I dont hear much about them these days?

I use the 225's in my 35 Whelen. (and like them a lot)

These were extracted from a bruin;



The 130's and 140's are on the "to-do" list for my 280 and 7SAUM.

YES!! Absolutely! I use the 225 gr. .338 bullet in my .338 WM. In the past, I've always used the Partition in both my .270 Win. and .338. The results have been always been fine. The only "complaint" I had/have is that IMHO, the Patrition isn't quite as accurate as I personally would like.
I had read about the NF so decided to try them in the .338. I found that it was slightly more accurate than the Partition so I went with it and loaded it to the same velocity I had with the 225 Partition (2800 fps). So far, I've taken 2 moose with that load and I can say I think it's a devastating bullet. I have a bullet taken from the 1st moose I shot with it on my desk. It's a perfect, text book mushroom and weighs 218 grs. (maybe 217 gr. - I forget offhand).
I'm aware that the Partition is designed to lose around 15% or so of it's weight and I don't complain about that but I thinkl the NF is slightly better. As a side note, I had a conversartion one day with Mike Brady, the founder and he told me that the 240 gr. .338 bullet was designed with the larger bears in mind and would not be as accurate at extended distances.
When I get my .270 WSM loads worked up, I'm hoping to use the 150 NF in that. I've always used Partitions in my .27 cal. rifles. I'm thinking/hoping that I may get even slightly better accuracy with the NF. Right now, I can get 3225 fps with my .270 WSM and a 150 Sierra ( I use less expensive bullets for load workup) so I should be able to get that with the NF.
NF's are more expensive but IMHO, cost should not enter into a decision as to which bullet to use for hunting. IF I can get a good load worked up for the WSM, I'm seriously thinking of taking it on our annual moose hunt in Sep., this after our sheep/caribou hunt up in the Brooks in Aug.
BTW, NF has a sale on right now - 15% (I think) off. I just ordered 2 more boxes of 150 gr. .27 cal. bullets.
Good luck and I hope you at least try'em. LOad work up for the NF is very easy - just follow their instructions.
Bear in Fairbanks

Other than the expense,there a dang good bullet...I use them in my 45-70 and they are tough!!!



Jayco

thinking of the 120 grain in 260 rem

Since you asked�

350g in the .45-70
180g in the .300WM
165g in the .308 Win and .30-06s
160g in the 7mm RM
140g in the 7mm RM


North Fork bullets have two flaws as far as I�m concerned. The first is that they don�t have as high a Ballistic Coefficient as some other bullets. Not bad but not great, and not that big a deal.

The second flaw is the cost. I cringe every time I write a check for them, but I buy them nevertheless. My preference is to use bullets that work as close to every time as possible and I don�t know any bullet that comes closer to meeting that goal.

Just how DO they work? My Ruger M77 in 7mm RM was never better than a .5� shooter and .9� was common. After working up a 160g load it shot a sub-caliber 3-shot group measuring .262� Mike at the original North Fork in Glenrock (?) tested some of my .45-70 loads and found them to be the most consistent loads he had ever tested. Same with me � single digit Extreme Spreads were common with some 5-shot strings having an ES under 5. And good accuracy.

On-game performance has been outstanding. A 6x6 bull elk went straight down with the .45-70 at 213 lasered yards. So did two cow elk at about 40 and 125 yards with the .30-06. After being hit by the .45-70, a forkhorn mulie made a tight circle and tried to run uphill but didn�t make it more than 10-15 feet. That was a quartering away shot, tight behind the ribs and angled for the far leg, and I�ve never seen so much blood on the ground. It looked like someone had sloshed blood out of a bucket onto the fresh snow.

On 200-yard steel the only bullet I have recovered is a North Fork. They consistently buried themselves in the steel. Every other bullet, including TSX, fragmented and sent shrapnel flying in every direction. Not saying that makes North Fork a great bullet, just reporting my experience on steel.


Below, left to right:

.30-06, 165g North Fork @ 2800fps - 500yds from dirt, 145.0g retained
.30-06, 165g North Fork @ 2800fps - ~25yds from cow elk, 133.2g retained
7mm 140g North Fork @ 3200fps - ~150yds from buck mule deer, 131.2g retained (ham to sternum)




Below, left to right:

350g North Fork, .45-70, 6x6 elk, 213 yards
160g Grand Slam, 7mm Rem Mag, 5x5 elk, 125 yards
162g Hornady BTSP, spike elk, 110 yards
180g North Fork, .300 Win Mag, 200-yard steel

Got some here;they have been very accurate in my 270's.

Have yet to use them on game,because I have Bitterroots,which are very much the same in performance,since Mike Brady designed the NF to work that way......

As BBC supplies dwindle on me,they will be replaced with NF's.

Too rich for my blood so, no, I don't use them. Originally, back when Mike ran the business and they weren't quite so pricey, I considered them. The TSX delivers all the accuracy I need and critters simply fall when hit by them.

I ran the 160's in my 7 Wby. They were 1/2 moa @ 100 yds. I liked 'em and the Mike Brady closed up shop. When the new owners took over and nearly doubled the price I was no longer interested.

My 300 WSM shoots the Nosler E Tips so well I won't look any further until they quit making that bullet or it fail to perform on game. I have yet to kill anything with it.

How much are they? I haven't checked price in awhile....

I have shot them in 358 win. They seem very accurate and thus far terminal performance has been perfect.

I like the design, and if money was no object there are several applications I would use them for. Unfortunayly money is an object and there are other bullets I have high confidance in that cost half of what the NF do.

If I was Africa bound for DG or going for big bear..I would still give the NF strong consideration

$60 per 50 +/-

Reloader: TX

Any data on what the BC is for these bullets? Look very similar to Trophy Bondeds in design.

Per 50 in 375 the cost is $70-80...

I've used them in my 340 and they are very accurate. I also bought some for my 405. Excellent bullets but I've gone to T/TSXs almost exclusively now. jorge

John Barsness thinks you are just wasting your money on North Fork bullets and that by buying them you are supporting "inefficient manufacturing". Never mind how they shoot or perform, from muzzle contact distance and velocities to way out there. He recommends 180g Ballistic Tips instead.

Still trying to figure out how to shoot those 180's in my non-.308" rifle bores and why I would want a 180g in my .308 Win or .30-06s to begin with � that�s what I have a .300WM for.

Whatever, you sure don�t want to get caught supporting �inefficient manufacturing�. You�d probably have to leave the country or something�

Say what..Inefficient..Yeah right.I have shot about every major bullet known to man since the 50's and the North Fork rates right up there with the best.As I have said before,the price is the major reason I don't use them more in my other calibers...

The 45-70 suffered big time in bullet choice(jacketed)and the North Fork was a good choice as well as the Woodleigh and newer Swift A-frame at $62 a pop now, if memory serves me.

If I had to switch from Nosler Partition bullets as my major source for my rifles,North Forks would be tops on my short list of available bullets these days.

Jayco

Inefficient.

Three bullets recovered within 2" of one another beneath the hide on a brown bear.

When I am about to take my first shot at a cape buffalo or a big brownie.. that's what I want in my rifle a balistic tip.. yeah right

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.

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

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�





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:



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

Something about a pot and a kettle comes vividly to mind here.....

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.

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.

Sorry for the bad pictures.

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�

The pictures are fine. 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

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

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.

Well, there you have it, if you'd only shot once, you would have been much more efficient.

Actually, I was a bit disappointed in the results; All I'd ever read or saw on video was the bear rolling and snapping at the "sting", running like mad etc......He simply collapsed and slowly "rolled over". I felt guilty plunking him some more - my guide, not so much.

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.


(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.)



(Play nice, John�)



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.



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.

[/quote] Let it go... [/quote]

He doesn't have a clue what that means......

On the contrary, I know quite well what it means -- I just have no intention to do so when others keep responding in ways I disagree with.

The facts are that JB and I have had more than one disagreement and this was the latest at the time. He resorted to name calling when the facts weren�t on his side, wrongfully accused me of editing posts and deleting things in responses to challenges he made, and repeatedly and I believe willfully misrepresented my position. I call that personal attack, even if some here don�t.

I find it funny that people don�t mind piling on me, a nobody, but no one has stopped to ask JB what the facts are.

1. Where are JB�s missing posts in which he claims to have challenged me?
2. What were those challenges?
3. What is it he thinks I deleted from my posts?
4. How does he explain the fact that the timelines don�t support his claims that I edited my posts in after he made those mysterious challenges � or that the timelines in fact make his claims impossible?


Pretty damn curious myself, but JB won�t answer and his continued silence speaks volumes.


I'm more that willing to get back to the subject at hand, North Fork bullets, or not. Reader's choice.

My guess is that he is talking about the fact that they are a "boutique bullet" made in a small shop which drives the price way up over what they would cost if they were made by the ten thousands! Federal made the TBBC better and cheaper when they bought it!

Maybe if they bought out NF and turned them out en masse, the price would be right in line with other premium bullets instead of frightfully expensive. I have never used one, so I can't comment from personal experience, but the ones in the photos sure seem to suggest that the [much cheaper] TSX is a very good bear bullet as well.

If TSXs were made in someone's garage on an old Swiss machine, I am sure we would be having this same discussion about how good they are- and expensive- they are!-


Wow- I wrote this before I got to the end of the thread and read your last couple of posts. I happen to agree with the inefficient manufacturing theory to a large extent. Sometimes, however, we just gotta have what we gotta have and are somehow convinced, whether right or wrong that we have it all figured out.

Amazing! A question was asked about NF Bullets and low and behold personnel attacks materialize from out of no where. One thing you can say about the Campfire, it is consistant.

I must add here that although some may think the manufacturing techniques for the North Fork bullets add to the cost and is inefficent, I have hands on experience in the manufacture of them. I have seen the testing of them against other "premium or dangerous" game bullets and they are in a league of their own. I use them whenever I will be hunting in bear country as they out penetrate any bullet I've ever used in nearly 50 years of hunting. They open up rapidly but NEVER come apart! When hunting mixed game or in a area with dangerous game the "North Fork" is the only bullet I will trust!

ZOMBIE THREAD!!!!!
This thread was dead for two years before being brought back from the dead.

They shot like crap in my 308

"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..."


Shame, shame, I say shame on you, Sir! Everybody knows one needs an Ultra -Mag with premium bullets to kill deer inside 300 yards... Beyond that, one needs more....

I'm with JB's last line on this one.

Actually, Premium bullets aren't needed for much of anything in NA. Wanted, yes, but not really needed. I'll make an exception, perhaps, for the big bears, which I have no interest in hunting, only in stopping if need be, or for hunting any game with a "too light" caliber.

I AM going to shoot a moose with the .260, and will probably use premiums, tho they aren't really necessary. Probably. That one double-lunged with a .243 100 gr. Core-lokt at 80 yards only went about 50 feet.... Did not recover the bullet... it buried itself somewhere in the cut-bank behind him, having missed bone all the way through.

Accuracy (within reason) is more important to me than whether to use a plain jane or a Premium for most of my hunting needs- BTDT with no different terminal results, as far as my experience goes- 20 moose, about 50 caribou, several sheep, goats, black bear, and a lone elk. Most of which keeled over from plain jane bullets. I had a 210 gr .338WM NP blow up on the near shoulder blade of a bull moose at 100 yards, resulting in near-pant-formation on walking up to him, at which point he lurched to his feet at less than 10 feet distance. That experience was impressive enough that I never used the NP210 again on game, sticking with the NP250's for a time, which have performed adequately, tho not as an accurate load as other plain jane loads, which I've largely gone back to. - but really- how much accuracy is "good enough" for a broadside moose at 70 yards (my average). The NPs were perfectly adequate grouping at about 1.75, factory or worked up handloads.

But I'm chea...I mean economically minded. So why shoot a more expensive, less accurate bullet for marginal terminal performance differences?

Since misplacing two lung-shot bulls long enough for the meat to spoil, I've largely gone to CNS shots on close-in moose in heavy cover, so I want all the accuracy I can reasonably get. I often have to shoot standing off-hand, so every little bit helps. Again, within reason. Some Sierra GK 250 handloads go right at 1 inch at 200 yards, but I've been saving those last 3 loads for years now in case I get a LR op... I have the data on these originally thrown together "junk loads" written down, so I can dup them if I want.. Currently the .338 moose load is some other thrown together junk loads- this time Hornady 250RN- which shoot MOA at 100 yards. UGLY cartridges/bullets!!!!

Had a spike bull moose soak up 3 factory TB 250's (perhaps I shouldn't count the 2nd, knee-cap one however.... ), finally going down with the fourth reload round- a Sierra 250 GK. The 3rd TB went in just forward of the ham as the moose was trying to make the brush, and exited in the same hole in the off shoulder as the first TB - which had penetrated through both shoulder blades from broadside without shattering either. Impressive penetration, but the GK (again broadside, just under the spine) made a bigger hole and flattened the spike, which was about to go down anyway. I have the off shoulder blade as a trophy on the piano downstairs. One could cover the 1st, 3rd, and 4th shot exit holes in the hide with a the palm of one's hand, tho the GK passed just over the blade.

By accuracy (within reason )- I just ain't gonna spend 80 bucks for 50 bullets to gain an extra .2 inch group, or even .5, if the rifle shoots cheaper bullets nearly as well, AND I am getting adequate terminal performance out of the cheaper bullets. If a bullet ever fails me, I'll go elsewhere. So far, only one factory load (plus the 210 handload) has, but I was misusing it anyway.. Did result in adead and recovered animals (moose at 70 yards, sheep at 330) however, so it wasn't a "failure", really- I just wasn't happy to find exploded bullet pieces and poor penetration on both animals, tho that was perhaps the most accurate factory load I've ever found for the short-barreled '06 "Stub".. I don't reload brass fired from that one, as it has a mis-shapen chamber. I keep thinking I ought to rebarrel, but why? It shoots most factory ammo into 1.25 MOA as is... and it's my favorite beater.

On the other hand, if a rifle significantly reduces groups with a Premium, that's what I'll feed it, especially if I anticipate the need to reach way out there... So far in my rifles, I've found Sierras, Hornadys, and Corelokts are almost always as accurate, usually more accurate in my handloads than Partitions, sometimes by a significant amount. I'm really not very impressed with NP group sizes. But if I find one that works better than PJs, guess what I'll feed the rifle??? Just can't see feeding them amore expensive Partition which shoots half-inch larger groups just to say I used a premium,....

I've killed a number of caribou beyond 300 yards using plain-janes in .25 and .30-06, 270, .280 and .260. Those two 'bou taken using the .338WM and TB 250 gr bullets didn't die any quicker or deader, just a wee bit more expensively.


Just bought a factory box of Rem 140 Corelokts for the .260 today, not being in a position to reload at the moment. It's what it shoots really well.... but at $38/box including tax....... AAARRRGGGGG!. And yeah, they kill caribou at any range I can hit them at.

I'll try not to pecker shoot another one, however- I'm saving up for a 1,000 yard rangefinder, good to 500 or so probably. My current "400" just ain't cutting it for open country hunting, since it seldom ranges past 300 on 'bou, and they are usually beyond that. At the moment, a premium range finder is more useful to me than premium bullets....

But if Premiums float your cork, or significantly increases the accuracy of the rifle, have at it. It's your money, and your confidence.

Well, if JB is agains NorthFork, is it because he is sponsored and paid by Nosler? Now, I just don't know.

John ain't, IMO, that type. I have never seen where he was against NF. I think his only comment was to the effect that they are very expensive, it might not always be warranted. But then, he can speak for himself and he has an unimpugnable reputation.

Yeah, because we don't have grizzlies down here in Montana...laffin...

Since. I don't shoot hundreds of bullets a year, cost doesn't matter.
The ttsx load i use has been lethal and extremely accurate

This is a dead head thread...but..there is just too much floating not to be rebutted based on lack of real northern hunting experience. Or with real irritated bears
that need stopping. Or even trophy bull elk that need to be downed without being lost due to sub-standard bullet performance.
IMHO, premium bullets work-and more advancement in bullet design has occurred in the last 15-25 years than the previous 100 yrs.
My last moose in the Interior of Alaska was shot with a 270 gr Hawk bullet- 348 in a M-71 Winchester chambered for 348 AK Imp. Ballistics identical to a 35 Whelen.
No guide, no backup in case of a bear contesting the meat or gut pile.

So if someone wishes to hunt Alaska-Canada with 1920s era jacketed bullets, that's OK. Its his hide in bear country. Someone mentioned "no grizzly bears in Montana".
Interesting observation, but wrong. A US Forest Service employee was killed off duty on his mountain bike a couple of miles outside the West Glacier NP entrance
in 2017. Look it up. My "other rifle" is a pre -war Deluxe Model 71 chambered in 450 Fuller-cousin of the 450 Alaskan. Use Hawk or Alaska Bullet Works bonded FP
400 gr bullets. For those who think nothing like this could happen-read Alaska Bear Attacks. Or Bear Attacks-their causes and avoidance.-Dr. Stephen Herrero.

Carry what you want: just be aware that if you make a mistake, you may not retrieve what you shot at. Another little known fact: A good lever action 1886 or Model 71
will deliver more repeat shots on a moving target inside 100 yds than ANY bolt action rifle. Like upset bear or moose for "moving targets".

Well, since this thread has been resurrected I’ll throw in my two cents worth...

I love my Partitions and old style TBBC’s. However, since initially trying 225 grain NF’s in my 338 beginning in 2014, and every year since, I think they hung the moon. Much more accurate, much cleaner shooting (less copper fouling) and Good Lord, what terminal performance! Ive posted my share of “elk success” stories here and I can’t quit gushing about the performance of that bullet. Credit goes to JB and BobinNH for load workup advice. Thanks to two fine gentlemen for their assistance!

Since the Winchester 1886 was mentioned, I sure wish NF had a flat point for my 33 WCF. I’ll use JB’s trick and file down a 210 grain Partition, making it a flat point for now.

How do you guys find these old threads?? Any why???


Is North Fork even still in business?

Just placed an order