Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Has Hornady changed the Interlock?

Wish I had the tools to perform a decent section on these bullets.

Actually it isn't too hard. Put a bullet lengthwise in a good bench vise, then file on it until you're close to halfway down.
Sometimes you have to adjust the bullet in the vise a few times to get the sectioning right, but once you do, "polish" it with a piece of sandpaper.

The core hardness can be checked with a cast bullet tester. Checking the cores of a few bullets will give you a relative idea of hardness--which makes as much difference as the jacket.

I'm embarrassed to say that I lost my bench vice in the last move... about 2.5yrs ago! Christmas has come and gone twice with no dice... or vice. Maybe I can get up to my dad's shop sometime this weekend. His vice hasn't moved in 30 years.

Aletheuo: CHECK THIS OUT!! I got my box of H. 30, 180s out of
curiosity. My box has THE SAME LOT NO as YOURS on the left.

#2090196 I bought these from MIDWAY Sept/Oct this yr.

Whatever diff/likness you find will tell us something between these 2 lots.

AIN'T THAT A COINCIDENCE? ? Waiting to hear.

JWALL

Ok JB - you know I'm a computer jock (spelling g-e-e-k), right? This shop stuff ain't my forte. This is the best I can do and I can't get the end of the shank because I held them down with a fencing staple driven into my bench. I also don't have access to a hardness tester. Left and right are the same as in the above.


JWALL - It is interesting as I bought these in Western Canada. I have no idea how many bullets are made per lot so it's hard to know what the chances are... sounds like a fair mathematical pursuit.

Hey Jamie
I'm thinking that I might have actually sold you my last box of good ones.........dang! Is it just me, or can you actually see a difference in the interlock on these two bullets? It looks to me like it's quite prominant on the one on the right, yet just a change in the thickness on the one on the left. It also looks like the one on the right has a slightly thicker jacket, also the more lead exposed on the one one the left would initiate expansion more. I would guess that these would all be small differences, yet I wonder if small differences would be a big difference upon impact.
I think that I made the right choice in going to the 168gr Barnes TTSX, yet I'm still having a hard time swallowing the fact that I'm paying twice as much for a bullet that should be half as hard to make.
P.S. Ya notice that I used a separate paragraph on this post?
Mike

In terms of any difference in jacket thickness, I think you are seeing what you wish was there, instead of what actually IS there..

Mike - no, I don't see any difference actually. I think the section of the one on the left is not quite down to half so it appears thicker. But if you have an open box of the lot you have we can section one of those as well. I'm an experienced sectioner now LOL.

That said - as Mule Deer pointed out, hardness of lead is also an important factor.

The one on the right seems to have a more uniform jacket. Note the jacket difference near the top on the LH bullet.

.

SC:

edit - I had another look and it does appear that the section is good in that area so your observation is valid - there is a lack of uniformity in the jacket at that point.

There is also a lack of uniformity in the way the bullets were sectioned.

Not exactly lab quality work and a poor basis to pick apart a perfectly good design.

Just sayin'.

All I can see is the cannelure, no interlock ring visible to me...

The Interlock ring is normally down near the base, and the bullets weren't sectioned that far--though the one on the right may show some of the top of the ring.

Another test would be to shoot some into newspaper, alongside some older Interlocks of the same weight and diameter.

Or better yet, the Interlock critics here could just get some Corbin bullet swagging equipment, some copper bullet jacket material and lead wire and set up shop and show us all- including Hornady- how to make a "good" .30 hunting bullet.

And then set back and watch others tear apart there handiwork, both literally and figuratively.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to get at. There are comments about how the IL rings compare in the photo, but I beleive they are really referring to the crimping cannelure.

Ok - you guys dun made me set up my bench grinder. This is getting equivalent to butchery now. But... I dun see an interlock ring on either bullet. edit: the one on the left appears to have some sort of bulge but it's ain't. It's a "finesse" issue with the grinder.

You should put in your application at the meat counter at Safeway.

The interlock ring on the first sectioned picture is about an inch down from the cannular. I can see a little spur on both sides at this point on the right hand bullet. but it's only a change in thickness on the left hand core. The origonal bullet with the ID ring showed it very obviously, so yes, the bullet on the right is different from the origonal, but not as different as the one on the left.
Mike

Ok - I should stick with being an IT guy - knives and tools dangerous LOL. There is clearly an interlock ring in either bullet but one is quite a bit smaller - to the point you can't hardly detect it with your finger it on the core. The other one is way more pronounced. I offer this up to the experts to determine if it's simply lot-to-lot variation. I would also encourage someone else to do this as I'm pushing the limits of photographic and shop abilities.

DING. DING. DING.

We have a WINNER!

By the way- there ARE no "experts" here on making Hornady bullets- only the folks AT Hornady qualify in that regard.

Nice job peeling those 180g bananas , though..