Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Anyone use North Fork Bullets?

Skane's pictures of the North Forks taken from a Brown Bear seem to provide some pretty good evidence of North Fork's ....reliability... anyone have some ballistic tips taken from a Brown Bear so I can compare...

Skane,

Does the TSX belong to the backup shooter or did you have 2 different bullets in your chamber?

I was wondering the same thing- and does it normally take three rounds on those buggers?

Calvin-

All from my Whelen. I had three NF's in him. (pinned him with the first shot) Steve, my guide, insisted I keep "filling him". I had time to reload and had three TSX's in a different pocket if the opportunity presented itself to try them. So I did.

BTW, I'd better nip this in the bud right now - the first shot was enough and had done its job. When I'm doing something I normally don't do - and, that's hunting BB, I listen to my guide - that was "keep shooting."

Nice. I think I'm going to load up both 225 X's and 225 NF in my 338 Ultra for bears. I have both on hand.

Either one will make a bruin very sick.

Skane...your guide gave you good advise...especially if the bruin was close to the alders...in 1991 I had to put 3 275 BBCs from my 375 in a 10' on Kodiak at 35 yards.....1st shot broke the right shoulder and the 2nd got the left...he was dead on his feet but still tried to get up.. a 3rd in the chest and he gave the ol' last growl and then latched onto an alder branch with his jaws..needless to say Kodiak Brown Bears are tough critters and require a lot of killing power...

Guess I don't fully understand the idea of "cost". You work up an accurate load with an accurate, less expensive bullet and chrono it. Then, begin loading the NF's starting about 7-8% below your "accurate" load. Keep increasing the powder charge until you reach the velocity you had with the less expensive bullets. In my .338 WM., I used the Hornady, 225 gr. bullet to start and had no problem going from there to the NF.
I also don't get the "inefficient" comment. "Inefficient" regarding what? If , it's manufacturing, Mike was stuck due to his cost of materials which were sky rocketing. "Inefficient" in game? Definitely not from what I've seen. In fact, as I recall, I'm using about 2-3 gr. of powder less than I did when I was working up my .338 load. Besides, what's the cost of 2-3 grs. less of powder? Zilch!! Nada!!! Nothing!!
I'm gonna keep using 'em anyway, thank you very much.
Bear in Fairbanks

Bear �

I�m with you. When I work up loads I generally start with known data for another bullet. That has worked pretty well.

John Barsness was talking about �inefficient manufacturing�. Not sure why, as I don�t care if they are made by elves on blue moon nights using a water wheel for power. Making them is not my problem, and Mike was much more efficient than that. Further, what is �efficient� for turning out 10�s of thousands or millions of bullets is often horribly inefficient of capital when turning out much smaller quantities. Thus I don�t know that I would agree that Mike�s processes were �inefficient�. Low volume, yes, but I�m more concerned with how they work than how many are being made.

North Forks are superb bullets in my experience � very accurate and highly �efficient� on game every time I�ve tried them.

I've used them in my .375 H&H (250 & 300 grain softs) and .416 Rem Mag (370 grain softs and solids) to take some large critters - elephant, cape buffalo, giraffe, eland, etc. They're an accurate, tough bullet and were easy to develop loads for. By the same token, I don't think they're any tougher or more accurate than Barnes TSX's and Banded Solids, which are much easier to find and a lot cheaper. When my current supply runs out, I'll be switching back to Barnes. I just don't see any added advantage, aside from supporting small business.

Pete

Uh, IIRC he killed a big moose with a 7x57 and a 160 grain North Fork, and wrote a pretty glowing recommendation of them in Rifle or Handloader (will go dig it out if needed).

Some conflicting information here...

No "conflicting information".

The quote from John Barsness, regarding North Fork bullets, starts with "If you prefer to pay for inefficient manufacturing..."


Post #4279086 - 07/28/10 08:53 AM in the "Penetration vs. Frag" thread:
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...79086/Re_Penetration_vs_Frag#Post4279086

I hate to break it to you, but you are not helping your argument by link to this post. Read in its entirety, as intended, it absolutely makes sense.

Expat

How would Swift Scirrocos compare to your old favorite Bitterroots?

To be fair,JB never mentioned North Fork bullets once in that quote and the thread was about bullets for Whitetails.



I don't have a clue how hunting is in Montana or Colorado but I do for Idaho.Here we hunt both Deer and Elk at the same time and a Deer bullet isn't always the best choice for Elk nor is an Elk bullet the best for Deer..That is the major reason my bullet choice is Nosler Partitions.They open up easily but penetrate better than most making it in my opinion,a great bullet choice if your hunting both on the same hunt.

If I was hunting Deer only..I would probably use the old Sierra and never look back.Premium bullets are not needed for Deer..Period...

If I missed the quote that included North Forks being inefficiently manufactured,point me to it or quote it.I to am a North Fork fan and happen to like MB.

Jayco

+1. His post is being taken out of context...

I used the 250gr. in my 35 Whelen with great success in Botswana. Cleanly took two kudu, gemsbok, zebra, wildebeest and eland with that bullet. I had no prior experience with such game but relied on the reputation of the bullet to perform. I was not disappointed.

Not hardly. Read the entrire thread.

I did. If his post is kept in context, he's referring to deer sized animals in the deer hunting forum. Not bears, elk, bison, etc. I don't think he ever generalized not using them at all but the message I got was they were not necessarily needed on deer sized animals.

And what does that have to do with supporting "inefficient manufacturing" as a reason not to use a bullet? JB claims you shoudl judge a bullet by its performance and I agree. But in that thread he lists other reasons like cost and, eventually, the inefficient manufacturing argument.

As long as they work, I don't care how they are made. I hunt deer and elk at the same time so I load for elk. I have also used my elk/deer load for antelope and coyotes. The North Forks work just fine for everything I've tried them on.

In that thread John also repeatedly and intentionally misrepresented the reason I buy North Forks, claiming I was making my decision as to bullet performance based on the cost of the bullets. Hogwash. I base my decision based on actual performance which has been excellent in terms of accuracy and on-game results. North Forks aren't cheap but cost isn�t my primary concern. In fact, I buy them in spite of the cost - not because of it.

�Inefficient manufacturing� as a reason not to buy a bullet?? That was JB�s argument and he was talking about North Forks. They work very, very well and I�ll keep using and recommending them, regardless of higher costs than I would like or the manufacturing efficiency.