Accuracy, LBT vs Keith

[1886]

Lets opine in very general terms. In your experience, regardless of firearm used as a test vehicle, what is GENERALLY a more accurate bullet design, the LBT style or the Keith design. I understand there are variations with both designs but lets lump them together for the sake of this discussion. I am interested in your experiences only. Thanks, 1886.

[Sixgun]

Thats quite a question that not even The Man can not answer. I have LBT and Keith moulds for the same calibers but in different configurations and nose styles in the LBT. If I had to choose, I would pick the Keith because...................after playing with Keith moulds and several hundred revolvers over a 35 year period, well, I never could trace an accuracy problem to the Keith. I'm not a big hunter with revolvers so my choices with the LBT are standard designs that approx. Lyman/Saeco/RCBS looks. My 38-40 LBT is a tackdriver but that bullet was designed for the 40 S&W as are several other LBT's I have but in 30 cal and 45 acp. I only played with two of the LBT designs that had that big metplate and these were bullets that were given to me, so......I really can't fairly describe their performance.

The Keith bullets has the full diameter driving band which really helps to center things up. I don't care for that huge metplate (or however its spelled) on the LBT. It may have a slight advantage over the Keith in killing power but the deer I've shot with the Keith all died very nicely. The Keith is a better long range design. (200-500 meters) The LBT in "big metplate" form is just a wadcutter that is rounded off a bit and we all know what wadcutters do after 75 yards or so.

Once I find something that works, its hard for me to permantly change---thats why I try everything else but always go back to the Keith design.

Probably not the answer you were looking for but there's not that many people who have extensive experience with the LBT (except 'ole Veral himself) But you will get lots of people who have played with the Keith

[Hobie]

I've shot them both in several guns and I can't answer that question. I think you have to try them in YOUR gun to know how they will do in YOUR gun.

[J Miller]

OK, gonna show my lack of smarts here, but what does "LBT" stand for?

Joe

[AJMD429]

OK, gonna show my lack of smarts here, but what does "LBT" stand for?

Thanks Joe...

I always like it when someone else asks the question I was wondering. Now I can sit back and pretend I knew all the time...

[Terry Murbach]

OK, gonna show my lack of smarts here, but what does "LBT" stand for?

Joe

"LEAD BULLET TECHNOLOGY"

IT IS MY OPINION THAT THE KEITH HAS IT ALL OVER THE LBT FOR ACCURACY , PARTICULARLY WHEN WE GO TO LONG RANGE SHOOTING. THE LBT'S CAN DO SOME REALLY SCREWY CURLY-QUES WAY OUT YONDER THAT YOU NEVER SEE WITH A KEITH BULLET.

[RKrodle]

OK, gonna show my lack of smarts here, but what does "LBT" stand for?

Thanks Joe...

I always like it when someone else asks the question I was wondering. Now I can sit back and pretend I knew all the time...

Lead Bullet Technologies

Dang it Terry, Someone finally asks a question I know the answer to and you beat me to it.

[Griff]

"Lead Bullet Technology"... edit: oh well... beat like a drum!

I've only compared LBT and Keiths in .45 Colt. But, truly not a real comparison as the Keiths were 250grainers and LBTs were 185s.

Out of the pistol (Colt SAA), @ 25 yards, I couldn't begin to discern a difference. But, outta the rifle (1873 Uberti), the LBTs tumbled something fierce beyond the end of the barrel! The Keith's still cooked along with great accuracy, but in the straight lifter of the toggle link the clattered around and didn't feed well for speed necessary in the CAS game. edit: Terry, curly q's!!!! VERY descriptive!

And Sixgun, it's "Meplat"!

[sore shoulder]

OK, gonna show my lack of smarts here, but what does "LBT" stand for?

Joe

"LEAD BULLET TECHNOLOGY"

IT IS MY OPINION THAT THE KEITH HAS IT ALL OVER THE LBT FOR ACCURACY , PARTICULARLY WHEN WE GO TO LONG RANGE SHOOTING. THE LBT'S CAN DO SOME REALLY SCREWY CURLY-QUES WAY OUT YONDER THAT YOU NEVER SEE WITH A KEITH BULLET.

I know a certain somewhat well known pistolsmith that said the same thing to me personally once during a visit to his shop.

[2X22]

IT IS MY OPINION THAT THE KEITH HAS IT ALL OVER THE LBT FOR ACCURACY , PARTICULARLY WHEN WE GO TO LONG RANGE SHOOTING.

+1

I've had much better luck on game like elk with the keith over LBT's also, launched from either rifle OR pistol.

2x22

[J Miller]

Terry, Thanks for the LBT definition. Now since I didn't know what LBT stood for it's obvious I wouldn't recognize one if it fell on my head. Is there a link to someone who sells a selection of LBT bullets so I can familiarize myself with them?

Joe

[fordwannabe]

Joe google Lead Bullet technologies and you get to Veral Smiths site and it has a bunch of good stuff in it. I use the blue lube from them and like it very much. Good reading you'll be there awhile I bet! Tom

[J Miller]

Thanks, seems I do have a few of those loaded up that someone gave me.

Joe

[Buck Elliott]

FWIW -- The "LBT-style" bullet is essentially a round nose-flatpoint or a truncated round-nose, if that makes more sense to you. Some folks like to call 'em "alphabet bullets" because of the letters used to describe bullet-nose profiles, such as FLN (Long Flat Nose); WFN (Wide Flat nose); LWFN (Long Wide Flat Nose); etc...

It looks like my experience runs just the opposite of the general consensous in this area. With very few exceptions, the LBT-style (particularly in LFN configuration) bullets have been more accurate -- for me -- especially at longer ranges. The WFNs have not proved to me to be as accurate as the LFNs, at extended distances. The WFNs and LWFNs are not normally as accurate as (same weight) Keith-style slugs, at longer yardages. That is where the Keith-designed #358429 amd the #429421 missles seem to outshine the competition. Have not yet discovered a semi-wadcutter .45 Colt or .475 Linebaugh bullet that will run with the same-weight LBT LFN. Factor in the somewhat sticky feeding issues associated with many Keith-style bullets, especially in lever-gun loads, I'm much more comfortable with the LFN design. That squared-off shoulder can even slow up revolver reloading.

All that aside for a moment. The WFN and LWFN bullets deliver tremendous "slap" at defensive distances, which was the reason for their design. Life is full of trade-offs -- that's the reason God made Blondes, Brunettes, and girls that look like Maureen O'Hara...

[Idiot]

They can be equally accurate, but the LBT bullet sheds velocity rapidly and it needs velocity to remain stable. Back in the day we used to call them "ogival wadcutters" and the problem with all full or nearly full wadcutters is they have "too much" weight up front to remain stable at low velocities. So to maintain accuracy with an LBT bullet you need to start them fast and keep the range short enough to so they don't shed too much velocity and become unstable before hitting their target.

Ross Seyfried was able to achieve a consistent minute of angle group using LBT bullets out of a revolver. That is accurate by anyone's standards. But to achieve this level of accuracy he had to drive them very fast. I can't remember now, but I think he used a stout revolver (might have been with a five-shot cylinder) to get the loads running at full steam to ensure stability out to 100 yards (I'm not sure if he used the LFN or WFN to achieve this feat).

Some LBT designs are more forgiving when it comes to velocity/stability. The LFN (long flat nose) has more weight at the rear of the bullet and doesn't require as much velocity to keep it stable.

With that being said, I wouldn't pass up the LBT designs when shooting them from a levergun. Velocities out of a levergun are substantially higher than a revolver and most of the problem is then solved. And LBT bullets feed like hot butter.

I shoot Keith style bullets, which shoot well at all hunting velocities, in my handguns and if I feel rich I'll load LBT's in my levers.

[Buck Elliott]

Weight for weight, you'll find that LFN bullets have at least equal or better ballistic coefficients compared to SWCs, meaning that they shed velocity more slowly, not more quickly. I have no accuracy problems with them, from 700 fps on up, in .45 Colts. And in weights of 250 gr. on up through 325 grains. In the .475s, 400-gr to 440-gr. slugs all perform well in the 1000 to 1800 fps range, out to 200 + yards, beyond which big, heavy lever-gun slugs become more-or-less moot.

The Freedom Arms/Lyman mould for their 300-gr (nominal) cast GC bullet is essentially the same as the LBT LFN series, and gives excellent accuracy, from 1400 fps to over 2100 fps. Cast Performance Bullets LBT series have proved their mettle, over and over.

Ross Seyfried's MOA quest was done with a special, Hamilton Bowen 5-shot, seriously-custom revolver. Not every (read almost NO) production or semi-custom gun will give that sort of accuracy -- even ONCE -- let alone on a repeat basis. IIRC, Ross used LFN bullets for his MOA testing. Have lost contact information for Ross, so can't immediately verify all that.

[Idiot]

Ross Seyfried's MOA quest was done with a special, Hamilton Bowen 5-shot, seriously-custom revolver. Not every (read almost NO) production or semi-custom gun will give that sort of accuracy -- even ONCE -- let alone on a repeat basis. IIRC, Ross used LFN bullets for his MOA testing. Have lost contact information for Ross, so can't immediately verify all that.

Thanks for squaring that Buck. I have Ross' article stashed somewhere and didn't have time to find it. The LBT bullet that's touted with being the most lethal is the WFN because of its wide meplat and the most of the LFN bullets have smaller meplats and are akin to a Keith bullet without the square edges.

I think that is one of the distinctions that must be made when talking about LBT bullets compared to Keith style bullets. The ones that are less stable at low velocities are the WFN bullets, while the LFN bullet is very similar to a Keith style bullet (weight distribution wise as well as frontal size) and should be just as stable as the Keith.

[Rusty]

Try looking over on Graybeards' outdoor forums. Veral has his own section there.

[BigSky56]

Ive found WFN if driven fast will hold up good to 100 yds give or take from a pistol after 100 the LFN is more accurate I havent shot pistol rounds from a rifle so I cant comment on that aspect. danny

[Griff]

Joe,



2 boolits on left. .452 185WFN



1st one on right, same bullet

[J Miller]

Thanks Griff. Now I know what an LBT is.

Joe

[rimrock]

I've shot several hundred LBT 250-255 cast that made by Lasercast and Beartoothbullets.com, and they did pretty good in my .45 Colt. But, me and my gun like the wide meplat Lee 250 RNFP sized to .452 for 25 yd. paper practice.

[J Miller]

Personal experience with Keith bullets I have, over 30 years worth. I have some with LBT bullets although I did not realize it.

When I lived in AZ I have sat on one hill and shot rocks out to 3 and 4 hundred yards with my 7.5" Ruger BH in .45 Colt using Keith SWCs I cast myself. I found I could hit said rocks easier with the revolver than I could my Win 94 AE. I think it's the sights, but I don't know.

I may have shot some LBT type bullets then but I honestly do not know.

All I know is when shooting the Keith bullets if I did my part, I'd smack the rocks every shot once I got ranged in. Very consistently.

So for what it's worth, that's my story.

Joe

[Sixgun]

Joe,

Wow Griff!,
You must have the brasso company running a separate shift all for your consumption. --------------------------Sixgun

[J Miller]

Sixgun,

Griff has his tumbler belt driven by the drive shaft of his tractor. He loads the brass in when he leaves home and only takes it out 30,000 miles later when he gets home.

Joe

[Griff]

Wow Griff!,
You must have the brasso company running a separate shift all for your consumption. --------------------------Sixgun

Nope, just some new brass that I "spiffed up" for that photo op!

Sixgun,
Griff has his tumbler belt driven by the drive shaft of his tractor. He loads the brass in when he leaves home and only takes it out 30,000 miles later when he gets home.
Joe

WOW! Now that's a great idea, Joe. Remember, I AM the guy that left my tumbler runnin' for 6 or 7 weeks!

Mostly cause my brass looks like this when it goes in:

[Griff]

Wow Griff!,
You must have the brasso company running a separate shift all for your consumption. --------------------------Sixgun

Nope, just some new brass that I "spiffed up" for that photo op!

Sixgun,
Griff has his tumbler belt driven by the drive shaft of his tractor. He loads the brass in when he leaves home and only takes it out 30,000 miles later when he gets home.
Joe

WOW! Now that's a great idea, Joe. Remember, I AM the guy that left my tumbler runnin' for 6 or 7 weeks!

Mostly cause my brass looks like this when it goes in: