Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >

Reloading All Reloading Topics Go Here


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-12-2013, 08:36 PM
David LaPell's Avatar
David LaPell David LaPell is offline
Member
Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould?  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,506
Likes: 642
Liked 6,339 Times in 1,274 Posts
Default Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould?

I found a secondhand Lyman 358429 mould recently, and it is a newer "revised" version of the bullet with the thinner front driving band compared to the other version with the thicker appearing band. Why did Lyman change that band? I have had good accuracy with both, I am just curious as to what was the point of changing it.
__________________
Vaya con Dios
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-12-2013, 08:49 PM
358156hp 358156hp is offline
Member
Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould?  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 713
Likes: 92
Liked 210 Times in 143 Posts
Default

To allow the loaded cartridge to chamber in different guns. Are you asking about them shortening the front driving band, or their reduction in diameter. They did both. The reduction in front (driving) band diameter was to allow easier chambering in revolvers with tighter cylinder throats. Early Colt DA revolvers often had .355 to .356 throats, and bullets with a .358 driving band were difficult to chamber. And even worse once the chamber fouled a bit. The shortened and reduced driving band made chambering easier under these circumstances.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-12-2013, 08:57 PM
GP100man's Avatar
GP100man GP100man is offline
Member
Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould? Why did Lyman change the 358429 mould?  
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Tabor City, NC
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Default

I agree with 358156hp it was for easier chambering , but narrowing the band I don`t know unless the difference was to shorten AOL of the boolit.

David , if ya do some searching on Castboolits.com I think there`s a long thread on this subject of the 358429.

All I can say is thank goodness for NOE Bullet Moulds !!!!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
.38 special/Lyman .358429 Buckey08 Reloading 8 12-14-2014 09:10 AM
Looking for a 358429 mould-FOUND David LaPell WANTED to Buy 0 04-09-2013 09:29 PM
Lyman 358429 mould troubles David LaPell Reloading 14 07-17-2012 08:02 PM
Lyman 358429 Snapping Twig Reloading 3 04-14-2012 07:31 AM
FOUND: Lyman mould #358429 David LaPell WANTED to Buy 0 03-28-2011 06:40 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:03 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.42 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)