Does anyone see a problem with triming northfork bullets?
Their nose sections seem identical within each calibre. Increased weight for calibre seems to be achieved by simply increasing the length of the solid copper section.
I like the idea of a 9.3/270gnNF,alas they dont make them. Maybe one could trim the 286 grainer.

ask mike (owner of north fork) about it...

he might even do a custom if you pay for it but i cant speak for him.

the shanks are long but they are faster by design so the longer bullet is a moot point imho

Chop away. Good luck with any weight consistency. I don't really see what you wish to accomplish. The 250 allows the 9.3x62 to have legit 300 yd elk capabilities in trajectory, powder, and terminal performance. Heavier only limits that. The 250 will do anything that needs done on this continent, including moose and big bear. The 286 is only for VERY large game at relatively close range.

My reasoning was to have a 265-270gn bullet that one could run firm from 9.3x64B but still retain the benefit of your (HG) type construction typical of the heavier weights. Seems like a good stepup from the std consrtucted NF250gn/9.3x62. I certainly cannot see any disadvantage in it.
But if you can, please let me know what it is, I would be interested to know.
Once one has worked out how much needs to be removed,its easy to set em up in a chuck,zero the tool,advance the tool the determined amount with the compound slide and cut away with the crossslide.You could do 3-4 per minute no problem.Cheap experimental fun.

Wood, Mike will make special runs if you get enough ordered. There must be more 9.3 guys out there that would want to jump in. That's how we got the 340gr/404 done.

Sounds to me like a lot of work, then you would never notice the difference between it and a 286.

Sounds like diminishing returns if you ask me. But hey, whatever floats your boat is just fine and dandy too.

Seeing NF make a 270gn for .358cal & .375cal

http://www.northforkbullets.com/358-270.htm
http://www.northforkbullets.com/375-270.htm
and that they are the primary recommendations for Elk,Moose,Bear & APG, I logically reason that a 265-270gnHG(.366) smack bang in the middle of those other two,seems fairly justifiable, No?..

But then again,looking at a rough visual, I cant see why anyone would want one.

WHAT WAS I THINKING?!!

I think doing so would make you eligible for a new "Vonage" commercial...............DJ

I have no data, but as always an opinion. I think the 286 gr bullet is great. But look at it this way, your own Vonage style commercial? Priceless! Priceless

This reminds me of when I was a kid and my Dad chastized me for buying solid 22 rimfire ammo instead of hollowpoints for squirrels and rabbits.

I then set out to make hollowpoints. After much trial and tribulations I turned 500 solid points into 500 hollow points.

Being a kid thinking a little is good alot must be better. I used a pocketknife and created super hollowpoints. The hollowpoint was at least twice as big and deep (if not more) as a normal factory hollowpoint.

I thought, oh boy, this is going to be absolute death and destruction on the local small game population.

They didn't work any better or worse. Lesson learned.

So IMO Why? I know that experimentation and tinkering is what leads to better mousetraps.
But shoot the 250's or 286's and go hunting.

Believe me, that question doesn't even come close to rating a Vonage commercial. I do get some questions that do but this one doesn't. Chop a few off and see what happens. You have my blessing.

There is not a large degree of difference between the 250 and 286; not near as much, for example, as between the 308-180 and the 308-200. Both 250 and 286 have been shot out of wildcats in excess of 3000fps with no adverse results.

There is a pervasive and durable misconception (often promulgated by bullet makers for advertising purposes) of what a heavier contructed bullet will or will not do. The only reason for a heavier jacket wall is to withstand impact in a worst case scenario, i.e., heavy boned game, high speed and/or very close range. Once that is taken care of, increasing jacket strength can actually be counter-productive. An overly strong jacketed bullet will NOT penetrate better than one that is constructed "strong enough", and often even penetrates LESS. For that very reason, I often have to steer potential customers away from where they originally wished to go. For instance, the 30-06 is not a good choice for a launch platform for the 308-200. It just doesn't have the velocity to properly use that bullet, unless ranges are kept very short.
The same thing goes for the 358-270. There are very few cartridges that can utilize that bullet. The ones that can, have a powder capacity that could be used on light armored vehicles (HiPat )

Here's a fella that cuts larger bullets and how he does it...

http://handirifle.com/articles/hornady270.htm

Woodjack

You really must need something to do.

NFmike,
thankyou,I appreciate the explanation.
I will still probably experiment with making a lighter HG version, with your blessing of course! ..forever learning through others and myself.
But I would like to know something to help me along,
Question,, do your HG pills reach max.expansion dia.@2100fps like the lighter ones,but with more controlled peel back due to stronger jacket...or do they need a higher minimum velocity to reach max.exp.dia?
Hold on a second, I may? have just answered that myself,the FIV,PIV figures are higher for the 270gnHG.358, than the 250gn.

Hey Mike, Do you think he would have a bit better luck if he tried removing a bit of Lead from inside the Nose?

I believe Foster makes a Hollow Pointing attachment for their Lathe style Case Trimmer. Haven't used one, so I don't know if it would help him or not. But I think the Bullet needs to be "inside" a Case to use it. Then verifying the weight loss would be a real hassle.

For what it is worth, I twisted the Lead Tips off of some 7mm 150gr Win PSPs with a pair of regular old pliers. I wanted to Seat them out just a bit more and that allowed me to do it. The weight reduction ammounted to approximately 4.0gr. Accuracy remained the same.

Hey Woodjack, I just can't imagine "holding" that bullet and cutting on the Base without totally destroying the Accuracy. If that is the plan, how do you intend to accomplish the weight reduction?

How?
weigh bullet before hand.
Initially, take small measured and noted cuts.....Machine from groove to groove, with paper on lathe bed.
Collect copper from each segment cut and weigh.
Then when you think you have got it down to a weight you like,take out the bullet to see if its the weight you have figured.
If you get satisfactory consistency in your method,then you know you can go straight to the particular "grooveforweight" and part it off.
For better consistency,I would still zero the tool off the bullet base and advance it the predetermined amount to the groove with the aid of the compound slide measure dial.
Having done ones home work,makes it a very quick process.
Really no hurry though, cause its lazy fun Sunday afternoon activity in the shed.

How do you "hold" the Bullet for all this Solid Base cutting without damaging the Rings?

Woodjack,

Appears to be alot of Doom & Gloomers out there on your query. Below a link with a new product that may serve your requirement. I plan on attempting to use the .338" model on some 9.3 Speer 270 grainers. If it doesn't work I'll ream the "bullet holder" some to fit .366".

http://www.sinclairintl.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?catego...m=05-50XX&type=store

Good Luck with your project.