Hornady DGX not performing......

[Martin Snyman]

This is what we found in the buffalo after the client gave it a “perfect shot” with his 458Win… needless to say his perfect shot was not as fatal as we hoped due to very bad bullet performance. It looked like the bullet just broke up after impact and had very little penetration. I have used the Hornady DGS before to great success but looks as if the softs are just too soft for the job.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

An all too common result unfortunately.

 

[Royal27]

Looks about right. ..

And Martin, I've seen examples of DGS falling apart too....

 

[IdaRam]

+1 sadly enough. We are developing a pretty extensive database of DGX bullet fails Thank you Martin for sharing this information with the rest of us.

The bottom bullet in this pic is a .416 cal 400 gr recovered from a zebra.

 

[LivingTheDream]

I have had good luck with the solids, and though I haven't experienced the failure of DGX they scare me. Someone is going to make a soft 416 Ruger and mass produced it and make a fortune.

 

[slam8031]

In laymen's terms, what is the issue that is causing failure? I have used interlocks for 20 years on whitetail with great success. I have used hand load A frames only, however, in Africa with great success.

 

[Jono Joseph]

We have had them preform badly too from 375H&H to 500NE
Not what you want to see from a premium brand

 

[Mekaniks]

In laymen's terms, what is the issue that is causing failure? I have used interlocks for 20 years on whitetail with great success. I have used hand load A frames only, however, in Africa with great success.

Bullet speed x hard bones = bullet fragmentation. IMO and I am definitely not an expert, these bullets have a much higher rate of fragmentation when muzzle velocity is above 2600 and they contact something hard at close range (under 100 yards) like large African animals front shoulders.

Many folks believe that the DGS have a manufacturing flaw of some kind... Possibly, but almost every story we have heard in the last few years (and that's quite a few) has included rifles with standard muzzle velocities of 2800 or more.
I cannot remember seeing a single thread that started with "I had a DGS failure in my 9.3x62 and 404 Jeff ".....
My 2c for what it's worth...

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Bullet speed x hard bones = bullet fragmentation. IMO and I am definitely not an expert, these bullets have a much higher rate of fragmentation when muzzle velocity is above 2600 and they contact something hard at close range (under 100 yards) like large African animals front shoulders.

Many folks believe that the DGS have a manufacturing flaw of some kind... Possibly, but almost every story we have heard in the last few years (and that's quite a few) has included rifles with standard muzzle velocities of 2800 or more.
I cannot remember seeing a single thread that started with "I had a DGS failure in my 9.3x62 and 404 Jeff ".....
My 2c for what it's worth...

The DGX in the original post was fired from a .458Win. The lightest version of the DGX for that caliber is a 480gr pill. A reasonable guess is even if that lighter bullet were used in this case, the max velocity would be below 2300fps. Certainly nowhere close to 2600fps.

It may be splitting hairs a bit. But I don't think of the DGX as having a manufacturing flaw, I believe it is a design or technology issue. Swift and North Fork have the copper/lead bonding technology figured out. I don't think Hornady has. I have never seen a picture of an A-Frame or NF Bonded Core that looked like the bullet in the OP. Whereas I have seen all sort of pics of the DGX like this or worse.

 

[Mekaniks]

The DGX in the original post was fired from a .458Win. The lightest version of the DGX for that caliber is a 480gr pill. A reasonable guess is even if that lighter bullet were used in this case, the max velocity would be below 2300fps. Certainly nowhere close to 2600fps.

It may be splitting hairs a bit. But I don't think of the DGX as having a manufacturing flaw, I believe it is a design or technology issue. Swift and North Fork have the copper/lead bonding technology figured out. I don't think Hornady has. I have never seen a picture of an A-Frame or NF Bonded Core that looked like the bullet in the OP. Whereas I have seen all sort of pics of the DGX like this or worse.

Yes Phil good point. The math still holds true. Its really about the amount of energy applied to the bullet when it impacts. If the bullet construction can't handle the energy applied at impact the bullet going to come apart. A larger (heavier and larger diameter) going slower can still have as much or more impact energy than a smaller bullet going faster.

 

[kesha]

I had bad experience as well with Hornady ammo on Safaris as well very poor weight retention on 270 gr. Interlock bullets as was recommended by Hornady for my hunt . Terrible so now I use Barnes.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

If the bullet construction can't handle the energy applied at impact the bullet going to come apart.

Yes, I think this is the crux of the problem. The evidence against the DGX is empirical, but there's just too much of it out there that says the construction of the DGX is not reliable.

The real question that I think everyone should ask themselves is why risk it? Particularly if you're a hand loader, the world is you oyster with bullet selection for DG now. You're going on a DG hunt that runs around $10K or higher. It's a DG hunt, as in you or your PH can get hurt by a wounded animal. We, myself included, spend a terrible amount of time discussing and cussing over the best rifles and/or calibers to use in hunting. Shouldn't we put at least as much if not more emphasis on the bullets we're using? After all the rifle is out of the game once the shot is fired, it's the bullet that has to do the heavy lifting at that point.

Now if you shoot factory ammo, bullet selection is more limited. However look at what is available from Swift now in DG calibers:

http://www.midwayusa.com/s?targetLocation=/_/N-690+4294967006?Np=2&Nr=AND%28p_visible%3A1%2Ccustomertypeid%3A1%29&Nrpp=24&Ns=p_metric_sales_velocity%7C1&Ntpc=1&Ntpr=1&userItemsPerPage=48

And Barnes:

http://www.midwayusa.com/s?targetLocation=/_/N-0+4294966051?Np=2&Nr=AND%28p_visible%3A1%2Ccustomertypeid%3A1%29&Nrpp=48&Ntpc=1&Ntpr=1&Ntt=tsx+ammunition&userItemsPerPage=48

You may have to expand the view to see all the calibers available.

 

[Foxi]

This is what we found in the buffalo after the client gave it a “perfect shot” with his 458Win… needless to say his perfect shot was not as fatal as we hoped due to very bad bullet performance. It looked like the bullet just broke up after impact and had very little penetration. I have used the Hornady DGS before to great success but looks as if the softs are just too soft for the job. View attachment 181647

Dung.
Send this pic to Hornady and their factory should bring a better work.
And tell them that AfricaHunting.com is a multiplicator for their business.
I was happy with my DGX .
But the discussions are to often about the quality of Hornady bullets for Dangerous Game.
And always Hornady DGX
I don't understand Ivan Carter (big sponsored by H.) that he doesn't kick the responsible ingeneers in the ........

Foxi

 

[slam8031]

Those explanations make sense! Thanks Mekaniks and Phil!

 

[Mekaniks]

Yes, I think this is the crux of the problem. The evidence against the DGX is empirical, but there's just too much of it out there that says the construction of the DGX is not reliable.

The real question that I think everyone should ask themselves is why risk it? Particularly if you're a hand loader, the world is you oyster with bullet selection for DG now. You're going on a DG hunt that runs around $10K or higher. It's a DG hunt, as in you or your PH can get hurt by a wounded animal. We, myself included, spend a terrible amount of time discussing and cussing over the best rifles and/or calibers to use in hunting. Shouldn't we put at least as much if not more emphasis on the bullets we're using? After all the rifle is out of the game once the shot is fired, it's the bullet that has to do the heavy lifting at that point.

Now if you shoot factory ammo, bullet selection is more limited. However look at what is available from Swift now in DG calibers:

http://www.midwayusa.com/s?targetLocation=/_/N-690+4294967006?Np=2&Nr=AND%28p_visible%3A1%2Ccustomertypeid%3A1%29&Nrpp=24&Ns=p_metric_sales_velocity%7C1&Ntpc=1&Ntpr=1&userItemsPerPage=48

And Barnes:

http://www.midwayusa.com/s?targetLocation=/_/N-0+4294966051?Np=2&Nr=AND%28p_visible%3A1%2Ccustomertypeid%3A1%29&Nrpp=48&Ntpc=1&Ntpr=1&Ntt=tsx+ammunition&userItemsPerPage=48

You may have to expand the view to see all the calibers available.

This is excellent Phil. What we as hunters need to understand is that bullets are designed to preform differently. As EXAMPLE, Barnes TSX and Nosler Partitions are very different bullets and designed to preform very differently under different conditions. IMO Both are excellent bullets when used under the conditions for which they are designed. But both also experience failures when they are used in applications they are not designed for.
IMO when Hornaday bullets are used in the application and optimum thresholds for which they designed, they preform very well. If impact energy is pushed, they it appears they will come apart. I personally would not take that chance. And, I also would not take the chance with with a TSX bullet in a rifle with a low impact energy either.
Use bullets that are designed to preform based on what the specific application is and do not stretch those limits on the upper or lower end of the design.

 

[Velo Dog]

Hunters / Rifle Enthusiasts,

HORNADY:
I took the Buffalo in my avatar with the Hornady 480 gr DGX and DGS, one from each barrel of my .450 No2 NE.
The recovered DGX is shown in my media photos.
It worked very well from the buff's point of view.
However ...... my regulating load (very accurate for a double) was only 2050 fps muzzle velocity, from 28" barrels.
The DGS was not recovered.

The DGX is jacketed in mild steel.
But sadly, the ogive jacket is formed much thinner than it is on the shank.
The steel needs to be same thickness all the way from the base of this bullet, to the excellent shaped flat tip.
Furthermore, the lead alloy core needs to be bonded to the steel jacket.

WOODLEIGH:
For double rifles, the Woodleigh bonded core bullet is usually preferable (surprisingly, Woodleighs were noticeably less accurate than Hornady, in my particular .450 double).
If one must use the DGX, as others here have already said, I caution you to keep the velocity down.

SWIFT:
In bolt action and single shot rifles for heavy game like Buffalo, from what I have learned by befriending PHs and fellow clients alike, is that the Swift A-Frame is the best of the best premium bonded soft nose bullet.
There are others that are about as good but none better, especially when one also considers how wide spread available the A-Frame is now.

Stay on that front sight!
Velo Dog.

 

[bassasdaindia]

Not an unfamiliar sight with the DGX , it's a bullet I wouldn't use either.

I would however use the DGS the solid .

 

[008]

I've started researching this a bit as I'm about to get a 9.3x74R. The factory options for that round are very limited with Hornady and Federal being the most widely available it seems. What do folks think of the Federal product in a double? TNA

 

[Mekaniks]

I believe @AKSloper71 took his 9.3x74r to Namibia last year. I don't remember what bullets he used and can't find the thread, but I bet he has some good info.

 

[Shootist43]

This is what we found in the buffalo after the client gave it a “perfect shot” with his 458Win… needless to say his perfect shot was not as fatal as we hoped due to very bad bullet performance. It looked like the bullet just broke up after impact and had very little penetration. I have used the Hornady DGS before to great success but looks as if the softs are just too soft for the job. View attachment 181647

Please repost your experience with Hornady's DGX (perhaps with a little bit more information) on AH's new thread titled Bullet Performance Data Base. The goal of that thread is to get all reports both good and bad into one location. Hopefully in the future we will be able to access that database on a caliber specific basis. Thanks