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

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......