I suppose that it may be possible, but I will have to see a steel jacketed DGX bullet that has been torn in half by impact with a game animal before I will believe it.

These bullets seem well-built to me.

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
These bullets seem well-built to me.

They will not be terms of endearment to the antique double rifle shooters.

I see Hornady has started making a bullet that looks like the plastic-tipped Barnes TSX, but Hornady has only two cannelure-grooves on their shank.

Why does not Hornady simply make a bonded-core soft like the Woodleigh?
They also have the better bullets like the Swift, North Fork, and Nosler softs to compete with. None of those are steel-jacketed softs.

The steel-jacketed solid FMJ is a necessary evil, whether ogived-FN or RN-FN ... until they start making a true truncated-cone FN of copper or brass.

Better make the solid a TC-FN of monometal copper with driving bands to keep it useful in all DR's too.

One of these days Hornady will get their bullets right too.

Aren't Woodleigh solids, steel jacketed?

Yes they are.I am sure if I shot the 500gr fmj's from my Lott,they would shoot through and kill anything-even the biggest ele.No need for me to ponder over that.However if I were to use broze bullets with flat noses,then I have issues.One being that they are not accurate,second that they would transfer less energy,third,that that they are more likely to jam need I work the bolt fast and last,they would ruin my barrels.Monometals are IMO,an inexpensive way to make bullets and a more profitable one for the maker,but an inferior bullet.

quote:

They will not be terms of endearment to the antique double rifle shooters.

Look fine to me. Steel jacketed solids have been in use in doubles for almost 60 years. Kynoch steel jacketed softs were available from the mid-50s. The problems started with the monos.

quote:

The steel-jacketed solid FMJ is a necessary evil, whether ogived-FN or RN-FN ... until they start making a true truncated-cone FN of copper or brass.

God I hope they never do.

I checked a little on the story about the bullets being tested in Africa last year. Still not definite, but it doesn't sound like they were DGX/DGS. If I remember, I'll ask Steve when I see him at SCI.

Good post 400 Nitro Express! RIP doesn't know much about bullets because he is not used to thinking but memorizing. He feels the need to construct a silly metal box to test bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Yes they are.I am sure if I shot the 500gr fmj's from my Lott,they would shoot through and kill anything-even the biggest ele.No need for me to ponder over that.However if I were to use broze bullets with flat noses,then I have issues.One being that they are not accurate,second that they would transfer less energy,third,that that they are more likely to jam need I work the bolt fast and last,they would ruin my barrels.Monometals are IMO,an inexpensive way to make bullets and a more profitable one for the maker,but an inferior bullet.

Huh?

shootaway, are you okay, mentally?

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
shootaway, are you okay, mentally?

Someone needs to find out who this joker really is...no one could be this clueless...gotta be Walter on behalf of Saeed.

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
shootaway, are you okay, mentally?

MR,
No shootaway is not okay mentally.

The steady diet for a DR is a Woodleigh RNSP.
The steel FMJ is the occasional Twinkie treat for the DR when hunting elephant or backing up the soft on smaller DG.
Monometal-copper-driving-banded-truncated-cone solids will always be more healthful for the DR and the rifleman.
Y'all can argue until blue in the face, but it will not change physics, unless you are from the anti-universe that shootaway lives in.

quote:

Monometal-copper-driving-banded-truncated-cone solids will always be more healthful for the DR and the rifleman.

No need to argue. It isn't true.

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
shootaway, are you okay, mentally?

LMFAO

Be gentle with him. He just can't help it...

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Copper is not copper like all pizza is not pizza and all coffee is not coffee. Ask someone who knows bullets and I am sure he will agree with me.Your way of thinking is all to common.

Copper is copper, just like gold is gold, oxygen is oxygen.


Jason

Just like wood is wood?

shotforbrains:
Copper is an element.
The copper in any gilding metal is the same elemental substance. The gilding metal differs in the alloy content of other elements like zinc and tin.

Wood is from living organisms called trees, is an organic material, mostly cellulose, composed primarily of the elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, and many other traces of other elements, such as in the form of mineral compounds of elements (even some copper) suspended in the complex cellulose matrix, and the matrix differs in structure between different species of wood.

There are many different types of wood, from different species of trees.

Now make a numb-noggin note of this:

There is only one type of copper, it is called "copper."

Go look it up in the periodic table of elements and report back with the atomic number to signify your understanding, you moron.

Hey RIP,I was an honours student in college,so cut the crap.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Hey RIP,I was an honours student in college,so cut the crap.

Majored in underwater basket weaving and minored in creative drooling, eh?

In my book,there is not one kind of anything.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
In my book,there is not one kind of anything.

Can I get a signed first edition of "Your Book"...??

Only if you start selling REAL bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Only if you start selling REAL bullets.

Sorry Shootaway...I'm not very smart and can't figure out how to make real bullets...but if you get your Crayola out and draw a real bullet for me I'll make them for you. You'll need some money Shootaway to buy them...of course a Successful Nuclear Physicist such as yourself can afford whatever bullets he may like...

Just make the A-frame with a slightly thicker jacket and you will make a fortune.If you don't succeed in making a fortune(future??),you will have many bullets left over that will please many hunters.

How bout including that drawing in your book...?? Better yet...why don't you draw up your super-bullet and post it here so we can all understand what you're thinking...

I am too tired to draw anything right now and I am off to bed.

We'll be here when you come back Shootaway...

I have only been here on AR for a short period of time, but have not been shy about speaking my mind. Some of you have seen my posts, and they can be rather lengthy at times. This morning I have to say;

I am at a loss for words to describe this!


shootaway ???????????????????

Michael

quote:

I am at a loss for words to describe this!

Shootaway is our resident Artiste-Savante in a Sarthe meets Shemp kinda way...most entertaining and now we have a book AND a drawing to look forward to...

Macifej

I gathered that about shootaway. I think he has teamed up with a select few that have posted on this thread and between them they are doing a book now, as I suggested to one early in this thread, very possible we can have some drawings of new bullets. And of course the material we should use to make said bullets. Of course I fear that the bullet material would be a mix of wood and wax, as to not damage the bores of shootaways plastic barrels? Maybe shootaway should have only smoothbore barrels, then wear and tear on the rifling would not be a concern?

I don't know, that is out of my circle of expertise? For me, hell I love copper, zinc, bronze, brass, sure can make some nifty bullets out of these materials, and I like bullets-projectiles, which I can only assume there must be a little something odd about me in that respect?

Michael

[URL= ]bullet design[/URL]

And I thought it was just going to be another dreary day. Thanks for the entertainment shootaway .

Ken....

This stuff is better than anything on the T.V.

Me Too!!!!!!!!

Got to get out more.I am going to see the nutcracker at the Place des Arts this afternoon.Got to plug in my truck.Hopefully,I'll be back with some fresh ideas.

I wonder how shotforbrains is going to get the lead inside of the copper base?
Surely not by welding a copper disk onto the base of the lead-filled copper cup?
Some new technology? A cross between teleportation and alchemy: teleport the copper out, and teleport the lead in, or just teleport the alchemy in and transform the copper to lead where it sits?
Adding that much mass to the inside of the solid copper bullet base will require a lot of energy.
Has shotforbrains perfected coldfusion?

RIP

I am surprised it is not obvious to you!!!! I know exactly how he is going to do it. See Below!

I think I would settle for the North Fork over the Shoot-A-Frame, so long as the quality is still what it was...

quote:

Macifej: Someone needs to find out who this joker really is...no one could be this clueless...gotta be Walter on behalf of Saeed.

Has to be. Or Scott, InfoSpin, BBBruce or one of the other trolls.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
These bullets seem well-built to me.

They will not be terms of endearment to the antique double rifle shooters.

I see Hornady has started making a bullet that looks like the plastic-tipped Barnes TSX, but Hornady has only two cannelure-grooves on their shank.

Why does not Hornady simply make a bonded-core soft like the Woodleigh?
They also have the better bullets like the Swift, North Fork, and Nosler softs to compete with. None of those are steel-jacketed softs.

The steel-jacketed solid FMJ is a necessary evil, whether ogived-FN or RN-FN ... until they start making a true truncated-cone FN of copper or brass.

Better make the solid a TC-FN of monometal copper with driving bands to keep it useful in all DR's too.

One of these days Hornady will get their bullets right too.

RIP:

I have had great luck on non dangerous thin skinned game like deer and elk with a plain old Hornady Interlock. I think that as long as you stick to bullets that are heavy for caliber, they work great in that regard. However, I have not been inclined to shoot the new steel jacketed soft from Hornaday. I just don't feel comfortable about feeding my rifle a steady diet of steel jacketed bullets.

With respect to solids, I have a faily good supply of Woodleighs but gosh are they ever getting expensive. In several calibers I have switched over to Barnes TSX bullets and I think they are superb. I have also logged in a good supply of Barnes banded solids. What do you think of the Barnes solids?

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by lawndart:
Does anyone have feedback on the new Hornady round/flat nosed style of soft and solid bullets. The price is attractive for practicing, but how do they (.375 and up) perform on Buffalo, Elephant, Water Buffalo, and such?

How do the compare to the newer Woodleighs?

Thanks for you input on these questions.

LD

Lawndart!
To get back to your original question, I have been looking into the field performance of the new Hornady DGS and DGX bullets for an upcoming article in AH Magazine. I pay little attention to tests of bullets in simulated media as actual field reports of their use seems to me to be what in the final analysis is what we want to know. Initial reports of the Hornady DGS solid look very promising. But, we need many more reports before we can comfortably predict how good they will be. One of the problems is that when we get early reports they are for one or two calibers. The same bullet design in two different calibers may perform differently. Such things as barrel twist, velocity and bullet construction may influence how the bullet reacts to soft or hard tissue. Early reports also are necessarily of small sample sizes which means that where the bullet hit may indicate one level of performance while a different bullet path may lead to a different performance level. As I said the initial reports are positive but we need many more before we can reliably rate these bullets.
I haven't seen enough reports of the DGX to have formed even an initial opinion. So to sum it up I would say that the jury is still out on these bullets.

465H&H