Hornady DGX bonded honest opinions?

[Aussie_Hunter]

I know this is probably going to open a giant can of worms and hunters out there are are once again going to vent their frustrations about the old DGX that was not bonded. And I am also aware there are other threads about this topic but from what I have read these topics date back to when the DGX bonded was just released and no one had any real world experience with them.

Please if we can lets look past the old DGX and genuinely look at what the new DGX bonded is. From the reading I have done not only is the DGX now bonded it also says on the Hornady website it now has a thicker jacket at 0.098" which is 2.5mm in our metric terms over here in Aussie land. I am actually surprised at this, this is a very thick jacket but I am assuming this is the jacket thickness at the base of the bullet only to maybe half way up the projectile before it tapers down to a thinner jacket for expansion? Having said this I looked at Woodleigh's website and the Woodleigh weldcore only has a 1.6mm jacket which is nearly 1mm thinner jacket thickness of the new DGX bonded (again as I said though I believe the 2.5mm jacket would be at the base of the bullet to maybe halfway up before it starts to taper off to a thinner jacket)

Also I have watched the YouTube promotional video with Dr Kevin Robertson on the new bonded DGX a few times now, I believe the 416 diameter bullet was being tested and also It appears to be a paid presentation by Hornady. Even so, in my humble opinion the bullet seemed to perform very well, whats other peoples thoughts? Link to the video below.

I have also already mentioned I have used the new Honrady DGX loaded ammunition in my 375H&H on scrub bulls and the ammo performed flawlessly from what I can see, I haven't actually spent the time recovering a DGX bonded bullet yet from an animal.

So where are we really at with the Hornady bonded DGX? Is it as good as a TBBC now? Is it not quite as good as a TBBC? Is it better than a Woodleigh weldcore? I'm looking for honest genuine opinions on the new bonded DGX and not another thread of bashing the old DGX.

Whats peoples thoughts and or real world experience with the bonded DGX?

 

[BenKK]

Very interesting facts you present. I’ll be interested to test some of the new ones at some point.

 

[Hallgeir Gravråk]

I have shot just 20 rounds with Bonded DGX in my 470 NE.
And my double Krieghoff Classic won`t regulate with this bullet, I don`t know why.
Not on the tracks for your questions but I feel that we also can discuss this, I know a lot of you guys use this in a doublerifle aswell.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

I have shot just 20 rounds with Bonded DGX in my 470 NE.
And my double Krieghoff Classic won`t regulate with this bullet, I don`t know why.
Not on the tracks for your questions but I feel that we also can discuss this, I know a lot of you guys use this in a doublerifle aswell.

Very fair point, I didn't consider the regulation of doubles.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

Very interesting facts you present. I’ll be interested to test some of the new ones at some point.

When you do, please share your opinions.

 

[MMAL]

I used the bonded dgx on a buffalo in Zimbabwe and it performed as advertised. Retained weight was 88%. It was out of my kreighoff classic in 500/416 ne. I used the Hornady because I could not get the gun to regulate properly with woodies. Funny how same gun type likes the two different ammos. See two posts up. With that said I am heading to the caprivi in sept and I just got the gun back from kreighoff, I had it re-regulated for 400gr swift a-frame. Reason is quite simple, I have seen a woodie fail,(friends buffalo) and I had heard about all the dgx failures. I used them as a last resort because I wanted to hunt with a open sighted double and they worked but it is only one time evidence. Now that I have some time just went with what I now consider the best.

 

[Red Leg]

I suspect the new bullet will be fine. It is what they should have designed the first time. I have only tried them in my .470 and you would have thought the rifle had been regulated with them. I haven’t and probably won’t try them in .375 simply because I have enough A Frames to last years.

 

[Shootist43]

Aussie Hunter, this is a very fair question. I'm very interested in seeing what current users have to say about the matter. I have no doubt but what some "old stock" of components and or loaded ammo still exists and that there might be some failures reported. As time goes by the possibility / probability of using the older design will diminish. If all Hornady users started punching a little more paper, the supply of "older" stocks would be depleted quicker, thereby giving better results in the field.

 

[fourfive8]

Here are results of tests I've done comparing the Hornady "original" 480 gr 458 DGX non-bonded to the Hornady "current" 480 gr 458 DGX bonded. Both tests were in my wetpack media- which is truly a severe test for any bullet. Impact velocity for both was approx. 2000-2150 fps. Both old and new versions of this DGX bullet appear to be externally identical.

The penetration of the non-bonded original version was less than 12" with pieces being scattered along the track. The deepest penetration was a lead fragment from the base section.

The new bonded version penetrated in a straight line to just over 20" which is in upper end of the ranges of most quality expanding bullets such as A Frames, TSXs and TBBCs in most common calibers tested at normal hunting impact velocities- 30 cal through 45 cal.

The DGX bonded version on right showed good symmetrical expansion and retained 95% mass. It appears that, in addition to the core to jacket bonding, the jacket is internally skived for 8 petals.

 

[Shootist43]

fourfive8, thanks, that is the kind of info the OP and I among others is looking for.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

Here are results of tests I've done comparing the Hornady "original" 480 gr 458 DGX non-bonded to the Hornady "current" 480 gr 458 DGX bonded. Both tests were in my wetpack media- which is truly a severe test for any bullet. Impact velocity for both was approx. 2000-2150 fps. Both old and new versions of this DGX bullet appear to be externally identical.

The penetration of the non-bonded original version was less than 12" with pieces being scattered along the track. The deepest penetration was a lead fragment from the base section.

The new bonded version penetrated in a straight line to just over 20" which is in upper end of the ranges of most quality expanding bullets such as A Frames, TSXs and TBBCs in most common calibers tested at normal hunting impact velocities- 30 cal through 45 cal.

The DGX bonded version on right showed good symmetrical expansion and retained 95% mass. It appears that, in addition to the core to jacket bonding, the jacket is internally skived for 8 petals.

View attachment 328508 View attachment 328509

This is exactly the sort of info I was looking for, thanks for sharing! So far from what I have seen on this thread people are having the same success as I have had with the bonded DGX. I believe in time the old DGX will be forgotten about and the DGX bonded will actually become quite popular.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

Aussie Hunter, this is a very fair question. I'm very interested in seeing what current users have to say about the matter. I have no doubt but what some "old stock" of components and or loaded ammo still exists and that there might be some failures reported. As time goes by the possibility / probability of using the older design will diminish. If all Hornady users started punching a little more paper, the supply of "older" stocks would be depleted quicker, thereby giving better results in the field.

I just bought 3 boxes of the old DGX for exactly this, zeroing my new 458 Lott and just for range ammo to get used to the gun a bit.

 

[Longwalker]

I have shot two shots at game with the new Hornady DGX bonded from my .450-400 3" N.E. first was an elk, at something like 120 M. Broadside high lung shot. Elk ran approx. 200 M and died. Longest track after the shot I have ever had to do, on about 30 elk. I think the bullet was actually too strong for this relatively small soft target.
Second shot was a cape buffalo, facing me almost straight on, angling slightly to my right, at about 80 M. Bullet penetrated the heavy chest muscles, just missing the Humerus, passed through one lung and over the heart, and was lost somewhere in the rumen. There was a very visible reaction to the shot, and the bull could not use his right shoulder as he turned to hobble away. My PH and I shot follow up shots immediately after that, so I don't know how long it would have taken for him to die. But I think not long. I was satisfied with the apparent damage in the lungs, and the penetration.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

I have shot two shots at game with the new Hornady DGX bonded from my .450-400 3" N.E. first was an elk, at something like 120 M. Broadside high lung shot. Elk ran approx. 200 M and died. Longest track after the shot I have ever had to do, on about 30 elk. I think the bullet was actually too strong for this relatively small soft target.
Second shot was a cape buffalo, facing me almost straight on, angling slightly to my right, at about 80 M. Bullet penetrated the heavy chest muscles, just missing the Humerus, passed through one lung and over the heart, and was lost somewhere in the rumen. There was a very visible reaction to the shot, and the bull could not use his right shoulder as he turned to hobble away. My PH and I shot follow up shots immediately after that, so I don't know how long it would have taken for him to die. But I think not long. I was satisfied with the apparent damage in the lungs, and the penetration.
View attachment 328535 View attachment 328537

Hunting Elk with a double rifle, I like it!