Why avoid Hornady DG bullets and ammunition?

[Paul Edwards]

Hello Paul Edwards,

I've only shot one dangerous African animal with Hornady bullets.
So, do take my opinion on DG bullets with a grain of MSG.
Nonetheless, it was the buffalo shown in my avatar here, with the old left and right, from an Army & Navy double, in .450 No2 NE (that I sold to pay off my safari bill).
The bullets were 480 gr Hornady DGX and DGS respectively, leaving the muzzles at 2050 fps and the range was 40 paces.
The soft struck him at the juncture of his throat and brisket, just left of center, nicked his neck bone, badly damaged blood vessels above the heart, tore through his left lung and stopped against a broken rib on that side.
This bullet is shown in my photos.
He dropped to the shot but gathered himself back up to run, obviously not agreeing with the experts that he had just received a very fatal wound.

Soon as there were no other animals in my line of sight (herd was thundering off and at first, all around him as he was running with them), I fired the solid into his right flank, just behind the last rib, at what I say was about 120 paces but the PH said 150 - whatever, (grew up shooting jack rabbits with rifles / revolvers and this practice definitely paid off on my 2nd shot here).

The "solid" passed through about 3 or more feet of buffalo, smashing his spine and tumbling him, as if he hit a trip wire.
He was very dead by the time we arrived at his location, including a small delay while the Tracker threw rocks and sticks at several bulls that had come back around to confront us, the PH ready with solids in his custom CZ actioned .458 3" and me with solids in both barrels of the .450 #2.
Very sadly, I do not have the solid to show for my time and money (miscommunication with the skinners) and so, it is still somewhere along the banks of the Olifants River, Maruli Concession, SA.
By the wound channel, it did not deform much if at all.

The only other animal of any size I have shot with the DGX was a zebra stallion, also at about 40 paces maximum, in heavy foliage.
He was likewise quartering toward me but, nearly broadside.
My soft struck spot on the right shoulder, smashing it, then through both lungs, breaking a rib on the left side, close behind the left "armpit", and stopping just under the skin, showing a distinct lump there.
In fact I nicked my finger examining the lump, as there was a tiny, sharp piece of jacket material sticking through but concealed in the short hair (lesson learned).
That bullet is also shown in my personal photos, within the world's greatest forum here.
A .45 caliber, 480 grain bullet tends to almost always pass through smaller animals such as reed buck, impala and such, even if it is fragile.
So, only two bullets to illustrate my opinion that:
1. Hornady DGX seem to work alright if impact velocity is rather low.
2. Hornady uses malleable steel jackets, guilding metal plated so as not to ruin rifle bores HOWEVER, I feel they should stop forming these thinner toward the tip.
This bullet would be quite good if the jacket was same thickness from base to nose.
3. If Hornady was to bond the core to the jacket, they could probably leave the jacket thinner toward the nose but, if left up to me (and if a frog had wings), I'd still thicken it as mentioned.
4. Since about age 16, (late 1960's), I have used various Hornady bullets, mostly spire point and round nose, in a multitude of calibers, from .224 caliber, through .458 caliber and enjoyed no bullet failures (none).
However, I am not one to use smallish calibers on largish animals, I like rifles and have various ones for various types of game and various hunting conditions.
And so, I feel their old fashioned and dreaded "cup & core" are quite good for things like deer, impala, etc., (f course as always, provided suitable calibers and bullet weights are chosen according to animal hunted, in other words, I prefer a 6.5 bullet of about 140 gr or heavier as my personal minimum on mule deer / wild boar

Parting shot as it were:
If you are not shooting some finicky, stubborn double that, refuses to regulate with any of today's tough, bonded core bullets, and / or the rifle is antique, thereby causing concerns about very stout bullets, potentially loosening the solder bond, between the rib and barrels, I would avoid Hornady softs for heavy game.
If you are using just such a double rifle in say, .375 H&H, I'd be nervous about the velocity threshold.
As for repeaters and single shots, since the Swift A-Frame is almost always accurate in these types of rifles, and since IMO, it is the very best of the best premium softs ever dreamed up, were I to use a bolt action or single shot for DG hunting, when a soft is advisable (such as first shot on buffalo for one example), the A-Frame would be my choice.
Pertaining to close in hunting of large, heavy animals, dangerous or not, I'm no fan of very high velocity, no matter what bullet I intended to use.
IMO, high velocity and pointed bullets are however a very good fit for shooting rodents and small predators at long range.
So, perhaps needless to say, I've zero experience with the .460 Weatherby cartridge.
My life's experiences and opinions are not the Gospel unto all the world.
However, my suggestion on that fast mover, is to not use the DGX in it for heavily built animals.

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

Velo Dog, I thoroughly enjoyed the recount of your hunt, informative, yes, but written so we'll I felt like I was right there!

 

[Velo Dog]

Hello Paul Edwards,

I've only shot one dangerous African animal with Hornady bullets.
So, do take my opinion on DG bullets with a grain of MSG.
Nonetheless, it was the buffalo shown in my avatar here, with the old left and right, from an Army & Navy double, in .450 No2 NE (that I sold to pay off my safari bill).
The bullets were 480 gr Hornady DGX and DGS respectively, leaving the muzzles at 2050 fps and the range was 40 paces.
The soft struck him at the juncture of his throat and brisket, just left of center, nicked his neck bone, badly damaged blood vessels above the heart, tore through his left lung and stopped against a broken rib on that side.
This bullet is shown in my photos.
He dropped to the shot but gathered himself back up to run, obviously not agreeing with the experts that he had just received a very fatal wound.

Soon as there were no other animals in my line of sight (herd was thundering off and at first, all around him as he was running with them), I fired the solid into his right flank, just behind the last rib, at what I say was about 120 paces but the PH said 150 - whatever, (grew up shooting jack rabbits with rifles / revolvers and this practice definitely paid off on my 2nd shot here).

The "solid" passed through about 3 or more feet of buffalo, smashing his spine and tumbling him, as if he hit a trip wire.
He was very dead by the time we arrived at his location, including a small delay while the Tracker threw rocks and sticks at several bulls that had come back around to confront us, the PH ready with solids in his custom CZ actioned .458 3" and me with solids in both barrels of the .450 #2.
Very sadly, I do not have the solid to show for my time and money (miscommunication with the skinners) and so, it is still somewhere along the banks of the Olifants River, Maruli Concession, SA.
By the wound channel, it did not deform much if at all.

The only other animal of any size I have shot with the DGX was a zebra stallion, also at about 40 paces maximum, in heavy foliage.
He was likewise quartering toward me but, nearly broadside.
My soft struck spot on the right shoulder, smashing it, then through both lungs, breaking a rib on the left side, close behind the left "armpit", and stopping just under the skin, showing a distinct lump there.
In fact I nicked my finger examining the lump, as there was a tiny, sharp piece of jacket material sticking through but concealed in the short hair (lesson learned).
That bullet is also shown in my personal photos, within the world's greatest forum here.
A .45 caliber, 480 grain bullet tends to almost always pass through smaller animals such as reed buck, impala and such, even if it is fragile.
So, only two bullets to illustrate my opinion that:
1. Hornady DGX seem to work alright if impact velocity is rather low.
2. Hornady uses malleable steel jackets, guilding metal plated so as not to ruin rifle bores HOWEVER, I feel they should stop forming these thinner toward the tip.
This bullet would be quite good if the jacket was same thickness from base to nose.
3. If Hornady was to bond the core to the jacket, they could probably leave the jacket thinner toward the nose but, if left up to me (and if a frog had wings), I'd still thicken it as mentioned.
4. Since about age 16, (late 1960's), I have used various Hornady bullets, mostly spire point and round nose, in a multitude of calibers, from .224 caliber, through .458 caliber and enjoyed no bullet failures (none).
However, I am not one to use smallish calibers on largish animals, I like rifles and have various ones for various types of game and various hunting conditions.
And so, I feel their old fashioned and dreaded "cup & core" are quite good for things like deer, impala, etc., (f course as always, provided suitable calibers and bullet weights are chosen according to animal hunted, in other words, I prefer a 6.5 bullet of about 140 gr or heavier as my personal minimum on mule deer / wild boar

Parting shot as it were:
If you are not shooting some finicky, stubborn double that, refuses to regulate with any of today's tough, bonded core bullets, and / or the rifle is antique, thereby causing concerns about very stout bullets, potentially loosening the solder bond, between the rib and barrels, I would avoid Hornady softs for heavy game.
If you are using just such a double rifle in say, .375 H&H, I'd be nervous about the velocity threshold.
As for repeaters and single shots, since the Swift A-Frame is almost always accurate in these types of rifles, and since IMO, it is the very best of the best premium softs ever dreamed up, were I to use a bolt action or single shot for DG hunting, when a soft is advisable (such as first shot on buffalo for one example), the A-Frame would be my choice.
Pertaining to close in hunting of large, heavy animals, dangerous or not, I'm no fan of very high velocity, no matter what bullet I intended to use.
IMO, high velocity and pointed bullets are however a very good fit for shooting rodents and small predators at long range.
So, perhaps needless to say, I've zero experience with the .460 Weatherby cartridge.
My life's experiences and opinions are not the Gospel unto all the world.
However, my suggestion on that fast mover, is to not use the DGX in it for heavily built animals.

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

TYPO:
Line 5 of my post above, should have said : "at the juncture of his throat and brisket, just RIGHT of center, not - just "left" of center, as I had posted, obviously without properly proof reading it first .... (ooopsie).

And, thank you Paul Edwards, likewise I do enjoy your posts and style of writing very much as well.

 

[Hank2211]

This is a repeat of something I mentioned in a hunt report. I was hunting buffalo with a .404 Jeffery, using Hornady bullets. After firing the first shot, and trying to load a second round, the gun jammed. Turned out that the bullets in the magazine had been pushed - by recoil - back into the brass, with the result that those cartridges were shorter than they should have been, and were hitting the chamber in the wrong place. Not something you want to have happen when a subsequent shot counts.

When I returned home, I sent Hornady an email. They responded promptly, asking for a lot number. I provided it. They then told me that they checked, and that lot was fine. End of story.

Well, I hadn't hammered the bullets into the brass.

End of story for Hornady and Hank.

 

[Royal27]

This is a repeat of something I mentioned in a hunt report. I was hunting buffalo with a .404 Jeffery, using Hornady bullets. After firing the first shot, and trying to load a second round, the gun jammed. Turned out that the bullets in the magazine had been pushed - by recoil - back into the brass, with the result that those cartridges were shorter than they should have been, and were hitting the chamber in the wrong place. Not something you want to have happen when a subsequent shot counts.

When I returned home, I sent Hornady an email. They responded promptly, asking for a lot number. I provided it. They then told me that they checked, and that lot was fine. End of story.

Well, I hadn't hammered the bullets into the brass.

End of story for Hornady and Hank.

Surprised they didn't tell you that they never had the issue occur with their Ruger No 1 test rifle.

 

[CAustin]

I am one of the people who have used Hornady DGS and DGX ammo in 416 Ruger with good result. I am Not an engineer nor am I a reloader. So all I can recount is my personal use of the product. I buy my ammo off the shelf practice with it and then go hunting. Nobody seems to doubt the record of the DGS round.......it's the DGX that often receives condemnation! My avitar documents the successful use of DGS ammo on the largest DG animal walking the earth.
I have had no issues with the DGX round and have taken large game, giraffe, and DG , lioness and Cape buffalo, without incident. I pointed the rifle pulled the trigger and the intended animal fell dead. Results for me have been good. However lots of folks on this forum have had issues with the DGX round and documented the same here. My main DG rifle is the Ruger Guide Gun in 416 Ruger so my options are limited to Hornady ammo unless I were to engage someone to hand load ammo for me. I have a safe full of both DGS and DGX Hornady ammo and I will go hunting with it again. No doubt my son will as well when I can't take to the field anymore.

The top picture clearly shows the thickness of giraffe skin. It's thick and tough. The bottom is a DGX round that penetrated the left front shoulder blade of the animal and traveled through the body to be recovered just under the skin on the far side of the body and back several ribs. It did what it was intended to do......killing the giraffe with the single shot. I can't argue with the results others have experienced and I don't know enough about various types of ammo to say if the spent round above retained the proper weight or if the jacket deformed properly. I just know that it worked well for me!

 

[Paul Edwards]

I think one reason many choose Hornady bullets/ammo is because of the price point. For most calibers there are many, many other options out there- especially if you reload. I haven't shot a factory loaded round since about 1970 except for 9mm handgun and 22 rimfire. However I do shoot Hornady DGXs at paper…. because they are cheap! I have yet to find a decent explanation or reason for using cheap or questionable bullets or ammo for big game hunting of any kind much less dangerous game hunting. The reaction of Steve Hornady is understandable if indeed he was confronted with these "issues" about his "hunting" bullets. After all he did hunt cape buffalo with undoubtedly Hornady ammo… all caught on video- woo hoo! Killing a buffalo on a Boddington video is probably all the proof he needs to ignore any criticism of his bullets. I imagine I could kill a cape buffalo with a frozen hot dog if I could propel it fast enough! I believe it's best to plan for the worst scenario when hunting, not the best and this is particularly true for bullet selection.

There is nothing about the DGX bullet that is designed for fail safe performance on dangerous game! It is not a bonded bullet. The lead core will separate from the jacket. The jacket is relatively thin. The thin steel core liner flakes off just like brittle copper jacket material when encountering tough tissue or bone. I proved all this when testing the DGX in tough, realistic ballistic test media. Will it kill dangerous game?- of course it will… just like any number of other designs no matter how good or bad. Will I ever use it for dangerous game or game of any kind?- not a chance.

As an aside, even the illustration, lower right corner on the DGX box is fraudulent. It shows a supposed expanded bullet with a very small rivet like expanded nose. Good grief!! That bullet might look like that after an inch or two of penetration into soft gel but I absolutely guarantee that illustration has nothing to do with the reality of what that bullet really does if penetrating bone or tough tissue!

View attachment 191303

TYPO:
Line 5 of my post above, should have said : "at the juncture of his throat and brisket, just RIGHT of center, not - just "left" of center, as I had posted, obviously without properly proof reading it first .... (ooopsie).

And, thank you Paul Edwards, likewise I do enjoy your posts and style of writing very much as well.

 

[Paul Edwards]

Velo Dog, typo abounds in my reply, lol. I meant, "... written so well...." not, "... written so we'll...". Oops

 

[Paul Edwards]

I am one of the people who have used Hornady DGS and DGX ammo in 416 Ruger with good result. I am Not an engineer nor am I a reloader. So all I can recount is my personal use of the product. I buy my ammo off the shelf practice with it and then go hunting. Nobody seems to doubt the record of the DGS round.......it's the DGX that often receives condemnation! My avitar documents the successful use of DGS ammo on the largest DG animal walking the earth.
I have had no issues with the DGX round and have taken large game, giraffe, and DG , lioness and Cape buffalo, without incident. I pointed the rifle pulled the trigger and the intended animal fell dead. Results for me have been good. However lots of folks on this forum have had issues with the DGX round and documented the same here. My main DG rifle is the Ruger Guide Gun in 416 Ruger so my options are limited to Hornady ammo unless I were to engage someone to hand load ammo for me. I have a safe full of both DGS and DGX Hornady ammo and I will go hunting with it again. No doubt my son will as well when I can't take to the field anymore.
View attachment 191334
View attachment 191335
The top picture clearly shows the thickness of giraffe skin. It's thick and tough. The bottom is a DGX round that penetrated the left front shoulder blade of the animal and traveled through the body to be recovered just under the skin on the far side of the body and back several ribs. It did what it was intended to do......killing the giraffe with the single shot. I can't argue with the results others have experienced and I don't know enough about various types of ammo to say if the spent round above retained the proper weight or if the jacket deformed properly. I just know that it worked well for me!

CAustin-
Thank you, impressive Ele. I now have a Ruger Hawkeye African and have found it much easier on the old shoulder than the 458. It is limited to the 416 Ruger round made by Hornady. I have only used the solids so far but have been happy with them. I never head out without already having fired at least a couple of rounds from each box of my off-the-shelf ammo at the range. Although I do some handloading for some of my ammo, not all, and I was beginning to think that I was the only one using off the shelf ammo. Clearly, you have had great success. Do you alternate between the DGS and DGX, following up one with the other, depending on the game? Thanks.

 

[ActionBob]

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. Consistent top quality bullets are very reliable if used within their design parameters, and assuming the company claims are accurate.

IMO, a bullet such as the 416 Ruger DGX pictured above is a prime example of a bullet that has lost all the lead out of it's nose, thus obviously loosing a lot of it's original weight. The jacket is obviously mushroomed back nicely, but to a much lesser diameter than it would likely be if it had the lead core properly bonded to it. I believe some of the rest of the story is, thank God it did not expand into a larger diameter as it would have shed momentum quickly without retaining it's weight thus may not have penetrated well. However, I'm sure to good shooting and a very good amount of luck, it killed the buffalo. I would not claim it performed well.

This has been debated and discussed extensively on this forum and others, and most surely will be more. But to fuel this discussion some more... I offer the following picture and explanation below.....

Left to right, 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. Then the long bent one and pounded down piece next are the same factory loads out of an Eland taken on the same hunt. I think there were 6 or 7 shots into that eland... None made a proper wound and he just kept going.

Then 3rd from the right is a properly expanded and wight retained Federal Premium factory loaded 300 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw shot out of the same 375 H&H. That entered between the head and shoulder of a lion and was dug out of his opposite rear quarter by the skinner. To me, that is what a proper bullet should look like, most of it's weight retained, large controlled expansion, and penetrated exceedingly well.

Next two are, of course TSX, those were 525 grain coming out of different 505 Gibbs rifles at 2300 fps, The second from the right was against the skin on the opposite shoulder of a giraffe. The last was a quartering away killing shot on a buffalo, that bullet left a wound channel I could stick my arm through. Went through the rumen, the diaphragm and lungs, and smashed through the opposite front should to rest against the hide.

All three of these retained most of their weight, penetrated deep and had enough expansion to dump all the energy into the animal.

Do you Hornady fans really want to continue to rely on luck or switch to something that actually performs the way a proper DG bullet should.

BTW, 375 and 416 Ruger guys, Swift is loading factory ammo in A Frames as well as their new solid.

 

[Paul Edwards]

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. Consistent top quality bullets are very reliable if used within their design parameters, and assuming the company claims are accurate.

IMO, a bullet such as the 416 Ruger DGX pictured above is a prime example of a bullet that has lost all the lead out of it's nose, thus obviously loosing a lot of it's original weight. The jacket is obviously mushroomed back nicely, but to a much lesser diameter than it would likely be if it had the lead core properly bonded to it. I believe some of the rest of the story is, thank God it did not expand into a larger diameter as it would have shed momentum quickly without retaining it's weight thus may not have penetrated well. However, I'm sure to good shooting and a very good amount of luck, it killed the buffalo. I would not claim it performed well.

This has been debated and discussed extensively on this forum and others, and most surely will be more. But to fuel this discussion some more... I offer the following picture and explanation below.....

View attachment 191337
Left to right, 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. Then the long bent one and pounded down piece next are the same factory loads out of an Eland taken on the same hunt. I think there were 6 or 7 shots into that eland... None made a proper wound and he just kept going.

Then 3rd from the right is a properly expanded and wight retained Federal Premium factory loaded 300 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw shot out of the same 375 H&H. That entered between the head and shoulder of a lion and was dug out of his opposite rear quarter by the skinner. To me, that is what a proper bullet should look like, most of it's weight retained, large controlled expansion, and penetrated exceedingly well.

Next two are, of course TSX, those were 525 grain coming out of different 505 Gibbs rifles at 2300 fps, The second from the right was against the skin on the opposite shoulder of a giraffe. The last was a quartering away killing shot on a buffalo, that bullet left a wound channel I could stick my arm through. Went through the rumen, the diaphragm and lungs, and smashed through the opposite front should to rest against the hide.

All three of these retained most of their weight, penetrated deep and had enough expansion to dump all the energy into the animal.

Do you Hornady fans really want to continue to rely on luck or switch to something that actually performs the way a proper DG bullet should.

BTW, 375 and 416 Ruger guys, Swift is loading factory ammo in A Frames as well as their new solid.

....uh, is this where I am supposed to genuflect?...

All kidding aside, your input is appreciated ActionBob, albeit couched in a bit of sarcasm. I come seeking wisdom, not voices chiming back what I want to hear.
I freely admit that I am a relatively newcomer and I have found, like in many aspects of life, one of the best means of getting wisdom is from those who have been there, done that, and who are will to share. So, I came to this forum and have found the sportsmanship I expected from serious, ethical hunters.
I do take very seriously the need for 100% reliable ammunition and firearms in DG hunting. So, when I added the 416 Ruger to my 458 Win Mag and 460 Weatherby Mag (my two angry mules, one angrier than the other) I thought it best to glean from some experts more definitive information about what I was hearing on Hornady DG bullets and ammo.

Your information, bullet comparison photo, and Swift mention are appreciated, thanks.

 

[CTDolan]

BTW, 375 and 416 Ruger guys, Swift is loading factory ammo in A Frames as well as their new solid.

They're loading the 375 Ruger but, to my knowledge, not the 416 Ruger.

 

[Paul Edwards]

CT Dolan, To my knowledge, also, they are loading the 375 Ruger, not the necked up 416 Ruger.

 

[CAustin]

Ok here is a DGX from a Cape Buffalo full on chest shot and was dug out of the belly of the beast some five feet back through his guts! This is after passing through the chest plate the heart and all that stuffed rumen! Did it deform properly? I don't know? Did it drop the buff...?? Yes it did! Did the bullet retain enough weight to satisfy those who have had poor performance??.......PROBABLY NOT!

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

https://www.swiftbullets.com/pages/high-grade-ammunition#a-frame-heavy

DANGEROUS GAME | A-FRAME® - HEAVY RIFLE

Heavy rifle A-Frame bullets are for use on dangerous game. The bullet initiates expansion at 1650 feet per second on the low end and stays together at 3000+ feet per second on the high end. Controlled expansion of 2.2x its original caliber and 95%+ weight retention make the A-Frame® bullet superior in downrange energy and stopping power. Terminal performance is unequaled.

Cal. WT. *Mouse over [+] for cartridge specs
9.3x62 286

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
375 RUGER 300
[+]

$88.75 USD | 20ct
375 H&H 300
[+]

$84.50 USD | 20ct
416 REM MAG 400
[+]

$132.25 USD | 20ct
416 RIGBY 400

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
404 JEFFERY 400

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
458 WIN MAG 500

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
458 LOTT 500

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
470 NE 500

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
505 GIBBS 570

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
500 NE 570

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
500 JEFFERY 570

AVAILABLE:
Coming soon
DANGEROUS GAME | BREAK

 

[CAustin]

This is another DGX that went through a giraffe! Weight retention?? Did the petals open properly? I don't know! Giraffe dead! Yes.....yes he was!

 

[Paul Edwards]

View attachment 191514
View attachment 191515
This is another DGX that went through a giraffe! Weight retention?? Did the petals open properly? I don't know! Giraffe dead! Yes.....yes he was!

CAustin, you got me laughing over here! Can't argue with that result,lol!

 

[Royal27]

Nobody seems to doubt the record of the DGS round......

Actually, folks do doubt the DGS. You just don't hear about it as often. Its my belief that you don't hear about it as often not simply because it doesn't happen, but because the bullet isn't used nearly as often and the sample size is smaller.

Here's a failed DGS, or a totally successful one, all depending upon your point view. My view? The bullet performed very poorly and not as it was designed to, or at least marketed to do. Now the animal ended up dead, so if your only criteria is a dead animal then yeah, luck was involved and the bullet "performed." I personally don't want to bring luck into DG hunting and an animal being dead, but that's just me.

All of my statements above apply to the DGX as well.

I have no issue with someone who purposely and consciously chooses to hunt with inferior performing equipment. Its their choice and perhaps part of the thrill to them, with black powder and bow hunting being two examples. What bothers me though is when people are told "its just as good" when the empirical evidence shows it isn't. Even the bullets you show Charlie certainly appear to be failures, despite the dead animal - they simply didnt perform as advertised by the manufacturer.

View attachment 191513
Ok here is a DGX from a Cape Buffalo full on chest shot and was dug out of the belly of the beast some five feet back through his guts! This is after passing through the chest plate the heart and all that stuffed rumen! Did it deform properly? I don't know? Did it drop the buff...?? Yes it did! Did the bullet retain enough weight to satisfy those who have had poor performance??.......PROBABLY NOT!

There is plenty of information available for you to find the answers to these questions without even leaving AH, although its elsewhere too. My challenge to you is that you find out, and make an informed decision on more than a few dead animals. If after doing that you either decide you like the extra risk, that you don't care if you use an inferior bullet for DG, or that you don't believe the evidence supports the claim by many (myself included) that the bullet is inferior, then hunt with confidence!

CAustin, you got me laughing over here! Can't argue with that result,lol!

You really can argue the DGX/DGS results, and in my opinion, you should.

 

[lwaters]

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.

 

[Paul Edwards]

Actually, folks do doubt the DGS. You just don't hear about it as often. Its my belief that you don't hear about it as often not simply because it doesn't happen, but because the bullet isn't used nearly as often and the sample size is smaller.

Here's a failed DGS, or a totally successful one, all depending upon your point view. My view? The bullet performed very poorly and not as it was designed to, or at least marketed to do. Now the animal ended up dead, so if your only criteria is a dead animal then yeah, luck was involved and the bullet "performed." I personally don't want to bring luck into DG hunting and an animal being dead, but that's just me.

All of my statements above apply to the DGX as well.

View attachment 191563


I have no issue with someone who purposely and consciously chooses to hunt with inferior performing equipment. Its their choice and perhaps part of the thrill to them, with black powder and bow hunting being two examples. What bothers me though is when people are told "its just as good" when the empirical evidence shows it isn't. Even the bullets you show Charlie certainly appear to be failures, despite the dead animal - they simply didnt perform as advertised by the manufacturer.



There is plenty of information available for you to find the answers to these questions without even leaving AH, although its elsewhere too. My challenge to you is that you find out, and make an informed decision on more than a few dead animals. If after doing that you either decide you like the extra risk, that you don't care if you use an inferior bullet for DG, or that you don't believe the evidence supports the claim by many (myself included) that the bullet is inferior, then hunt with confidence!



You really can argue the DGX/DGS results, and in my opinion, you should.

Thank you Royal27 for your input, and in particular your challenge to find the answers here (AH) and elsewhere to enable me to make an informed decision...

Actually, that is what led me here initially, perhaps you missed my earlier posts regarding that as well as the seriousness with which I take DG hunting. My desire is not to justify hunting DG with inferior equipment, as I am certain you did not intend to communicate (another of my earlier post regarding only hunting with British Bests) but rather learning from experienced hunters the strengths and weaknesses of the bullets and ammunition I questioned upfront. Thank you.

 

[Royal27]

Thank you Royal27 for your input, and in particular your challenge to find the answers here (AH) and elsewhere to enable me to make an informed decision...

Actually, that is what led me here initially, perhaps you missed my earlier posts regarding that as well as the seriousness with which I take DG hunting. My desire is not to justify hunting DG with inferior equipment, as I am certain you did not intend to communicate (another of my earlier post regarding only hunting with British Bests) but rather learning from experienced hunters the strengths and weaknesses of the bullets and ammunition I questioned upfront. Thank you.

No worries and wasn't intending to imply that you were, but rather that you were on the right path. Poor worded on my part. Continue your search and keep asking questions!

Its how we all learn as you obviously know.