Why avoid Hornady DG bullets and ammunition?

[TTundra]

Point you are making is noted, however a broken fishing rod or broken pack strap does not have the potential to kill you(or so slight that it really cannot be considered as life threatening), crap bullets on DG most certainly have.

If you go for a once in a lifetime marlin fishing trip or intend climbing Mount Everest or spending a lot of money on a once in a lifetime DG safari, do you buy equipment with a known failure rate or do you buy something with a proven track record?

I know what I would buy and use, others can use their own discretion and use what they want but for hunting it will not be Hornady for me....

Again, this post was outlining another post specific to defects and establishing their point of origin. It does not matter what brand you buy if their is a chink in the manufacturing process for that specific PO. Every manufacturer will have a defective product come off their line at one point or another. Determining that defect and where it originated is essential, and sometimes it is a consumer error rather than manufacturing. That's goes for the best rifle and ammo manufacturers as well. I doubt there is a single manufacture that hasn't at one time had to deal with a defect, and obviously in mass production it's more common.

My rod company holds 248 IGFA records, so I think I know a little about blue water fishing and quality. I know that it's not always the products fault and the adage "the customer is always right" is marketing and not product performance.

Also again, it is clear to everyone how you feel about Hornady DG ammunition, it's been stated multiple times. However, many consumers like Hornady and will use them their hunts and that is their prerogative. You simply do not need to quote every post and state the same rhetoric. You would do better providing images of failed product, hunt date, specific info, etc; especially new images and not ones already circulated. That is what consumers like and need to see.

 

[fourfive8]

Again, this post was outlining another post specific to defects and establishing their point of origin. It does not matter what brand you buy if their is a chink in the manufacturing process for that specific PO. Every manufacturer will have a defective product come off their line at one point or another. Determining that defect and where it originated is essential, and sometimes it is a consumer error rather than manufacturing. That's goes for the best rifle and ammo manufacturers as well. I doubt there is a single manufacture that hasn't at one time had to deal with a defect, and obviously in mass production it's more common.

My rod company holds 248 IGFA records, so I think I know a little about blue water fishing and quality. I know that it's not always the products fault and the adage "the customer is always right" is marketing and not product performance.

Also again, it is clear to everyone how you feel about Hornady DG ammunition, it's been stated multiple times. However, many consumers like Hornady and will use them their hunts and that is their prerogative. You simply do not need to quote every post and state the same rhetoric. You would do better providing images of failed product, hunt date, specific info, etc; especially new images and not ones already circulated. That is what consumers like and need to see.

Problem with certain of Hornady's bullet designs is not a one of problem originating on the assembly line during the manufacture of a specific lot. It is a BASIC design flaw of the design itself and has been known by Hornady and ignored by Hornady for years- and with one bullet design I can remember dating back at least 30 40 years! I remember this same type discussion that long ago with people reporting to Hornady that one of their main line, heavily marketed big game hunting bullets was subject to gross fragmentation and core separation.... Hornady's official arrogant response that I saw in print was something like, "not considered a failure.... dead is dead isn't it?". I had that experience with one of that design in the 70's and never looked back nor used another Hornady because other, far superior premium big game bullets were coming into the market at that time. Fast forward to fairly recently the reported issues with their DG series of bullets proved yet again how arrogant Hornady is/was by how slow it was in responding to valid complaints based on demonstrable design flaws (not rhetoric!) and then finally changing the basic design of that line of bullets. In the end why even mess with them with sooooo many superior bullets available?

 

[Hoss Delgado]

Problem with certain of Hornady's bullet designs is not a one of problem originating on the assembly line during the manufacture of a specific lot. It is a BASIC design flaw of the design itself and has been known by Hornady and ignored by Hornady for years- and with one bullet design I can remember dating back at least 30 40 years! I remember this same type discussion that long ago with people reporting to Hornady that one of their main line, heavily marketed big game hunting bullets was subject to gross fragmentation and core separation.... Hornady's official arrogant response that I saw in print was something like, "not considered a failure.... dead is dead isn't it?". I had that experience with one of that design in the 70's and never looked back nor used another Hornady because other, far superior premium big game bullets were coming into the market at that time. Fast forward to fairly recently the reported issues with their DG series of bullets proved yet again how arrogant Hornady is/was by how slow it was in responding to valid complaints based on demonstrable design flaws (not rhetoric!) and then finally changing the basic design of that line of bullets. In the end why even mess with them with sooooo many superior bullets available?

This is very true. I would like to use Renowned ( now sadly departed ) PH Harry Selby as an example. As WE ALL KNOW , Harry used to use a .416 Rigby as his Personal backup rifle ( and kept a .375 HH Magnum Winchester Model 70 in the car's gun rack to let his clients use ).
Now , in the late 1960s when Kynoch stopped Manufacturing Centrefire Cartridges , Harry was suddenly out of ammo for his .416 Rigby. So he started turning off the belts on .460 Weatherby Magnum Cases on a miniature lathe to make .416 Rigby Brass Cases. He was using Hornady and Barnes Solids ( whatever , he could find ) . He noticed that the Hornady Bullets were more prone to breaking apart than Barnes bullets.
I will try finding the article if l can . It's saved as a PDF on my laptop

 

[TTundra]

Problem with certain of Hornady's bullet designs is not a one of problem originating on the assembly line during the manufacture of a specific lot. It is a BASIC design flaw of the design itself and has been known by Hornady and ignored by Hornady for years- and with one bullet design I can remember dating back at least 30 40 years! I remember this same type discussion that long ago with people reporting to Hornady that one of their main line, heavily marketed big game hunting bullets was subject to gross fragmentation and core separation.... Hornady's official arrogant response that I saw in print was something like, "not considered a failure.... dead is dead isn't it?". I had that experience with one of that design in the 70's and never looked back nor used another Hornady because other, far superior premium big game bullets were coming into the market at that time. Fast forward to fairly recently the reported issues with their DG series of bullets proved yet again how arrogant Hornady is/was by how slow it was in responding to valid complaints based on demonstrable design flaws (not rhetoric!) and then finally changing the basic design of that line of bullets. In the end why even mess with them with sooooo many superior bullets available?

@fourfive8 no issue there at all. If you look at my original post that was referenced by IVw it was an overview of a process to determine origin of malfunction. It can absolutely be a design flaw in some products and in others user error (or in logistical issues as in my post). Thay post as quoted was asking to present all the information so a conclusion can be reached, not subjective opinions. Some products absolutely have a design flaw, but most people want to see why and where it is rather than just hear a general statment about it. At least I want more information.
One last time, that post referenced by Iv was identifying the process of looking into product failures to see where they originate, regardless of manufacture.

 

[IvW]

"the customer is always right"

The customer is not always right however the customer should always be put first.

 

[TTundra]

The customer is not always right however the customer should always be put first.

I'd add that the customer should always be listened to, any situation investigated, and a response or answer always be given and corrective action taken if needed. Fault can lie in a variety of places and finding where is essential in any issue to correct it.

 

[fourfive8]

Actually many of us get tired of repeating the same facts over and over. Some customers want to shoot big game at 700 plus yards so some bullet companies are more than happy to supply magic testosterone bullets for just that including Hornady with their SST. No it's not just about the customer being right no matter the circumstances. Naturally, the SST is mostly used as a high BC bullet for all manner of big game not just the magic performance window of 500-700 yards. And predictably it comes apart like any thin jacketed cup and core cheap bullet. NO- it's about a company's integrity.

Specifically, the bullet that Hornady so heavily marketed for so many years and continues to do so as far as I know is their so called Interlock. Nothing more than a super frangible non bonded core, thin jacketed conventional bullet with a very thin inner ring that is supposed to keep the jacket from shredding and shucking the core... right! That thing comes apart like a cheap suit when meeting the least of resistance in big game. I shot a medium-sized mule deer just behind the shoulder with one (130 gr 270 @ about 150 yards with an impact vel of no more than 2500) way back when and couldn't find a piece of that bullet bigger than flattened pea.... not to mention the horrific surface wound it made with little penetration. I had to track that animal down to finish it. I started researching reports of Hornady bullet failures and that's when I found Hornady's arrogant response as posted earlier. From that time on no more Hornady BS for me. I was able to find and use the true premium, well designed hunting bullets just starting to hit the market. If you shoot a hundred pound whitetail at a feeder in Texas off a the rest in a blind from 75 yards and your 7mm mag shootin' a Hornady Interlock blows it nearly in half... you consider it perfect performance? I guess that is what Hornady's customer feedback means to Hornady.

Fast forward to a few years ago, after all the feedback and internet chatter about the Hornady DG Series failures, curiosity set in. OK time to do a bullet test of one of the two- a 480 gr- 458 DGX. I posted detailed results here and don't feel like doing it again. But basically, what they advertise and picture on each box of that is downright CR7#!P and they know it! That flat meplat statement and diagram on the bullet box is absolute bogus! That bullet, pushed at nominal 45 cal rifle impact vels of maybe 2000 fps, fired into test media, may come apart, fragment, shuck the core and not penetrate... just like any other cheap, basic cup and core bullet. I can take a 30 or 338 cal premium, well designed expanding bullet, shoot it into the same media at reasonable and conservative impact velocities and get anywhere between 14-18 inches of penetration and recover a compete, expanded bullet, still point forward at its penetration terminus. In my test, that 480 gr 458 @ about 2000 fps into the same media penetrated to about 11 inches and shed pieces of jacket and core, including pieces of the steel jacket all along the track. The largest was at the track terminus, a 1/4" piece of lead core that weighed about 50 gr. So is that customer rhetoric?- nope. Now after years of reports about and knowing that staying silent and denying a design problem, Hornady suddenly starts bonding those bullets?? Sorry, Hornady too late, not interested- too many other superior choices. Won't even bother testing or messing with their DGS, not interested- too many superior choices.

 

[Foxi]

People,the company sells over a billion bullets a year.
Does anyone know the number of hunters who are satisfied with it.......(and do not post anything in AH,but simply hunt successfully).

 

[tarbe]

I will take data over imagined satisfaction from anonymous and silent customers any day.

In God we trust, all others bring data!

 

[Ray B]

Since hunting opportunities are expensive and limited i prefer to test bullets for performance in a medium that gives comparative results. As such, I test bullets by shooting them at different velocities into plastic jugs containing water. this method is criticized because it doesn't match muscle & bone, but it does show how one bullet compares to another given similar resistance. Based on these tests I have found that I much prefer to spend a little extra for the bullets used for actual hunting. I use "standard" bullets such as hornady but they are limited to the high volume activities such as range time.

 

[tarbe]

Since hunting opportunities are expensive and limited i prefer to test bullets for performance in a medium that gives comparative results. As such, I test bullets by shooting them at different velocities into plastic jugs containing water. this method is criticized because it doesn't match muscle & bone, but it does show how one bullet compares to another given similar resistance. Based on these tests I have found that I much prefer to spend a little extra for the bullets used for actual hunting. I use "standard" bullets such as hornady but they are limited to the high volume activities such as range time.

Ray - I used wet newspapers, starting around 1974. Any consistent medium that has high water content will give meaningful comparative results, as you state.

 

[colorado]

DGX is fine for deer, wouldn't use them for elk.

 

[IdaRam]

A couple years ago I went to Mozambique hunting buffalo and plains game. I planned to use A-Frames for everything except the tiny stuff, which I took some Hornady DGS for, figuring they would be fine for just poking little holes in little animals. I wasn’t real excited about taking DGS bullets as my solids, but that’s what I had and bullet options were damn near non-existent at the time. The rifle is a .375 H&H that I’m very comfortable with and I’ve taken on every trip to Africa.
Due to Covid and the dust up going on in northern Moz & Tanzania at the time, the PH I had planned the hunt with was not allowed to transit from Zim into Mozambique for the hunt so I hunted with a different PH who I’ve not hunted with before. No problem, he was a good PH and we had a great hunt together. However, he did throw me an unanticipated curve ball and requested that I please load solids in the magazine under the A-Frame for follow up shots if needed. I complied with his wishes, although with some misgivings.
We were in buffalo every day and on Day 5 the magic happened. We closed on a pair of dagga boys late in the afternoon after tracking from shortly after first light. I put the A-Frame through the lungs of the bull on the right and they took off in a cloud of dust. Thankfully going in opposite directions. After a breather we began the follow up. Straight into the head-high grass. Fun. But both the PH and I were happy with my shot, he had seen the bullet impact through his binocs. We were pushing through the grass when the outline of the buff materialized. Still standing, head hanging. All I could see in that instant was a head and neck, somewhat broadside, so I shot him right through the neck at the base of the skull. Happily he crumpled right there, but I gave him another for insurance.
The A-Frame had performed flawlessly, mushrooming perfectly and coming to rest under the hide on the far side. The 2 DGS’s not so much. The one in the neck had in fact broken his neck, but all that was left were smallish pieces. The insurance bullet had the front ripped off and all the lead squeezed out of the jacket. All that was left was the back half of the jacket.
Below is a pic of the bullets. The 300 grain A-Frame still weighs 289 grains. The DGS jacket weighs 78 grains, but in fairness it is full is meat and blood so a tad lighter than that
So, please don’t be a dummy like me and take DGS bullets to Africa, even if you think you’ll just be shooting Grysbok and Oribi. It could cost you your life and that’s no joke.

 

[Tokoloshe Safaris]

The customer is not always right however the customer should always be put first.

Another way to put it, Treat every customer as if they are your online y customer.

 

[IdaRam]

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

A couple years ago I went to Mozambique hunting buffalo and plains game. I planned to use A-Frames for everything except the tiny stuff, which I took some Hornady DGS for, figuring they would be fine for just poking little holes in little animals. I wasn’t real excited about taking DGS bullets as my solids, but that’s what I had and bullet options were damn near non-existent at the time. The rifle is a .375 H&H that I’m very comfortable with and I’ve taken on every trip to Africa.
Due to Covid and the dust up going on in northern Moz & Tanzania at the time, the PH I had planned the hunt with was not allowed to transit from Zim into Mozambique for the hunt so I hunted with a different PH who I’ve not hunted with before. No problem, he was a good PH and we had a great hunt together. However, he did throw me an unanticipated curve ball and requested that I please load solids in the magazine under the A-Frame for follow up shots if needed. I complied with his wishes, although with some misgivings.
We were in buffalo every day and on Day 5 the magic happened. We closed on a pair of dagga boys late in the afternoon after tracking from shortly after first light. I put the A-Frame through the lungs of the bull on the right and they took off in a cloud of dust. Thankfully going in opposite directions. After a breather we began the follow up. Straight into the head-high grass. Fun. But both the PH and I were happy with my shot, he had seen the bullet impact through his binocs. We were pushing through the grass when the outline of the buff materialized. Still standing, head hanging. All I could see in that instant was a head and neck, somewhat broadside, so I shot him right through the neck at the base of the skull. Happily he crumpled right there, but I gave him another for insurance.
The A-Frame had performed flawlessly, mushrooming perfectly and coming to rest under the hide on the far side. The 2 DGS’s not so much. The one in the neck had in fact broken his neck, but all that was left were smallish pieces. The insurance bullet had the front ripped off and all the lead squeezed out of the jacket. All that was left was the back half of the jacket.
Below is a pic of the bullets. The 300 grain A-Frame still weighs 289 grains. The DGS jacket weighs 78 grains, but in fairness it is full is meat and blood so a tad lighter than that
So, please don’t be a dummy like me and take DGS bullets to Africa, even if you think you’ll just be shooting Grysbok and Oribi. It could cost you your life and that’s no joke.
View attachment 515705

But what of the latest Hornady DGX and DGX. New data anyone? On a separate thread there are lots of positive comments.

 

[IdaRam]

But what of the latest Hornady DGX and DGX. New data anyone? On a separate thread there are lots of positive comments.

The pictures I’ve seen of the new bonded DGX actually look pretty good. Nice mushrooms and no ripping the fronts off anymore, so maybe Hornady has finally successfully addressed customers concerns and complaints. I sure hope so. I still don’t think they’ve done anything with the DGS? For folks shooting factory ammo, especially out of double rifles it sure would be helpful to have Hornady making stuff that performs.
Too many other better options in my opinion for handloaders. Paper and steel for me with Hornady’s if I use them at all. And I admit, some of that is due to Hornady’s non-response to legit concerns raised by a lot of their customers.

 

[Hunter4752001]

I was under the impression, but don't know for sure, that Hornady had redesigned the DGS range of projectiles specifically due to these issues. @IdaRam was your experience with the new or old style?

I have a few boxes of the old style 500g .458 projectiles which I'm relegating to practice only. Having said that, I'm yet to be convinced that a solid is needed given the quality of A-Frames and some of the mono-metal designs.

 

[Desperatezulu]

Too many other better options in my opinion for handloaders. Paper and steel for me with Hornady’s if I use them at all.

Agree wholeheartedly with this! I have found most Hornady components to be inferior from brass to bullets to dies. The possible exception being Interbond bullets but there are more black rhinos in SA these days than Interbonds.

Putting it differently, how many people think any Hornady offerings are better than the competition?
(Especially for hunting applications - maybe their target stuff is great, I wouldn't know)

Hunting and reloading are enjoyable leisure activities for me, I therefore choose to use components I believe are quality and give me pleasure in their usage, as well as performing to a high standard.
Failing bullets, short-lived brass and imprecise dies fall outside that group.

 

[Foxi]

DGX is fine for deer, wouldn't use them for elk.

ive used them for some buffs .
It has worked always fine.
No reason for me to change.
"he who heels is right" said my doctor