Hi
@sheephunterab
I think what we may have here is a failure to communicate. Pretty damn funny after how many pages now?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7dcac/7dcac283ae5e078e1182a0e66332aebad456125b" alt="Smile :) :)"
So, speaking only for myself, but viewing the discussion broadly and considering others comments here, you seem to be of the opinion that none of us get it. That you have a superior understanding of ballistics and we're just a bunch of rubes. I don't intend that maliciously or in an insulting manner, but when you suggest that we have inferior understanding to your own, it is obvious you have not tried to understand or acknowledge another point of view. I'm not sure, but I may also suffer from that affliction at times. If I am guilty of that in this instance, then I apologize. I actually agree with some of the things you have posted in a broader context. I just have a different expectation of a DG bullet.
Some of you seem to be struggling with the fact that no one bullet does everything perfectly.
Thus making them shine when you are shooting around 150 yards. You seems to be confusing muzzle velocity with impact velocity. The 416 is a very apt 150 yard cartridge if I'm not mistaken.
I happen to agree with you that no one bullet does everything perfectly, which is why I don't use an A-Frame or Solid for everything. In my .375 I generally choose an Accubond for general PG hunting or lion. I shot my lion 2 years ago with a 300 gr Accubond along with a bunch of PG. Worked great. I would probably opt for an A-Frame if I were pursuing Buff and PG. I would also probably choose a Woodleigh solid or something similar for Ele and maybe Buff if my PH wanted me to stack some solids below softs.
I may have a different expectation from a DG bullet than you do. I don't want a bullet that sheds weight. Not much anyway. So, for me, the A-Frame is my perfect DG expanding bullet.
Most of the DGX bullets I have seen pulled from animals or media of some sort do, in fact, look somewhat similar to the pics Hornady publishes. The front half missing amd not much mushroom. OK, maybe they perform in some instances like Hornady intends. I just simply disagree that this is proper performance for a Dangerous Game bullet.
When I see lots of small fragments after the resulting impact, first I cringe and then reaffirm my decision not to ever us them for anything but paper or steel.
If I want a fragenting bullet I will choose a Nosler Ballistic Tip. They shoot more accurately anyway.
So, the punch line is I don't like the way DGX perform, whether Hornady intended it that way or not. Not only that, I find Hornady's representation of these bullets to be quite misleading. Just my opinion.
As far as understanding ballistics, I know that there are a number of folks on AH that I can learn a lot from. You're likely one of them. However, you assume a bit much on occasion
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7dcac/7dcac283ae5e078e1182a0e66332aebad456125b" alt="Smile :) :)"
. You might be surprised to learn the depth of background some of us have with internal, transitional, external and terminal ballistics
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10d90/10d9034f00ff93d62711ca9ed1272c292dc0dd91" alt="Wink ;) ;)"