308 Winchester Hornady Outfitter CX Ballistics Gel Ammo Test

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Get early access to videos, become a Channel Member! www.youtube.com/@masonoutdoors_masonleather/join Get your handmade leather gear here! www.masonleather.com Get my favorite range and outdoor gear here! www.masonoutdoors.com Visit my Amazon Storefront! www.amazon.com/shop/masonoutdoors Let me know what you think about the video and please share, it’s a big help! Visiting the websites above directly supports the channel and helps me bring you more awesome videos!

[@Lure-Benson]

I shoot a 300 Weatherby mag and max reloads so those bullets would be crap using in my 300. Over and Over, I see I can't go wrong straying with Barns TSX --- TTSX and LRX bullets. I even bulked up on 8 mm Barns X bullets in 8 mm before they became discontinued for the 8 mm - 378 Weatherby mag long range custom rifle

[@LeopardStrikeGaming]

@@Lure-Benson I’ve got a 300wsm I’m working a 178 gr hornady eldx for the 200s worked great last year but I want a lil more speed and bigger energy dump

[@Lure-Benson]

@@LeopardStrikeGaming Everyone can use whatever they like. For me to shoot target bullets with lead cores rebranded as hunting bullets is asinine stupid and shows someone cares more for the horns than taking the meat home and then feeding the coyotes allot of blood shot meat. On some of the moose hunts when the client shooting Big name lead core bullets, we left the full front half of the moose because the blood shot and bone fragments are all through the meat and lead and copper fragments could clearly be seen ever place on the areas of bullet entered and exited. Most all of these Moose of brown bears shot by client using these crap lead core bullets it was me who had to kill the animal shooting rifles from a 9.3x62 Mauser --- 338 win mag or a 8mm-378 Wby mag shooting the old Barns X bullets I hoarded. before they are discontinued. Every one of these rifles I am loading the barns TSX - TTSX - LRX and X bullets and it took just one of these bullets to put down the client's animal for good when many of the clients had put in the animal from 5 to 18 of these lead core bullets that fragmented and exploded! Two different clients shooting Hornaday interlock bullets it became just sickening to watch the bull moose in total pain and suffering being shot 10 and 13 times from a 300 win mag and a 340 Wby causing the bullets to complete explode on impact and when both clients yelled, I am out of ammo it took my 9.3x62 Mauser one Barns TSX 286 grain bullet for each moose to be sniffed out dead ! The other I have witnessed, and nearly got me killed was my Alaska client using crap lead core bullets caused so many wounded Moose and brown bears then I was the one who went looking for the animal that was pretty pissed off when I came looking. I finally said to prospective clients this is the rules so if you don't like my rule to bring not less than a 338 magnum and Barns ammo or ammo with Barns bullets then go find another guided because my life isn't worth getting killed over allowing you to bring crap bullets and deer guns to my camp. Now everyone wants to fallow the target match shooting trend for hunting but so many now have no experiences in hunting.

[@LeopardStrikeGaming]

@@Lure-Benson what did I say to you to clearly offend you enough you spent enough time to type all that info out as a response…. I literally just agreed with my guy mason….. what’s your issue?

[@Ariel-x1x]

@@LeopardStrikeGaming He made many valid points that have nothing to do with you.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Let me clarify: I evaluate bullets against their own manufacturer performance claims first, and against other comparable ammunition second. When a bullet doesn’t measure up to that, it is, by definition, a failure. Here’s the exact copy from the CX product page: “One-piece copper alloy won't separate and delivers devastating terminal performance, deep penetration, and 95% weight retention.” Will it still kill a deer? Absolutely. Might it even be more effective under certain circumstances? Absolutely. Did it perform as per manufacturer claim? In this case, no.

[@LeopardStrikeGaming]

@@masonleather_outdoors well I mean it….did… penetrate really well…. But that’s about it lol

[@ramseycattn5941]

A few thoughts: first, terminal performance of this bullet was exceptional. You had a very impressive permanent cavity AND almost 30” of penetration for the 2 and more for the 3rd. You said that this bullet failed in doing what it claimed; I think it’s important to remember that this clear gel does not behave the same way living tissue would. It has similar density, and that’s about it. 10% ordinance gelatin does a better job, but even that is not quite the same. So you really aren’t able to fairy say it did not meet it’s own design criteria. I’ve been disappointed with the performance of Barnes copper bullets in deer in the past, and had decided to go back to lead bullets. Seeing this has potentially swayed me in favor of giving these a try. Awesome performance. Well done Hornady 👍 I like your channel a lot, thanks for giving us good content. Just thought I’d add a bit of perspective to your evaluation. God Bless.

[@codyperry6021]

As a deer hunter who wants rapid/violent expansion but also wants an exit wound, I believe they did quite well. Will definitely be looking to try these on a deer hunt.

[@cbvidieo]

I agree, they did better than expected.......Not a fail at all, just different than the picture on the box.

[@Brad-RB]

I agree.

[@EdAb]

Amazing performance, these are exactly what I'm looking for. Hornady clearly states on their web page that they use 24 inch test barrels. Thanks for the video!

[@Mattessj]

The cx bullets did the same thing for my 338 … the busted petals didn’t affect anything, the elk dropped in his tracks

[@Wheelchair-bear]

Hammer bullets (also monolithic copper), are meant to open rapidly, shed their pedals and have excellent penetration with the shank continuing its travel, those bullets performed well in my opinion. Look at that wound channel. How can you say that is a fail ?

[@ericsalazar2337]

I’ve been making some loads for my ruger 16” SFAR and I switched from the 165cx to the 150cx for velocity reasons, thanks for the test info good to know

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Glad to be of service!

[@Marcus-jg4jb]

I hear you about them not performing exactly as intended, but nothing about the performance of these bullets in your test suggests they would fail on medium game in terms of terminal performance.

[@edwarddonahey]

I wouldn’t mind that fragmentation at that range of 100 yards. The petals will create their own unique trauma. While the base will continue to penetrate and do its job.

[@keithreese9636]

Personally, i prefer the larger wound channels hence more damage to the vitals i get with Federal fusion or sst's. Im speaking of deer & hog size game where 36" of penetration isn't really needed. Just my 2cents thanks for the vid

[@Ariel-x1x]

Agree, why was that discounted as if the lighter grain weight 's higher velocity was irrelevant?

[@jjgriffin3275]

I would rather drop the price of the ammo have a cheap box. Box goes in trash when done so i do not want to waste money on a fancy box when we could have cheaper ammo

[@scottythebody0811]

Good point. I guess flashy sells.

[@rileyneufeld7001]

The box costs Hornady pennies. Going to a plain cardboard box is not going to drop the price for the consumer.

[@yackson4804]

The box probably cost less then a dollar to make

[@guardianminifarm8005]

Appreciate the great demonstration. I am not terribly bothered based on what this did in the first block. I may be wrong but it did seem to produce impressive wound channels. It surely fully expanded in the first 16" and then began to shed the pedals in the following travel of the bullet. Are you inclined to think that the bullet construction would fail in the actual animal when striking ribs, shoulder and the like. It certainly wouldn't be my first choice. But I might not completely abandon it for Whitetail size game. Thank you again for the good content.

[@ejsocci2630]

Another a great video that you shared for us.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@gunjunky187]

I think they did very well. The wound tracks were fantastic and they didn't shed most of the copper until after more than sufficient penetration.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

I evaluate based on claimed performance. Here’s text straight from their product page: “One-piece copper alloy won't separate and delivers devastating terminal performance, deep penetration, and 95% weight retention”

[@mot0rhe4d40]

@@masonleather_outdoors I agree that manufacturers should do better, less misleading product info isn't a bad thing.

[@donwyoming1936]

As far as performance goes, that's a great deer, antelope or coyote load. Explosive expansion and deep penetration. These will drop game.

[@gunjunky187]

Well definitely a fail on advertised performance and characters. It would definitely be a fantastic cartridge on game though. Love the content and the quality of your videos 👍

[@bigdogdjango]

Mason with respect mate I think your whole weight retention and expansion diameter are flawed metrics to judge lethality. Did it have a wide/deep wound channel that would emphatically and quickly incapacitate? Yes! Does weight and diameter matter then? I don’t use copper bullets because animals exsanguinate too slowly unless they are hit with a tonne of velocity. The erosion and malleability of a metal in the body cavity is what contributes to large and effective wound cavities. This is the first mono metal bullet I have seen that might actually replicate lead bullet performance.

[@briankopp1369]

I know it didn't do what the box said, but I often use Underwood extreme chaos which perform very well on deer. This one seems similar to the Extreme fragmenting. At the distances I hunt this bullet may be optimal, and I would expect the petals to be less likely to sheer off at 300+ perhaps performing better than other coppers. I'm going to try it.

[@deridderadventures]

Love your work!

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Thanks!

[@jti2007]

Hornady seems to have the reputation of embellishing the velocity on their cartridges. This looks like an attempt to push their proprietary cartridges over the similar ones from other manufacturers. I’m glad you’re being honest across the board about the actual specs from different ammo suppliers.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

I’ll always report objective results.

[@DannyRunion]

Just got a box of 130 gr.for 6.5 prc hope better results!! Thanks again for great videos!!

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Glad to be of service!

[@andrewtisdale4186]

My wife just took an elk at 140 yards with her 6.5 creedmoor shooting my hand loads with 130 grain CX bullets. She put two in rapid fire while it was broadside. Both bullets expanded fully, and came to rest under the hide on the opposite side. One lost about three grains of copper and the weight from the tip. The other bullet just lost the tip. They more than doubled their diameter and the elk didn't go anywhere.

[@gerarddecosta1738]

Hornady are the masters of marketing, packaging and advertising. They have some good bullets and some I personally would only choose if nothing else was available. My resume includes 50+ years of hunting and 40 years of competitive rifle competition. Which includes 20 years of international long range. Just my opinion.

[@gerarddecosta1738]

BTW, I appreciate your objective review. Keep up the good work. 👍🏻

[@wesleymagill4993]

you say the weight retentions is not great or the expansion is not great but that wound channel is the best looking one I've seen for 308 copper rounds.

[@martinmuc1]

Again a great video from you, thank you very much. Never expected that. I still prefer lead bullets as long as they are allowed where i life for that reason. Many greetings from Germany, please keep up the excellent work! If it is available in the USA, can you test bullets from RWS and GECO?

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Thanks for your support!

[@alexandrealain]

Interesting that the 165 cx did great

[@brian770]

industry standard for vel testing is a 24" barrel, which would have added maybe 25-30 fps max, so still low but much closer.

[@Costapalmasdevelopments]

We had similar looking bullet with winchester copper at 150 grain. I got the 165 cx to try out. Barns is apparently really good in copper too. I got the 3030 ammo they make to try for island deer.

[@dewsports2]

Love your channel. Keep it up.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Thanks for your support! If you’d like early access to videos and a way to directly support more videos like this, consider becoming a Range Boss! channel member here: www.youtube.com/@masonoutdoors_masonleather/join

[@mr.mr.3301]

I would listen to the vortex podcast where they interview the Barnes people. Very informative.

[@JD-jn5we]

I like this much better than Barnes, personally very impressive for a solid copper

[@paulhomsy2751]

That weight retention is not "horrible". The wound channels are a testament to the quality of the bullet. Weight retention isn't everything, far from it. There was a time when 18 inches of penetration was the holy grail with a 30. caliber 200 grains Nosler Partition with 55% weight retention... Here you have far more weight retention and twice the penetration with wound channels that surpass all other copper bullets wound channels. I'd say this is excellent performance. If you only think that a bullet that retains all its weight is better, that's just your opinion. Copper isn't toxic and its fragmentation isn't dangerous for consumption.

[@Stu.E.]

Great video, thanks for sharing!

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Glad to be of service!

[@WalterRitchey]

Looks good to me. Probably better than their other polymer tip bullets.

[@psycowilley3498]

Factories use 24" or 26" test barrels so they can publish higher velocities. I will try this bullet, because lots of hunters want fragmenting, lead free bullets to get more lung damage. RWS makes a fragmenting lead free bullet; EVO Green, but it costs about $100 a box. Bonded lead bullets work great, because of an explosive fragmenting bullet with a core that penetrates and passes all of the way through the animal.

[@WallyMerc06]

Hey Mason, do you think you can get a nosler E-tip gel test done when you get a chance. I'm not seeing any on yt at the moment besides from nosler. Thanks!

[@talbyjustus6403]

I would love to see the federal power shok coppers if you can get your hands on some! They are the only monolithic I can find in stores here in Stillwater, OK. I have one box in 308 that I would love to take hunting if the performance is all well and good

[@talbyjustus6403]

I have some Superformance 90gr CX’s for my Marlin XL7 25-06 and can’t get them to group for nothing! I’m talking 8” 3 shot groups. Usually a very accurate gun

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Thanks for your support! Already done and in editing. Get early access to my videos by becoming a Range Boss! channel member here: www.youtube.com/@masonoutdoors_masonleather/join

[@Leipziger-Fanklub]

In personal hornady sst 165 grain superpreformance. They have the speed of a 150 grain bullet but the extra weight does wonders.

[@allmyhobbiesareexpensive2676]

I remember 20 years ago when we were just glad if there was more on the shelf than fmj 😂

[@cfoutdoors0624]

Can you, or do you plan to, do the Sig Elite Hunter copper ammo?

[@masonleather_outdoors]

At some point

[@dbeardsley0]

Got an HMR in 308, it really likes accubond ammo such as winchester big game 168. Have to get some of the federal terminal ascent 175s tho to see how it compares. Accubond 168s is .4 moa on avg out of the rifle, be hard to beat. It be for plains game in South Africa. Don't think I'll be wasting money on the outfitter ammo tho

[@burmaconda]

Personally I couldn’t care less about retained weight and pretty expanded bullets I care about wound channels and this seems to be far better than most copper bullets. There’s no lack of penetration.

[@JohnNowicki-xj6nb]

Great video! I'm hoping you do a Barnes VOR-TX .308 video as a comparison to the Hornady CX.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Thanks for your support! Already done and in editing. Get early access to my videos by becoming a Range Boss! channel member here: www.youtube.com/@masonoutdoors_masonleather/join

[@dannys4253]

Only copper I use is Barnes. They are the experts, been doing it the longest.

[@JohnHubbard-h1t]

You stated you wouldn’t use this ammo and from your test it’s absolutely devastating results. Dumped energy, massive wound track and penetration. I don’t understand why you wouldn’t use that ammo

[@cbvidieo]

Because they preformed better than what the manufacturers claim....... doesn't make sense to me either.

[@edwarddonahey]

@@cbvidieo👍🏽

[@JimParvin-o9e]

I sure am glad that I don't use that there hi dollar ammunition. I use my precision handloaded in all of my rifles except one. It's a 243 Howa cerakote and camouflage stock. It will poke all three rounds into a single jagged hole at 100 yards and it doesn't matter if it's a Remington or winchester 100gr power point or cor lok bullet and the point of impact does NOT change. This little guns a one in a million!

[@Adventure_outdoors16]

Can you do 7mm rem mag or 270

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Thanks for your support! Already done and in editing. Get early access to my videos by becoming a Range Boss! channel member here: www.youtube.com/@masonoutdoors_masonleather/join

[@Adventure_outdoors16]

@@masonleather_outdoors ok cool

[@davidlaney8254]

I know you're not into reviews of load accuracy. However, have you considered sharing the Standard Deviation after indicating the average velocity of a given load? Since the SD shows how much the recorded velocities are spread out from the average, it gives you an idea as to how well a given load should group or create a greater POI shift from one shot to the next. And the Garmin Chronograph offers the value at the punch of a button or two. As the case with weight retention, I suspect you'll soon discover what SD values are good and not so good from one load to the next.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

In the video clip where I show the chronograph it actually shows the standard deviation on the screen (of the chronograph), so the info is there if someone really wants it, but it’s not something I’m going to get deeper into. Thanks for your support!

[@davidlaney8254]

@@masonleather_outdoors Thanks. I’ll start looking for it in your videos.

[@TODinWY]

Did you not say this ammo showed more Gel damage than almost any other CU bullet you tested? Looks to me like a perfect deer bullet.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

I did. I never said it wouldn’t work on game. It is an objective failure as compared to manufacturer claimed performance.

[@kevinkerr2847]

I’d be happy with those results on deer and antelope size game but would stop short of using them for elk. Also at longer ranges as the bullet slows a bit it is more likely to stay together but I understand your review based on hornady’s claim.

[@chemex9968]

gracias senor

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Glad to be of service!

[@Paul-q3m7k]

I wonder if that was a bad batch or something. I’ve never seen copper do that especially in ballistics gel .

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Very possible

[@cbvidieo]

Hammer bullets are meant to do that and I have seen TTSX bullets do it in water, resulting in a bigger wound cavity and better penetration, it's not a fail, it's a best case scenario.

[@johnl5974]

A couple years ago I recovered my 44 mag bullet, from a muzzleloader hunt. The bullet was under the far side skin, the cup in the ribs near it. I showed the recovered bullet parts to a friend, he said "I don't like that at all, the bullet failed". I got it from my dead deer. Dead. Those CX would kill my deer just fine. We get all hung up on bullets looking like magazine ads. My 2 cents.

[@wcndguy5302]

Yea man I shoot monos and cup and cores and I’m seeing stuff die faster with the cup and cores. Monos have other advantages but I agree with your statement. I don’t care if the bullet comes apart if the animal drops in its tracks. Ideally I want a mono that shoots well and performs like a partition. Not a super aerodynamic wonder bullet in a 150 grain 308. Marketing is so silly!

[@mogulrider]

When one compares Federal Premium or PowerShock ammo (I use both) in most calibers it's performance is always consistent. It's why I use them. Mason's results show that clearly here that some copper bullets do frag. Very interesting results. Mason's result with Federal ammo show clearly it does what it's supposed to. In my area they are thinking of banning lead bullets for hunting. I'll have to consider this going forward. I certainly would consider the Barnes bullets as apposed to these. It's not necessarily that they failed. The animal is probably done for but it's the principle of it. Copper shouldn's shed petals. I'm wondering if the gel density was different Mason. TBH I've always been suspicious of copper bullets. How do they perform on a bone hit? I have no experienece with that but maybe some folks can provide their experience. All in all, I'll stick to S&B and Federal cup and core. It just works.

[@alaskatruoutdoors9238]

Behaved like a Barnes LRX. That's not a bad thing, but like you said, that's not what they're advertised to do.

[@Leipziger-Fanklub]

Btw factory usually tests with 60 cm Barrels .Standart factory testing for all 308 Bullets in Europe. (´This also includes the american made ones) It allways says fired with a 60 cm barrel (This would be a ≈ 23,5 inch barrel by US standarts. ) So it perfectly makes sense because you use a 1,5 inch shorter barrel than the factory. This is where you lost the 50-70 Fps. Maybe the US doesn´t have to print the barrel lengh it was tested on the box (But in europe they have too so we know exactly from wich barrel also the US made ammo was test fired in the factory)

[@Leipziger-Fanklub]

In personal my 308 has a 54 cm barrel (about 21 inch) So i loose about 100 fps. But as said thats normal. Factories test their bullets with the best barrel lenght available to get the best results so they can print it on the ammo box. Of course in real life most rifles do not match this conditions.

[@Stu.E.]

Weird the 150s did this and the 165s didn’t. Curious if you have more terminal performance on these 150s.

[@martingrillkor]

Any chance you can try sako powerhead blade 308 w 162 grain?

[@darrylpacholko5495]

This is very expensive ammo here in Canada. I can think of other ammunition manufacturers that make better more consistent products than Hornaday. Federal is my personal favorite, I've used terminal ascent, fusion and blue box. All have performed well , especially Fusion for the money. Hornaday has had a lot of problems with PRC ammo and this outfitter ammo.

[@eggbert191]

I load the 130's in my 6.5 prc at just over 3000 fps. Surprised to see the 150 come apart. I still may try tgem out in my 24 inch 308. Im getting just under 2900 fps with 168 using staball match. Might be worth contacting hornady and see what they say about tge 150 coming apart

[@masonleather_outdoors]

I don’t reach out to manufacturers, they have far more resources than me and should be QC’ing their own products.

[@eggbert191]

@@masonleather_outdoors fair enough just sometimes they provide replacement product. Appreciate the video as always

[@garytrainer1690]

Thanks Mason. Good to know. 👍

[@pcolice]

IMO, that is not a failure. Those separating pedals do damage.

[@buckdown1658]

Seems like they are trying to give these a lower opening velocity then the previous GMX's. Think I'll stick with the LRX's after seeing this.

[@JimmyJusa]

looking at a standard lead free bullet, this performance is not up to par, although i do think they would still be devastating and along the lines of the hammer bullets. did you/will you reach out to hornady about this performance? perhaps there is a lot issue and they need to know, if people don't test like this they would not know if there is an issue.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

I don’t reach out to manufacturers, they have far more resources than me and should be QC’ing their own products.

[@DaveL9170]

I use this exact ammo. It is NOT a fail. If that exact result happened inside a deer or elk they would be dead!!! No ungulate would survive the results you got with your test.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

It is absolutely a failure as compared to manufacturer claimed performance. I never said it wouldn’t t kill a deer.

[@audiosurfarchive]

The idea is it failed by what the product is advertising. I could sell you a piece of trash car that still drove consistently but lied about tons of features and specs.. and that's nOt A FaIL??? it still drives! That's what it's supposed to do! 🤡

[@albertaoutdoors9220]

Yep. Keep the grading system consistent. It’s a fail when compared to advertising. But sure they could still work fine on game.

[@constitutionalist4391]

What is wrong with the petals breaking off? I've never heard any guarantees that the petals wouldn't break off in copper bullets. Those wound cavities look XLNT! You're talking about about 134 grains of retention, with an enormous wound cavity. You say the only good thing about the 150 grain CX is the depth of penetration. I'd like to see a deer that was hit in the vitals that survived with one of those... 'nuff said.

[@True70woodsman]

I’d say that’s ideal for deer sized game. Would rather it perform as advertised on elk, moose, bear though.

[@cbob3605]

Ok so my question is did Hornady crap the bed on this one?

[@edwarddonahey]

At 100 yards its basically point blank. Try it at 300-400 yards and see what happens!

[@michaelkaylor6770]

So let me get this right you describe it as a massive failure and it’s not what you think you usually see but we got 30 inches rounded off 30 inches of penetration and great wound cavities and we had multiple wounds because the pedals broke off?

[@masonleather_outdoors]

It completely and objectively failed on two of four manufacturer claims, here’s the text straight from the product page: “One-piece copper alloy won't separate and delivers devastating terminal performance, deep penetration, and 95% weight retention.” I never said it wouldn’t kill a deer.

[@CastIeBravo]

Hornady seems to have a metallurgical problem. Their brass is soft, meaning you get fewer reloads out of the brass before it’s just too far out of spec; especially the primer pocket. You can’t even approach maximum loads without compromising the brass. Their monolithic metal bullets are also too hard. My first experience with them was the 85 grain GMX that performed exactly as you have shown here. I tested them in various different mediums and the results were very repeatable. The bullet’s petals almost always shed and the shank continues on like a FMJ with little or no tissue disruption. I have tried the CX in 6.5/.264, too, and they still suffer this same problem as the 85 grain .243 Win. Not a fan. I hate to say it, but the cheaper Federal blue box Power Shok is more reliable for taking most game. It’s soft and mushrooms quickly, bleeding velocity and energy quickly once inside the animal. But it works fine as long as you don’t expect it to act like a premium bonded core bullet. While disappointing, your results do not surprise me.

[@jonhodges2957]

I enjoy the videos, and this is the first time I have to disagree. In many ways, this out performed most monolithics on the market. You had superior wounding and penetration, but we're gonna get sideways due to 89% weight retention? I'm guessing everything CEB puts out is trash since it fragments? What this shows, for me at least, is that when a monolithic "catastrophically fails" it still out performs 99% of the bullets on the market.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

I’m not evaluating it on wounding and penetration, I’m evaluating it based on manufacturer performance claims, just like every other load. It’s purported to maintain 95% weight and not break up at all, which it objectively failed at.

[@jonhodges2957]

@masonoutdoors_masonleather I get that, but this was a happy accident. I've used most of the monolithic and bonded offerings out there. For someone less knowledgeable, they might skip this and get something like a Remington corelock or Win power point because Mason said the CX in 308 was a failure. It failed in the best way possible. I feel like you went pretty hard on it when its terminal performance was stellar.

[@cbvidieo]

​@@jonhodges2957That's what I said as well, it performed like a much more expensive hammer Hunter bullet. You can't call something a fail when it performs better than the manufacturer's claim. I suppose if the manufacturer would have said, "sometimes the pedals come off which produces a bigger wound cavity and better penetration", then it wouldn't have been a fail.

[@JohnAngle-vw8yq]

Why Hornady doesn’t have a true bonded bullet option, I will never understand

[@John_Redcorn_]

They do, the Interbond. Idk if they make any loadings with it tho, or just offer it as a reloading component.

[@Wheelchair-bear]

Hammer bullets (also monolithic copper), are meant to open rapidly, shed their pedals and have excellent penetration with the shank continuing its travel, those bullets performed well in my opinion. Look at that wound channel. How can you say that is a fail ?

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Because they didn’t do what they’re supposed to… these aren’t Hammer Bullets.

[@Wheelchair-bear]

@@masonleather_outdoors They did better than what they are "supposed to do", preforming like a much more expensive lathe turned premium bullet. The bullets produced a huge wound channel with good penetration, that not a fail, it's a nice surprise. If they didn't open at all or veered off immediately, that is a fail. A Hyundai isn't supposed to preform like a Porsche, but if it does, the owner shouldn't complain. I'm just saying, "Fail", is the wrong word.

[@cbvidieo]

​@@masonleather_outdoors Bullets should produce a wound cavity and good penetration, I would agree with that other guy, you can't call that a fail.

[@LeopardStrikeGaming]

First let me be clear I’ve never ever hunted with copper bullets. Second the only copper bullets I ever shot were Barnes ttsx. That being said…. I’ve never ever seen a full copper bullet behave like the ones in this video… and it’s not minor differences this is way WAY WAY WAY out of the norm for copper bullets as far as I’m aware… the harness ttsx I found in my 300wsm had micro pellet peeling or very very lil loss at all…. No something isn’t right with this perticular bullet… what it is I don’t know but I actually agree with mason copper bullets really don’t do what the outfitters did

[@Leipziger-Fanklub]

Why do you think it failed? The wound channel is deep and devastating. So it would have definitely killed a deer pretty fast if you hit double Lung.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

I say exactly why in the video, watch the entire video.

[@Leipziger-Fanklub]

@@masonleather_outdoors Yeah but this is a generall problem with copper bullets. They depend only on speed. So at short ranges they tend to "explode" (because the velocity is to high) The higher the speed the faster they open up. For example you would get better results at 200 yards. Because its allways a trade off. No one wants a hunting bullet that does no longer expand at lets say 300 yards. On the other side nobody whants a bullet that simple explodes at 50 Yards. So copper bullets are in generall better for 100+ distances, because they open up to fast with too much speed. So if you want to hunt at 100 Yards with copper use a heavier bullet. It will travel slower but still packs the punch you want. it will go deep and expand slower because of the lower speed but will still deliver the energy.

[@garrettschienschang7898]

Any chance of you trying .308, 300wmg, .223, or 300blk ammo from defiant munitions?

[@parshafarahi172]

The main problem with monolithics is narrow wound channel

[@SouthernCoastOutdoors]

That is really terrible considering its a uniform gel block. No hide no bone. Thanks for the video.

[@danielrobey1759]

That is the downside of the monolithic bullet when the temper/ work hardening isn't right they suck, no expansion on soft tissues and too brittle for big bones so even a shoulder shot is no sure thing...

[@awiedevilliers1288]

This is a failure but also not a failure good wound channel were it matters and deep penetration I would hunt with this ammunition with confidence what's happening with this bullet at 200 would be interesting to know

[@Simon-talks]

This is more disappointing than modern Pop-Country

[@jasonshults368]

That's a tough race to call.

[@williamgaines9784]

I would disagree that they are horrible...TSX generally say 1.5x expansion. Lehigh/Wilson "chaos" bullets fracture. 89%, which is about the same starting weight as most 6.5 bullets, penetrating through and through at 1.5x, which the 6.5 would need to expand 1.75x, would be deadly on deer. Would I pay a premium price for those? Not likely, unless I hunt CA or my state adopts CA ammo regulations.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

Horrible in regards to claimed performance, straight from the CX product page: “One-piece copper alloy won't separate and delivers devastating terminal performance, deep penetration, and 95% weight retention.”

[@williamgaines9784]

@@masonleather_outdoors With that, I now agree with your assessment as compared to their claims.👍👍

[@kevinli9331]

Hornady is known for lying on their products 😂

[@Meh-hr7gq]

I use the ELDX in my 6.5. Great on medium game. And the most accurate. Yet they are so slow per manufacturer specs. My friend reloads them for me back to spec. Ridiculous.

[@TODinWY]

Think Hammers.

[@RandyMan388]

I personally don’t think it’s as bad as you’re leading on. You need penetration, it needs to blow all the way through. We want 2 holes. It will kill just fine. If you were testing Hammer bullets, you would be saying these bullets worked just fine. Yeah, you like seeing those Hammers with that flat front, it blows through game leaving holes all the way through your game animals. Or, the same bullets you were using, hit game and you get Dead Right There response would be golden. All bullets work perfectly and differently. May work one way for 2 rounds and different on the third. Doesn’t make it a failure. You have a great day. Take care.

[@crpp5030]

Hey Mason! Shoot one bullet in the gel and show the wound channel. 3 bullets is just a big ass mess. And a copper bullet shedding petals is a good thing. It creates more wound channel. I would shoot these any day over the pencil through Barnes. And are you harvesting game, or shooting to have a pretty bullet???

[@masonleather_outdoors]

I’m not going to run up and down a 100 yard range and film more clips more times than I already do just to show a single wound track. It might be better in certain circumstances, but it’s also not what the manufacturer claim, i.e. it failed versus claimed performance.

[@crpp5030]

@@masonleather_outdoors well one shot is a better example of a wound channel then three in the same block. Just saying.

[@RonHudgens-ck5qe]

Just a SALESMAN

[@m444ss]

Hammer bullet are designed to drop pellets for additional tissue damage (hemorrhaging) while the base penetrates all the way through. I'm not saying that's the design for CX bullets, but losing petals is not axiomatically failure.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

These aren’t Hammer bullets.

[@liverpool6380]

7prc Please

[@janbastein7355]

For a “solid” bullet in a slow loaded 308 ,150 gr is too heavy! Look at Barnes ttsx 130 gr ,3125 fps and they open up!

[@reconrc1787]

For Deer hunting, im loving what im seeing. That fast explosive expansion that goes out to the 13 - 15 inch mark, that would leave one heck of an exit. The blood trail (if needed to follow) would be very visible. I love solid copper bullets as much as the next guy for the awsome penetration but one aspect of them that I have always wished was better is just how explosive they are at openning. I bet on real flesh and bone these CX bullets would make one heck of a hole.

[@Ugh_its_dat_guy86]

I don't think they failed at all. They expanded, the wound track was fantastic, and penetration was deep. Holes in and out for easier tracking job. Dead animal to me.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

As measured against claimed performance, these objectively and irrefutably failed. Straight from the product page: “One-piece copper alloy won't separate and delivers devastating terminal performance, deep penetration, and 95% weight retention.”

[@Ugh_its_dat_guy86]

@@masonleather_outdoors I do agree that if only measured by box standards it failed no question. However that gel animal you shot with is plenty dead and so would any whitetail or cow elk. I'm a copper shooter mostly barnes. By all account that ammo did its job. It acted very similar to the barnes LRX. It's a softer long range copper bullet and at shorter ranges at higher velocities it can shed pedals, but it's reputation is held very high. Barnes is the best coppers, hoping to see you test them 😉

[@parshafarahi172]

These are more ethical

[@stcif]

Interesting. My son shoots the Outfitter in 30-06 180 grain. Recovered one from a whitetail and it expanded well and penetrated deep. 40 yard quarter away shot.

[@peterhrkal8165]

Didn't go through other side? Weird. Must of been really quartered away lol

[@stcif]

@@peterhrkal8165 walking away, head down. Entered towards back of rib cage, travelled forward into the neck on opposite side.

[@stcif]

@@peterhrkal8165 I recovered a Federal Trophy Copper 150 grain .308 on a whitetail facing me. Brisket shot, found the bullet in the sirloin tip roast.

[@peterhrkal8165]

@@stcif like I said, really quartered away

[@mr.mr.3301]

I’ve read that fragmenting copper bullets are the new trend. I think hammer bullets are designed to do that.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

These aren’t designed to do that. Straight from the product page: “One-piece copper alloy won't separate and delivers devastating terminal performance, deep penetration, and 95% weight retention.”

[@mr.mr.3301]

@@masonleather_outdoors it is odd. They tore apart in 308 speeds. I’m a Barnes fanboy. Not a fan of the cx. I think hammer would be cool to see you review.

[@chemex9968]

buy it !!!!

[@davesnodgrass2074]

Far as I'm concerned All copper ammo is crap 62 years old until they made us go to copper when you go hunting in California never lost anything and now you lose animals you know the bullet went all the way through but it does no damage

[@briansouth9325]

Hornady consistently under preforms. From soft brass, to breaking apart or not expanding, or subpar performance for the money. Do better Hornady, we know you're capable of it.

[@Ariel-x1x]

Your testing is meaningful and well done, but I disagree with your conclusions here. The stats may be lower, but the long and deep explosive wound channels in the gel tells you why that is. It literally ripped its way through the gel, and would have left a large exit wound on a medium-sized animal. That is absolutely an acceptable result, indeed, highly-desirable, IMO. Whether it's "monolithic copper" or not, is completely irrelevant to me. Does it kill? Oh yes, it's instantly devastating. Your definition of an "abject failure" makes no sense to me, this clearly would be an extremely effective projectile at its primary hunting aim, of rapidly and ethically killing a target animal. So I wonder what would not be "an abject failure", to you? How dead do you want it? If you stand there with an animal that was destroyed by one round are you going to be comparing the animal, to the blurb on the manufacturer's ammo box graphics? I fully see your points and reasoning, but calling these results "an abject failure" is fundamentally incorrect, it misrepresents the physical result. Why do a physical test if you're going to ignore the highly successful visible result, and call the ammo an "abject failure". How is that valid? I don't know where you're going with that sort of conclusion. IMO you're wrong, based on your own physical testing. To then conclude that you would never use this ammo because of such deluding stats, seems extreme and absurd to me, based on the visual physical testing recorded in the gel. I don't know how you reconciled that view. It's a very strange take on the result. I saw your test with those two 165 grain CX loads, and the smaller wound channels produced with those, and the extreme over-penetration, from the weight retained in them, amounted to lower lethality, and an unfortunate waste of the energy retained in the projectiles, after exiting even a large animal. But you still considered this a highly successful test and load(s), and desirable projectile behavior. Which again, seems far less 'successful' to myself, than this 150 grain CX, which behaved exactly how I would want it to behave. Your testing and videos are good but your takes on the results seems to miss the point of the whole AIM of buying an using such projectiles--namely, to make living animals dead, as quickly as possible.

[@andrewhirsch6472]

We may have a different definition of "failure." I think too much is made of what the BULLET looks like after impact. In the field, as opposed to in theory, I believe it's more important what the GAME ANIMAL looks like after impact. That, in my experience, determines whether the animal dies quickly or....not so quickly. If (big if) Hornady made its 150gr CX load perform this way consistently, I'd say it would perform well against all deer, including the larger muleys and Northern Whitetails.

[@masonleather_outdoors]

“Failure” is when it doesn’t do what the manufacturer claims, this is unequivocally an objective failure in that regard. That’s how I gauge everything I evaluate.

[@andrewhirsch6472]

@@masonleather_outdoors : Fair point--I don't suggest you change your evaluation policy. That said, the knock on lead-free bullets is that they produce narrower wound channels than lead-core expanding bullets, all others things being equal. Perhaps Hornady has found--albeit accidentally--a solution to this drawback? Certainly, the penetration remained more than good enough for all deer hunting.

[@54jnl]

Ultra fail? BS!

[@boshoffbotha7830]

Looks like Hornady is the biggest bull shitters in the industry. Typical salesmen/ gamesmenship. Really disappointing. Wish I did not buy a 6.5 creedmoor. And went with the trusty 6.5 Swedish.......

[@1RobHunter1]

There are far better out there than this CX bullet.