Going from 158grn to 160grn Keiths?

D

doc540

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
1,697
Reaction score
1,115
Location
Beaumont, Texas
I realize different loads need to be tested, but some may already have experience and advice when reloading .357 with Win231 and going up to a Keith-style 160 grn SWC, 16 BRN.

Any significant difference from my 158 grn loads with 6.0 of Win231?

Or should I load them the same and test from my 158 base?

Goal is steel silhouettes at 50yds.

38-160.jpg
 
Register to hide this ad
2grains diff? Most cast bullets vary that much.

Unless a different mold , or there was a notable difference from the base of the bullet to the crimp groove , there should not be a problem.

I personally would NOT use 231 for this application. Unique , Blue Dot , 2400 , H-110/W-296 , AA#7 or #9 would be much better IMO.
 
mkk41 said:
2grains diff? Most cast bullets vary that much.

Unless a different mold , or there was a notable difference from the base of the bullet to the crimp groove , there should not be a problem.

I personally would NOT use 231 for this application. Unique , Blue Dot , 2400 , H-110/W-296 , AA#7 or #9 would be much better IMO.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response and info.

The only reason I'm using 231 is because I've been testing with it, and it's grouping better than my Unique. Those are the only two powders I currently have.
 
Those are NOT Keith's Style bullets.

Here is a Keith style .358" bullet:
358429.jpg


There is quite a difference in those two styles not to mention the weight. A true Elmer Keith style 38 caliber bullet weighs in at 173gr as well. The ones in your photo are more of a Phil Sharpe design that was made to be shot out of the shorter cylinders of the S&W "N" frames when they went to 357Mag caliber. An H&G #51 style or like the one I have, an H&G #290BB.

But, as to your question, no, the 2gr difference isn't enough to matter. If you don't believe me, go through the 158gr bullets you have and I will hazard a guess that there are some in that batch that range more than the 2gr difference in designs.

BUT, as with all things reloading, change a component and you start over working up loads.......Safety rule #1!
 
Correct Skip. Elmer designed his bullets with a lot of the weight in that long nose , thus leaving a short shank for more powder capacity in the case.
 
Like Ship said, those are not Keith style bullets.

With real Keith style bullets, even at the same weight you will see increased pressures because there is more contact surface against the rifling so the friction increases thus increasing the pressures.
 
Several points.

"Keith type bullets". This is a misnomer. As pointed out by Skip Sackett. The Lyman 358429 is the only .357 diameter bullet designed by Elmer Keith. All semi-wadcutter bullets are simply that, and there were several other designs that pre-dated any of Keith's bullets. There are Sharpe, Thompson, Boser and others, some are very similar in basic appearance. FWIW, the original .357 Magnum factory bullet was not a Kieth, it was more or less a compromise/adaptation of a Phil Sharpe design.

The Lyman 358429 was not intended for .357 Magnum, it predates that cartridge by ca. 6 years. It was intended for heavy .38 Special loads.

As mkk41 notes, cast bullets vary in weight. It is not uncommon for commercial cast bullets to vary by as much as +/- 4 gr. from the nominal weight they are sold as. Don't worry about small differences, they have no significant effect.

Longer bullet shanks causing increased pressure. Here I have to disagree with ArchAngel. While this is true in principal, it only has a significant effect with jacketed bullets. With the much lower coefficient of friction of lubricated Lead alloy bullets it makes no statistically significant difference.
 
I'll test them with equivalent loads when they arrive, and see how they shoot.

And with the two grooves, their width, and overall shape I'm gonna call them "seimi-Keith-style" but not EK's. ;)
 
Alk8944 said:
Here I have to disagree with ArchAngel. While this is true in principal, it only has a significant effect with jacketed bullets. With the much lower coefficient of friction of lubricated Lead alloy bullets it makes no statistically significant difference.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected, it's true jacketed bullets are much more effected than lead. I knew that but didn't post that... :o
 
I cast and load 358429 but use unique under them. Weights will also vary with alloy. Cant help you with 231.
 
alk8944, nothing is further from the truth then your statement that lead is any different than a jacketed bullet when it comes to the seating depth.

In the industry it's known as the "shot-start pressure" & it doesn't matter if the bullets are lead, zinc, brass, copper or alloys. Less case volume ='s more pressure.

You are telling people it's ok to do something that can easily get them hurt!!!!!
 
Silhouette bullets

Hi Doc 540,

The loads that I used was a 158 gr hard lead # 358429 bullit in a .357 case.

I used 15grs of 2400 powder which was a red lined (hot max) load. My gun is

the 6" S&W model #28. It will take down your 50 yd steel silhouettes.

I used it to also take down the steel rams at 200 yds. CAUTION ! Do not

use this load in a K frame S&W as it ruined my model 19.It dimpled my

clylinder. Good luck.

springfield bob
















OTE=doc540;136876280]I realize different loads need to be tested, but some may already have experience and advice when reloading .357 with Win231 and going up to a Keith-style 160 grn SWC, 16 BRN.

Any significant difference from my 158 grn loads with 6.0 of Win231?

Or should I load them the same and test from my 158 base?

Goal is steel silhouettes at 50yds.

38-160.jpg
[/QUOTE]
 
doc540 said:
I'll test them with equivalent loads when they arrive, and see how they shoot.

And with the two grooves, their width, and overall shape I'm gonna call them "seimi-Keith-style" but not EK's. ;)
Click to expand...

They're standard semi-wadcutters. Keith bullets would never have a bevel base, and the front band of those commercial bullets is not of the correct dimensions, it would be of equal diameter and thickness as the other two bands. The nose is also too short, and incorrectly configured. Still they look like nice bullets and I hope they shoot well for you.

Lyman did make some "unauthorized" changes to Keiths designs over the years, changes that Keith immediately called them out on. At one point, they shortened and narrowed the front driving band, and shortened the nose slightly to make the bullet chamber easier in some guns. Thankfully, they didn't try to add a gas check to them, that would have been an act of war!
 
Unique shoots 358429 cast about 170 gr very well in my 8 3/8 model 686. The sweet spot for me was at 6.4 gr and a WSP.
 
Doc,,,, the bullet pictures you posted look like Missouri 158 gr SWC. When I use these bullets I load Titegroup @ 5 gr. Many people I shoot with find the sweet spot at 4.5 gr. Most of the people I shoot with are shooting bowling pins and are using S&W revolvers.
 
Titegroups said:
Better watch what you call a "Keith" style bullet.
Click to expand...

LOL!!! There's always some anal type like me just waiting to show how deep they can go into excruciating detail about some design detail.

They do look like pretty good bullets though...
 
Titegroups said:
Better watch what you call a "Keith" style bullet.
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth! :)

The resident I've-been-reloading-since-you-were-loading-your-diapers guy at my gunsmiths shop has already been quick to correct my every misspoken word about reloading.

And that's just about everything I say when I open my mouth even to yawn.

Now if I could only find another clip for my 1911. :o
 
Now if I could only find another clip for my 1911.

Ha ha. Good one. On Ruger forum, which I also frequent, we have these "discussions" about old model / new model Vaqueros (with someone always reminding that ALL Vaqueros are "New Models", etc..), what is a "real" flattop, on and on. Everybody needs to be "right" about something, right?

OP's initial concern was about a change in bullet weight, which, while probably insignificant in this case, is still a good example of exercising caution and not taking anything for granted in reloading. I THINK he got his question answered before we got off-track.
Regards to all,

Ken
 
Forrest r said:
alk8944, nothing is further from the truth then your statement that lead is any different than a jacketed bullet when it comes to the seating depth.
Click to expand...

Go back and read it again, you are mis-stating what I said. The reference was to SHANK LENGTH, not seating depth!

The length of the bullet shank has no direct relationship to seating depth, and the question was regarding the effect of shank length (bearing surface) as it affects pressure, not seating depth!!!!!!!!!! Either your reading or comprehension skills need a bit of improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BE Mike
No Space to Reload?
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
Toxophilus
T
K
Where does the extra 0.001" come from in cast bullets?
Replies
14
Views
793
Alk8944
Alk8944
W
If you were going to stock up on two powders, what would they be?
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
4K
LostintheOzone
LostintheOzone
lrrifleman
Alternative to Alliant Unique?
3 4 5
Replies
82
Views
7K
sniper
S
jdlii
The not to distant past.
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
AJ
AJ

Latest posts

Back
Top