Why avoid Hornady DG bullets and ammunition?

[Royal27]

Thus making them shine when you are shooting around 150 yards. You seems to be confusing muzzle velocity with impact velocity.

Makes sense now. All you have to do is shoot your buff at 150-200 yards and you have the perfect load, straight from the Hornady factory.

You seem to be doing the misunderstanding here, meaning, in what world is 150 yards an average range for African DG?

 

[gizmo]

I believe you mean DGX...the GMX is a mono metal that thrives on velocity. And loading them at 2400 would make them ideal for slightly longer ranges......it's the shooter that must decide if they are been used at their optimal impact velocity not the manufacturer. Because Barnes bullets are loaded in 270 does that put them at fault when someone shoots them at 600 yards? The other thing to consider is that driving the DGX at high velocity doesn't make it ineffective, it just makes it predictable that you are going to experience high fragmentation inside the animal. Drive an Accubond LR at high velocity and expect the same issues. Is that Nosler's fault if you choose to shot a moose at 15 yards?

Which makes the DGX extremely ineffective as they fragment all to hell and fail to penetrate. 5 inches of penetration is pathetic performance from a DG round. They know it yet they still only use those in their "superformance" calibers like 375&416 Ruger. The latter of which I own and hunted lion and buff with which is exactly how I have first hand experience of what kind of crap they are.
The point is that's the only offering. It's not like they say, "these aren't designed for this". Quite the opposite, they claim absolute reliability in any situation which is complete BS. It's not like Nosler says hey shoot moose with these at 15 yards or manufacturers say hey use an accubond at a mile. Hornady does though, they say these are the greatest most reliable bullets for DG hunting which is crap. You by your statement admit they aren't worth two squirts of cold duck shit when pushed at higher velocities.
That would be like buying a car for strictly highway use knowing that it will blow up on the highway then turning around and saying well it's exactly the car I needed even though it wasn't designed for the way you use it. I can garauntee you if you didn't know any better you'd be pretty pissed at the salesman who sold you on it knowing that the intended purpose would cause disasterous results.

 

[gizmo]

Makes sense now. All you have to do is shoot your buff at 150-200 yards and you have the perfect load, straight from the Hornady factory.

You seem to be doing the misunderstanding here, meaning, in what world is 150 yards an average range for African DG?

In what world does anyone shoot DG at 150 yards?????? If one likes to shoot DG 150 yards out from the bakkie they need to put their purse down, man up, and hunt the animal the way God intended DG to be hunted.
I guess if one was mobility impaired or something but otherwise that's animal shooting not DG hunting.

 

[gizmo]

Hell the places I've hunted DG in Africa you couldn't see 150 yards through the brush if your life depended on it.

 

[sheephunterab]

Makes sense now. All you have to do is shoot your buff at 150-200 yards and you have the perfect load, straight from the Hornady factory.

You seem to be doing the misunderstanding here, meaning, in what world is 150 yards an average range for African DG?

If where you hunt the average shot is much closer then common sense would dictate that you'd look at other bullet options. I'm still not certain how this is Hornady's fault. Out of a short barreled rifle the velocity on that load could easily make it ideal at 100 or less yards. Should Hornady put a warning label on it or should shooters be smart enough to know how it's going to perform from their particular rifle? At one time we didn't need a warning label on coffee cups that coffee was hot and we didn't need a label to know that a kid could drown in a 5 gallon bucket. Is this where we've got to with ammunition?

 

[Royal27]

In what world does anyone shoot DG at 150 yards?????? If one likes to shoot DG 150 yards out from the bakkie they need to put their purse down, man up, and hunt the animal the way God intended DG to be hunted.
I guess if one was mobility impaired or something but otherwise that's animal shooting not DG hunting.

At least now you know the problem on your lion. Andri screwed up and got you too close!

Next time don't forget to back it up a bit.

 

[Red Leg]

I believe you mean DGX...the GMX is a mono metal that thrives on velocity. And loading them at 2400 would make them ideal for slightly longer ranges......it's the shooter that must decide if they are been used at their optimal impact velocity not the manufacturer. Because Barnes bullets are loaded in 270 does that put them at fault when someone shoots them at 600 yards? The other thing to consider is that driving the DGX at high velocity doesn't make it ineffective, it just makes it predictable that you are going to experience high fragmentation inside the animal. Drive an Accubond LR at high velocity and expect the same issues. Is that Nosler's fault if you choose to shot a moose at 15 yards?

You caught my typo and congratulations. I don't write about Hornady very much, because I don't think about them very much.

With regard to velocity, your argument is moving from the sublime to the specious - or maybe just argumentive. Normally usually most of the time, MV is the starting comparison standard for bullet performance. I suppose that is because most shooters don't tailor loads for specific impact ranges. You obviously know that as well, but then again, maybe not - perhaps you carry a bandoleer into the jess with optimal 50/100/150/ and 200 meter loads, all striking within the same velocity envelope. But of course you don't. In Velo's case, assuming your point of few, then the DGX is only useful from 1850 - 1950 FPS - assuming Velo didn't shoot his buff off the muzzle (and forgive me Velo for appropriating anything about your experience with your buff!). Hornady is loading a mid 20th century cup SP too fast for the critical work it is likely to be asked to do within the most likely employment ranges for the load - roughly 5 feet to 150 meters.

 

[IdaRam]

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.

Yes, it certainly is. You are now going to argue that Hornady loads it's Dangerous Game ammo for shots of 150 yards or greater and the bullets are predictably likely to have dimished performance at close range?
Ummm, I see no point at which our points of view may intersect. But I do appreciate your tenacity!

 

[sheephunterab]

With regard to velocity, your argument is moving from the sublime to the specious - or maybe just argumentive. Normally usually most of the time, MV is the starting comparison standard for bullet performance.

Muzzle velocity means squat in terminal performance...it's all about impact velocity. Stray outside of the performance envelope and don't expect optimal performance. That doesn't mean failure by any means but.....................

 

[gizmo]

 

[sheephunterab]

Yes, it certainly is. You are now going to argue that Hornady loads it's Dangerous Game ammo for shots of 150 yards or greater and the bullets are predictably likely to have dimished performance at close range?
Ummm, I see no point at which our points of view may intersect. But I do appreciate your tenacity!

No I'm saying Hornady published the maximum velocity from that load under optimal conditions from a 24" barrel. The shooter needs to decide where their rifle fits in and then decide if the bullet they chose will be right or wrong.

 

[Royal27]

If where you hunt the average shot is much closer then common sense would dictate that you'd look at other bullet options. I'm still not certain how this is Hornady's fault. Out of a short barreled rifle the velocity on that load could easily make it ideal at 100 or less yards. Should Hornady put a warning label on it or should shooters be smart enough to know how it's going to perform from their particular rifle? At one time we didn't need a warning label on coffee cups that coffee was hot and we didn't need a label to know that a kid could drown in a 5 gallon bucket. Is this where we've got to with ammunition?

I'd be happy simply with them not misrepresenting to customers and trying to pretend they are something they aren't. I certainly don't need a label. I'm smart enough not to use Hornady on DG.

 

[Red Leg]

Muzzle velocity means squat in terminal performance...it's all about impact velocity. Stray outside of the performance envelope and don't expect optimal performance. That doesn't mean failure by any means but.....................

Of course it does - if the MV creates a likely impact performance window measured by meters to target and impact velocities within that likely use window.

 

[sheephunterab]

I'm not certain what the misrepresentation is.

 

[sheephunterab]

Of course it does - if the MV creates a likely impact performance window measured by meters to target and impact velocities within that likely use window.

So we agree that impact velocity is all that matters when predicting terminal performance of a given bullet and it's important to select your bullet for the expected conditions/ranges and not be surprised if the bullet doesn't offer optimal performance if we stray outside that optimal impact velocity range....perfect.....I'm glad we cleared that up

 

[Red Leg]

Nope. Merely proved my point with respect to a specious argument and discussion. I am glad we cleared that up.

 

[sheephunterab]

Nope. Merely proved my point with respect to a specious argument and discussion. I am glad we cleared that up.

On that point I can definitely agree...thanks for the entertainment today gentlemen...it made being stuck in the office slightly less boring!

 

[CTDolan]

Goodness...this post has some serious legs!

 

[Wheels]

The DGX is designed to shed weight..

........ reason why people would use a more frangible bullets like the DGX.

http://www.hornady.com/store/DGX

"The DGX® bullet incorporates our patented InterLock® feature that locks the core and jacket together, improving retained weight of the expanded bullet"


You state that the DGX is designed to shed weight and is a frangible bullet. Hornady's website states that the core and jacket lock together to improve retained weight.

You are probably right. The DGX seems designed to shed weight. Unfortunately Hornady wants it to hold together and retain weight. That seems to be where the problem lies.

 

[sheephunterab]

It does improve it over a traditional cup and core...sheesh read what's written! It never claimed 100%. Works the same as their Interlock vs a bullet like the SST. The higher the impact velocity, the more weight shed. No real news here.