This article written by Jim Lewis of Gillette, WY appeared in Fouling Shot #210 Mar/Apr 2011.
Sometime back in the early 1970s, I dont rememberthe exact year, I bought a Lyman four cavity mold for their 358477 bullet, a 38/357 semi-wadcutter bullet that weighs a nominal one hundred and fifty grains. At the time, buying a four cavity mold was a great investment and I wanted to be sure that I got a mold that would cast bullets that I would be pleased with. I had already bought several single and two cavity molds for 38/357 semi-wad-cutters and for various reasons I wasnt pleased with the bullets that came from these molds.
Way back then I wasnt a sophisticated caster and used a lot of scrap lead of unknown alloy composition (still do). Often I would come up with bullets that were extremely brittle. Not necessarily very hard, just brittle. At the time I had a 38/357 mold that made bullets with a very narrow front driving band. When I used brittle alloy in this mold I got terrible accuracy. I started recovering some of these bullets and inspecting them and I found that large portions of the narrow front driving band would break away. I believe this greatly unbalanced the bullet and caused the poor accuracy. A study of the catalogs of the time showed that the Lyman 358429 and the Lyman 358477 both had nice thick front driving bands.
I looked long and hard at the Lyman 358429 bullet, a 38/357 semi-wadcutter bullet that weighs a nominal one hundred and seventy grains, and almost every article that I read about this bullet rated it as the number one 38/357 bullet. But, I came across an article that statedthat the nose of the 358429 bullet was so longthat it wouldnt work in some revolvers thathave short cylinders. My favorite 357 Magnum revolvers have always been the Smith and Wesson N-frame, either the model 28 or themodel 27. Both of these guns have cylinderlengths left over from the time before the cre-ation of the 357 Magnum and have cylinderssized for the 38 Special cartridge. A lot of shoot-ers dont realize it, but the smaller K-framemodel 19 has a much longer cylinder than the N-frame 357s.
Most shooters have read where Elmer Keith, and others, worked with heavy loads in the 38 Special cartridge in the large N-frame Smith and Wesson revolvers to develop what became the 357 Magnum cartridge. But a lot of shooters dont realize that this was the time period when Elmer came up with the bullet design that we now know as the 358429 from Lyman, and, this bullet was designed to work with 38 Special cases. Ive read where if the Lyman 358429 bullet is seated to the crimp groove in a 357 case, and then this cartridge is inserted into an N-frame Smith and Wesson cylinder, that the bullet will protrude past the end of the cylinder. I dont know this first hand because Ive never had any 358429 bullets to try this with.
Ive also read that the solution for using the 358429 in N-frame 357s is to seat the bullet deeper in the case and crimp in front of the front driving band, or, use the bullet with 38 Special cases. I didnt want to try to make 357 Magnum loads using 38 Special cases and I didnt want to run the risk of excessively high chamber pres-sures caused by deep seating the long 358429 bullet in 357 Magnum cases. So, based on what I read, I discard-ed the 358429 from my search for a 38/357 semi-wad-cutter. After getting a mold for the 358477 bullet Ive never had the urge to try the 358429 bullet.
Sometime back in the early 1970s, I dont rememberthe exact year, I bought a Lyman four cavity mold for their 358477 bullet, a 38/357 semi-wadcutter bullet that weighs a nominal one hundred and fifty grains. At the time, buying a four cavity mold was a great investment and I wanted to be sure that I got a mold that would cast bullets that I would be pleased with. I had already bought several single and two cavity molds for 38/357 semi-wad-cutters and for various reasons I wasnt pleased with the bullets that came from these molds.
Way back then I wasnt a sophisticated caster and used a lot of scrap lead of unknown alloy composition (still do). Often I would come up with bullets that were extremely brittle. Not necessarily very hard, just brittle. At the time I had a 38/357 mold that made bullets with a very narrow front driving band. When I used brittle alloy in this mold I got terrible accuracy. I started recovering some of these bullets and inspecting them and I found that large portions of the narrow front driving band would break away. I believe this greatly unbalanced the bullet and caused the poor accuracy. A study of the catalogs of the time showed that the Lyman 358429 and the Lyman 358477 both had nice thick front driving bands.
I looked long and hard at the Lyman 358429 bullet, a 38/357 semi-wadcutter bullet that weighs a nominal one hundred and seventy grains, and almost every article that I read about this bullet rated it as the number one 38/357 bullet. But, I came across an article that statedthat the nose of the 358429 bullet was so longthat it wouldnt work in some revolvers thathave short cylinders. My favorite 357 Magnum revolvers have always been the Smith and Wesson N-frame, either the model 28 or themodel 27. Both of these guns have cylinderlengths left over from the time before the cre-ation of the 357 Magnum and have cylinderssized for the 38 Special cartridge. A lot of shoot-ers dont realize it, but the smaller K-framemodel 19 has a much longer cylinder than the N-frame 357s.
Most shooters have read where Elmer Keith, and others, worked with heavy loads in the 38 Special cartridge in the large N-frame Smith and Wesson revolvers to develop what became the 357 Magnum cartridge. But a lot of shooters dont realize that this was the time period when Elmer came up with the bullet design that we now know as the 358429 from Lyman, and, this bullet was designed to work with 38 Special cases. Ive read where if the Lyman 358429 bullet is seated to the crimp groove in a 357 case, and then this cartridge is inserted into an N-frame Smith and Wesson cylinder, that the bullet will protrude past the end of the cylinder. I dont know this first hand because Ive never had any 358429 bullets to try this with.
Ive also read that the solution for using the 358429 in N-frame 357s is to seat the bullet deeper in the case and crimp in front of the front driving band, or, use the bullet with 38 Special cases. I didnt want to try to make 357 Magnum loads using 38 Special cases and I didnt want to run the risk of excessively high chamber pres-sures caused by deep seating the long 358429 bullet in 357 Magnum cases. So, based on what I read, I discard-ed the 358429 from my search for a 38/357 semi-wad-cutter. After getting a mold for the 358477 bullet Ive never had the urge to try the 358429 bullet.
Another consideration in favor of the 477 bullet over the 429 bullet was its twenty grains less weight. If I did the math correctly, it appeared that I would be able to get another five hundred and forty nine of the 477 bullets from a hundred pounds of lead. That might not seem like much, but at the time lead was more precious to me than gold.
All of the mold manufactures had a 38/357 semi-wadcutter available and I had a tough time trying to pick a mold. I found myself comparing all the various semi-wadcutter designs to the Lyman 477 bullet, so, I thought
All of the mold manufactures had a 38/357 semi-wadcutter available and I had a tough time trying to pick a mold. I found myself comparing all the various semi-wadcutter designs to the Lyman 477 bullet, so, I thought
(Top) S&W Model 27, N frame; (Bottom) S&W Model 14, K Frame if I liked what I saw in the design of the 477 bullet that I should just go with it. It was a decision that Ive never regretted and would make the same decision if I had to make the same choice today.
After getting a four cavity mold for the 358477 bullet I found that my theory about the front driving band to be correct. I found that the 477 bullet is extremely tolerant of alloy. I found that if I had an alloy that was capable of producing well filled bullets that the bullets would have acceptable accuracy. None of the bullets that I recovered showed any signs of fractures in the front driving band.
After a while I man-aged to use up the all of the brittle alloy that I had and I now believe that alloy was some sort of bearing babbit.
Even after the brittle alloy was gone I found that the thick front driving band of the 477 bullet was a plus. Ive recovered a lot of cast bullets that show that the bullet slipped when it hit the start of the rifling. The recovered bullets had larger rifling land marks at the front of the bullet than at the rear of the bullet. This meant that the bullet resisted the spinning effect of the rifling. This will often be more pronounced with soft alloys and thin front driving bands. The thick front band of the 477 bul-let is a big help in getting the bullet spinning.
When I first started shooting 357 Magnum revolvers everything I had read had convinced me that the most accurate load, for paper punching, was a full wadcutter bullet loaded in 38 Special cases, with 2.7 grains of Hercules Bullseye powder. I had a Lyman bullet mold for their 358495 wadcutter bullet and I was convinced that for serious paper punching that this was the best bullet I could cast. I thought I would be using the 358477 semi-wadcutter bullet for practice, plinking and rabbit hunting but when serious target shooting came around that I would use the 495 wadcutter bullet.
I experimented with several powders using the 477 semi-wadcutter bullet and finally settled on Winchester 231. For years my 38 Special load using the 477 bullet has been 4.3 grains of W231. If my memory is correct this load came straight from the Winchester load book and was listed as a duplicate of the factory 38 Special loads using 158 grain lead bullets. Funny thing about my 38 Special ammo using the 477 semi-wadcutter and 4.3 grains of W231, that load was just as accurate as my 38s using the 495 wadcutter and 2.7 grains of Bullseye; often even more accurate. On any given day, if I could shoot a four inch fifty yard group using my wadcutter target ammo, then I could turn right around and shoot a four inch fifty yard group with my factory duplicate loads with the 477 bullet. If I happened to shoot an expert PPC score with the 495 wadcutter ammo, then I could turn right around and shoot an expert, or even a master, score with the 477 semi-wadcutter factory duplicate load. The very few master scores that I ever shot were done using the 477 semi-wadcutter bullets. My plinking loads were as accurate, and maybe more accurate, than my very best target ammo. Go figure.
After getting a four cavity mold for the 358477 bullet I found that my theory about the front driving band to be correct. I found that the 477 bullet is extremely tolerant of alloy. I found that if I had an alloy that was capable of producing well filled bullets that the bullets would have acceptable accuracy. None of the bullets that I recovered showed any signs of fractures in the front driving band.
After a while I man-aged to use up the all of the brittle alloy that I had and I now believe that alloy was some sort of bearing babbit.
Even after the brittle alloy was gone I found that the thick front driving band of the 477 bullet was a plus. Ive recovered a lot of cast bullets that show that the bullet slipped when it hit the start of the rifling. The recovered bullets had larger rifling land marks at the front of the bullet than at the rear of the bullet. This meant that the bullet resisted the spinning effect of the rifling. This will often be more pronounced with soft alloys and thin front driving bands. The thick front band of the 477 bul-let is a big help in getting the bullet spinning.
When I first started shooting 357 Magnum revolvers everything I had read had convinced me that the most accurate load, for paper punching, was a full wadcutter bullet loaded in 38 Special cases, with 2.7 grains of Hercules Bullseye powder. I had a Lyman bullet mold for their 358495 wadcutter bullet and I was convinced that for serious paper punching that this was the best bullet I could cast. I thought I would be using the 358477 semi-wadcutter bullet for practice, plinking and rabbit hunting but when serious target shooting came around that I would use the 495 wadcutter bullet.
I experimented with several powders using the 477 semi-wadcutter bullet and finally settled on Winchester 231. For years my 38 Special load using the 477 bullet has been 4.3 grains of W231. If my memory is correct this load came straight from the Winchester load book and was listed as a duplicate of the factory 38 Special loads using 158 grain lead bullets. Funny thing about my 38 Special ammo using the 477 semi-wadcutter and 4.3 grains of W231, that load was just as accurate as my 38s using the 495 wadcutter and 2.7 grains of Bullseye; often even more accurate. On any given day, if I could shoot a four inch fifty yard group using my wadcutter target ammo, then I could turn right around and shoot a four inch fifty yard group with my factory duplicate loads with the 477 bullet. If I happened to shoot an expert PPC score with the 495 wadcutter ammo, then I could turn right around and shoot an expert, or even a master, score with the 477 semi-wadcutter factory duplicate load. The very few master scores that I ever shot were done using the 477 semi-wadcutter bullets. My plinking loads were as accurate, and maybe more accurate, than my very best target ammo. Go figure.
Anyway, after a while I quit making the 358495 wad-cutter bullet and Ive never missed it. Anything I might have done with full wadcutter bullets I started doing with the 477 semi-wadcutter bullet. In fact I settled on just one 38 Special load and it was the already mentioned 477 semi-wadcutter bullet and 4.3 grains of W231. By now I had an early Dillon press and it was nice to be able to gather up all my empty 38 cases and run them through the Dillon using just one load.
Like I said at the start of the article, I was shooting all these 38 Special loads in revolvers chambered for the 357 Magnum cartridge and this was done in an effort to obtain the best possible accuracy out of my 357s. I was very well pleased with the accuracy that I was getting with the 477 semi-wadcutter in my 357s, but, I got to wondering if there was room for improvement.
One of my first ideas was to use my 38 Special ammo in a gun chambered for the 38 Special cartridge, not the 357 Magnum cartridge. So, first off, I bought a Smith and Wesson model 14, a K-frame 38 special with a six inch barrel and adjustable sights. Wow!! If you ever have a chance to buy one of these guns, buy it. You wont regret it. Ive read several articles in which the author is going on about the Smith and Wesson K-32; about how accurate the 32 Smith and Wesson is and how much fun it is to shoot and etc, etc. I dont disagree with anything Ive read about the K-32, but, a shooter can have the same great shooting experiences with a Model 14, in 38 Special, for a fraction of the cost.
My model 14 and my 358477 semi-wadcutter bullets went together like peanut butter and grape jelly. I liked the gun so well that I bought the matching model 17 in 22 rimfire. This has proved to be an excellent combina-tion of handguns. I could write several articles about these two guns but lets get back to the Lyman 358477 bullet.
Mixed in during this time were several experiments using the 477 bullet for full power 357 Magnum loads. I mostly used Hercules/Alliant 2400 and Hodgdon 110 for my full power 357 loads, with limited successes. I found that trying to make full power magnum cast bullet loads with plain base bullets (and this will be true for any cal-iber) that bullet alloy becomes critical. Too soft an alloy and the bullet tries to slip in the rifling and too hard an alloy and the bullet base will not upset and form a good gas seal. The result of both conditions is severe barrel leading and terrible accuracy. I found that I could make excellent full power 357 Magnum loads using the 477 bullet if I used Lyman #2 alloy (there is a reason why this alloy has been so popular for so long) but using a known alloy was a rare treat. During this time I made a crude hardness tester but it wasnt much help. I ended up using gas check bullet designs for my full power, cast lead bullet 357 Magnum loads.
After shooting thousands of the 477 bullet, I decid-ed that when I was using unknown alloys that I would limit the 477 bullet to 950 feet per second muzzle veloc-ity. Also, I would use the softer alloys that I had on hand and I would use fast burning rate powders. The soft alloy and fast powders were used so the bullet base would expand as quickly as possible and form a good gas seal.
I shot a lot of the afore mentioned load using the 477 semi-wadcutter and 4.3 grains of W231, but loaded in 357 Magnum cases, not 38 Special cases. This was another idea to try to improve the accuracy of 38 Special loads when used in 357 revolvers. When using the 38 Special load in 357 Magnum cases, some 357s would show a noticeable improvement in accuracy and with other guns it didnt seem to matter. I eventually came up with what amounted to a 38 Special +P load but assem-bled using 357 Magnum cases. This load consisted of the 477 bullet, made from a soft alloy, and 5 grains of 231. This load will do about 850 fps to maybe 900 fps from most six inch barred 357s. Pushing this load to 5.5 grains of 231 will get the velocity up to about 950 fps. Both of these loads are just plain fun to shoot.
My hunting with the 358477 bullet has been limited to rabbits. First off, I dont consider a 357 Magnum enough gun for big game hunting. Sure a 357 will kill a deer, but so will a 22. I just believe that a deer hunter would be better off with a 44 Magnum. However, if you just have to use a 357 for deer, then the semi-wadcutter design of the 358477 bullet should be fairly effective.
But, when it comes to rabbits, the 477 bullet is great. The semi-wadcutter design of the 477 bullet allows it to carry fairly well over longish ranges and also, the semi-wadcutter design will put a rabbit down right now and without a lot of meat damage. Ive spent a lot of time try-ing to sneak up on rabbits in the sage brush just so I could get a shot at them with a revolver. Somehow, fried cottontail tastes better when the rabbits were taken with homemade bullets.
In the last thirty five years Ive put a lot of lead down the barrels of various 38 Special and 357 Magnum revolvers and during all that shooting the Lyman 358477 bullet has been my workhorse bullet. Ive found that if a 38 Special or a 357 Magnum revolver couldnt be made to shoot the 477 semi-wadcutter with good accuracy then the problem was with the gun, not the bullet. After making and shooting thousands and thousands of the Lyman 358477 bullet I cant think of any way to improve on the design of the 477 bullet. Enough said.
One of my first ideas was to use my 38 Special ammo in a gun chambered for the 38 Special cartridge, not the 357 Magnum cartridge. So, first off, I bought a Smith and Wesson model 14, a K-frame 38 special with a six inch barrel and adjustable sights. Wow!! If you ever have a chance to buy one of these guns, buy it. You wont regret it. Ive read several articles in which the author is going on about the Smith and Wesson K-32; about how accurate the 32 Smith and Wesson is and how much fun it is to shoot and etc, etc. I dont disagree with anything Ive read about the K-32, but, a shooter can have the same great shooting experiences with a Model 14, in 38 Special, for a fraction of the cost.
My model 14 and my 358477 semi-wadcutter bullets went together like peanut butter and grape jelly. I liked the gun so well that I bought the matching model 17 in 22 rimfire. This has proved to be an excellent combina-tion of handguns. I could write several articles about these two guns but lets get back to the Lyman 358477 bullet.
Mixed in during this time were several experiments using the 477 bullet for full power 357 Magnum loads. I mostly used Hercules/Alliant 2400 and Hodgdon 110 for my full power 357 loads, with limited successes. I found that trying to make full power magnum cast bullet loads with plain base bullets (and this will be true for any cal-iber) that bullet alloy becomes critical. Too soft an alloy and the bullet tries to slip in the rifling and too hard an alloy and the bullet base will not upset and form a good gas seal. The result of both conditions is severe barrel leading and terrible accuracy. I found that I could make excellent full power 357 Magnum loads using the 477 bullet if I used Lyman #2 alloy (there is a reason why this alloy has been so popular for so long) but using a known alloy was a rare treat. During this time I made a crude hardness tester but it wasnt much help. I ended up using gas check bullet designs for my full power, cast lead bullet 357 Magnum loads.
After shooting thousands of the 477 bullet, I decid-ed that when I was using unknown alloys that I would limit the 477 bullet to 950 feet per second muzzle veloc-ity. Also, I would use the softer alloys that I had on hand and I would use fast burning rate powders. The soft alloy and fast powders were used so the bullet base would expand as quickly as possible and form a good gas seal.
I shot a lot of the afore mentioned load using the 477 semi-wadcutter and 4.3 grains of W231, but loaded in 357 Magnum cases, not 38 Special cases. This was another idea to try to improve the accuracy of 38 Special loads when used in 357 revolvers. When using the 38 Special load in 357 Magnum cases, some 357s would show a noticeable improvement in accuracy and with other guns it didnt seem to matter. I eventually came up with what amounted to a 38 Special +P load but assem-bled using 357 Magnum cases. This load consisted of the 477 bullet, made from a soft alloy, and 5 grains of 231. This load will do about 850 fps to maybe 900 fps from most six inch barred 357s. Pushing this load to 5.5 grains of 231 will get the velocity up to about 950 fps. Both of these loads are just plain fun to shoot.
My hunting with the 358477 bullet has been limited to rabbits. First off, I dont consider a 357 Magnum enough gun for big game hunting. Sure a 357 will kill a deer, but so will a 22. I just believe that a deer hunter would be better off with a 44 Magnum. However, if you just have to use a 357 for deer, then the semi-wadcutter design of the 358477 bullet should be fairly effective.
But, when it comes to rabbits, the 477 bullet is great. The semi-wadcutter design of the 477 bullet allows it to carry fairly well over longish ranges and also, the semi-wadcutter design will put a rabbit down right now and without a lot of meat damage. Ive spent a lot of time try-ing to sneak up on rabbits in the sage brush just so I could get a shot at them with a revolver. Somehow, fried cottontail tastes better when the rabbits were taken with homemade bullets.
In the last thirty five years Ive put a lot of lead down the barrels of various 38 Special and 357 Magnum revolvers and during all that shooting the Lyman 358477 bullet has been my workhorse bullet. Ive found that if a 38 Special or a 357 Magnum revolver couldnt be made to shoot the 477 semi-wadcutter with good accuracy then the problem was with the gun, not the bullet. After making and shooting thousands and thousands of the Lyman 358477 bullet I cant think of any way to improve on the design of the 477 bullet. Enough said.
