|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,528
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,528 |
I think you took that thread as a personal attack on yourself and can't get over it. I read the entire thread, and posted twice on it when it was still going on, and just read the entire thing again.
You took it out of context, everyone here can see that but you.
With fantastic combo deer/elk bullets like the Partition, TTSX, E-Tip and others that cost $30 +/- a box, I personally can't find any logical reason to spend $60 +/- a box on bullets other than to be "different".
But if they floats your boat, have at it. Your the only one you have to please.
Don't get so butt hurt when others don't agree.
Bill
Last edited by tx270; 01/03/11.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651 |
I think you took that thread as a personal attack on yourself � This thread was not the first go-round between JB and myself, so there is some history there. He apparently doesn�t like it when someone disagrees with him. Personal attack? Why would I think that� Coyote_Hunter, � After this last post of yours I have come to the conclusion that you are a hard-headed horse's ass. �
Coyote_Hunter, I was wrong. You're not a hard-headed horse's ass, just a self-important twit � It didn�t matter to me that JB resorted to name calling. Actually, I had a good laugh about it. Still, I don�t see how you could interpret it as anything but a personal attack. Then he wrote this: Calvin,
Yes, Coyote Hunter did edit a couple of his early posts on this thread, a day or so afterward. Some of the things he originally stated (and I challenged him on) are no longer there. � That, as was easily proven, was an out and out lie. In each case my last edits were made before any following post by JB so they could not have been made in response to something he posted. Further, my edits were made to add stuff and/or correct typos, but in no case were any deletes of information made. The simple truth is that JB a) lied about my actions and b) did so to discredit me. Like the name calling, I�d call that a personal attack. YMMV
Coyote Hunter - NRA Patriot Life, NRA Whittington Center Life, GOA, DAD - and I VOTE!
No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.
A good .30-06 is a 99% solution.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,528
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,528 |
He apparently doesn�t like it when someone disagrees with him. � Something about a pot and a kettle comes vividly to mind here.....
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 24,640
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 24,640 |
Fight nice fellers. FWIW, I feel reasonably confident that I would have gotten same/similar performance on the bruin with a Swift A-Frame, Nosler Partition or TBBC.
WWP53D
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 17,173
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 17,173 |
I use the 225 in my 338 RUM. 90 grains of VV165 = 3050 fps. Used this load to take my Black Bear in BC. Worked on this Bear. Hear is a picture of a recovered bullet. I think they are a good bullet, but not perfect. They are like any other bullet, sometimes they work great and sometimes you get a Boo Boo.. And both.
Randy NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 17,173
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 17,173 |
Sorry for the bad pictures.
Randy NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651 |
He apparently doesn�t like it when someone disagrees with him. � Something about a pot and a kettle comes vividly to mind here..... tx270 � I don�t care if someone disagrees with me. One of the things I�ve often stated is that people are free to use whatever they want. Doesn�t bother me at all. On the other hand, when someone repeatedly mischaracterizes my position, in spite of multiple protests on my part, I can only conclude that the person in question is doing so intentionally and with less than good intent � and that is exactly what JB did in the thread in question. I did find it funny that on one hand JB said one should nor choose a bullet based on cost (a statement with which I agree unless we�re talking really exotic/expensive, which North Forks, etc. are not), then argued my choice of North Fork is a poor one based largely on the basis of � cost. I�m still laughing�
Coyote Hunter - NRA Patriot Life, NRA Whittington Center Life, GOA, DAD - and I VOTE!
No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.
A good .30-06 is a 99% solution.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651 |
Sorry for the bad pictures.
The pictures are fine. That's the first time I've seen a North Fork that didn't expand.
Coyote Hunter - NRA Patriot Life, NRA Whittington Center Life, GOA, DAD - and I VOTE!
No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.
A good .30-06 is a 99% solution.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,295
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,295 |
That's the first time I've seen a North Fork that didn't expand. +1..Thanks Hammerdown for the picture and nice Bear!!! Jayco
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,418
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,418 |
I'm with Coyote Hunter on this.My .338 is primarily used on moose with a chance of running into a grizzly up close & personal. The NF's have so far performed flawlessly for me tho I haven't used any of 'em on grizzly. Assuming things work out, I'm hoping to use the 150 gr. bullet in my .270 WSM this next season on our sheep hunt into the Brooks. The simple reason is that we could run into a grizzly and I certainly DON'T want a simple cup & core bullet should I need it. It amazes me how so many guys in the Lower-48 don't understand conditions up here yet think they are the experts. Bear in Fairbanks
Last edited by Bear_in_Fairbanks; 01/03/11.
"Unless you're the lead dog, the scenery never changes." Amazingly, I've lived long enough to see a President who is worse than Carter. And finally, Gun control means using two hands.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,935
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,935 |
I did find it funny that on one hand JB said one should nor choose a bullet based on cost (a statement with which I agree unless we�re talking really exotic/expensive, which North Forks, etc. are not), then argued my choice of North Fork is a poor one based largely on the basis of � cost.
I�m still laughing�
Taken in the context of deer hunting I think his point was a super premium wasn't needed for deer and your results on deer could've easily been duplicated with any number of bullets costing far less. I don't recall him saying of your choice with NF's being a poor one, but something along the lines that if you thought they were needed on quartering shots...it's your money and your choice, but many others would've done the same thing. At least that's how I read it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,034
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,034 |
Inefficient. Three bullets recovered within 2" of one another beneath the hide on a brown bear. Well, there you have it, if you'd only shot once, you would have been much more efficient.
A wise man is frequently humbled.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 24,640
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 24,640 |
WWP53D
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,900
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,900 |
They are a super premium bullet that is "hand crafted" and you will pay that price. If what I was hunting was deserving of a super premium bullet I would shoot them. I only shoot whitetail, black bear and vermin. Factory production stuff is good enough. I never shot them but if you dig you can find testimonials of many who have used them with a great deal of success and I have heard nothing but good things. I wouldn't use them for plinking and would try to pic someone else's brain for good load data as to minimize rounds spent finding a good load. Worth it? Is what you're hunting worth it? If I was spending $500.00 or better on an elk tag $60.00 on some fine bullets wouldn't make me wince. Over the counter deer, they get the norm. I can make production bullets hit sub moa out over 350 yards. Elk at 200+ yards with my 45-70 and a 350 grainer sounds very tempting. American craftsmanship, as a former machinist I will support that. True craftsmanship is hard to find even in the US anymore, it's all automated, rough cut end product mostly.
Keep your powder dry and stay frosty my friends.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651 |
Taken in the context of deer hunting I think his point was a super premium wasn't needed for deer and your results on deer could've easily been duplicated with any number of bullets costing far less. I don't recall him saying of your choice with NF's being a poor one, but something along the lines that if you thought they were needed on quartering shots...it's your money and your choice, but many others would've done the same thing. At least that's how I read it.
M1Garand � On hunting trips, I�m the kind of guy that takes 4 tire chains and two rubber tensioners per tire, with a couple extra tensioners as spares. Many hunts I don�t need the chains at all, other years I can get by with just two. Some years I�ve been mighty glad to have all four. No regrets and I have often recommended to others to do the same. Experience has also taught me that it is better to chain up before you need to than when you are axle deep in the mud. It is possible, even probable, my results (game quickly on the ground, not lost and no tracking) could have been duplicated, under identical circumstances, with cheap C&C bullets. It is one of those things we can never know. Hunting might be simpler if we knew in advance exactly what shot opportunities we would be presented with, but life doesn�t work that way. My preference is to use a bullet I have confidence in regardless of the range and the resulting impact velocity I might encounter. The 140g North Forks exit my 7mm RM at 3214fps. One thing I do know is I don�t want to shoot a deer with a 140g C&C at anywhere near that velocity. JB is right � it�s my money and choice and, frankly, the cost delta between a North Fork and a C&C simply isn�t great enough for me to worry about. Many people chose C&C bullets and that�s OK by me. I use them in my lever and handguns and have recommended them more times than I can count, albeit with heavier bullets and slower loads than I typically use. JB could have had a gentleman�s discussion, no need for his name calling or repeated misrepresentations of why I choose North Forks. I use them because in my experience they work very well - not because they are relatively expensive as JB claimed, but rather in spite of that fact.
Coyote Hunter - NRA Patriot Life, NRA Whittington Center Life, GOA, DAD - and I VOTE!
No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.
A good .30-06 is a 99% solution.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,528
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,528 |
I'm with Coyote Hunter on this.My .338 is primarily used on moose with a chance of running into a grizzly up close & personal. The NF's have so far performed flawlessly for me tho I haven't used any of 'em on grizzly. Assuming things work out, I'm hoping to use the 150 gr. bullet in my .270 WSM this next season on our sheep hunt into the Brooks. The simple reason is that we could run into a grizzly and I certainly DON'T want a simple cup & core bullet should I need it. It amazes me how so many guys in the Lower-48 don't understand conditions up here yet think they are the experts. Bear in Fairbanks No arguement here, but the whole arguement has been over WT, mule deer and elk, not grizzlies or brown bears or even Alaska. So no one is trying to "be an expert about Alaska". Totally different subject.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 17,173
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 17,173 |
JB is right � it�s my money and choice and, frankly, the cost delta between a North Fork and a C&C simply isn�t great enough for me to worry about. Many people chose C&C bullets and that�s OK by me. I use them in my lever and handguns and have recommended them more times than I can count, albeit with heavier bullets and slower loads than I typically use. JB could have had a gentleman�s discussion, no need for his name calling or repeated misrepresentations of why I choose North Forks. I use them because in my experience they work very well( sometime ) - not because they are relatively expensive as JB claimed, but rather in spite of that fact.
[/quote]
I fixed it for you.
Let it go...
Randy NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 13,401
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 13,401 |
John Barsness thinks you are just wasting your money on North Fork bullets and that by buying them you are supporting "inefficient manufacturing".
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 Pick up a copy of Handloader magazine #246, April 2007 issue. Flip to the back page and read John's article on North Fork bullets. Then you might see my point...
“There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot.” ALDO LEOPOLD
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 12,651 |
Pick up a copy of Handloader magazine #246, April 2007 issue. Flip to the back page and read John's article on North Fork bullets. Then you might see my point... What JB wrote in April of 2007 has no bearing on what he wrote in the �Penetration vs. Frag� thread in late July of 2010, more than three years later. In that thread John repeatedly claimed I was judging the North Fork bullets by their cost, which is pure BS, and in spite of my statements to the contrary. John is the one that brought up bullet cost, which eventually lead to his �inefficient manufacturing� statement. ... If you're absolutely convinced that $1 or $1.50 bullets are necessary to kill deer or pronghorn on bad angle shots, then why it's your money. But there are a bunch of other bullets that will do what you describe. ... (Really? I haven�t found any C&C�s that meet my criteria for accuracy with reliable but controlled and limited expansion and good weight retention in the calibers, weights and velocities used. Contrary to John�s claims about the problem being fixed back in the 1980�s, I still see reports of BT�s blowing up. Deer and antelope, for the most part, are an opportunity for me to practice using the loads I use for elk. Think I�ll stick with North Fork, Trophy Bonded, A-Frame, Partition, Grand Slam, TTSX, MRX, AccuBond and Scirocco.) � bullets that would be way to cheap for you to consider � (Play nice, John�) � Given all your previous insisting that ONLY premium (and the more expensive the better) bullets are suitable for the hunting you do, I believe my comment about cheap bullets is completely justified. ... I challenge JB to point to any place where I have ever made a claim remotely suggesting I evaluate a bullet based on cost or �the more expensive the better� for the hunting I do. (Good luck on that one, John�) The facts are I choose my bullets based on performance and often in spite of their cost, as I stated multiple times in that thread. JB seemed to be unable to grasp that concept. � One of the reasons some bullets cost a lot is because the manufacturing process is much slower than with bullets that are made in larger factories with faster machinery. Just because such a bullet costs twice as much as another bullet doesn't mean it's twice as good--and sometimes it isn't even as good as some bullets costing less. If you prefer to pay for inefficient manufacturing, fine, but don't try to tell me cost is the absolute criteria of any bullet, because it isn't. ,,, Since I have never made any argument that cost directly affects bullet performance, paying for �inefficient manufacturing� is a red herring argument. That said, I don�t mind paying for low volume manufacturing (which is not necessarily �inefficient�, btw) if it is the only way I can get what I want. Admittedly, bullet cost is a pretty minor issue with me � performance is what matters most. Because I hunt elk and deer at the same time, I tend to load for elk and use them for everything. JB claims cheaper bullets can kill deer quicker, but of the last 10 deer and antelope I�ve been directly involved with (and built the ammo used), 9 went straight down and one antelope made it 25 yards. The bullets were North Fork (1 mule deer), TTSX (3 antelope, 1 belonging to my son-in-law), MRX (2 mule deer), Scirocco (1 antelope) and AccuBond (3 antelope, 2 belonging to my nephews). I fail to see how non-premium bullets could have worked any better -- unless the animals start dropping before the shot -- but have seen multiple cases of poor penetration with C&Cs. Berger even advertises what I consider poor penetration (13� to 15� per their web site), although they don�t call it that. Such results could have easily resulted in a long tracking job or a lost animal on the mule deer where I used a North Fork. But, gee, I guess I could have loaded Ballistic Tips for those 10 animals and saved almost enough for a cheap glass of wine with my dinner out� =============================================== I�m more than willing to continue, but I suspect most would like to get back to the issue of North Forks and how they perform. For me they have provided outstanding accuracy in every rifle I�ve tried them in, best exemplified by a .262� center-to-center 3-shot group in my 1982 Ruger 7mm RM, a rifle that typically shot around .9�. In my .45-70 they provided excellent accuracy and the most consistently consistent loads I have ever seen in any cartridge -- period -- with single digit 5-shot Extreme Spreads typical and E.S. under 5 pretty frequent. (Mike Brady said in an email that the test loads I sent him were the most consistent he had seen.) (I know, small E.S. is not a guarantee of anything when it comes to accuracy.) On game, the North Forks have resulted in all but one animal going straight down. The exception was a cow elk at 260+ yards I shot with a 180g North Fork from my .300WM. That cow made it 25 yards and was on the ground before I could get another shot off. Penetration has been very good with the North Forks, although I have not always gotten an exit. Bullets recovered from dirt at 500 yards, elk at 25 yards and deer at 150 yards look so much alike I challenge anyone to tell which was which without additional information. In terms of on-game bullet performance, I think they are pretty much identical to the Trophy Bonded Bear Claws (non-tipped) that my hunting buddy used until they were taken off the market as components. They also seem to work about like the older dual-core Grand Slams I used for 20+ years, but provide better accuracy and higher weight retention. They make much prettier mushrooms, too.
Coyote Hunter - NRA Patriot Life, NRA Whittington Center Life, GOA, DAD - and I VOTE!
No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.
A good .30-06 is a 99% solution.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,528
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,528 |
[/quote] Let it go... [/quote]
He doesn't have a clue what that means......
|
|
|
|
318 members (1_deuce, 204guy, 260Remguy, 29aholic, 30Gibbs, 32 invisible),
2,243
guests, and
1,196
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,754
Posts18,476,343
Members73,942
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|