Hornady DGX bonded honest opinions?

[Nhoro]

Interesting observation on the retained weight, my recovered 400 grain .416 Hornady DGX Bonded bullets were also right at about 82% recovered weight or 330 grains.

Prior recovered .375 Barnes TSX bullets have been 95% plus in recovered weight.

What is it that we hunters want from these bullets? Personally I think sheading 18% of weight is not a bad thing as I believe that those fragments are producing damage. My recovered bullets are normally very few in quantity as most just pass through the animal. Of the bullets recovered they tend to come from quartering / frontal shots or shots that have hit bone.

On the same Australian trip we shot some Barnes .308 150 grain TSX at donkey, I felt that these were totally the wrong bullet and performance was poor, we swapped out to Nosler partition ammo and immediately saw an improvement.

With all the different products available it quite a science picking a good solution.

I used Rafiki's bullet weights for the calculation.

 

[Nhoro]

I hope you are not talking about me because I never said that.

I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to say that yours are the only facts stated.
I used your bullet weights 100 gr loss on 570 gr for 82 % weight retention. Basically trying to say I am OK with 82% vs 95% but it is a significant difference.

 

[cajunchefray]

I am always amazed by the hate for Hornady bullets. Being I scientist I want to see well reasoned statements with facts to back them. Facts against : 470 gr retained weight from original 570 gr = 82 % retained weight. Not the best but acceptable in my book. Other argument, it failed on a waterbuck. Even if a 500 gr bullet breaks up, surely some part of the bullet will penetrate enough to get through lungs and heart. Even 100 gr. I would assume it is a bad shot missing the vitals

I shot an impala in April with a 180 gr bullet from a 30-06. Probably 40 m away an shot offhand. I shot too far back, missed the rib cage but hit the liver. Lungs and diaphragm were damaged and the impala took off in a loop charged towards us and then turned and went down in 50 m. The wound channel was calibre size because I just hit soft tissue. Bullet did not fail, I shot poorly.soaked paper, etc) o

Instead of galloping along and telling us the bullet is junk, tell us where it hit, what THE recovered weight was and some facts about it.

Agree, my work requires scientific rigor for consistent, repeatable results.

Has anyone done testing in controlled media (i.e. soaked paper, with known water content} to compare penetration, expansion, and wound tracts of the premium bullets?

Hornady DGX, Swift A-Frame, Woodleigh SP, TBBC, Barnes TSX?

Of course, buffalo are the best medium, but at a few thousand dollars a pop, that can get expensive.

I have done this testing in wet paper, comparing various 45 ACP bullets, and then comparing various 9mm bullets.

I soaked rope bound newspapers stacks (about 10 inches thick) in water for 1.5 hours and recorded final weight, and water pickup was 100-110%.
So, a 12-pound dry stack weighed 25 pounds after soaking.

For the pistols test, range 7 yards, 3 shots per bullet type, recovered the bullets, and examined the penetration depth and direction.
(Results were, in 9mm and 45 ACP, Speer Gold Dot best, Hornady XTP a very close second. I load the XTP due to availability).

I did test a few rounds of 458 Win Mag, using 400grain Woodleigh PP at 2350 fps. 20-inch wet newspaper stack, shot at 25 yards.
Penetration was 17-19 inches, good expansion. mostly straight, weight retention 75-85%.

Now I want to do this test, with 30 inches of soaked newspaper, 458 Win Mag, loaded to 2150-2200 fps:

- Hornady DGX 480 grains
- TBBC 500 grain (based on availability)
- Northfork SS 450 grain
- Swift A- Frame 450 grain
-Barnes 450 grain TSX
-Cast Performance 430 grain LBT FP (because I have some, they are tough)

 

[Rafiki]

I looked at the pictures of your bullets. It is hard to expect anything better, be it with DGX bullets from Hornady or Welcore Soft Nose bullets from Woodleigh. A-frame bullets often will not deliver more. The 90% and more residual weight is a very theoretical value for many premium bullets. Regardless of the bullet brand, the beautifully mushroomed bullets were made under very standardized conditions. In practice, things sometimes look very different, but I think you know that too. Ultimately, it is about remaining critical of all the bullets available for DG hunting and not demonizing some and praising others, all only based of what one have hear or read from no objective authors.

Actually I'm not demonizing or praising DGX. I shot exactly one buffalo with DGX Bonded so there isn't enough personal experience to judge too harshly. I chose Hornady's DG series because it hit all of my desires; weight, large meplat, jacket construction and consistent geometry between DGX & DGS. I was a bit disappointed when I saw the recovered bullets, I was just expecting better, maybe that's asking too much.

My opinion was that Woodieghs (2nd buffalo) retained weight but MAY have over expanded but that's a judgement call. In any case they all did their job.

I have since moved to Peregrine and so far have absolutely no issues with my choice. Two buffalo, one with 375cal the other with 500cal; one shot each, perfect expansion, for all practical purposes 100% weight retention. I will be taking Peregrine again next buffalo hunt. That's what I'm going to do, I'm not telling others what they should do.

I probably should say that to this point I have not shot TSX at all. I probably will get some for paper while getting ready for my next safari but will not take them for hunting as they are relatively easy to get and cheaper than Peregrine. My reasoning is that they have a spire hollow point and that is just not what I like or really what is needed for the short ranges that buffalo are/should be taken. I also believe that at acute angles on a tough beast a spite point MAY have more of a tendency to deflect; something that is reflected in some of the postings on this thread. In looking at some of the images of bent TSX bullets, I have to wonder if the path the bullet takes is reduced to random in such cases.

 

[375Fox]

Maybe it was the old Hornady SP bullets again. These bullets are constantly confused with the DGX bullets.

It’s been 7 years since Hornady bonded the DGX. It was the old non-bonded bullet excuse is more common than confusion which bullet it is. Hornady DGX bonded has a higher failure rate than other DG bullets. That simple. If a bullet fails or underperforms let’s say 1 out of 10 on DG shots I won’t understand why someone wants to use it when bullets that fail 1 out of 100 are easily accessible (at least in US). The bigger and slower the bullet the less failures it will have. I would suspect DGX failures/not performing to design are most common in 375 H&H because highest velocity with lightest bullet.

 

[Kevin375]

Degol bullets are a good choice but have an almost similar design to the DGX bullets, so that in the opinion of some this bullets also belong in the trash can. No matter how, when I remember all the different bullets I have used in my life to shoot buffalo and that worked well, one can go hunt buffalo with DGX bullets without worries.

I agree with you. The New DGX Bonded has basically the same internal structure than the Degol Starkmantel while the old, non-bonded, DGX was a bit different.

However, it seems the Degol has a thicker jacket and maybe it is in gilding metal ? I'm not sure about it. The Hornady has a copper-clad steel jacket and it was already the case for the old version.

I still have some old Interlock 500 gr, but I have never shot an animal with them. I think I should test one in water jugs to see how it performs. For sure, it's not an animal but it already give an idea.

 

[Bandera]

Current generation DGX 375 Ruger 300 grain factory load. Out of a guide gun.
Lost about 48 grains on weight.
Only one was recovered.
One is in the skull.
The other 4 may have been in the gut, they were not recovered. I suspect a couple of them may have come apart.
By comparison the 375, 300 grain Barnes TSX from my rifle.

I would say the performance of the DGX was marginal on Buffalo and Giraffe.
I wonder if the bullet would have come apart if it had a couple hundred more FPS out of a say a 23” or 24” barrel.
Why would anybody use these bullets? Only if they don’t reload.

 

[grand veneur]

I agree with you. The New DGX Bonded has basically the same internal structure than the Degol Starkmantel while the old, non-bonded, DGX was a bit different.

However, it seems the Degol has a thicker jacket and maybe it is in gilding metal ? I'm not sure about it. The Hornady has a copper-clad steel jacket and it was already the case for the old version.

I still have some old Interlock 500 gr, but I have never shot an animal with them. I think I should test one in water jugs to see how it performs. For sure, it's not an animal but it already give an idea.

The designation DGX for the bullets from Hornady has only been used for a few years. Hornady's older bonded bullets were the Interbond, which have been on the market for a little over 20 years. The predecessor was the Interlock bullet. I have used both caliber 458 500gr Interlock bullets as well as 500gr Interbond bullets for buffalo shooting. They work, but they break down in the body of the game with weight losses of 50% or more. Degol bullets have a slightly thicker jacket than the bullets from Woodleigh, but I have only poor informations about the alloy of all these bullets.

 

[Foxi]

I am always amazed by the hate for Hornady bullets. Being I scientist I want to see well reasoned statements with facts to back them. Facts against : 470 gr retained weight from original 570 gr = 82 % retained weight. Not the best but acceptable in my book. Other argument, it failed on a waterbuck. Even if a 500 gr bullet breaks up, surely some part of the bullet will penetrate enough to get through lungs and heart. Even 100 gr. I would assume it is a bad shot missing the vitals

I shot an impala in April with a 180 gr bullet from a 30-06. Probably 40 m away an shot offhand. I shot too far back, missed the rib cage but hit the liver. Lungs and diaphragm were damaged and the impala took off in a loop charged towards us and then turned and went down in 50 m. The wound channel was calibre size because I just hit soft tissue. Bullet did not fail, I shot poorly.

Instead of galloping along and telling us the bullet is junk, tell us where it hit, what THE recovered weight was and some facts about it.

"82 % retained weight. Not the best but acceptable in my book".

Splinters cause bleeding, not so much the compact mass.
I am satisfied with any projectile from 60% residual weight onwards .
It's the effect that counts for me.
in Germany and neighboring countries, the rule is: if a bullet does not leave an exit wound, it is crap.
In Finland, Canada, and on most of my hunts in Africa, this was completely irrelevant.
You want the energy of the bullet to be released inside the body and not to travel around the area.

 

[375Fox]

"82 % retained weight. Not the best but acceptable in my book".

Splinters cause bleeding, not so much the compact mass.
I am satisfied with any projectile from 60% residual weight onwards .
It's the effect that counts for me.
in Germany and neighboring countries, the rule is: if a bullet does not leave an exit wound, it is crap.
In Finland, Canada, and on most of my hunts in Africa, this was completely irrelevant.
You want the energy of the bullet to be released inside the body and not to travel around the area.

Fragmentation is also often in exchange for penetration in lead core bullets. That matters a lot on a buffalo not so much on deer. If Hornady DGX bonded always gave greater than 60% weight retention this discussion would disappear. Bullets get judged on their failures more than success. What failure percentage is acceptable? Other recommended DG bullets fall in a much more predictable window. The only thing Hornady has is it’s widely available. It’s no longer the cheapest. In the US Barnes ammo with TSX is often less expensive. Factory loaded swift A frame or TBBC is similar price range. I’d use DGX bonded if I had to, but better options are easily available at least in US.

 

[375Fox]

I discovered this old thread by chance and immediately excavate it because in the context of another topic the SP bullets from Hornady, especially the new DGX, are systematically being criticized and described as unsuitable for hunting DG. I have no hunting experience with the new DGX bullets from Hornady, but I have shot several buffalo without any problems with the previous SP bullets from this company. As I already wrote in the other topic, Hornady has developed its new DGX bullet concept like all other companies after studies. Furthermore, to question the effectiveness of bullets such as the DGX bullet from Hornady also means to question the effectiveness of similar bullets, such as the SP bullets from Woodleigh for example. I fear that many comments are not objective and are the result of good advertising by other companies with additional anti-propaganda supported by various sides against particular SP bullet designs.

I was wondering what restarted this discussion. You argued before there was no difference in performance of non-bonded soft points and swift A frame bullets, but then you posted photos of bullets showing some core separation and significant weight loss that many would consider bullet failure today. You bring up one point I agree with even if that wasn’t your intention. I believe the hornady observations are very objective. The woodleigh observations are not. No one wants to criticize woodleigh because it’s a very established name and carries some tradition that Hornady doesn’t have, but it’s a very outdated bullet design. My only experience using them showed a very soft bullet at 375 velocities with a lot of fragments. A simple google search of bullet cut outs will show what anyone needs to see. The bonded bullets with the best DG reputations have a partition or solid base design so even in event of failure the bullet shank can not fail.

 

[Kevin375]

The designation DGX for the bullets from Hornady has only been used for a few years. Hornady's older bonded bullets were the Interbond, which have been on the market for a little over 20 years. The predecessor was the Interlock bullet. I have used both caliber 458 500gr Interlock bullets as well as 500gr Interbond bullets for buffalo shooting. They work, but they break down in the body of the game with weight losses of 50% or more. Degol bullets have a slightly thicker jacket than the bullets from Woodleigh, but I have only poor informations about the alloy of all these bullets.

Exactly.

In my previous message, I forgot to mention the Interbond.

I have never seen one in .458", but I had the opportunity to buy at a cheap price, several boxes of .416 Rigby loaded with 400 gr Interbond in Luxembourg 15 years ago. I have never shot an animal with this caliber, so there is no point of comparison possible, and the only bullet I recovered was in the ground behind the target. It was well flattened, maybe too much, but the ground is a poor media for balistic tests.

In 2014, I used a rented rifle in .338 Winchester magnum in Africa and the owner was absolutely clueless about ballistic. One of his friend reloaded the ammunition, and when he gave me the box of ammunitions at the beginning of the trip, I just asked him what were the bullets reloaded ? His replies was simple : "Red tip Hornady".
I thought it was SST bullets because they shed a lot of weight in animals but I had a doubt. There was no cannelure on the bullet and on the jacket, it was easy to see some lead bonded to it. In real, bullets were Hornady Interbond 225 gr and just after, they stopped the production. They introduced a new generation later but they stopped it again few years ago. Currently, it seems there is no longer bonded bullets for small and medium calibers at Hornady. The only bonded is the new DGX.

I have never hunted an animal with the .460 Weatherby magnum but I knew a man who only swore by the Degol Starkmantel Protected Point 500 gr. He told me, they were more toughter than Woodleigh and Hornady's but once again I have no experience with this caliber.
My friend from Belgium uses the TSX 450 gr in this caliber.

 

[grand veneur]

I was wondering what restarted this discussion. You argued before there was no difference in performance of non-bonded soft points and swift A frame bullets, but then you posted photos of bullets showing some core separation and significant weight loss that many would consider bullet failure today. You bring up one point I agree with even if that wasn’t your intention. I believe the hornady observations are very objective. The woodleigh observations are not. No one wants to criticize woodleigh because it’s a very established name and carries some tradition that Hornady doesn’t have, but it’s a very outdated bullet design. My only experience using them showed a very soft bullet at 375 velocities with a lot of fragments. A simple google search of bullet cut outs will show what anyone needs to see. The bonded bullets with the best DG reputations have a partition or solid base design so even in event of failure the bullet shank can not fail.
View attachment 705397View attachment 705396View attachment 705394View attachment 705395View attachment 705393

By the same performance, I mean a buffalo that fell over dead after being shot. What the bullet looks like afterward is irrelevant. What matters is that the bullet killed the game and whether it did not expand significantly, lost weight, or even disintegrated, is irrelevant when a buffalo lies dead on the place. The result counts and I had that with very different bullets of outdated concepts and with premium ones. A wounded buffalo I had to track under difficult circumstances was shot with a Woodleigh PP SN bullet. Even the best bullet want not help after a poor shot placement. Too much hunters are immersed in theory instead of confronting themselves with practice.

 

[BeeMaa]

To put it simply, there are too many better options available out there for most cartridges. Barnes TSX, Swift A-Frame and the Federal TBBC come to mind immediately for DG use. I've landed on the Barnes because it shoots the best in my rifle.

 

[grand veneur]

I really don't know how those who only use A-Frame or TSX bullets can make any statement about DGX or similar bullets. If one read the posts to the topic, one can see that those who have used DGX very often have hardly reported anything negative about it. None of this all is scientifically proven anyway. I have never seen a study that statistically examined what happens when 100 buffalo are killed with DGX bullets compared to 100 buffalo killed with A-Frame bullets for example. Everything written on the Forums is subjective personal opinion based on what one heard in the hunting camp at the evening or what one read in various article from non objektive sponsored authors.

Ultimately, everyone should use what they have experience with or what is available and not always try to talk someone else out of something. I am not an absolute advocate for one type of bullet or the other and I have used bonded core bullets just as well as A-Frame or TSX bullets for shooting buffalos.

The point of a discussion about bullets like the DGX is above all to inform undecided hunters that they can use such bullets for buffalo hunting and not to promote the use in all cases of DGX bullets rather than other ones.

 

[375Fox]

I really don't know how those who only use A-Frame or TSX bullets can make any statement about DGX or similar bullets. If one read the posts to the topic, one can see that those who have used DGX very often have hardly reported anything negative about it. None of this all is scientifically proven anyway. I have never seen a study that statistically examined what happens when 100 buffalo are killed with DGX bullets compared to 100 buffalo killed with A-Frame bullets for example. Everything written on the Forums is subjective personal opinion based on what one heard in the hunting camp at the evening or what one read in various article from non objektive sponsored authors.

Ultimately, everyone should use what they have experience with or what is available and not always try to talk someone else out of something. I am not an absolute advocate for one type of bullet or the other and I have used bonded core bullets just as well as A-Frame or TSX bullets for shooting buffalos.

The point of a discussion about bullets like the DGX is above all to inform undecided hunters that they can use such bullets for buffalo hunting and not to promote the use in all cases of DGX bullets rather than other ones.

I don’t know why you are so passionate about it. There are examples posted in this thread and many others of less than perfect performance from DGX bonded. There are better bullet designs. You’ll have to search much harder for swift failures. I don’t know why you’d want to push someone towards anything but the best when the cost difference is minimal unless availability is an issue. I’m assuming you stepped up to 460 weatherby in part to make up for poor bullets.

 

[Hunter-Habib]

The new Hornady DGX Bonded bullets are very good. Hornady is just about the only brand of big bore ammunition one can find in Botswana, ever since the hunting ban got lifted again. Their DGX Bonded ammunition is regularly used by resident hunters for Cape buffalo, with excellent results.

But their DGS solid bullets are still not strongly constructed enough, in my field experience.

 

[grand veneur]

I don’t know why you are so passionate about it. There are examples posted in this thread and many others of less than perfect performance from DGX bonded. There are better bullet designs. You’ll have to search much harder for swift failures. I don’t know why you’d want to push someone towards anything but the best when the cost difference is minimal unless availability is an issue. I’m assuming you stepped up to 460 weatherby in part to make up for poor bullets.

I think you did not understand what I wrote above. It might be my English.

I am not a passionate of DGX or similar bullets, but when I started hunting buffalo more than 30 years ago, this type of bullets was the reference for buffalo hunting. I chose the cartridge 460 Weatherby Magnum not for compensate something, but because I wanted a larger cartridge for hunting DG and especially buffalo, larger than the cartridges 9,3x74R and 375 H&H Magnum I had previously used for shooting buffalo. At that time, when it came to buy factory ammunition for the cartridge 460 Weatherby Magnum, you only had the choice between a classic SP bullet like the Interlock from Hornady or a FMJ bullet. At a later time, I loaded the cartridge 460 Weatherby Magnum with A-Frame bullets, TSX bullets, and finally at time the PP SN bullets from Woodleigh, latter because of the accuracy of these bullet in my rifle.

...and as I wrote above,

The point of a discussion about bullets like the DGX is above all to inform undecided hunters that they can use such bullets for buffalo hunting and not to promote the use in all cases of DGX bullets rather than other one.

 

[Hunting Hitman]

Sorry, but the bullet is garbage.
Here is a picture of three bullets pulled from a 2025 Cape Buffalo on brand new 2025 Hornady DGX bullets (2 dgx & 1 dgs) as you can see the performance is miserable. Thank God I had my 500 Jeffrey with Swift A-frame to put the buff out of its misery.

 

[Fordy]

Gday hunting hitman

Sorry, but the bullet is garbage.
Here is a picture of three bullets pulled from a 2025 Cape Buffalo on brand new 2025 Hornady DGX bullets (2 dgx & 1 dgs) as you can see the performance is miserable. Thank God I had my 500 Jeffrey with Swift A-frame to put the buff out of its misery.View attachment 705561

glad that picture above shows your taste in high quality stuff
Yes I like that fudge also

cheers