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

It would have been nice if we had an interlock with a ID ring still, as I'm sure that we would see a more pronounced difference. Jim62; none of us are experts, but we are the ones that have to count on these in the field. If they have changed, and in fact they have, and if they no longer work as they did, which is unfortunately my findings, we should be obligated to point this out.
Mike

OH CONTRARE my new friend: My & Aleth's LOT is newer than the ones that failed for you (NEWER BOXES). My lot worked as desired even at 300 WM vel. at 145 & 260 yds. lasered.

It SEEMS to me that this is lot/lot variation. HOWEVER I know and understand I'm only looking at PICS.

ALETH: Can you compare the jackets toughness,flexibility,or brittleness??

Is there a crude,UNSCIENTIFIC, way to COMPARE the hard/soft diff. in the LEAD CORES?? Any differences in jackets and or cores would contribute to performance.

I would be glad to help or do some of this but I don't have the other lot to campare. I didn't expect you to work on this in the wee hours of the morning.

Also I'm certain we CAN NOT determine the exact diff.

I am NOT signing off on this subject but I want to THANK everyone who has contributed, esp. Mike, Aleth,& M D. Any pertinant observations and suggestions are appreciated. We have had MANY to participate w/reports of success or failure. More have had success than failure among those responding.

Scrathing My Head LESS:

JWALL

Sorry, but nothing you Cannucks have posted on this thread in ANY way qualifies you to cast dispersions about the quality of Hornady's bullets.

The length of time it took you guys to figure out how to even FIND the interlock ring in the sectioned slug tells me how far up your backside you heads truly are.

Good luck with those Barnes bullets. Really looking forward to some "report " from the Cannuck ballistic scholars as to how the Barnes have failed you or have been "changed" in a few years.

The only "impressive" thing about this thread is what an impressive waste of bandwidth it has been.

Peace out.

jim62 - Unfortunately I think you are grouping us Canucks together. We each think differently because we are individuals like yourselves. I am in this simply to determine the truth in the Interlock. Although I haven't posted much on the fire I certainly have been around long enough to know that the Interlock is the sacred cow of the 'fire. In fact, I still use them as my go-to bullet to this day because of the great reviews on from other fire members. I have not given up on them yet. Others have.
But I do now submit for your consideration another two samples. Mike just sectioned these and asked me to post the pictures. Lot numbers marked.





I certainly notice a few things about the 208 lot (last pic)
1) Thicker jacket
2) ID Ring
3) More substantial interlock ring
4) Lower interlock ring.

Thoughts?

Quite frankly, I was supprised to find the ID ring on a lot that I presumed to be a newer lot. If you look at the core carefully, you can catually see the indent that the ID ring leaves on the core. Also, I was supprised to find the interlock lower on 2080037 as well. Those two things, all else beig equal will change the performance of the bullet markedly. What I find more supprising is that out of 4 different lots, we have 4 markedly different bullets. Where is the consistancy in that? How much of a performance difference is there going to be from lot to lot?
Mike

All bullet manufactures have been changing bullets from time to time and not telling the public. This is not new.

I used to use a slide of Hornady bullets in my ballistic seminars to illustrate up to 5 changes in the external differences noted to teach people that we are only noting the external changes.

Remember Nosler Ballistic Tips when introduced?

Barnes copped flack becuase most of their changes were obvious but still largely external.

What about when Speer bullets were the hardest C&C bullets of the major names?

These variances can be planned and also sometimes, not planned, and therefore not admitted to.

JW

Ok but did you read and look at the INTERNAL pictures of that 208xxx lot? What would constitute a "design change" if this does not?

My point was it doesn't matter what they change, they will not admit it.

JW

ahh, gotcha - I guess I didn't read clearly enough. I am glad that the truth is the truth no matter if anyone admits it or not. And no matter the legacy of one's father, character and true honor is demonstrated one decision at a time.

One of the things that concerns me is that the Interlock ring has been moved so far forward in one of the bullets.

I've sectioned a bunch of Interlock bullets (as well as other bullets) over the past 25 years or so, and all had the IL ring a short distance above the base of the bullet. This was so consistent that I quit section Inerlocks maybe 10 years ago.

The Interlocks I've recovered from game were mostly expanded back to the ring, with the core intact. A very few, however, separated jacket and core, because the jacket expanded back beyond the ring.

This only occurred at close range, at relatively high impact velocity, when something very hard was hit. One example was a pronghorn buck my wife shot at 100 yards as it faced us, with a .270 Winchester and a 130-grain Interlock. The bullet hit the spine at the base of the neck and came apart--though not without killing the buck instantly.

However, with the Interlock ring higher in the bullet it would seem to be more likely for the jacket to peel back beyond the ring, as the jacket isn't all that thick. This might be the cause of the problems mentioned early in this thread.

I will also note, however, that even before Hornady started putting the Interlock ring in their Spire Points, Hornadys had a better reputation for holding together than most other cup-and-cores. This was because the lead alloy used in the core was harder than in most other bullets.

Cub.

Clever, but girlish.

About what I expect out of a Cannuck.

I imagine you keep a reference photo handy, since you can't find your own azz with both hands?

I'm surprised you got it. More than I would expect from an idiot.


.

Hey Guys I have a polite request. Let's not dejackulate..er I mean degenerate the thread please.

It may be near its end but I don't know that. I don't know who or what else may have important bearing on the subject.

A New Friend

JWALL

SuperCub,

My apologies. Truly.

I have some very good friends in Western Canada.

So, it's not right for me to paint with such a broad brush. I do know that the friends I have up there- all of which who hunt- would never whine about the performance of a very inexpensive Non-Bonded cup and core bullet like the Interlock.

Also,if they ever did, they would darn sure present better "empirical evidence" than I have seen here on this thread.

That was my reaction when you finally found the Interlock rings after hours (days?) of you and your peeps claiming they were not even there...

At any rate I am glad you finally "got to the center of the tootsie pop"..

jim62:
Clearly it was a fumble your way thru it kinda thing. Mike had the experience, I had the guts to tell him he was a nut job in claiming that the interlock was not the same as it was (casually offering numerous times to buy his extra 12 boxes at a reduced rate because they were "defective") and then this thread appeared so I mentioned it to him in passing. He decided that what was here-say should be explained in firsthand.

It's interesting that what was "thought" was the real issue (external appearance at the tip) was not the issue at all. It's funny how many things in life are like that.

And what's a credit to all the folks here is they quietly walked along the way as I made my first abortive-like attempt at a section.

I am nearly positive any changes in the bullets were intended to be improvements- not just change for change sake or as cost cutting.

Hornady probably has the MOST dynamic and solid track record of any ammo/component maker in the last 20 years for bringing out innovative, high quality products. They also have a lot of common sense up there in Grand Island, NE.

Muledeer/JB mentioned something very pertinent here about Core hardness. It is very important as is the exact composition of the lead alloy. Certain elements such as antimony can make the core brittle and cause fragmentation.

Another thing to consider is the composition and consistency of the jacket alloy. Copper is expensive these days and and a bullet maker's sources of supply are probably moving offshore more and more everyday- just like steel and other industrial raw materials. The consistency of those alloys may be an issue they are fighting.

I have often thought of this when I have read report of very odd expansion with other bullets such as Nosler Accubonds and B-tips, etc. "Bad batches" of certain bullet many have more to do with material composition rather than changes in design from lot to lot.

I think that it's high time for me to chime in here. I don't think that it's unreasonable at all to expect a bullet that always did hold together and penetrate, to continue to do so. If someone thinks that I'm an idiot canuck for conveying my findings, so be it. If someone thinks that i'm over-reacting when I ask questions and expect answers so be it.
I have expectations of a bullet that I take into the field after animals; if I can get performance at a good price, I'll do so. If a bullet is failing to perform, I will pay the money that's needed to obtain that performance.
historically, the hornady interlock performed to my expectations; so much so that I recommended them to others without hesitation. I now find myself in a situation where I have to tell others that my recomendation has been wrong due to the poor performance that I have personally found. If anything makes me an idiot, that is it.
But to convey my findings so some other person doesn't find out the hard way that the bullets may fail, is, in my oppinion, the right thing to do. Do I care what a certian person on this site feels about me........no. If he has issue with my findings he's more than welcom to continue to use whatever bullet he wants. I personally want full penetration from any angle, fallowed by an exit hole if possible.......I don't ever want to loose the biggest bull I've ever seen due to the bullet blowing up on the shoulder.
Mike