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

Bridgetowner
No idea who you are but my suspicion is you are from NS. This ain't 54-40 or fight, man. We've got lots to learn from these guys and stuff like that ain't looking so good or classy. It's no wonder that even if you're the most experienced guy in the camp that you ain't nothing until your post count is 1000+. We're all cut from the same cloth.

It dont take 1000+ posts to realize an "A-HOLE" when ya see one!!
You worry about you, and I'll worry about me Ca'mon!!!

Bridge Tower.

It's only taken 11 posts to see you are an idiot.

Really impressive. And quite a pitty party you girls are participating in here.

Some people here cannot take the truth.

They bounce from 'net forum to net forum bashing a maker's product- only offering VERY flimsy "evidence" to back it up. Then, they combine it with really offensive insults against the company, it's products and it's customers and then top it all off with a silly "marketing conspiracy theory".

Brilliant.

Are you preparing to return to your village for Christmas?

.

Nope, you'll be there

What are you laughing at, hillbilly?

You are the MAYOR of that village.

Mr. 13 posts..

Ahhh, that's what I thought...

Another mentally defective Cannuk.

And, your request for a BJ a few posts back was very typical of your type.

No farm animals around to have sex with, so you have to go online "looking for love".

You'll find that most heterosexual Americans such as myself are not interested in your homosexual advances.

Do try some of your countrymen here. I'm SURE they'll oblige.

Dont Be Nervous!!

Then stop asking folks on this forum for BJs..

I've been using Hornady bullets for 30 years almost exclusively and the new ones have worked just as well as the old in my 270. If they have changed them it hasn't changed their terminal performance in my experience.

ORION 03: THANKS for getting back to the subject. I had decided to fade but you have the proper perspective.

There are MANY of us, who THIS YEAR with NEW LOTS of H. ils., have had the dependable results we EXPECTED. There have been FEW to report of failures.

I have one last suggestion for CONSIDERATION. Could it be that even tho Hornady moved the location of the interlock ring, they also CHANGED the alloy, tinsel strenght, whatever of the jacket
AND or the hardness of the LEAD CORE and still MAINTAIN the performance desired? ? ? These are things we can NOT SEE.

IF that is true, with the il. ring forward it would make the remaining SHANK a little LONGER and have more weight to promote penetration. If ANY OF YOU could have seen the terminal performance I had on THREE deer this year with this NEW LOT, you would have NOTHING to complain about.

THE ONLY reason I offer this suggested possibility is: I KNOW I have used a NEW LOT of ils. and they worked as DESIRED. So, if they changed the design SOMETHING has to be right for it STILL to perform properly.

This thread has reached the point that we can not DETERMINE the real difference by LOOKING at the bullets. NOTHING is to be gained by name calling, insulting, and accusing of immoral acts.

If someone with access to TECHNICAL equipment to test alloys and hardness and flexibility, etc. could and would run test THEN we might have real EVIDENCE to work with.

Otherwise we need to test bullets in mediums (media) to compare performance. I need NOT to test my lot, I already have, IT IS GOOD. When I get another lot I will test for comparison. Let's spend our time in productive activity and discussion.

Scratching My Head for ANOTHER REASON

JWALL

JWALL,

Great post. I've been watching this thread and wholeheartedly agree with everything you said.

I've thought this has been a worthwhile and very interesting thread. Kudos to Aletheuo and the rest that have actually contibuted to the discussion.

The rest of the commentary by the fuggin' trolls posting here is ............................ well, BULLSHITE. Find something else to waste your time on.

FISH HEAD; THANK YOU ! ! !

JWALL

I could not agree moore.

I'm definitely not detracting from the IL, but moving the IL ring forward doesn't necessarily mean that they lengthened the bullet. If all they did was move the ring forward, that would promote core loss, not additional penetration, due to the fact that the locking ring will be lost due to jacket expansion sooner in the expansion process. If the old IL could expand almost down to the base of the jacket before the ring was disabled, the new bullet only has to expand the jacket down half the length of the bullet before the ring is disabled.

Again, not arguing one way or the other, just pointing out the consequence of moving the ring forward (which JB also pointed out above, but just briefly).

JWALL,

I guess the only way to settle this once and for all is... a dry newsprint penetration test and an examination of the recovered bullets. Anyone else have some ID ring interlocks hanging around?

And I want to reiterate my point: People in both Canada and the US used the old design interlock on elk and moose all the time without the need of a premium bullet. And they continued to do so because they got decent performance. They trusted the interlock and hornady in general.

Now some feel they can not trust hornady because they made a change to their favorite non-premium without ever informing anyone about it. It certainly causes me to ponder the situation. If I can't trust that the same bullet DESIGN (externals aside) is inside the same box today, tomorrow, a year or ten years down the road then what's a guy to do? I can't rightly walk into the store and ask the owner if I can have one bullet to section before I buy the whole box, can I?

Let me tell you why I want to continue to use the Interlock on Elk and at the range. I'm a reloader and my local shop has a box of Interlocks on the shelf for $34.95 - that's 35 cents each. They also have Partitions. They're 71/box - that's $1.40 each. And you wonder why us Canadians are so ticked? Don't anymore. Often, it ain't double for premiums up here. We're paying like 3.5x as much in some cases. Rant over! (oh please don't get me talking canadian leupold pricing)


My theory is this - and it is simply a theory. "This is simple capitalism. The interlock was too good a bullet to have alongside the newly introduced interbond so they had to dumb it down so that they could make more money on premiums instead as premiums make them more money."

If Hornady had done this and told consumers, fine. But the silence is deafening.

More baseless slander and NUTJOB conspiracy theories.

You have provided not ONE SHRED of evidence that ANY changes to the Hornady Interlock bullets- whether imagined or real- have in ANY way changed their performance on game. Period.

No ballistic media testing. no lost game animals. no recovered "failed Bullets. nothing- nada.

Just your mindless little rants against Hornady and how they are responsible for high bullet prices in Canada?

It's your utter stupidity here that is deafening.

Jim

Prove that the new bullets hold up just as well as the old ones did using a dry newsprint test and I will withdraw my theory and eat all the crow necessary. And all I'm expecting is 30-06 velocities of 2800 with the 180 #3070.