a historian regarding it, by no means. There are others that could give you a far more accurate account.

By the same token, the RCBS has had a couple variations of the 44-245KT. The older having a thinner front band, the newer having a thicker front band but smaller rear driving band. Then they introduced the 44-250K version which bears a longer nose.

I cast and load the 44-245KT in preference to the Lyman variation as the bullet is slightly shorter overall, the nose to crimp dimension is a bit shorter, this fitting some guns better. ( It fits some win 92 style levers for feeding. ) Lastly it has a bit larger meplat than the Lyman version.

I have several local folks whom I cast for that use the 44-245KT with great success on whitetail deer. Most have never recovered a bullet as they are most always have complete penetration.

I cast mine as an air cooled alloy about 12-13 BHN. They serve well in the 44 mag over 18.0 of 2400, producing 1250 fps from a 4" Model 29. Charges of 14.0 grains of 2400 in 44 Spl cases, give 1050fps from a 5 1/2" OM Blackhawk. They run a bit slower, as I remember of the top of my head, High 900's (980??) from a 4" Taurus Tracker and the new GP100 3". The reason for the velocity being the same with these two guns is the Taurus is actually a 3" barrel with the last inch being expansion chamber and muzzle brake.

The discussion will go on regarding meplat size and seems to occasionally get heated. It doesn't need to be. Use what shoots good in your gun, what works when it gets there. When you do, you'll have confidence regardless of the shape.

All the best

Edit, Looked up my data for the 44 spl 14.0/2400 load. Went 1095fps from the old model Ruger 5.5"

Thanks Kaytod. Brian Pearce discussed the Lyman mold changes somewhere along the line. I'm pretty certain that just about any flavor of 250-grain Keith at 1100 or so will get a lot of work done.

Hi Bill:

I don't know the mold numbers you guys discuss.
and I don't have or shoot a 44 anything unless it's this copy of Walker Colt I have.

I do shoot LOT's of 45 Colt with the 250gr SWC I believe is Keith's design. I pick pellets from the range berm and just clean the rocks and jackets out of the metal and cast from there. I can't mark 'em with my thumb nail. Most pellets I pick up are cast and I figure other guys have done the mixing already. When it's soft enough I can mark ingots with my thumb nail I put it in the "soft" box.

I sent some of the same design from a 38 mold to Lee when I sent a mold back for repairs and asked if they'd check the hardness.
They said was between 8 and 9BN. Quite soft compared to some you guys talk about.

In the Colt with 20gr H110 fired from 20 feet or so. They all went thru a live 10" pine. Believe I shot two cylinders full at it and every one went clear thru. Would have to look it up and don't feel like doing that now. I believe they're 1240fps or there about.

I'd bet they'd do the same on deer. For a back up on elk I got a mold that casts 320gr flat points that I call: "hammerheads". You can see that in Lee's line up. That's with this metal I use, I don't know off hand what wt they quote in the catalog.

Until the club shut down pistols on the 100yd rifle range I was putting them into about 10-14" groups at 100yds off one hand in my blackhawk and stock irons. Sure would like to do a lot more shooting at that range. Never know when elk will stray by when the rifle is out of reach.

Wish you luck, stay cool down there!

George

I have shot one Elk with the 250 Keith. Wheel weights home cast on top of a Blue Dot load that was probably 1100 FPS maybe less. I shot the Elk in the right shoulder at about 40 yards as she ran through an opening in the brush. "Whack" ran downhill about 100 yards or less and piled up. Broke both scapula and the lungs had a big hole in them and filled with blood. Recovered the bullet under the off hide. Nose was smeared a bit. Target of opportunity because I had the S&W 29 with me. There are "better" bullets I am sure, but the 250 sharp shouldered Keith in a 44 is plenty when delivered to the right spots.

NOt much you can do to improve the 250 gr. Keith bullet except perhaps mold them a bit harder, that shoulder cuts a big hole and lets a lot of blood out..Penetration is close to extreme, using a heavier bullets isn't the answer as it won't increase penetration to any degree, as the bullet is slowed down so its a push..Some folks think all you have to do is make a bullet heavier and you get more penetration, not so, its a balancing act, a happy medium before you get to diminishing returns..The 250 Keith is that perfect combination in a 44 or 45 caliber IMO..

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
NOt much you can do to improve the 250 gr. Keith bullet except perhaps mold them a bit harder, that shoulder cuts a big hole and lets a lot of blood out..Penetration is close to extreme, using a heavier bullets isn't the answer as it won't increase penetration to any degree, as the bullet is slowed down so its a push..Some folks think all you have to do is make a bullet heavier and you get more penetration, not so, its a balancing act, a happy medium before you get to diminishing returns..The 250 Keith is that perfect combination in a 44 or 45 caliber IMO..

Ray, I have to disagree. Weight certainly helps with penetration all else being equal, and frankly there are better designs than the "Keith" that have a significantly larger meplat that subsequently produce a substantially larger wound channel. Veral Smith proved long ago that the shoulder does not contribute to the wound channel. The Keith and other semi-wadcutters do however punch clean holes in paper.

This topic usually opens up some serious and somewhat unfriendly lines of "discussion", ending with the emphasis on dis-Cuss'n.

In my faded memory, the Keith design wasn't the first flat nosed bullet for handguns, however Keith did "improve" the design and subsequently went on to use it with great success in the field and in print. The examples we have today are "Keith types" as there were many subtle variations even when mold makers such as Lyman, made the molds. There are those who are better historians than I, therefore the subject of variations are left to someone else.

Veral did use paint on the noses of Keith bullets and if I remember, shot them into water. In this aqueous medium the cavitation around the bullet will indeed wipe the nose clean of paint, yet leave the bullet shoulder untouched.
However, recovered bullets from game and other semi-aqueous mediums show definitive contact with the shoulder of the bullet. So, the questions remain, where, when and to what extent does the Keith shoulder play in wound channel.

First, my disclaimer. I profess no expertise, nor claim any authority on the matter. Just some simple observations and end with my hypothesis.

The WFN designs with wide meplats generally produce a measurably larger wound channel than bullets with smaller meplats.

In wetpack tests, nearly all flat nosed handgun bullets will "lay down" or turn sideways the last inch or two of it's penetration. This is sometimes seen in animals, but it is hard to tell the exact reason due to muscles movement or the hide flexibility on an animal that doesn't know it is expired yet.

What I theorize is the following, at the onset of penetration the cavitation area around the bullet, ( henceforth call the "CV Bubble" ) hasn't been completely formed yet as the bullet enters the hide and tissue. And at the end of it's penetration travel, the CV bubble is collapsing as the bullet slows. I believe these two places are where the shoulder of the Keith does contact the material. ( which may account for all styles of bullets "laying down" as the CV bubble collapses the bullet turns to the path of least resistance )However during penetration when the CV Bubble is formed, work is done by the nose meplat.
(The WFN designs have larger meplats than those of the Keith designs, even the NEI "rebar noses" that were seemingly cylindrical. Therefore they should and do create larger diameter channels although they do sacrifice some depth of penetration.)

Now, to what extent this ( Keith shoulder) has on game and how much effect is for someone else who can test this hypothesis and see if it has merit.

For those who like to stretch the legs of the revolver bullet to see how far bullet types are accurate, I would suggest talking to a pair of fellows in Wyoming/North Dakota.
These two gentlemen have numerous hours of high quality video footage of bullets in flight from handguns.
Their target was a 4x8 sheet of plywood, I think at 1500 yards. Bullet bases were polished (copper or gas checked ) and painted white to capture them in flight.
Interestingly the Keith types were generally recovered, as when they struck the dirt, the shoulder seemed to steer them into the dirt. LBT style RNFP bullets would arc out of the dirt and continue airborne.
NOW IT HAS BEEN SOME TIME SINCE I SPOKE WITH THEM REGARDING THIS DATA. Don't take my word for it, contact them yourself.

PM me for their information, as I don't have their permission to make it public.

Do I have a dog in the fight? No, I like both styles of bullets and have used them both with success.
I will choose either based on game, application, gun, ( accuracy or nostalgia ) or simply on a whim whatever blows my skirt up that day. I've always eaten well with both designs.
Choose what you like, what shoots good in your gun, what performs as you wish on the game, but most of all, enjoy our liberty to choose or choose again as you wish.

Most of all, Go shootin!

All the best
Todd

quote:

Originally posted by kaytod:
This topic usually opens up some serious and somewhat unfriendly lines of "discussion", ending with the emphasis on dis-Cuss'n.

That's because too many folks are emotionally attached to bullets for some unknown reason and often times their limited experience doesn't allow for an objective evaluation of bullet performance. This is precisely why we started the Bovine Bash in Texas, where bullets are put to the flesh of animals that will truly test bullet integrity unlike whitetail. No emotion, just real world testing.

And for the sake of visuals, there really is no comparison with regards to meplats and wound channels:

Todd: After seeing how much grief Elmer Keith took (some of it after he was called home) about his 600 yard mule deer shot, I no longer shoot my revolvers at 1500 yard targets. If you would like to further explore meplat area and wound channels I suggest the following two references:
1. "Jacketed Performance With Cast Bullets" by Veral Smith page 102
2. "Beartooth Bullets Technical Guide" by J. Marshall Stanton page 70-71

I agree with Whitworth in that a wider meplat like that in the Cast Performance offerings is superior in terminal performance. Yes, the Keith design works, but these seem to do better and cut a wider wound channel throughout. My experience with them is years ago and likely involves only 15-18 animals, but even with that limited usage, I came to prefer the WFN design for the .44 Magnum.

Plus, they shot incredibly well for me with minimal load workup -- almost rifle-like accuracy out of revolvers.

This subject reminds me of when I approached all the bullet makers about making a flat nose solid for shooting buffalo, hippo and whatnot with large bore rifles..They voiced all the nays and no.s I hear in this thread base on mathamatics, and all manor of reasoning short of actual killing of big tough animals, I took my scolding and filed off the noses of solids and used cast bullets of my design..Now they all recommend flat nose solids. I do believe the sharp shoulder cuts a clean hole that will not close up or fill with fat...To state that a heavier bullet has more penetration is not written in stone its lack of velocity can void that statement in a heart beat, as with most things somewhere in the middle is the true answer. A fast expanding bullet will slow down penetration, but a too slow bullet will not penetrate, its a balance. One mustn't get caught up in tech soup, it'll ruin your day and lose your trophy or visa versa, but to each his own, as it should be..When it comes to killing bullets never say never..keep an open mind. A 220 corelokt at 2300 FPS will not out penetrate a 150 Nosler or Barnes X, I would suggest that flat out statements don't hold water, too many varibles involved..to wit I disagree with Whitworth to some extent, but not in total.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
This subject reminds me of when I approached all the bullet makers about making a flat nose solid for shooting buffalo, hippo and whatnot with large bore rifles..They voiced all the nays and no.s I hear in this thread base on mathamatics, and all manor of reasoning short of actual killing of big tough animals, I took my scolding and filed off the noses of solids and used cast bullets of my design..Now they all recommend flat nose solids. I do believe the sharp shoulder cuts a clean hole that will not close up or fill with fat...To state that a heavier bullet has more penetration is not written in stone its lack of velocity can void that statement in a heart beat, as with most things somewhere in the middle is the true answer. A fast expanding bullet will slow down penetration, but a too slow bullet will not penetrate, its a balance. One mustn't get caught up in tech soup, it'll ruin your day and lose your trophy or visa versa, but to each his own, as it should be..When it comes to killing bullets never say never..keep an open mind. A 220 corelokt at 2300 FPS will not out penetrate a 150 Nosler or Barnes X, I would suggest that flat out statements don't hold water, too many varibles involved..to wit I disagree with Whitworth to some extent, but not in total.

You have willfully ignored the caveats I posted such as all else being equal. I am not suggesting that mere bullet weight is the answer, but take enough big game with a revolver and patterns emerge that are explainable. None of what I have stated above or anywhere else I have written on this topic, have I based my conclusions on theory. We thoroughly -- and I do mean thoroughly -- test our bullet/caliber/load combinations on bovine flesh AND bone in the field. Frankly I'm not even a big fan of cast bullets on any animal north of a thousand pounds. That said, there are many designs - LBT for example - that are a clear improvement over a 250 grain Keith-style bullet. Bigger meplat, bigger hole, more weight, deeper straight penetration are the order of the day. I am not suggesting that weight in and of itself is the determining factor of deeper penetration, but the resulting momentum gain (again all else equal - nose profile, bullet alloy/hardness, velocity, etc.) will result in a deeper penetrating bullet. Now, I have tested really heavy for caliber bullets as well, and there is a tipping point - literally and figuratively speaking, but that isn't germane to this discussion. Nothing wrong with the Keith bullet for deer-sized game.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
This subject reminds me of when I approached all the bullet makers about making a flat nose solid for shooting buffalo, hippo and whatnot with large bore rifles..They voiced all the nays and no.s I hear in this thread base on mathamatics, and all manor of reasoning short of actual killing of big tough animals, I took my scolding and filed off the noses of solids and used cast bullets of my design..Now they all recommend flat nose solids. I do believe the sharp shoulder cuts a clean hole that will not close up or fill with fat...To state that a heavier bullet has more penetration is not written in stone its lack of velocity can void that statement in a heart beat, as with most things somewhere in the middle is the true answer. A fast expanding bullet will slow down penetration, but a too slow bullet will not penetrate, its a balance. One mustn't get caught up in tech soup, it'll ruin your day and lose your trophy or visa versa, but to each his own, as it should be..When it comes to killing bullets never say never..keep an open mind. A 220 corelokt at 2300 FPS will not out penetrate a 150 Nosler or Barnes X, I would suggest that flat out statements don't hold water, too many varibles involved..to wit I disagree with Whitworth to some extent, but not in total.

I can guarantee with certainty that a 300 LBT LFN or WFN in a 44 mag will out penetrate a Keith semi wadcutters of 250 grain on buffalo. I’ve seen many times, the LBT 300 grain also out penetrates the Keith in wet pack.

So I have had a lot of success with a 200 grain Keith bullet in .45, on warthog, impala and used a a coup de grace when hunting many many african antelope. The sharp cutting edge works and must be seen to be appreciated. Beats a round nose by leaps and bounds

We were talking about deer and elk size game I thought in which case Ive always got exit holes.
and my disagreement was mainly on Whitworths suggestion that the cutting shoulder on the Keith bullet was inconsequential, how that can be is contradictory to his own post that a round flat point is as effective, when the Keith cutting shoulder actually cuts as big a hole as the caliber is in a hard cast bullet, you could actually cut thee front end off, but that would disturb the ballistics in several ways and it would tend to tilt IMO. A round nose flat point has never impressed me in a big bore rifle or pistol it tends to stretch the entrance hole and close up and it won't allow enough air into the body cavity to and allows the entrance hole to fill with fatty tissue or whatnot...This was my only real concern and it even should apply to a big bore double rifle. I got the same comeback from ALL the bullet makers and factory people when I campaigned for a flat nose solid and I finally got a box of RnFP from ITT&D as I recall or some outfit that sounds close to that..The just filed off the simi point, and it didn't suit me at all..Then I got with North Fork and GS Customs and North Fork produced such a bullet and GS Customs already had one but nobody on this side of the pond was aware or even cared...Now its the berries and all the nay sayers are joining in with GSC and No. Fork..Barnes was theleast interested of all for even a flat point, but now they have changed..What applies for a rifle should apply to a pistol as well IMO..I say pistol not an auto. I also have to disagree to some extent that are round nose Hollow point is not as apt to expand as well as a simi wad cutter, and Police kill records and some experts agree with this. Most bullet makers have a sales pitch out of this world and pimp their bullets with well thought out BS, not saying that applies to anyone on this thread as far as I know..but have seen this on AR and other blogs..

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
We were talking about deer and elk size game I thought in which case Ive always got exit holes.
and my disagreement was mainly on Whitworths suggestion that the cutting shoulder on the Keith bullet was inconsequential, how that can be is contradictory to his own post that a round flat point is as effective, when the Keith cutting shoulder actually cuts as big a hole as the caliber is in a hard cast bullet, you could actually cut thee front end off, but that would disturb the ballistics in several ways and it would tend to tilt IMO. A round nose flat point has never impressed me in a big bore rifle or pistol it tends to stretch the entrance hole and close up and it won't allow enough air into the body cavity to and allows the entrance hole to fill with fatty tissue or whatnot...This was my only real concern and it even should apply to a big bore double rifle. I got the same comeback from ALL the bullet makers and factory people when I campaigned for a flat nose solid and I finally got a box of RnFP from ITT&D as I recall or some outfit that sounds close to that..The just filed off the simi point, and it didn't suit me at all..Then I got with North Fork and GS Customs and North Fork produced such a bullet and GS Customs already had one but nobody on this side of the pond was aware or even cared...Now its the berries and all the nay sayers are joining in with GSC and No. Fork..Barnes was theleast interested of all for even a flat point, but now they have changed..What applies for a rifle should apply to a pistol as well IMO..I say pistol not an auto. I also have to disagree to some extent that are round nose Hollow point is not as apt to expand as well as a simi wad cutter, and Police kill records and some experts agree with this. Most bullet makers have a sales pitch out of this world and pimp their bullets with well thought out BS, not saying that applies to anyone on this thread as far as I know..but have seen this on AR and other blogs..

The shoulder doesn't make contact. The meplat - in flesh - is determining the size of the wound channel. It seems to me, Ray, that you may have never used LBT bullets in a revolver on game. The wound channel is significantly larger. Maybe you should give them a whirl. Again, the shoulder makes nice holes in paper, but there is a reason savvy handgun hunters moved away from semi-wadcutter designs and over to Veral Smith's designs. Even the best monometal handgun solids are either a truncated cone or an LFN-like nose profile (as well as the Punch bullet which is not technically a monometal bullet). Ever wonder why no one has produced a semi-wadcutter-style bullet in brass?

This is the Punch and the CEB handgun solid. I've used both on 1,500-lb + animals and they both delivered great penetration.




These are by Lehigh Defense. The bullet on the right is clearly patterned after an LFN.

Send me some and I'll give them and honest try. I will shoot some whitetail culling next year..If they are that much better, then I'll use them from now on. Im opened minded to change but I don't take anyones word for it, been that route too many times on new and wonderful magic bullets..

Ray, the LBT designs date back some 35 years or thereabouts. Not new, just better.....

Max, you have a lot of experience with the wide-meplat slugs. Seems to me I have heard that the WFNs lose accuracy early on, vs. the LFNs -- or maybe I have this backwards. What is the reason for this?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Max, you have a lot of experience with the wide-meplat slugs. Seems to me I have heard that the WFNs lose accuracy early on, vs. the LFNs -- or maybe I have this backwards. What is the reason for this?

All depends on how far you are shooting. WFN’s work famously at hunting distances. They are not as accurate as LFN’s for long range shooting generally.
A spin stabilized projectile is better with the most weight behind center.