Why avoid Hornady DG bullets and ammunition?

[One Day...]

And what if Ford had spent several years saying they had never heard of the problem and you knew multiple people who had contacted Ford and been told the same thing - we checked, no problem, our gas tanks are great!
Then one day they make a big announcement that even though they have great gas tanks that have never failed, they chose to redesign them anyway. In fact, once public they tell people they've been selling the new tanks for quite a while without telling anyone .
And, from what you can tell it's likely that the new process costs more money but they are selling at the same cost as before. Hmm....
How much confidence would you have in Ford at that point ?

In 1887, then French Congressman Clemenceau stated: "war is something too important to be trusted to the military." In 1917, when he became Premier of France at a time when Germany came close to win WWI, he applied his own principle and took direct control of the war, turning it around and ultimately winning WWI with the help of America.

Time and again it seems that communication with customers is something too important to be trusted to marketeers. Do you guys remember the H&K infamous brochure showing a pistol mag loaded with bullets inserted backward?

Yeah, Hornady clearly mishandled the DGX situation. My advise to them would have been along the lines, as soon as reports of DGX issues emerged, to come out with: "We have discovered that some customers are loading the DGX for faster velocities than we designed them for. This causes them to over expand. To fix this issue we are now bonding them. Thank you for your continued business as we adapt to our customers' use of our products."

Just as H&K chose to laugh about their brochure screw up (I mean, seriously, what else could they do, right?), I agree that Hornady should have taken immediate ownership of the situation. If anything else, that would have allowed them to at least control the narrative...

End result: they have actually fixed the issue, but 40 years from now someone will still post about that dang unreliable DGX. Just like you still hear today, 50 years later, about the unreliability of the .458 Win (despite it truly mirroring with modern ammo the .450 NE ballistics that everyone have said are fine for over 100 years...)

As stated in another thread about the Sabatti doubles: "one never get a second chance to make a first impression"...

 

[Royal27]

We have discovered that some customers are loading the DGX for faster velocities than we designed them for.

Problem with that statement is that Hornady did the loading.....

I don't know that I've ever seen a complaint about a handloaded DGX. It has always been factory ammunition. Likely because many more handloaders use premium bullets, as opposed to Hornady .

As stated in another thread about the Sabatti doubles, "one never get a second chance to make a first impression"...

Agree.

Reputations take a long time to build, and not very long at all to tear down, and especially true when a person or company denies that an issue even exists.

 

[One Day...]

Problem with that statement is that Hornady did the loading.....
I don't know that I've ever seen a complaint about a handloaded DGX. It has always been factory ammunition. Likely because many more handloaders use premium bullets, as opposed to Hornady .

Interesting. Thanks for the clarification Royal. I was under the impression that factory ammo users were generally happy with it and that the DGX failures were experienced on hand loads in the days generally predating the somewhat recent availability of all these new bullets... I do not pretend to know one way or the other. Goes to show the paucity of data in these discussions... Velocity could still be the driving issue if they loaded the same bullets designed for Nitro Express speeds at modern magnum speeds, but that would indeed make Hornady's handling of the situation even poorer if these were their own loads...

 

[TTundra]

Not much of a report - they weren't my animals. The eland was shot quartering away the .416 rigby bullet impacted the second rib and disintegrated without penetrating the lungs. I have a picture of the bullet somewhere but not easily available. It looks like scrap metal. I finished the buffalo just 2 hours before my flight left, so I didn't even accompany it to the skinning shed.
If i may ask you a question, if you had heard one or two or even three negative reports about a future outfitter, would you change? You have multiple reports here, decide for yourself. Carpe diem. And again, hope your hunts go flawlessly

@K-man . Great question to ask. I'll preface by saying I work in development in the Fishing-Hunting-Marine industry (no, not for any gun or ammo manufacturers). Why I ask for the specifics is to make the best determination possible based on evidence, to then determine the percentage of factory failures.

Example. I design rods for sport fishing, many that are used in big game fishing and tournaments. Failures of the product are horrid to hear about let alone see, but when they do happen, I need to find out why so it can be corrected. Now, sometimes failures are a flaw in production, it absolutely happens, while some are a design flaw, that again absolutely happens. However, the vast majority of reported failures that I see are actually do to other circumstances.

One very recent is that we received about 5% of one rod style back, broken in the same area, all had been used to a light degree. Now, one could easily jump in and say rod "X" is bad, failed in the field, happens XX times, never buy again. The truth is though, upon looking into this rod, one (larger) customer had sold most of these 'broken' rods. While looking into this customer, I found out that the shipping method used to ship these rods from the DC to the stores involved downpacking and 'making' master cartons. These makeshift cartons allowed the tip (actually about 12" from the tip) to be exposed to 'whatever' during shipping. For those whom might not know, a small nick in the blank is all thats needed for a rod to 'explode' at the opportune moment. Its amazing what a rod can withstand if its used in the manner in which it was designed for....but throw in a curve ball like a nick, scratch, tear, it spells disaster.

Another fishing example...Ive seen certain styles of rods for warranty replacement that have a catastrophic seat failure that I can see no reason for. Well, once you dive in you see that someone caught a goliath grouper in a fast taper 6-12lb rod. Can that rod do it? Depending on the angler, reel, line, drag, etc, absolutely is possible. But not what you want to land one one. You might think thats a one off....but you'd be surprised at how often we hear stories like that, especially when it is landed successfully.

One last example...I had a pack that had been sold for 2 years without issue. Then, I received notice that there was an issue with the hip belt and buckle. The buckle would not stay tight once tension was applied. Well, that defeats the purpose of a hip belt... So, after examining the stock, it was easy to see that the buckle was assembled the wrong way so that the glide inserts could not put tension on the webbing. Simple fix, but "Why" did it happen? Trace it back to find out it was a new worker that had not assembled that product before. A manufacture defect yes, but the need to find out why was essential for correction.


Long winded yes, but believe me these are cliff notes to the full dive into issues. My point being, I needed to know why the product failed, and to do so, I needed to trace it back and know the specifics of the action. Going back to the first broken rod issue....It was no error to how it was being fished, rather something that happened before that damaged the product. The second rad issue...was actually was happened during the fishing. Why I want to see photos of the recovered bullets and hear and read the reports is to really see what is happening and know why it is happening....So I can make my own judgment. Now play economy of scale into this and how much Hornady sells vs. "XX"....I dont know that figure but I expect Hornady sells alot.

Always going to have a certain failure rate in any mass production, but some of those chalked up to failure are really another issue. Did the product fail to perform as intended? Was it loaded wrong to spec? Was shot placement poor? Was it poor design? Not marketed correctly? How many are truly honest in explaining the situation or even know what really happened?

I just want to know....probably as most reading this thread but not commenting.

 

[Witold Krzyżanowski]

Interesting. Thanks for the clarification Royal. I was under the impression that factory ammo users were generally happy with it and that the DGX failures were experienced on hand loads in the days generally predating the somewhat recent availability of all these new bullets... I do not pretend to know one way or the other. Goes to show the paucity of data in these discussions... Velocity could still be the driving issue if they loaded the same bullets designed for Nitro Express speeds at modern magnum speeds, but that would indeed make Hornady's handling of the situation even poorer if these were their own loads...

I use factory ammo from Hornady and maybe that's why not have any problems.

 

[One Day...]

@K-man . Great question to ask. I'll preface by saying I work in development in the Fishing-Hunting-Marine industry (no, not for any gun or ammo manufacturers). Why I ask for the specifics is to make the best determination possible based on evidence, to then determine the percentage of factory failures.

Example. I design rods for sport fishing, many that are used in big game fishing and tournaments. Failures of the product are horrid to hear about let alone see, but when they do happen, I need to find out why so it can be corrected. Now, sometimes failures are a flaw in production, it absolutely happens, while some are a design flaw, that again absolutely happens. However, the vast majority of reported failures that I see are actually do to other circumstances.

One very recent is that we received about 5% of one rod style back, broken in the same area, all had been used to a light degree. Now, one could easily jump in and say rod "X" is bad, failed in the field, happens XX times, never buy again. The truth is though, upon looking into this rod, one (larger) customer had sold most of these 'broken' rods. While looking into this customer, I found out that the shipping method used to ship these rods from the DC to the stores involved downpacking and 'making' master cartons. These makeshift cartons allowed the tip (actually about 12" from the tip) to be exposed to 'whatever' during shipping. For those whom might not know, a small nick in the blank is all thats needed for a rod to 'explode' at the opportune moment. Its amazing what a rod can withstand if its used in the manner in which it was designed for....but throw in a curve ball like a nick, scratch, tear, it spells disaster.

Another fishing example...Ive seen certain styles of rods for warranty replacement that have a catastrophic seat failure that I can see no reason for. Well, once you dive in you see that someone caught a goliath grouper in a fast taper 6-12lb rod. Can that rod do it? Depending on the angler, reel, line, drag, etc, absolutely is possible. But not what you want to land one one. You might think thats a one off....but you'd be surprised at how often we hear stories like that, especially when it is landed successfully.

One last example...I had a pack that had been sold for 2 years without issue. Then, I received notice that there was an issue with the hip belt and buckle. The buckle would not stay tight once tension was applied. Well, that defeats the purpose of a hip belt... So, after examining the stock, it was easy to see that the buckle was assembled the wrong way so that the glide inserts could not put tension on the webbing. Simple fix, but "Why" did it happen? Trace it back to find out it was a new worker that had not assembled that product before. A manufacture defect yes, but the need to find out why was essential for correction.


Long winded yes, but believe me these are cliff notes to the full dive into issues. My point being, I needed to know why the product failed, and to do so, I needed to trace it back and know the specifics of the action. Going back to the first broken rod issue....It was no error to how it was being fished, rather something that happened before that damaged the product. The second rad issue...was actually was happened during the fishing. Why I want to see photos of the recovered bullets and hear and read the reports is to really see what is happening and know why it is happening....So I can make my own judgment. Now play economy of scale into this and how much Hornady sells vs. "XX"....I dont know that figure but I expect Hornady sells alot.

Always going to have a certain failure rate in any mass production, but some of those chalked up to failure are really another issue. Did the product fail to perform as intended? Was it loaded wrong to spec? Was shot placement poor? Was it poor design? Not marketed correctly? How many are truly honest in explaining the situation or even know what really happened?

I just want to know....probably as most reading this thread but not commenting.

Awesome post. Could not have explained it better. Great contribution TTundra.

 

[Ygg]

Wow it must be St. PADDYS day.

I appreciate the brilliant critique. Very insightful.
My point was anyone can make a case for anything but at the end of the day you usually stick with what works for you and find reasons to support that conclusion. Human Nature 101. Perhaps I should have tossed slow and underhand?

 

[Graham Hunter]

I appreciate the brilliant critique. Very insightful.
My point was anyone can make a case for anything but at the end of the day you usually stick with what works for you and find reasons to support that conclusion. Human Nature 101. Perhaps I should have tossed slow and underhand?

Yep you're funny on so many levels.

 

[Ygg]

Yep you're funny on so many levels.

So true. Laughing at me or laughing with me either way its Ok by me. As long as its fun.
If you were here Sir I would buy you a beer, ( as a belated St. Paddy's Day offering ), and wish you well.

 

[Witold Krzyżanowski]

I change my mind about ammunition from Hornady.
From the purchased ammunition in 9,3x62 with bullet SP it is imposible to hit the target. I dont remember when I used such bad ammunition.
This is the ammunitin I buy last week.

 

[IvW]

The original question was "why avoid Hornady DG bullets and ammunition"
The short answer is because they are crap....

 

[TTundra]

I change my mind about ammunition from Hornady.
From the purchased ammunition in 9,3x62 with bullet SP it is imposible to hit the target. I dont remember when I used such bad ammunition.
This is the ammunitin I buy last week.

Wit,

Every barrel has loads it shoots well amd others it doesnt. If a factory load does not shoot well you simply need to try others or reload. This I have found to be true for factory ammo from Hornady, Federal, Nosler, etc. Also why I reload for certain rifles as they needed or warranted a personalized load.

Regardless if you like or dislike the Hornady dangerous game loads....factory loads are not universal and some shoot great in one rifle amd miss the plate in others.

 

[Witold Krzyżanowski]

Wit,

Every barrel has loads it shoots well amd others it doesnt. If a factory load does not shoot well you simply need to try others or reload. This I have found to be true for factory ammo from Hornady, Federal, Nosler, etc. Also why I reload for certain rifles as they needed or warranted a personalized load.

Regardless if you like or dislike the Hornady dangerous game loads....factory loads are not universal and some shoot great in one rifle amd miss the plate in others.

The barrel in my rifle is Lothar Walter. My be that's the reason.
When I use ammunition from NORMA or RWS everything is fine.

 

[Ray B]

In 1917, when he became Premier of France at a time when Germany came close to win WWI, he took direct control of the war, turning it around and ultimately winning WWI with the help of America.

.

If you are implying that France had anything to do with winning the Great War, you need to stop buying into that revisionist BS. France not only was a leading cause in their loss but their actions and Woodrow Wilsons failing health were the direct cause of WWII.

 

[Graham Hunter]

I change my mind about ammunition from Hornady.
From the purchased ammunition in 9,3x62 with bullet SP it is imposible to hit the target. I dont remember when I used such bad ammunition.
This is the ammunitin I buy last week.

I have shot the Hornady ammunition in my CZ and it was very accurate. But this rifle shoots everything well. I would not use Hornady for DG but it's ok for PG.

 

[IvW]

The barrel in my rifle is Lothar Walter. My be that's the reason.
When I use ammunition from NORMA or RWS everything is fine.

The only difference is quality....

 

[Witold Krzyżanowski]

The only difference is quality....

I think you're right.

 

[TTundra]

The barrel in my rifle is Lothar Walter. My be that's the reason.
When I use ammunition from NORMA or RWS everything is fine.

Just the load not matching up to your rifle. Some do, some dont. If I find a factory load that shoots great I buy a case in that lot #.

Just need to take personal al bias out and rely on facts. That's why reloaders work by the grain and change powders to fit the rifle and needs.

 

[Red Leg]

If you are implying that France had anything to do with winning the Great War, you need to stop buying into that revisionist BS. France not only was a leading cause in their loss but their actions and Woodrow Wilsons failing health were the direct cause of WWII.

The “Great War” is normally considered to be WWI. And France has everything to do with winning it.

 

[IvW]

Just the load not matching up to your rifle. Some do, some dont. If I find a factory load that shoots great I buy a case in that lot #.

Just need to take personal al bias out and rely on facts. That's why reloaders work by the grain and change powders to fit the rifle and needs.

And if Hornady do group in a specific rifle you still have crap in the front side so what is the point?