Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Hornady did change the Interlock

During the discussion of Hornady Interlock performance a little while ago here, a Campfire member (who didn't post on the thread because it turned into a typical Campfire name-calling contest) PM'd me and said he'd had a 180-grain .30 caliber separate jacket and core on a 200-yard broadside rib shot on a cow elk. The cartridge was the .300 Winchester Magnum, and the terminal velocity at 200 yards would have been about 2650 fps.

He sent me the jacket, and it's one of the new bullets with the Interlock ring much higher in the shank of the jacket, not far below the cannelure. The jacket opened back past the ring, and the core popped free. In fact, the Interlock ring is now on the outside of the jacket, where the jacket turned inside out.

In the past the Interlock ring was maybe 1/4" above the base of the jacket. I have a few Interlock Spire Points in my recovered bullet collection, and with only one exception they all opened up to the Interlock ring and no further. (The exception was a 130 from a .270 that hit the spine at the base of the neck on a big pronghorn buck, as it faced my wife at 130 yards. We found the mangled jacket and what was left of the core under the skin at the back of the neck, which might be expected on such a close-range shot from a high-velocity cartridge. The buck went straight down.)

He also sent along a couple of bullets pulled from his handloads, so I can do a little "media" penetration testing. But right now it does look as if the changed location of the Interlock ring is indeed affecting terminal performance.

John, thanks for that information. It seems that the changing of bullet construction is a secret that the industry guards more closely than we guarded the fact that we had obtained an Enigma machine or broken the Japanese code.

Wonder if it's changed across the line or just a few particular bullets?

A solution to a non-existent problem.

A friend of mine and I are going to start loading for his 257 Weatherby again, and we had already decided to change from the 100 gr. Interlock (that I duplicated factory loads with a few years ago) to the TSX and TTSX. I think we accidentally made the change at the perfect time.

John, if I'm reading your post correctly it sounds like they were going for more weight retention without thickening the jacket and it backfired as the expansion is going further than the Interlock ring.

Is that the gist you think?

PS, Dober had a 165 HDYBTSP come apart on his elk this year (400+ yards from 30-06).

One would think that such a change would be precipitated by much testing and analysis. Then again maybe not.

Brad,

That might very well be their reasoning, but who knows? Especially since there was no annoucement of the change. You'd think if the modification was an attempt to increase weight retention, it would be worth a little publicity.

Yeah, I heard about Mark's bullet separating. The next question: Is this indeed a trend?

Is it some type of money saving move? easier to produce? That would be my guess.

Thanks for the information. Dang, I hate to hear that. I really like the very bullet mentioned in your thread in my .30-06. I've got 20 loaded and 40 or so ready to load. Looks like it is time to scour the shelves for "pre-change" bullets.

Expat

... or a redesign to promote the use of their more expensive range of monolithics like the GMX and bonded bullets like the Interbond?

Seems just about every maker is going bonded or monolithic. Animals must be getting tougher by the day.
Cheers...
Con

Mine too...

In fact, a couple of years ago I inquired with Hornady about their 350gr RN in .458", as the box I had purchased had 2 cannelures (which I liked, by the way,as I was able to crimp in the bottom one, about 1/4" from the bottom of the bullet, using it in my .458 WM), one in the "normal" location. Plus the base of the bullet had very rounded edges making seating of the bullet almost like a BT. I was told that all apparent changes were simply to make things easier in the manufacturing process.

For a number of years, it was quite well known by serious users of Hornady bullets that they "tinkered" with the location of the cannelures: the 500gr in .458 and 225gr in .338 as examples.

Speaking of the bullet in question (the 190gr BT), I loaded that bullet for a bear hunt in a young friend's .300 WM at 2950 fps this past September. He shot a bear at 65 yds, broadside through the lungs, and the bear was dead before it hit the ground. Not a large bear, but a complete pass-through with lung tissue scattered over bushes. Exit hole was about 1.5".

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

The 190 Hornady BT is my go to bullet in my 300 Mag. I use it just for elk. I have killed my last 5 elk (6 years) with one box of bullets (still have bunch left) It is very accurate. Ranges from 80 to 495 yards. Funny thing is in spite of hitting no bones, I have recovered a bunch of them. Four in fact and always found in the off side under the hide. I did find one with separation, but the jacket and core were still intact just loose. They always expand at longer ranges. Retained weight was about 310 Lb. I know because a packed the [bleep] a couple miles

Thanks for posting this Mule Deer

Than you
You have helped to confirm that I'm not a hornady hating, rumor starting moron; unable to process obvious information.
After attemping to defend myself on the other thread, I gave up in absolute disgust, and didn't bother to even check 24hr until Jamie sent me this in an e-mail.
Mike

Brad, was this a bullet from new box (not the old red hornady box)? The 165 btsp has been my go-to bullet for years. Hope they have not changed that one.

Thanks for sharing your bullet experience both here and on CGN

Just great that is my every day go bullet for 308, 30/06. We should all e- mail Hornady and make a fuss,

I've already tried calling, and sending a package with proof to no avail.
Mike

Several things need to be said here.

The 190g .30 Bullet being mentioned by JB is a BOAT TAIL, I believe..

Interlock or not, conventional cup and core Boattail bullets do tend to shed their cores easier than a flat based designs.Especially at magnum level impact velocities .

Hornaday has grown into a pretty large company in the last 20 years. I'm sure they have a lot of young engineers who are constantly asked to tweek and improve products every day..

Those improvements often result in real progress, but those decisions are still made by human beings and sometimes they make the wrong moves.

I SINCERELY doubt Hornady would INTENTIONALLY make a change to a product that they KNOW would lead to it's failure in the field.

To those that say they are somehow "cheapening" the Interlock or making changes to drive costumers to their more expensive offerings- it does not add up.

Moving the LOCATION of the Interlock ring does not lower costs. It still requires the same process.

If Hornday wanted to drive customers to their Interbond and GMX lines, then they would simply DROP the non-bonded Interlock bullets altogether. That WOULD force folks to buy their higher priced lines AND not risk their reputation in the process.

To me, the BIG question is HOW Hornady reacts to reports of bullet failures and recovered bullets being sent to them with inquiries from their customers as to how /why they have changed those bullets. The problem is, large organizations take a while to make those decisions and implement those changes.

In the meantime, it will be interesting to see more of Muledeer's media testing. I hope he includes samples of the previously mentioned .30 180g Flat Based Interlocks, too.