Why avoid Hornady DG bullets and ammunition?

[Art Lambart II]

So what I don't understand is why does Hornady not develop an InterBond in the DG calibers and use that technology?

Hornady did make Interbonds in DG calibers I have 1400 .416 my basement but when they started making the DGX they stopped making the large caliber interbonds.

 

[LivingTheDream]

Well I just read all 20 pages because I thought this was going to be over in one page once the link to the other thread was posted and didn't really check back. I love my 416 Ruger, I got good accuracy and have had great luck with the solids. However, I'm scared to death to use DGX. I am getting set up to reload but when I go DG hunting again, I will have custom rounds using A-frame or woodleigh bullets.

Recap DGX will kill animals, it will also fail. Hornady ignores failures. If paid people will use it (Gizmo will not even if paid). Velocity matters, energy matters, animals shot in the heart regardless of bullet will die. Sarcasm is hard to detect on forums.

Hopefully, I didn't just crash the market on "beating sticks".

 

[CTDolan]

I'm quite smitten with my 416 Ruger, also.

I can't see how or why a DGS would fail to the extent shown earlier (much earlier) in this post. As for the DGX, it's more understandable (yet, somewhat perplexing).

These bullets are really nothing new. They're based upon technology now over 100 years old (and repeated over the years, incessantly). When it comes to heavy game, each has the look of being a solid improvement of the old cup and core (not being bonded, aside). Yet, by virtue of the experience of a number of people here, they seem prone to failure. It makes no sense (to me) but there (here) you have it.

 

[salesman]

I posted this picture on another thread concerning the Hornady DGX.

Bullet on left (400 grain Swift A Frame) fired from a .416 Rigby at a Cape buffalo at 30 yards. Buffalo facing head on, went 80-100 yards and down for good.

Bullet in center and on right (400 grain Hornady DGX) fired from the same .416 Rigby at a Cape buffalo. Bull facing with head down at 60 yards, bullet hits the spine, bull goes down. Second bullet was a finisher in the chest at 6-7 yards.

IMHO it tells me everything I need to know about the Hornady product. Yes it killed, but I will not be trusting it on future DG hunts.

 

[CTDolan]

From my experience it looks as though Hornady is using a too hard lead alloy for the core. Why else would it completely lose the nose section as it does? Lead is normally malleable and cohesive, a trait clearly exhibited in the A-Frame, but not the DGX.

 

[IdaRam]

Sorry Dan, gonna have to add a bit to this...

I have hunted African PG with a 6.5 Creedmoor using Hornady InterBond bullets with very good success. The PH on that first hunt actually guided the Hornady guys while they were testing the 6.5 Creedmoor and he told me he had great faith in InterBonds and in fact hand loaded them for his personal use... He also told he would not use InterLocks and considerd them inferior. He did no DG, and was not shooting anything over 30 caliber.

So what I don't understand is why does Hornady not develop an InterBond in the DG calibers and use that technology? Seems it would have longer term sustainability than investing in all the advertising they do on the DGX? I'm sure they are financially successful, but why keep up the false advertising and ticking hunters off by dismissing any and all claims against their product, when they have the technology in the smaller calibers to potentially develop a much better product in the DG calibers?

I am in 100% agreement with you Bob. Give the people what they want!
I suspect it may be a matter of economics I think the Interbonds are pretty good bullets.

From my experience it looks as though Hornady is using a too hard lead alloy for the core. Why else would it completely lose the nose section as it does? Lead is normally malleable and cohesive, a trait clearly exhibited in the A-Frame, but not the DGX.

Yes

 

[Paul Homsy]

Energy dump is not a real thing . It's total bunk. Energy is not a killing force. Energy is what is required for the bullet to expand and penetrate, It's that subsequent hole that kills! A bullet that passes completely through can do equal damage to a bullet that remains in the animal...all other things being equal of course. With expanding bullets, fragmentation and velocity are the real influences on tissue damage...both in permanent and temporary wound channels. The reason that fragmenting bullets often result in more rapid death is the increased tissue damage...not energy dumping. The real key with fragmenting bullets is how far they penetrate before fragmentation begins. If it begins early like with varmint bullets, then yes, you have an issue on large game but if it begins well after penetration, it can be very beneficial. The only negative with fragmentation is reduced penetration if fragmentation begins early...if it doesn't and penetration is not compromised, then death can be very dramatic compared to stouter bullets. That physics isn't brainwashing either. We can do a lot to control when expansion occurs. But you do end up picking chunks of lead out of your meat. I guess my point was about the comparison, it was like throwing a baseball and an egg at a wall and concluding that because the egg broke that the baseball would make a better omelette.

There are sets of intensive tests that have been conducted on live animals in New Zealand with a variety of mostly smaller to light medium calibers, with in depth reports on results, that confirm your view on fragmentation creating more emphatic death. The majority of animals are deer size hoofed animals along with a a few reports of bullets' performance on bears. The omelette is a hilarious analogy !

 

[Philip Glass]

My experience with my 375 was exactly the same. Terrible. Below are 3 shot groups of Hornady and Barnes ammo, shot the same day. And yes, that Hornady grouping is repeatable from the 375.... The group rattled me as it was first of the day and I thought my shooting had gone to hell.

View attachment 192504
View attachment 192505

My Lott actually shoots the junk quite well and is fine for paper only.

Royal27 ditto that!

 

[Philip Glass]

Sorry Dan, gonna have to add a bit to this...

I have hunted African PG with a 6.5 Creedmoor using Hornady InterBond bullets with very good success. The PH on that first hunt actually guided the Hornady guys while they were testing the 6.5 Creedmoor and he told me he had great faith in InterBonds and in fact hand loaded them for his personal use... He also told he would not use InterLocks and considerd them inferior. He did no DG, and was not shooting anything over 30 caliber.

So what I don't understand is why does Hornady not develop an InterBond in the DG calibers and use that technology? Seems it would have longer term sustainability than investing in all the advertising they do on the DGX? I'm sure they are financially successful, but why keep up the false advertising and ticking hunters off by dismissing any and all claims against their product, when they have the technology in the smaller calibers to potentially develop a much better product in the DG calibers?

I had the same experience with 6.5 Creedmoor and the Hornady factory loads are accurate and devastating on white tailed deer. Why the DG stuff simply doesn't work is beyond me.
Philip

 

[Philip Glass]

View attachment 192520 I posted this picture on another thread concerning the Hornady DGX.

Bullet on left (400 grain Swift A Frame) fired from a .416 Rigby at a Cape buffalo at 30 yards. Buffalo facing head on, went 80-100 yards and down for good.

Bullet in center and on right (400 grain Hornady DGX) fired from the same .416 Rigby at a Cape buffalo. Bull facing with head down at 60 yards, bullet hits the spine, bull goes down. Second bullet was a finisher in the chest at 6-7 yards.

IMHO it tells me everything I need to know about the Hornady product. Yes it killed, but I will not be trusting it on future DG hunts.

Thanks for posting this with your experience. I've seen similar pics before on those Hornady bullets. How they keep making that junk and advertising it all over is beyond me. That Swift A Frame is hard to beat. Barnes and Nosler have worked well for me too.

 

[Boela]

Good day all

I have been following this thread whenever I had the time to do so, and have I learned a lot from it this past couple of weeks. I am sure that most of you have read the hunting report I posted of where my dad hunted a giraffe using my 375H&H loaded with DGX ammo. It was a one shot clean kill. This past weekend a lady used my same 375H&H loaded with the same DGX ammo and had a one shot kill on a BWB that was quartering away from us - the bullet entered just before the ribs and exited between the neck and shoulder on the opposite side.
I have not been overly concerned using these 300gr bullets on PG.....but..... after seeing the video doing the rounds on social media involving Jacques Spamer and DG, and how a rifle was jammed shut because of Hornady factory ammunition, I have now also had more than enough to convince me that I will not be using these bullets even on PG any more. My remaining stock of Hornady bullets will now only be used for shooting at tins...

Let us (me) learn from mistakes others has made and not repeat them!

 

[EZRider]

Bullets marketed as DG bullets should be useful for the hunting of the tougher DG species like cape buffalo as many people purchasing DG bullets will be using them for specie like buffalo.
Facts that certain bullets perform better at longer ranges, lower velocity and kill more effectively through partial fragmentation, while certainly true, are totally irrelevant to discussions as to what constitutes a good bullet for hunting African DG.
A good portion of African DG hunting happens at close range in thicker bush and it won't help that your impact velocity exceeds the design parameter of your bullet just because you happened on a buffalo at 30 yards. Your hunt has a chance of failing.
Bullet integrity is also obviously vital when hunting thick skinned specie so all the arguments that the bullet was meant to fragment because it creates more wounding mean nothing when such fragmentation occurs on heavy shoulder bone.

You certainly should choose your bullets and velocity according to what you are hunting and at what range but that decision is not complicated when we are discussing most African DG.
I used to hunt with PMP softs until I lost a wildebeest due to fragmentation. Now I know that if I do my bit my TSX will do what's needed.

 

[Paul Homsy]

There are sets of intensive tests that have been conducted on live animals in New Zealand with a variety of mostly smaller to light medium calibers, with in depth reports on results, that confirm your view on fragmentation creating more emphatic death. The majority of animals are deer size hoofed animals along with a a few reports of bullets' performance on bears. The omelette is a hilarious analogy !

Please read extensive, not "intensive" ... used the wrong word.

 

[Art Lambart II]

The link below is to the best thing I have ever read on how a bullet kills game and how to effectively use them, its rather long but well worth your time.

http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Effective+Game+Killing.html

 

[Paul Homsy]

The link below is to the best thing I have ever read on how a bullet kills game and how to effectively use them, its rather long but well worth your time.

http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Effective+Game+Killing.html

Art, this is what I was referring to in my post. Ballistic Studies did an excellent job. I should have entered the link. Thank you for doing it.

 

[SETH RINGER]

To digress, I will be wading around that infernal Zambezi Delta in October with my .375 R8 loaded with the 300gr Woodleigh Hydro. It checks off 90+% of my DG preconditions, and does so, in .375, over a wide range of velocities from muzzle to 300 meters. I will use it on everything from buff to duiker. Like the North Fork cup-nose, it is a solid which, nevertheless, leaves a devastating wound channel. I can personally attest that in its 9.3 guise, it is decisive on bear. The 10% of failing to meet my preconditions will be broadside presentations in a herd. The potential for pass-through is higher than a normal soft. For me, that is a known and fully manageable characteristic with which I am willing to live in order to take advantage of the bullet's other attributes

MR. Red Leg, my son will be using my .375 R93 with the Hydros next March as a one gun battery. Would love some performance reports. Thx.

 

[Red Leg]

MR. Red Leg, my son will be using my .375 R93 with the Hydros next March as a one gun battery. Would love some performance reports. Thx.

I will absolutely write up a report on the hunt.

 

[Michael Dean]

@1dirthawker I've had the good fortune to test a wide variety of bullets from most manufacturers in both test mediums and live animals and the performance of most bullets is pretty predictable I don't rely on the advertising copy but rather look at the construction and can make a pretty educated guess as to how it will perform. Impact velocity is the single biggest factor that affects terminal pertformance and I select my bullets based on what chambering I'm shooting, what ranges I expect I'll be shooting, the animal I'm hunting. All bullet types have a performance envelope where they perform ideally and stray outside that and you'll see less than optimal performance. It's hardly failure but rather expected results. That doesnt mean they aren't deadly it just means they may fragment excessively or at the other end of their scale they may fail to expand.

People that want perfect bullet performance from one bullet under all conditions are delusional. That bullet doesn't exist but that doesn't mean if we experience less than optimal performance from straying outside the performance envelope that a bullet isn't deadly if placed well. I guess my point is that virtually any bullet will kill if placed properly and by selecting bullets designed to match our chambering, range and animal we can expect even better terminal performance. Luck has little to do with it. Anyhow, before I have to buy one of Paul's sticks I'm off to bed.

This argument is disingenuous at best, intentionally misleading and fundamentally and factually biased. The author wants us to believe that he wakes up on any given day, determines what distances and conditions he's going to hunt and selectively chooses his ammunition based upon these factors. In short, it's a flawed dishonest story tale. The key to premium bullets is performance under an array of different circumstances, distances, velocities and less than optimum conditions. It means being able to depend on performance regardless of the velocity or distance. What the author is attempting to sell us is that his product, Hornady, will properly perform as long as you do your part and make sure that you use the product at a given distance and a prescribed velocity.

He goes as far as stating that people who expect performance from a bullet, regardless of the conditions are delusional. What he's doing is making excuses for his product because it continually fails to perform unless the hunter gets lucky and manages to deliver the bullet at just the right distance and velocity.

What separates premium ammunition from the rest is it's ability to perform under a vast array of conditions. Hornady ammunition simply cannot stand up under these requirements. It's for these reasons I will not use Hornady ammunition. Swift A Frames and North Fork bullets expand and mushroom while retaining virtually all of its original weight regardless of whether it penetrates an animal at 1,800 feet per second or 2,800 feet per second. The manufacturers of these bullets don't make excuses to explain excessive fragmentation because it doesn't happen; they tear through muscle and bone and perform time and again. Hornady dangerous game ammunition is not premium ammunition frankly, it's not acceptable ammunition. Hornady bullets are temperamental, unstable projectiles that fail to perform unless the hunter manages to deliver the bullet at an ideal window of velocity.

The more Sheep Hunter pontificates the merits of his product while arguing the rationale for its inevitable failures, the more convinced I become that the Hornady product is good for little more than tin can shoots, but only at limited velocities and specific distances.

 

[sheephunterab]

I don't believe I pontificated the merits of any product...I just relied on knowledge of bullet construction and physics to help explain bullet performance. I honestly couldn't care less what bullet you shoot. I was just helping people understand the basics of terminal performance so they could make their own informed decisions. Point out one factual flaw...please.

 

[salesman]

I have a question concerning the term fragmentation and a DG bullet.

What good is a bullet that may fragment when fired at a "dangerous" animal?

IMHO a bullet that cannot be depended on to hold its' integrity and penetrate to and thru the vitals is a recipe for disaster. Take your pick...a deadly charge or a lost trophy fee.

I have had two experiences with the Hornady DGX 400 grain .416 Rigby factory loads. Thankfully neither produced a negative outcome.

1. Cape Buffalo...shot in spine at 60 yards. Buff went down immediately. Did have to use a 2nd finishing shot...still not a problem. Everything looked great from the outside. Then later that day one of the skinners gave me the spent bullets...they are pictured in an earlier post. It crossed my mind immediately that thankfully all the buff offered was a spine shot and not a shoulder shot. I truly believe that the Hornady DGX would have failed miserably on the shoulder and I would have had a wounded and possibly dangerous or lost buffalo.


2. Blesbok....shot thru the chest at 200 yards with the same 400 grain DGX out of the same .416 Rigby. Shot was on the point of the shoulder, the ram flopped right over. When I arrived the thing that shocked me the most was there was NO exit hole. There was no time that morning to wait for an examination of bullet performance as we were moving to another area. I assume the bullet "fragmented" on the shoulder of a BLESBOK and those fragments careened thru the chest cavity; otherwise if the bullet had retained its' integrity there should have been an exit hole.

Anyway, no more Hornady DGX bullets for me. I have seen enough and got the message.

Just my 2 cents as usual.