Why avoid Hornady DG bullets and ammunition?

[CAustin]

This guy pictured above............

Died when hit by this under performing Hornady DGS round! I realize my sample size is small as to performance of the DGS round (1) but I'm at 100% positive outcome.

When I go into the field my intent is to shoot and kill an animal. If the animal falls over dead the bullet did it's job! I Am not concerned about did it open properly or did it retain it's weight or was the wound channel sufficiently large???? I don't try to calculate the speed of the bullet and how close I was.....to impacting the animal and thus was the bullet recovered and subjected to my opinion as to it working as advertised.
OH I ALREADY HAVE THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE THE ANIMAL is ON THE GROUND AND NOT BREATHING. For me.......yes sir that is the critical data point I'm concerned with. DEAD ANIMAL. Plains game or dangerous game or some poor unsuspecting white tail deer that gets hit by any round I use.....Hornady, Federal........you name it.

MY VIEW.............the DGS round above worked just fine! Was it luck?? Ask the bull elephant pictured.......he would say it was not his lucky day!


Obviously a lot of AH members think Hornady Ammo is not a good product and that one should not risk his hunt on an inferior product.
I am on the other side. As mentioned previously I will keep hunting with Hornady DGX and DGS ammo. When it doesn't work I'll immediately let everyone know!

 

[CAustin]

I was at my taxidermist and he had a client complaining about a barnes bullet that didn't open up on a brown bear. Three of them just went straight through with small woud channel.

Your kidding of course. You don't really mean that a bullet other than a Hornady product failed to perform as advertised? Three Barnes bullets failed to open up properly?? We should start a dung throwing thread to expose this inferior product for what it is. What response has the maker made to the charge!? None you say! They say it worked just fine you say!

Oh that's right the brown bear was at the taxidermist! That implies that he was dead at least I hope he was because.........

If bears poop in the woods imagine what one live bear will do in the taxidermy studio.
But I'm thinking the bear was dead RIGHT!

 

[Paul Edwards]

View attachment 191580
This guy pictured above............
View attachment 191581
Died when hit by this under performing Hornady DGS round! I realize my sample size is small as to performance of the DGS round (1) but I'm at 100% positive outcome.

When I go into the field my intent is to shoot and kill an animal. If the animal falls over dead the bullet did it's job! I Am not concerned about did it open properly or did it retain it's weight or was the wound channel sufficiently large???? I don't try to calculate the speed of the bullet and how close I was.....to impacting the animal and thus was the bullet recovered and subjected to my opinion as to it working as advertised.
OH I ALREADY HAVE THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE THE ANIMAL is ON THE GROUND AND NOT BREATHING. For me.......yes sir that is the critical data point I'm concerned with. DEAD ANIMAL. Plains game or dangerous game or some poor unsuspecting white tail deer that gets hit by any round I use.....Hornady, Federal........you name it.

MY VIEW.............the DGS round above worked just fine! Was it luck?? Ask the bull elephant pictured.......he would say it was not his lucky day!


Obviously a lot of AH members think Hornady Ammo is not a good product and that one should not risk his hunt on an inferior product.
I am on the other side. As mentioned previously I will keep hunting with Hornady DGX and DGS ammo. When it doesn't work I'll immediately let everyone know!

Ok so now I am laughing so hard I can't see straight!

 

[fourfive8]

Comparing Hornady DGX to North Fork Cup Point Solid. Both tested in same media. Use or interpret the info as you wish.

 

[Bert the Turtle]

I was at my taxidermist and he had a client complaining about a barnes bullet that didn't open up on a brown bear. Three of them just went straight through with small woud channel.

Love to know how he determined that they didn't open up if they went straight through. TSX bullets fully expanded generally penetrate deeper and make a relatively narrower wound channel compared with most other bullets. I would not be surprised at all that a fully expanded TSX shot through a bear.

Not saying they didn't fail- no human endeavor is perfect. Just saying I don't understand how one could determine what the bullet did if it was not recovered.

 

[lwaters]

Who knows they all could have been in the gut

 

[Nosler guy]

Love to know how he determined that they didn't open up if they went straight through. TSX bullets fully expanded generally penetrate deeper and make a relatively narrower wound channel compared with most other bullets. I would not be surprised at all that a fully expanded TSX shot through a bear.

Not saying they didn't fail- no human endeavor is perfect. Just saying I don't understand how one could determine what the bullet did if it was not recovered.

We have had lots of Barnes bullets go right through without much expansion - How do we know - when you butcher and do a hunters autopsy and the wound channels / bullet holes are only slightly larger than the bullet diameter - doesn't take an expert to figure out what happened. Yes the animal was dead, but in all cases the recovery involved follow ups and additional shots. We have had several Barnes bullets that acted, just like solids - very little or no expansion - (these were all with smaller calibers .300's and 7mm's)

Used to use Barnes X-bullets exclusively - seems like the newer TSX are not nearly as consistent (in my opinion) - wouldn't catch me using them in a rifle hunting something like brown bear or lion

 

[PeteG]

Comparing Hornady DGX to North Fork Cup Point Solid. Both tested in same media. Use or interpret the info as you wish. View attachment 191648

These are similar to the results i saw when comparing A-Frame's and DGX.
Evidently they do work as @CAustin has shown.
However it does seem that there are a lot of reports indicating failures as shown above. Most successes are not spoken of as much as failures, lending to the overwhelming negative reports as opposed to positive reports on the DGX.
Considering the harsh tests i have done on Peregrines and A Frames, those are the only two options i will use in my 416rigby...
My opinion may not count for much, but in a couple of months i will be in the Luangwa (hopefully) and it'll be Peregrines in the 416 and 300.

The original question by the OP was "why avoid hornady dg bullets and ammunition?"
My personal opinion and answer - in my testing they have not performed comparably to others and that is why i will not use them.

 

[ActionBob]

When it doesn't work I'll immediately let everyone know!

Charlie I think the point a couple of us are trying to make is along the lines of... We certainly hope you can let us know... And not that a new thread gets started including r.i.p. for you or someone in your hunting party.

I can at least understand the love shown for the Ruger Guide Gun, with the limitation of that 416 Ruger cartridge is only readily available in factory loaded ammo from Hornady.. And sorry for my error in assuming Swift had an offering.
Charlie, if Hornady DGS is so great, why didn't you use that in your 375 H&H on your hippo hunt? Was it because there was a better option available? Or because your PH recommended another option, or the very large majority of experienced hunters you asked recommended something other than Hornady?

As for your kills with DGX and DGS 416 Ruger ammo, great shooting! All placed in vitals. As for pictures of bullets you post, I think I saw one that looked like it performed as advertised.

A wise old Panamanian hunter recently told me the hunter gets into position, but when the trigger is about to be pulled, the hunter should be replaced by the marksman and balistician... Now that is not meant to imply hunters all need to be balisticians What I took from it is you use your hunting skills to find the animal and get in place for for the shot, then a good Hunter should have some reasonable shooting skills and at least basic knowledge to do his best to make a killing shot. So, the big point of most of this discussion, why use much less defend a bullet that has proven it's downfalls if there are better choices available? And why not take advantage of information and others k owledge and experience to do everything you can to lessen your likelihood of failure? Especially on a DG hunt!

Again, understanding there may be no easy, cheap alternative for the 416 Ruger. Hell, I drive a Dodge but don't waste time trying to tell myself it's a Ford

 

[Royal27]

I've done some more research and based on what I found I've decided to switch my home defense ammunition.

This new stuff is proven to repel even those intruders wearing body armor.

 

[IdaRam]

Below are two Hornady .416 cal 400 gr DGX bullets. They were taken from 2 different blue wildebeest. Both show poor performance in my opinion although both resulted in very dead wildebeest. They were hand loaded and fired from my friend's .416 Ruger.
Out of curiousity he decided to create a test and went about rounding up materials that consisted of an Eland hide, some hardwood, water jugs, ballistic gelatin and a bunch of Granger catalogs.
He rehydrated the Eland hide and used the hardwood boards to simulate ribs and the water jugs, ballistic gelatin and grainger catalogs to simulate soft tissue and capture the slugs.
He shot several DGX bullets along with a 400 gr Hornady RN interlock and a 400 gr Swift A-Frame. The A-Frame and the Hornday RN were beautiful mushrooms. The DGX all looked virtually identical to the bottom bullet in the attached pic.
As the nose of the DGX's peels back in what should result in a mushroom the jacket and lead simply peel away. It has been said that they are too soft, but I think the opposite may be true. Too hard and non-malleable and just crackle away, if you will. Regardless, the result is a bullet that sheds weight rapidly and creates less wound channel.
Sadly, I don't have any pics of this test to share, but I did see the bullets from the test. It will be A-Frames for me, thank you very much.

 

[Bert the Turtle]

I think another important point is the mode of failure. A bullet that fails to expand but penetrates the vitals beats a bullet that goes to pieces and doesn't reach the vitals. This is the reason why solids were the preferred big game bullet for so long: the softs of the day did not reliably penetrate.

 

[fourfive8]

Ok, here's another comparison between the DGX "Hornady's dangerous game controlled expanding bullet" and the Barnes TSX controlled expanding bullet. Just like the other comparison- similar impact velocities and the test media was same. Draw conclusions or use info as you like.

 

[siml]

@ActionBob your first post hits the nail on the head.

@fourfive8, you can't argue with those tests.

When you hunt enough big game, you will know the importance of the right bullet. Hornady won't be my choice.

 

[spike.t]

well i find my flint bullets still work fine, so dont know what all the whoo haa is all about.......

 

[Royal27]

well i still find my flint bullets still work fine, so dont know what all the whoo haa is all about.......

always leaves them stone dead?

 

[spike.t]

always leaves them stone dead?

well of course they do.....

 

[Red Leg]

We are just to the east of I35

We have had lots of Barnes bullets go right through without much expansion - How do we know - when you butcher and do a hunters autopsy and the wound channels / bullet holes are only slightly larger than the bullet diameter - doesn't take an expert to figure out what happened. Yes the animal was dead, but in all cases the recovery involved follow ups and additional shots. We have had several Barnes bullets that acted, just like solids - very little or no expansion - (these were all with smaller calibers .300's and 7mm's)

Used to use Barnes X-bullets exclusively - seems like the newer TSX are not nearly as consistent (in my opinion) - wouldn't catch me using them in a rifle hunting something like brown bear or lion

I experienced some pedal breakage with the old X bullet. With respect to TSX, I could not disagree more. In mine, and numerous colleagues' experience, they have all performed exactly as advertised. In .375 up, they are my favorite bullet - closely followed by the Swift A-Frame. Those TSX bullets that I have recovered have all showed perfect expansion and have created extremely deep and decisive wounds, just like the one below.

 

[Wheels]

Didn't @Velo Dog once say something along the lines of "You can probably kill a buffalo with a well placed frozen mackerel............but wouldn't a frozen swordfish be better".

I do have DGX/DGS on my shelf. They are used as practice rounds.

In the field I use any of A Frame, TBBC and TSX in a large caliber expanding bullet. Are they always perfect? Probably not, but why go against the odds.

 

[Desert Dog]

That's interesting as I was speaking with a group of "F" Class shooters recently and they said the the ELD was the most uniform bullet for weight that they use.

I think most reloaders would put Nosler and Hornady brass pretty much on par with each other

I shoot F class and have NEVER seen an ELD used. Probably 99% run Berger, Lapua, and Sierra bullets. This "group" of F class shooters you talked to are definitely not at the top of the game. If you would like, I will post pictures of the bullet variances in a batch for you to plainly see Hornady even stays away form F class and most long-range competition, choosing instead to sponsor 3-gun, USPSA, IPA, and tactical competitions. Berger wins almost all of the individual and team shooting nowadays. The Hornady A-max was a fantastic bullet when it was initially released, but as Hornady often does, the quality on that bullet slipped from significance over time as well.

And saying that Hornady and Nosler brass are on par....well that is just ridiculous. Comparing Nosler to Lapua brass is a much fairer comparison (mainly because a great deal of Nosler brass IS Lapua brass).

Of course the claim is always that a dead animal proves effectiveness. I have learned that there is a huge difference between luck and truly good bullet performance. The first 3 pieces of scrap are a factory loaded Hornady 250 grain GMX in 375 H&H that came out of my very dead leopard. (the shrapnel blew his lungs out, literally chunks hanging out the wound) That was a lot of luck from a prime example of how a bullet of that design is not suppposed to work.

I used GMXs for about a year here in California because 30 cal Barnes TTSX were on back-order everywhere (and we HAVE to hunt with non-lead bullets). I saw the same exact thing as your 1st bullet when shoulder shooting big hogs and an Aoudad. After restocking my loading room with TTSXs, those 5 boxes of GMXs are still sitting on my shelf. I will not use them. I have never had a TSX/TTSX/LRX fail to perform as it should. My second choice would be the A-frame for tough game and the Accubond for thin-skinned game.

Too bad that the ATF forced Barnes to stop selling their banded solids. Those were fantastic and shot to the same POI as the TSX.