I contacted Freedom Arms about this bullet. They no longer have it in stock. Does anyone know who manufacturers it or where I can get some ?

Unfortunately they stopped producing that bullet some time ago. It was really good and tough and it expanded very little. This is the same bullet that Winchester later loaded -- which is also no longer produced, again unfortunately.

try a cast 300 grain.

Another company purchased the bullet making equipment from FA with the intentions of producing them for the public. For some reason the equipment has just set in their facility and has never been put back into production. Seems a shame since I know it was not cheap to buy all of the equipment from FA several years ago.

But Ebay is probably your best bet at finding some of the bullets but they bring silly money when they do go up for sale.


I am not a jacketed bullet sort of a guy, too cheap I guess so I don't know what the best jacket substitute bullet would be. I like 300gr LFNGC or WFNGC bullets myself that I cast for that weight bullet, or better yet a 335gr LFNGC...

Fowler,

Since you seem to have an understanding of the FA bullet and based on your post, would it be fair to assume that when the current batch of 260 grain bullets dries up at FA, this bullet may be lost to history?. Or at least unavailable from FA?

Thanks,

Craig

I don't know how many are in the inventory at FA but when they are gone, they are history. That is until production starts up with the people who bought the equipment. I have been told who it was who bought it but I can't recall..

Fowler,

Thanks for the confirmation. I was under the erroneous assumption that perhaps FA had just moved production to the 260, kinda splitting the weight and making what was popular. I have quite a few of them, but will not get too "attached" to the bullet. Just looking for a suitable jacketed bullet that had a little less expansion than the XTP series.

Craig

Yea they barely expand on steel plates! They are a great jacketed bullet, if you like those sorts of things....

And that is precisely why I liked those bullets! They acted more like a hardcast than and expanding bullet.

Fowler,

Thanks for the additional info. Yes, I swing both ways, jacketed and cast, and the prospect of a jacketed bullet that perhaps performs like hard cast is kinda interesting. I like hardcast but I like to have options. Did you know that here in NM, a hard cast bullet could be "technically" illegal to hunt with. "hunters may use only soft-nosed or hollow point bullets. Full metal-jacketed and tracer bullets are not legal", from the NM hunting regs. Technically a hard cast lead bullet is not a soft-nosed or HP bullet. Granted a game officer is likley to see the hardcast lead bullet and think it is of expanding design. But still, ocassionaly I find myself in hunting situations where I get very anal on the I's and T's, just in case. NM is nowhere near as bad as Colorado, but (as an example) on a hunt for Javelina down south where one finds oneself tripping over Game and Fish, Border Patrol, illegals and other federales, I try and play things tight. I will be testing the 260's this winter at various velocities and media.

And Whitworth, dats de plan......

Craig

it's the same here in Oregon, full metal jacket and non expanding bullets are illegal for use on big game animals. Most people that like hard cast use them anyways though especially since the two largest commercial manufacturers are here, Oregon Trail; Lazer Cast and True Shot and Rintoul Enterprises which is Grizzly Cartridge and Cast Performance Bullets.

Actually technically they are all "expanding" bullets -- even the Punch bullet has a tiny hole in its nose for that reason (as does the CorBon Penetrator). It's not legal for them to be marketed as "non-expanding" or "solids." Some bullets are just designed to "expand" less than others. I believe that unless you have a lead ban, like some parts of California, it is perfectly legal to hunt with hardcast bullets.

Whitworth,

I agree, that I would be splitting a mighty fine hair and the chance I could be called on it would be fractionally small. You did lose me with the statement about the legality of marketing or sale as a solid or non-expanding, as I have seen this in print. I use Barnes Solids (marketed as such) and from the Cast Performance web site:


"Cast Performance Bullets: The world's finest high performance handgun hunting bullets with LBT SERIES HEAT TREATED SOLIDS. LBT heat-treated solids are rapidly becoming the standard by which all others compare handgun hunting bullets. This new design of bullet does not depend on expansion as do soft point and hollow point bullets, but in fact the performance level achieved by the LBT design is far superior to conventional bullets...."

This information says specifically a solid, and that it is not a a softpoint or hollowpoint, exactly the wording in the NM regs that say it must be a softpoint or hollowpoint.

I have an older box of corbon 454 "solids" and I think they do have the tiny hole on the nose. So that is why it was put there. As to your legality thoughts, is there perhaps something about whether it's a handgun bullet v. rifle bullet as to how it is marketed? I am not up to speed on the minutia of ATF language, but I do know that loaded ammo starts to get "grey" when it come to the possibility of defeating body armor.

And Wapiti, looks like you see a pretty decent amount of my economic activity, as I use both of those companies. Just don't tell me you are close enough to them to drop by and pick up bullets. Heck, any reloading components are a several hour drive trip for me, and I still can never get what I want, only what they might have.

Craig

All handgun bullets sold in the United States are by legal definition classified as "expanding" and are therefore legal for hunting

Hard cast bullets will most certainly deform but are cast to minimize deformation and maximize penetration

Barnes uses some interesting language to describe their Buster bullets like: "resulting in minimal expansion," and "unlike conventional expanding bullets." The assumption is that all handgun bullets are "expanding" bullets.

I may be wrong about the reference to solids, but the conundrum with the term "solid" is the fact that there are so many definitions. The original concept of a solid was a jacketed, lead filled bullet not designed to expand. Then came monometal bullets which are solid in construction, but some are designed to open up like Barnes' Tripple Shock. So where do hardcast lead bullets fall? Good question.

This only applies to pistol bullets and not those for rifles. Is it a body armor issue? I suspect, but am not sure.

JWP and Whitworth,

Thanks, even though we have ventured a bit here, this is somewhat new to me. I think I remember Keyle having to gyrate a little when the Punch first came out, and it appears there is a distinction between rifle and handgun of which I was unaware. To sumarize for my concern (please correct me if wrong), by some legal stuff, in order for a maker to market handgun bullets THEY have to meet some criteria that I should not concern myself about. A pistol bullet by definition will meet the letter of the law, regarding handgun use.

Just to show my true anal colors, what about using a true rifle solid bullet in a single-shot pistol? Wonder if the legal definitions are based on cartridge and not necessarily platform?

And thanks again for helping me clarify my understanding.

Craig

If memory serves it is by cartridge. Even 45 ACP Ball Ammo is by the legal definition expanding ammo and is therefore legal for hunting.

Too much expansion is not a good thing, check out this thread (with pictures) of a 210 grain hollow point fired from a 42 mag at close range failed to penetrate into the chest cavity of a 230 pound Black Bear

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2911043/m/6831014541

From what I hear, on the opposite side of the animal!

LOL! You are absolutely correct!

JWP,

Thanks for the link. But, I have been pretty much since day one, reloading for a lot of cartridges that are either wildcat strictly by definition or by reality. So, I have long been a student of trying to match bullets to either increased or decreased (from design) velocities. You want to turn a 45acp jacketed bullet inside-out, run one through a 460 Rowland. But I have to admit, the 230 xtp while inside-out still hangs together pretty well

That is the nice thing about lead, other than perhaps some increased fouling, they are a lot less "sensitive" to velocity. What has me interested in the FA designed bullet is that it is jacketed, and the nose is much closer to a LBT profile than many other flavors. If the core is indeed as hard as an proper LBT type, then perhaps at lower velicity it will behave like a WFN or WLN. For my FA, I want to test some at less than full throttle, with an eye to the edges of the nose. And, if the whomever with the bullet making dies gets around to it, the 240 might make a very nice 460 Rowland bullet. That gun has a pretty aggressive comp, and the lead fouling in the ports/comp can be a pain in the neck.

Craig

Actually, I have found that the lead bullets I use tend to function best within a certain velocity window. You push them too fast and their nose shape degrades, which hurts their ability to penetrate. This is why we see no gains from the added velocity of the .50 Alaskan over the .500 Linebaugh shooting the identical bullets. The beauty is that you can push them at moderate velocities and they punch through even the biggest of animals, causing a whole lot of destruction on the way. What's not to like? I did like that 300 grain bullet, though. I wish I would have stocked up on them before they decided not to produce them any longer. I don't get any fouling from the bullets I use.

The 260 is one tough little bullet. That is what I shoot in my 10 FA. With the load I use, I'm not at max but it clocks out at 1890 fps from my gun. Shoots tiny groups and hits like a hammer. The steel plates that Fowler has been making don't really mark up with any of the other bullets but with the FA bullet, you can actually see a perfect indention of the meplat of the 260 grain slug. Its not deep but its a perfect round indention. I have some of the 300s put away in case I ever needed them but I buy lots of the 260s to have as they are my favorite in that gun. Mr. Baker with FA uses thhe 260 on elk, moose and deer. Good enough for him, then they will work for me also. Very accurate and hold together well. But, as Fowler mentioned, when the stash is gone, they are gone. 300s have been gone for some time. Last I talked with them, there were still a good many of the 260s around.

I talked with FA ordering brass for a new toy the other evening, and they still have plenty of supply of the 260. I might order a box and try them out in my Casull's to see if they digest well. Sitting on a cache of another discontinued bullet (260/300 gr Partition) currently anyway, what's another?

Well, I have modified my tsob scope base with an adjustable millet rear sight, and I need a taller front sight blade. Looks like it's time to order the blade, and a few more 260's ;^)

I worked up a really nice load with the 260 Nosler Partition, and that bullet looks to be dead-ended as well. Now I am hording the 100 or so I have loaded. I hate it when I get attached to something, and the powers to be decide it's time for me to make a change. I have scads of 335 and 360 lead bullets, but I do need a change to something with a little different authority on my wrists and nerves. And Glenn, while 1890 may not be top end for a 10 incher, I'm guessing it is not off by much......

Craig

That's not a bad idea.....