Nice Keith bullets. Keith type bullets are indeed classic. However, the features that determine what Keith Type bullets do not stand-up to scrutiny. For instance, the crimp groove is too deep and encourages hand loaders to over-crimp and shorten the life of their brass. Look at the crimps on .44 Magnum factory loads and you will see that, despite close to maximum, they are not all that heavy.
Also consider the excessively deep and wide lube grove of a Keith Bullet. Keith oft times mentioned that his lube groove was intended to insure that there was enough lubricant to do the job. However, firing near-maximum .44 Magnum, cast bullets into snow, and recovering them when the snow melts demonstrates that almost all the the bullet lube is still in the groove; it was not consumed in the firing.
Also consider the shape of the lube groove. Elmer stated that the shape, flat bottom and flat sides, ensured that the lube would stay in the lube groove. Which begs the question: "What evidence did he have that the round-bottom lube grooves were loosing their lube during firing? Did he find lube that was blown out of the cylinder gap? If he did, he never mentioned it. If he did not find lube blown from the cylinder gap, the lube had no means of exit when in the barrel, and would not matter if it came out of the groove after firing. It seems Elmer "fixed" a nonexistent problem. Therefore, the overly large lube groove on a Keith bullet is unneeded, and wastes lube.
Lastly, the sharp shoulder, despite what Elmer claimed, does not, "...cut a full-caliber hole...", in game animals. The sharp shoulder does not touch the flesh due to the flat meplate of the bullet. The wide meplate of the bullet nose is what makes Elmer's bullets good performers on game...despite his other "improvements".