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.

I would think such a change would be tested thoroughly, in expansion media, if it was intentional.

Knowing how things can go in stamping shops, I wonder if it was an error in the process setup, or a tool was repaired incorrectly.

This is some pretty sad news! I sued that bullet for years out of a Rem. Custom KS in 300 Win. mag with great results. Sure wish these companies could leave well enough alone!

Perhaps they will pull a Remington.
Took a bullet with a great reputation, (core-locked), saved a few pennies by thinning it out.
You can still get the original, but now its called the core-locked Ultra! More money of course. Go figure.

Um, no, the Core-LOkt Ultra is not the original Core-Lokt bullet. The CLU is essentially a cup-and-core bullet with the core bonded to the jacket.

OK.
Lets just say to get a bullet that works as well as the original.
They did indeed cheapen, and as a result, ruined a great bullet.

Ahh, yes! The new one is always better. Just ask Bill Cosby about the New Coke.

[/quote]
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..



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

I wonder if some of those engineers are "20 somethings"?...
I also do not recall anyone saying they were intentionally trying to change the product to make it fail, but if they made a design change and it doesn't work in the field Hornady should be made aware of it. A product designed to intentionally fail would not drive customers to a more expensive product from the same manufacturer but would drive customers away altogether. JMHO.

Yup - but it also drives other purchasing decisions. I'm just looking for a bullet to settle on for my new 204... the Sierra blitzking is becoming quite attractive.

You need to go back and look on this very thread. Some folks ARE claiming Hornady has purposely lessened the performance of the Interlock..

This quote on the top of page two-

I'm certain Hornady has had the intention of pissing everyone off; they did, after all, kept making Jet bullets, 22 Imp bullets and 33 WCF bullets because customers don't matter...

I was thinking the same thing, all the way along .

"Chit happens", in a manufacturing environment .

Hope somebody's got some lot #s to backtrack .

GTC

Was a time more than a few years back that I shot all my deer for 5-6 years with my push feed M70 300 Win Mag,for awhile I used my elk load 180 NPT's. then worked up a mild load of H4831 and Hornady 165 gr SP and BTSP bullets they were running just under 3100 fps. These Hornadys were Interlock vintage and both shot very well in my 300win mag. They both also shot well in my custom 03 30-06 at about 2800 fps. The flat based SP allways held together and exited. The BTSP's on the otherhand just about allways came apart or darn near did most of the time not exiting on quartering shots. I still like the SP flatbase as a go to bullet that gets the job done. I've found that the 139 gr 7's in the btsp aren't as durable either as the SP flatbase ditto the 100 gr in the 243. I think a btsp just comes apart easier period no matter whose they are or in what. Somebody got some new ones they will section ,I'll section an older Interlock. Magnum Man

I've got a couple of stunts I've muddled my way into for "Sectioning" bullets, and getting a real clean specimen....

Mind if I ask how you do it ?

GTC

Magnum Man: Yes, I have new lots of 30 cal. 180 fb. and 165 spbt.

I have already USED the 180s this season on 4 deer. Results were VERY GOOD. Two were broadside thru ribs/lungs. One was slightly 1/4ing and broke left side shoulder where it joins the upper leg upon exit. There was VERY LITTLE blood shot and did not do excessive damage.( Seemed very controled exp.)

The other one was almost RAKING. Broke 2 ribs on entrance and seperated the right shoulder upon exit. Again little bloodshot and not excessive meat damage.

It may take me a couple of days to get to it, but I'll try to section both 180 & 165. Both in NEW BOXES, new lots.

J.B. Since my new lot of 180 performed very well, I'm just wondering if they may have changed BACK. You would need to have seen the terminal performance on these 4 deer but we couldn't ask a c/c to do any better. This performance came from a 300 WM, 180 gr at distances of 145yds, @150yds, 135 yds, & 260 yds. So that's 3 at fairly close range and 1 at medium range.

I'll try to section samples of 180s & 165s ASAP.

I would also be GLAD to mail you a couple of each bullet wt. and you could do whatever you wanted with NEW LOTS. Aletheuo posted pics of the older box he got from Mike and Mine are the new box and the LOT NO. matched Aletheuos new no.

JWALL
______________

Son I Don't Know You Well Enough To Miss You.........Johnny Cash

Are we discussing bullet failures that were recovered from dead animals again?

Actually thought we would cut some bullets in half to see if the interlock was in the same place Magnum Man

"Actually thought we would cut some bullets in half to see if the interlock was in the same place"

Magnum Man



I guess that's for me ? Iwas curious as to the method YOU use to "Cut them in Half",...that's all,....

I'd be GLAD to do that,....I've got a "Never Sweat" way of getting good (LAB GRADE) results.

Made a BUNCH , once,....for a "Hunter Training" program, then just did it for laughs.

GTC

Wait a minute! You shot game with a push-feed Model 70? And you admit it? Good for you!

jim62.........the reason why I haven't bothered with 24hr campfire since the last post.........
I never personally clamed that Hornady had intentionally decreased the interlocks performance.........though I oddly don't find the idea beyond plausable. What I know is 6 months ago, I thought that I had 1200 bullets that I could absolutely count on for my 30-06; now I find myself in a situation where I have to buy very expensive bullets, that cost way more than they should possibly be worth, to get the performance I thought that I was always getting........even the most basic of cup and core bullet shouldn't totally fail on a deer.....or even an elk.
Mike

John,
I believe your original post on this was correct when you inferred that by moving the interlock forward, expansion to that point, "would/could", negate the integrity of the design and let the core go.

I think this is correct, at least in what I have seen posted on the sectioned bullets. I personally favor the BT version of this bullet so will section one to see if that IL has been moved as well.

JW

JW,

I'd sure like to hear what you find.

Obviously, we are in the early stages of this investigation. It's entirely possible that the change has been made only on certain Interlocks, for whatever reason.

I believe that the 30 caliber 180gr interlocks have an interlock ring in front of and behind the cannelure. I remember a number of years ago when their appearance changed: at least ten years.

Hmm. I've sectioned a lot of Interlocks, and never seen one with a ring in front of the cannelure.

As for changes in appearance, they happen all the time with Interlocks, probably when the forming dies wear out. I've been told by another bullet company that their forming dies wear out within about 40,000 bullets.

Well yeah, would be more than glad to hear your method. I thought I would drill a 30 cal hole in a block of wood press in the bullets and put them in a vise and saw thru them.

JWall I have the older 180 Interlocks and the 165 BTSP Interlocks for comparison lets measure from the bottom up to the top of the interlock.

5sdad, Never been ashamed of any pushfeed M70 I own a pre XTR 25-06, a USRA m70 Featherweight 6.5x55, a Win M70 300 Win Mag, and a Win M70 XTR 338 Win mag they all shoot well and are dead reliable. Don't have any crf M70's and don't know why I'd trade any of mine for a crf variety.

Wpah there is a ring above the canelure on the 180 Interlock that is visible from the outside but it is not the interlock that is on the inside.

Magnum Man

I sent this on to another fellow last night,......

"I've got a Milling machine,......and have been REAL successful "potting" slugs in "Cerro-Safe" in a Box mold (wood works fine at cerro temps),...then freezing the set up, and milling it with a SHARP high positive tool. Once cut,.....the whole thing comes unglued with nothing more complicated then boiling water.

For "Shelf Display",.....Hunter Training course samples and such,...substitute left over acra-glas. If the "Boxes" are done out of select wood,.....you get REAL pretty show-grade stuff.

I had a Corbin C-H1 Bullet swadging set up for a while,....sold the thing off, as it looked like something that could take over one's life,.....and most of his $$, too."

The main thing about the method above is keeping things COOL,....

.....Straight Copper has, in it's own right, some strange machining characteristics , Gilding medal some more...throw lead into the equation and the sawing & filing thing can get a little frustrating.

The machining stunts above yield REALLY nice samples, ....and I'd be more then willing to volly up for that detail, should you or anyone else here so require.

Cheers, GTC

I have never recovered a Hornady that seperated the jacket/core. My sample is small, maybe 10 bullets. I shoot Hornady's in quite a few calibers. My most recent recovery was a 180BTSP from a WT and another of the same from a large framed black bear. Both bullets looked good and no seperation. I hope the change is minimal at worst.

Joseph

I have some new 180g SP interlocks as well. I shoot red deer at quite close ranges as a rule, from 5 to 12 metres, I can let you know how they go.

Regarding BTSP versus SP - my experience backs up an earlier poster. At close range like this, the BTSP bullets (in any caliber) come apart every time.

John,do you know if the bullet killed the Elk?????

No the Elk was not killed, but he did bring the jacket to the hunter for inspection

I wanted to know if that bullet killed that Elk or did it need a finishing shot.

The elk is obviously dead.........hense him retrieving the bullet. The problem with this whole sinerio is that if things don't go quite right.....you don't hit him with the proverbial perfect shot.........or you have to do the politically incorrect Texas heart shot; what happens? If you have 120-180grs of lead and copper,traveling at 2700fps, it's going to plow through some meat; weather it does it in bits, or in one piece, it's still going to do it. The problem arises when it doesn't do enough of it.
If I've been killing animals by plunking a bullet through the ribcage for years, that doesn't mean that the bullet is going to do what I want when it meets the shoulder of a bull elk; that bullet it probably going to react quite differently than the bullet that has met little, or no resistance.
When I pick a bullet, I want to plan for the worst case scinerio, then, if things don't happen as planned, my suprise is pleasent; not unpleasent. for many years, I nievly thought that the Hornady Interlock was able to accomlish this for me; and for the most part, I was probably right. I recommended the Interlock to friends without hesitation. not only can I no longer do that, but I find myself having to look at an alternative.........at an inflated cost I might add.
Did Hornady mean to do this, I don't know. has it happened; yes. If you wish to, look at the other post to see the pictures. I'm not trying to change other peoples minds, but I'm trying to warn that things have changed. I've sent a package off to Hornady with no response; I thought that they where better than that. I had brand loyalty........that is in the past. I trust my own judgement now, and if others want to see, or hear about my results,they have been duly posted.
Mike

May I be so bold to ask: Why would one ever have to take a "Texas heart shot" at an unwounded animal? Must one take less than "the proverbial perfect shot"? If there's any question, wait for a better shot unless you or your family is starving. Patience is virtue....espically when hunting.

When I mention the texas heart shot, it's under the assumption that others would know that it's only taken when another shot has failed, and your dealing with a wounded animal.
Mike

The difference is that if the animal was killed by that bullet,whats the bitch?????if it was not then we need to investigate further.People who cry about a bullets performance if it kills the animal have OCD!!!!!!!!

Yes, the elk was killed.

The problem is that Hornady Interlocks have long been known as the "poor man's premium," because they almost never separated core and jacket. On a broadside rib shot on a deer a 180 .30 would just about always exit, and exit most of the time even on elk. Additionally, because they held together so well, Interlocks could be relied on to break considerable bone and still penetrate pretty deeply, unlike some cup-and-core bullets.

In fact, some hunters claim Interlocks compare to Nosler Partitions in penetration, given the same weight and diameter of bullet. My experience doesn't quite agree with that, but I have seen a lot of Interlocks perform very well on game larger than deer. Part of the reason was that they held together pretty darn well, retaining anywhere from 50-70% of their weight.

In the instance here the bullet did not even stay together on a broadside rib shot on a cow elk. Yes, it killed the elk, but on any sort of angling and/or bone shot, it might not have penetrated sufficiently. That is a long way from "poor man's premium" performance.

There have been other reports along those lines about recent Interlock performance, and it turns out that the Interlock ring has indeed been moved forward, at least in recent 180-grain .30 Spire Points.

The reason the bullet in question came apart is that the jacket peeled back to the point where the Interlock didn't retain the core. If the Interlock ring were still in the same place it used to be on the same bullets, 1/10th of an inch further down inside the jacket, the core wouldn't have left the jacket, because the jacket didn't peel back that far.

If you don't see the problem with that, then you don't understand why so many people have relied on the Hornady Interlock for so long, choosing the Interlock above many other cup-and-core bullets because it could be relied on to penetrate big game.

Exactly..Broadside shots are not always the norm if you want to eat Elk through the winter..

I have know idea why the manufacturers choose to change what is not broke.An earlier example I posted on the old Unicore versus the new Deep Curl showed the same penetration but more loss of bullet weight and less frontal area than the old Unicore...

Just because a bullet kills this time doesn;t mean it will next time on a different angle.

Jayco

Has anyone seen a change in packaging on the new Interlocks? I was thinking if I could find some of the originals, I would stock up on some of my favorites.

Thanks all,


ddj

trouthunterdj,

Well they have changed the packaging fairly recently (2009?). The packaging on the interlocks I purchased in 2006 have a different look than the ones purchased in 2009 & 2010. Obviously, that doesn't tell you when a change in the bullet was introduced. With how recent these reports of bullet changes are it sounds as if anything in the older style packaging is likely to have the interlock ring further back like it was traditionally.

We found a box of ID ring interlocks (with the lower interlock ring) in a lot number in between two newer ones... if lot numbers are actually sequential. Only Steve and his staff know.

ie/ 207xxx were newer design, 208xxx were ID rings, 209xxx were newer design or something like that. I don't recall the exact numbers now but you get the picture.

Guess thats why I like the Winchester Power Point.On big game moose bear ect I've always had WAY better performance from the Win bullet over the Interlock.Though I do have respect for the 30 cal 190gr BTSP Interlock thats it.

Azar and Aletheuo - Thank You


ddj

7 STW,

According to Gary Sciuchetti in his monumental test of 180 grain 30 caliber bullets, there are two different designs of Power Point bullet in that weight/caliber - one for the 30-06, and a tougher one for the 300 mag. Which one do you have the good experiences with?

Howdy Big Redhead

The 300 Win mag.

Are they factory loads?

Colin yes they were from the factory Super X ammo line.Wasn't even aware of the 2 different 30 cal slugs until now.Wonder which ones come in bulk?

Thanks for taking the time to explain the circumstances to me.I now understand your concern.

I do know that the 180 gr powerpoint in 308 win is very tough. About 7-8 years ago I shot a few factory loads of the win 180 silvertip (not BT) and 180 powerpoint at dry paper at about 25 yards. The 180 powerpoint went the deepest by far. I forget the details of weight retention, etc but based a few rounds into paper it made a good impression on me.

I suspect it is the same 180 gr pp bullet in the 300 wm, 3006, and component bags nowadays but don't know for sure.

Good for you! I would glady take any of them. Best, John

Does anyone have a box of new production 180 grain interlock 300 weatherby ammo? Curious to see if they are supplying Norma with the old style interlock? That would account for the box of ID ring interlocks in between two lots of newer ones. Thanks.

I've only recovered one Power Point from a moose neck.Every other PP has always exited from my 300.Through and through.

I've also had good luck with Power Points. They're usually very accurate too!

I shot nothing but 130-grain power points out of one particular .270 for many years. Although that rifle has since become something of a safe queen, the power points gave good accuracy and accounted for a lot of deer and hogs with zero performance issues.

Same for me John.My favorite old standard cup and core bullet by far.

I realize that the 'fire' represents a fraction of Hornady's business, but it would sure be nice to hear their side of the story. While not an Interlock customer, I've heard nothing but good things about the .338 200 Interlock. I'm not happy with Speer for messing with their designs in such a way as the .338 200 Hot Cor may go away.

I just bought a new box of 130gr. 270's. Hope they didn't change them because I've had nothing but good luck with the old ones.

About 10 years ago (pre-campfire) I read some stuff online about how the Hornady 6.5 129 SP was surprisingly soft. I shot a Texas doe with that bullet out of a 6.5x55 at 100 yards. Slightly quartered away, the coreless jacket was found in the off shoulder, not performance Hornady is known for. However, I never heard any more bad reports about that bullet and I sold the Swede. I chalked it up to a bad batch of bullets that got out of Hornady's door.

Could that be what happened in this case?

Weatherby is listing interlocks in their catalog as below. I can't imagine getting 70-80% weight retention on a new interlock when driven at weatherby velocities.

What PROOF do you (or anyone else here) provide to refute Hornady's claim ?

I have not seen any real evidence that that even the new batches of the flat based Interlock still do not perform as advertised on game.

Easy solution--

Poor mans premium = Nosler Partition 2nds...........

so I thought about different ways of doing this and came to the conclusion I was over thinking what was needed. I took a older 165 gr Btsp interlock and a older 180 sp flatbase interlok and put them horizontally in a vise to hold them and used a flat smooth file on them. after an appropriate amount of strokes to expose the interlock I found that the 180 gr Interlock (top edge)located at .200" from the outside bottom of the bullet and the 165 gr btsp top edge of the Interlock was .315" above the bottom of the bullet. So what were the new ones ? Magnum Man

Allright you talkers where are your results? This is real hard to do takes maybe 3 minutes with a vice and a smooth flat file or mill bastard. Magnum Man

I am absolutely astonished!

Who thought that "bastard" would make it past the board's "bad word autocensor"?

pussy! <-- just testing, still can't use that one!

John

Here's my result with the 3090.

Pretty discouraging because it doesn't look like the core is bonded to the jacket very well. Things that make you go hmmmmmm.....

It never was a bonded bullet. The interbond is. The Interlock was designed as a mechanical lock.

Good to know. Never had a problem with the older style interlock performing on game.

Those bullets are Interlocks.

They are not a "bonded bullet", just a regular cup and core.

Perhaps you are confusing those with Interbonds???

Yep my mistake, sorry

B,

Your comment does bring up a good point I have often thought of.

Given the kind of confusing names _ Interlock/Interbond- wonder how many folks get the two mixed up and expect bonded bullet performance from the Interlocks.

Jim, when I expect bonded performance out of a bullet I opt for the good ol trophy bonded bear claw (old style). Your right though, I thought the partition was a bonded bullet too becasue it is a premium controlled expansion bullet but it isn't. However, I think the interlock is an ideal and excellent deer bullet though.

I recovered two Interlocks from a black bear I shot in 2009 with bullets I bought that year. One was from a raking shot. The bullet was stuck in the spine. The core and jacket were together until I pulled the bullet out at which point they separated. The other was just a jacket I bit into while eating a roast, kind of like bird shot in a bird. I don't know where the core went. Would bullets made in 2009 be old or new?

The bullets were 195 gr. .323" bullets shot at 2520 fps and hit 50 yards away.

I dunno when or even IF any change was made in the 8mm Interlocks. So far I have only seen the change in .30 180's, and am not assuming the change was made throughout the line.

With the ease of communication these days, the bullet companies can easily post an "update" on their websites. They all have them. Is that asking too much? As bullet performance is the most important element of the hunt, why should we settle for "bullet roulette"? Seems to me it would be good public relations to let the customer know.

Are we going to be relegated to sectioning bullets before we hand load for the next hunt?

Would this not be a change that will eventually be spread across the entire Hornady line? It would seem to be strange if they only applied the change in a few bullets. Perhaps as the dies wear and are replaced, Hornady's plans are to apply the new design across-the-board.

Question: How receptive is Hornady to customer feedback? If reports indicate breakup of the new design and the older design holds together, what are the chances they might re-consider the new design?

Doesn't seem like it would be very difficult for them to go back to the previous design, does it? That is unless they decided the metallurgy (proportions of the constituent metals) for the jacket and the core for the old design was getting too expensive for their price point, and the new design was deemed needed for their new metallurgy.

As luck would have it I just bought some of that very bullet on line Sunday. I would not want a field problem, thanks for posting JB.

For what it is worth: All the old reliable companies are being taken over by younger people who did not have to sweat it out, they just roll with the name and reputation.

This goes for Hornady, Hodgdon, Ruger, Remington, Barnes. There have been posts of all them going down in quality/service. You can find the same in autos, trucks, appliances, you name it.

I will have to think over which bullets I want to use now. I always liked the interlock being as I am a "poor" man.

I want to see a new bullet cut open like the one a previous guy posted.

I do not believe until.

Hornady did not respond to my email, anyone had a response from Hornady?

It's amazing how we can hear about one bullet coming apart and from that know the age of the company executives.

That shows how perceptive we have become in the 21st century...

Dennis

At the end of the day- new or old- the Interlock is STILL a cup and core bullet. It's NOT a Mono copper slug, bonded or a Partition. A good bullet, but still a cup and core.

If the "old" Hornady Interlocks were perfect- these reviews on Midway's site going back nearly TEN years would not mention bullets that did not exit and core/jacket separations with the 180g Flat based .30 cals....

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=414237#productTabReviews

Looking at the reviews for all the Interlock slugs on the midway site is very enlightening. No matter what caliber, flat based or boattail, you get the picture that folks were happy with how they performed FOR THE MONEY. Nobody in those reviews is claiming them to be perfect game bullets which could never "fail"..

To me it's more than a little sad when people accuse Hornady of incompetence or sort of criminal motives in tweaking the design when all the are actually trying to do is improve a product that obviously was not perfect in the first place..

In my experience, they are not too receptive. I've received a snide comment back from my question earlier this year and no response when I showed them their erro on their original comment.

I don't think anyone was accusing them of criminal motives. I think it's sad that Hornady doesn't have the decency to even respond to the several people that have contacted them on this issue. To me, that shows incompetence and/or arrogance by not responding to customers' concerns.

Anyone ever get a response from Hornady?

Well its been a few years now how many of you have killed an animal with Hornady 180 flat base and how has it performed.

I found out the problem was somebody on the assembly line trying to hurry things up. This resulted in a few oddball bullets with the Interloclk ring higher than usual, but there never was any intentional change to the design--and the problem was eliminated quickly.

That is great news.

I know bullet makers replace forming dies every once in a while, so small changes in bullet shape will occur. But my latest batch of .308" flat base Interlocks has me annoyed.

For one thing the tips of their noses are more bulbous than before, about half way between older Interlocks and a Winchester Power Point. But that's not my problem with them.

Compared side by side with samples from several older lots, it's clear to the naked eye that the break point from shank to ogive has moved a good bit toward the base of the bullet. Measurements for the new bullets with a Sinclair nut are about .030" shorter than earlier lots as far back as those in cardboard boxes with metal clasp corners, up to earlier lots in the latest packaging.

Within magazine length constraints in my 308 rifles I haven't been able to get them to shoot as well as older lots either.

I use a fair amount of hornady spire points. For a while they had the cannelure too low from the break point. There were a number of guns where if i had simply seated to the cannelure the shank of the bullet would have been into the rifling considerably. Seems like I've noted number of hornady dimensional changes over the years but for me using the Sinclair "nut" to set seat depth to old successful dimensions has always resulted in the same good old accuracy.

That worked for me until the latest lot needs .030" to .040" over magazine length to reach the good old "nut length" so to speak.

I ignore cannelures.

Perfect answer !

I hope John Nosler doesn't start jacking w/the Partition. powdr

How much did they pay you to say this John??

Wow you are on a quest brother digging up a 2yr old post..

Ive been using current generation Interlocks in a small handful of calibres including .25, .277, .30 and .338 ie bullets produced in the last five years. I've dusted quite a lot of pigs and other game, and they honestly don't seem to work any different to what they did 20-30 years ago.

News Flash. The 180 Flat Base still works.

This one went through both shoulders of a big oryx yesterday. Found it sticking out of the offside shoulder when skinned. Weight 103 grains after plowing through a lot of heavy bone.



This big cow didn't complain. She just dropped at the shot.

Nice kill.....

Interlocks are still my favorite bullet. Just scored the last two boxes of 100gr .257s at my LGS. The week before, a guy bought five boxes. So, they're gone locally. The good thing is that I now have approximately 570 of the little buggers.

I have 11 or 12 boxes.

Ive only been using factory ammo in my 338RCM and am getting ready to load some 200 and 250gr Hornady bullets in my supply of cases. Am i doomed to failure in my 338 by using Hornady bullets?

So, it appears no change made to the Interlock.

Perhaps the title of this thread should be changed so google search doesn't pick it up?

A bullet, like men, should know their limitations. Hornadys work fine if one keeps the impact velocity at moderate speeds (although I must admit the no longer made 25 cal 100gr Interlock worked very well at 257 Weatherby velocities). i shot an impala on the point of the shoulder at about 80 yards with a 180gr interlock out of a 300 Weatherby quartering towards on the point of the shoulder.. Naturally it dropped on the spot but i was surprised I recovered the bullet (or what was left of it) on the off side ham. It weighed 79 grains). Had that been an eland or even a kudu shot in the same place, I am not sure the bullet would have held up.

Fast forward to last year where I shot a 150 lb hog with a 3006 at 220gr Hornady RNs at about 50 yards in the chest. Another DRT. The bullet held but lost about 110 grains. lesson? TTSXs ....

As for changes in the Interlock. I have two boxes of new production and two boxes from the older style box days. the new bullets are blunter, and the cannelure is located farther forward. These are 130 gr. .277 bullets. The older bullet is much sleeker.

I find the current 150 and 165 grain .308" bullets blunter than the old ones, and I can not get the new ones to shoot as well as the old from any of my 308s.

My impression of the decision makers at Hornady is that they would rather compete with Nosler at plastic tipped bullet lines than keep the older quality SP line going and supplied on dealer shelves. Guess I'm just an old turd that is happy with proven old standby's instead of reaching for the newest latest shiny wonder bullet. The demise of some popular caliber SP hornady's is so troubling that while drinking another beer I just placed another order at SPS for Nosler blems for less money. The power of a good cold beer at the right time is truly inspirational. MB

And again:

So the change in ogive and blunter front end do not count as changes?

They are not the "change" originally referred to that is the subject of this thread and the comment quoted.


Likewise.

Looks like the issue of outward changes were acknowledged a decade ago earlier in the thread. Time to move on.

Bullets pulled from dead elk..........just sayin'.

I just revived it to show off my oryx. Didn't mean to cause trouble.

Pot stirrer! Cool Oryx though.

Thanks. I actually researched this thread before deciding to use the 180 Interlock on my hunt.