Hornady DGX bonded failure

375Fox said:

Big bore bullets have different designed impact velocity windows than smaller calibers. You can view woodleigh impact velocity windows easier than some others.

Click to expand...

Yes sir, Woodleigh puts it on every box

I am sorry to say this is typical and many of us are not surprised. Sure you have many people posting to you pics of perfect DGX bullets but who cares? Yours did not perform. Why this discussion of minuscule differences in velocity and all the armchair QBing? It failed!
Go with 400g TSX like I do and you will no longer be dealing with this frustration!

Another Woodleigh Bullet



On my first Buffalo hunt I used a 375 Ruger loaded with the Barnes TSX @2550 fps.
The TSX preformed as advertised.
My buddy used the DGX, 375 Ruger. Looks kinda bad when compared to the TSX.
I will take the TSX performance over the DGX any day.
The TSX preformed the same on Giraffe & Zebra at 125 to 150 yards and the same on Black Wildebeest at 211 yards.

Granted dead is dead, but I want the odds stacked in my favor.

I use Hornady 17-22 caliber bullets almost exclusively on Sage Rats, Prairie Dogs, and coyotes etc.
Use these with excellent results for accuracy and explosive results, but never use their bullets 6mm and larger. I shot several buffalo with 450-400 Heym using Swift A-frames @ 2130 with fantastic results.
Results like you have had terrify me! I personally won't use Barnes bullets for anything but the North Fork SS and cup point solids appear to be excellent.

OK, that is a good point , yes 1900fps for bonded big bore bullet is the norm

Guys, we need a little rational thought here. The DGX bullet is often accused of 'failing' because it turns into a coin, over expanding. This bullet failed by not expanding- it was too hard. From what I can see, only the bullet that hit the leg bone is shown and it folded sideways.

The solution, TSX bullets. Known to be hard and needing velocity for expansion, it is recommended for a slow calibre. Furthermore, if you Google tsx failures, you will see a TSX fails in exactly the same way. The tip is bent over by impact and it fails to open.

If you really understand Ballistics, you realise there is no perfect bullet. In my opinion, a slow velocity calibre is best served with a lead core bullet. Swift A frame is my choice but if you need to run factory ammo or regulate your double then DGX will work. TSX is just the ticket for a 460 weatherby. Understand the bullet and use it in the correct rifle for best results. And even then, it may go wrong.

Bummer. Thanks for sharing. I use Barnes TSX and TTSX in everything except my .300 RUM.

That said, I ordered some SWIFT 500 Grain A-Frame’s and Break-Away’s for my 450 Dakota.

I also have Barnes TSX loaded for the 450 too…

I’ll avoid Hornady.

I run my WBY 416 at 2575 for both 400gr and 350 gr, I suspect more than fast enough to open them up. My PH indicated he had no issue with the DGX I also reloaded some Barnes to the same speed -- I do think that to slow can create issues. These big bore shed fps really fast -- start at 2000 and at 100 yards you are looking at less than 1800 -- just a thought.

Bandera said:

Another Woodleigh Bullet

View attachment 768068

On my first Buffalo hunt I used a 375 Ruger loaded with the Barnes TSX @2550 fps.
The TSX preformed as advertised.
My buddy used the DGX, 375 Ruger. Looks kinda bad when compared to the TSX.
I will take the TSX performance over the DGX any day.
The TSX preformed the same on Giraffe & Zebra at 125 to 150 yards and the same on Black Wildebeest at 211 yards.

Granted dead is dead, but I want the odds stacked in my favor.


View attachment 768072

Click to expand...

I agree. I made a great shot. Had I just clipped the lungs or even just one it could have been a long day.

Friends dont let friends...

When you’re spending $1000 plus a day and trophy fees on top of that why be limited with Hornady. Call up Hendershot’s custom ammo and get a premium bullet.

I've said this before so I'll just quote myself because I still believe it...

Rubberhead said:

Hornady is better at marketing than they are at making bullets...

Click to expand...

As a side note, during the early days of Covid, Hornady was filling store shelves with ammo while everything Nosler had disappeared. I wrote a letter to Steve Hornady suggesting he buy Nosler and straighten out their manufacturing issues. I got a very humorous and personally signed letter back from Steve Hornady that started with "Seriously Dude?"...

Bwhahaha

I use Barnes in all of my big bores, 270 grn for 375 H&H, 450 and 500 grn for 450 Ackley, and 570 grn for my 500 A2. Couple years ago the finishing shot on a buff from about 30 yards went through the horn midway to tip and entered the neck. The bullet was recovered, one petal sheared off but mushroomed perfectly

I sure that I'm the odd man out, but my old non-bonded Hornady DGX did just fine in 2021 out of my .416 Rigby.

1 shot - death bellows 30 yards away.

Well we're all in this pretty deep so we might as well go a little farther down the rabbit hole. I think there's been enough good points made that we can hopefully sumwhat agree that bullet failure is when it doesn't perform as it was designed to do. That being said we need to do our due diligence and research our bullet choices and understand their design.

That being said I'm going to introduce a new point of controversy I haven't seen mentioned. Since I am a fan of the TSX this topic addresses that bullet design (monolithic copper hollow points). Not just Barnes, but all of the other manufacturers making the same style bullets.

When I was placing my order with Aria Ballistics Engineering for several different calibers I told them that I wanted several of them loaded with TSX. Jason, who is the owner, asked me if I wanted Cavity Modification. I responded with I'm not sure because I don't know what that is. He went on to explain what they had discovered through extensive testing. They like many of us noticed inconsistent bullet performance and they were determined to find out why. What they discovered was that there was a considerable amount of fowlings within the cavity of the bullet that was left during the manufacturing process. This was causing the inconsistent expansion. He said that the tipped bullets were even more inconsistent in expansion although they dramatically helped with aero dynamics as they were designed to do. When they cleaned and "modified" the cavity they were shocked by the results. With the cavity cleaned out the consistency in expansion went up dramatically and to their surprise so did the diameter of the wound channel. They found that the wound channel averaged almost one caliber larger than prior to the modification.

Jason said he reached out to all of the bullet manufacturers with his findings and that Barnes was the only one that responded to him. They said they were aware of the information, but with pricing where it was already it would be cost prohibitive to correct every bullet that was made and that their current results they were getting was more than satisfactory with their customers.

Jason and his team came up with the machining tools necessary to fix the problem and they included it with no extra charge to my order. He said if he can make a good product better he's going to do it. He recommends it with all of that type of bullets and insists it allows each bullet to punch above its weight.

He says his customers have been very pleased with the results they have seen in the performance of the modified bullets.

I've included some pictures of three bullets from different companies. One from Aria Ballistics Engineering one from Buffalo Bore and one from Hendershots. All 525 grain TSX in 505 Gibbs. I chose a large caliber to make it easier to see in the pictures. You can see the difference in the cavity of the bullets. Notice the fowlings in the ones from Buffalo Bore and Hendershots.

I don't work for Aria Ballistics Engineering and I'm not getting anything from them for saying this. I do appreciate them being straight forward with me and after I reached out to them to place my order they called me a we spoke for the better part of an hour discussing the best possible options for the loads that I wanted. It was a nice personal touch and that goes a long way with me.


Take from this what you will.

I’ve seen posts by others indicating cleaning up the nose cavity on the TSX lead to much more consistent performance on game, so this is no surprise to me. I intend to try this myself if I can find appropriate drill bits.

get a set of numbered drill bits and use the one the fits the bullets for your caliber.

The tiny step-drill bits are handy in a drill press.
Bubba's other techniques are as proprietary to him as
the Barnes 400-gr/.458 TSX is proprietary to Buffalo Bore.
I am Bubba.









Bubba made a test batch of six of the 480.0-gr/.458 T6 bullets.
First three fired at 50 yard target from .458 WIN MAG:



A scope adjustment and then another 3-shot group at 50 yards,
this dog will hunt:






The 401-gr cast bullet is a great bullet in .458 SOCOM as well as .458 WIN MAG, sized to .461".
The longer 411-grainer is not as accurate.
Bubba does cast bullet work too,
But monometal copper and brass is "where it's at."

Hornady has a few monometals. They need to start making a greater variety.
North Fork SS and Trophy Bonded Bear Claws will do if you want bonded lead in the nose and monometal base,
preferrable to the Hornady DGX-Bonded.
Hornady keeps trying, bless their hearts.

Bubba's hollow-pointing tools:



Replaced by the 404-gr Stone Hammer:

All good, do you have any field test or real life examples, specially on DG.