American Handgunner- New Federal Ammo to Replace HydroShok
- Thread starter allamricn
- Start date
- Status
Check this URL www.federalcartridge.com/default.asp?pg=18
Scroll down to the fifth item. It's an Expanding Full Metal Jacket-Personal Defence round. Is this what they're going to?
Scroll down to the fifth item. It's an Expanding Full Metal Jacket-Personal Defence round. Is this what they're going to?
Oracle
Member
Doesn't it expand better than some hydroshock rounds? I've seen pictures of Federal Hydroshocks ripping through 18" of ballistic gelatin without even deforming. EFMJ almost always expands.
For whatever it’s worth . . .
I have used both 200 grain .45 ACP +P and 124 grain 9x19 P+ Federal EFMJs for the last two years. I suspect the EFMJ is an EXCELLENT defensive round. I put in the same “top tier†group as HydraShok, Golden Saber, Gold Dot, CorBon, Silvertip, and so forth.
I have used both 200 grain .45 ACP +P and 124 grain 9x19 P+ Federal EFMJs for the last two years. I suspect the EFMJ is an EXCELLENT defensive round. I put in the same “top tier†group as HydraShok, Golden Saber, Gold Dot, CorBon, Silvertip, and so forth.
LIProgun
Member
FYI
Regarding the future of the Hydra-Shok, you may find these two links of interest:
http://www.thegunzone.com/efmj.html (See the "End of an Era?" box)
http://forum.amback.com/viewtopic.php?t=515
Regarding the future of the Hydra-Shok, you may find these two links of interest:
http://www.thegunzone.com/efmj.html (See the "End of an Era?" box)
http://forum.amback.com/viewtopic.php?t=515
HYdrashoks have a far better reputation than it deserves nowadays, the center 'pin' has a nasty habit of gathering clothing material (like denim) and turning the bullet into a fmj with associated nonexpansion/overpenetration issues.
Hydrashoks have been superceded by newer designs, and Federal seems to have realized this.
Hydrashoks have been superceded by newer designs, and Federal seems to have realized this.
I don't contend that there is far better ammuntion out there, but as I understand it, Hydra-Shoks have long been extremely good sellers - both to LEO and civilians. Unless the new round they replace it with is far cheaper than the Hydra-shoks to produce, this strikes me as a bad decision purely from a business standpoint.
*mumbles about having to find a new defensive ammo*
I've heard that tests of the EFMJ have shown performance to be inconsistent. Here's a comparison from www.tacticalforums.com.
brad cook
snubby
Member
Seems the full metal jacket of the EFMJ may be too hard to allow expansion in certain situations, despite the serrations on the nose. Corbon's Powerball concept is probably superior as a round-nosed reliably expanding bullet design.
Dean Speir
Member
CWL asserts:
And this is based on what study or report? Cite please.
Hydrashoks have been changed . the original design penetrated too much. But this is not uncommon, as information is gathered about actual use , many bullets have been changed. But they work, the 45 hydrashok is considered the best 45 round. I carry the 40 -155gr hydrashok though I only have had woodchucks to defend against.
Country Boy
Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2002
- Messages
- 260
As I sit here with my tinfoil hat reading the flyer from Southern Ohio Gun, they're selling 50 rounds of 230gr .45 Hydra-Shoks for $11.95.
Dean Speir
Member
Errata
mete notes:
The design has in fact changed considerably over the years since Federal Cartridge licensed it from Tom Burczynski, starting with jacketing the projectile. I have at least four different iterations of that Federal round, and the ogive was "tinkered with" for purposes of feed reliability across a broader spectrum of police-issue semi-autos.
And yes, the geometry of the post has changed as well, but upon information and reasonably good belief, there was never an issue of "over-penetration."
Country Boy adds:
mete notes:
I don't think so, but then I don't know what your frame of reference is… the "original design" in .45 ACP at least utilized a 230-grain lead HP made by Alperts.
The design has in fact changed considerably over the years since Federal Cartridge licensed it from Tom Burczynski, starting with jacketing the projectile. I have at least four different iterations of that Federal round, and the ogive was "tinkered with" for purposes of feed reliability across a broader spectrum of police-issue semi-autos.
And yes, the geometry of the post has changed as well, but upon information and reasonably good belief, there was never an issue of "over-penetration."
Country Boy adds:
And that should tell you something… not that the Hydra-Shoks aren't excellent anti-personnel rounds anymore, only that Federal/ATK has something newer in the pipeline that they wish to promote, and nervous distributors and dealers are going to fire-sale those puppies outta their inventory.
Daniel Watters
Member
Dean: I think you mean Alberts. Whatever happened to them anyway? There used to be a time when you couldn't read a gunzine without seeing ads for their line of swaged bullets.
PCRCCW
Member
Well I can attest to and agree with the Hydra is outdated....the JHP has a smaller capacity than other JHP's and denim fills it up..thus the FMJ analogy.
They are still a good round..but there are better. Dots, Sabers and Corbon consistantly stomp on the Hydra's ballistically speaking.
But one thing Ill give them is they are VERY accurate. As far as EFMJ's replacing them.....I HIGHLY doubt it. They are not what I want to carry anyway. As far as accuracy...the EFMJ's Ive had and still have, SUCKED!
Shoot well............
They are still a good round..but there are better. Dots, Sabers and Corbon consistantly stomp on the Hydra's ballistically speaking.
But one thing Ill give them is they are VERY accurate. As far as EFMJ's replacing them.....I HIGHLY doubt it. They are not what I want to carry anyway. As far as accuracy...the EFMJ's Ive had and still have, SUCKED!
Shoot well............
cslinger
Member
Not to flame just an observation.
Do we, all of us, buy into the marketing hype? I mean when you look at the clinical, sterile descriptions and measure of rounds most of the big boys are within a few points of one another.
Real world we all know that handguns are a relatively poor man stopper/killer. Don't something like 70% of the people shot with a handgun survive.
Now I am not saying that you should load up your handgun with the cheapest reload FMJ plinking ammo you can find and I do believe that quality bullet design will give better results but what it all keeps coming down to is reliability and bullet placement.
Seems like I can find data showing that 9mm Hydrashoks out perform .45 Golden Sabres with one department but the opposite is true for another agency.
Now I am just as guilty at buying into bullet design changes etc. as anybody else but being a marketing major back in school most of it just screams "What can we do to sell more ammo?"
.38 SWC and round nosed lead was killing people for a long long time, the same with .45 hardball etc. I am not saying that a good quality hollowpoint is not loads better in most circumstances but I am beginning to come to the belief that the differences between one modern hollowpoint/EFMJ/Powerball round versus another are probably getting to be a pretty slim margin of difference overall.
Something tells me that should you ever have to shoot somebody, God forbid, that your skill and ability to shoot under stress will be the major deciding factor with bullet design playing a very little part.
Now I am not a LEO, Soldier, Super Agent or hired killer so I obviously have no practical experience. I am just basing this on what I know about physics, evidence provided me by people who have been there and done that and the fact that even the clinical sterile evidence shows most of the modern bullet designs to be so close to each other in performance that all things considered it probably doesn't matter much.
I personally like Hydra Shok ammo. Mostly because of what I have researched and the people I have talked to who have actually had to use it. Does that make it the best? No. But it does make me feel like it is more than adequate for my purposes.
Once again, I am not bashing anybody's opinion nor do I claim to have the "ANSWER". I just think that we have come to a point in firearms and firearm ammunition where a great deal of what is deemed the BEST has a lot to do with marketing and sales....................................Enter the .45 Glock and to a lesser extent the .40 S&W.
FWIW
Chris
Ohh yeah I own and like .40 caliber handguns so I wasn't bashing the round but I also don't think we would be ill armed if it had never come into being.
Do we, all of us, buy into the marketing hype? I mean when you look at the clinical, sterile descriptions and measure of rounds most of the big boys are within a few points of one another.
Real world we all know that handguns are a relatively poor man stopper/killer. Don't something like 70% of the people shot with a handgun survive.
Now I am not saying that you should load up your handgun with the cheapest reload FMJ plinking ammo you can find and I do believe that quality bullet design will give better results but what it all keeps coming down to is reliability and bullet placement.
Seems like I can find data showing that 9mm Hydrashoks out perform .45 Golden Sabres with one department but the opposite is true for another agency.
Now I am just as guilty at buying into bullet design changes etc. as anybody else but being a marketing major back in school most of it just screams "What can we do to sell more ammo?"
.38 SWC and round nosed lead was killing people for a long long time, the same with .45 hardball etc. I am not saying that a good quality hollowpoint is not loads better in most circumstances but I am beginning to come to the belief that the differences between one modern hollowpoint/EFMJ/Powerball round versus another are probably getting to be a pretty slim margin of difference overall.
Something tells me that should you ever have to shoot somebody, God forbid, that your skill and ability to shoot under stress will be the major deciding factor with bullet design playing a very little part.
Now I am not a LEO, Soldier, Super Agent or hired killer so I obviously have no practical experience. I am just basing this on what I know about physics, evidence provided me by people who have been there and done that and the fact that even the clinical sterile evidence shows most of the modern bullet designs to be so close to each other in performance that all things considered it probably doesn't matter much.
I personally like Hydra Shok ammo. Mostly because of what I have researched and the people I have talked to who have actually had to use it. Does that make it the best? No. But it does make me feel like it is more than adequate for my purposes.
Once again, I am not bashing anybody's opinion nor do I claim to have the "ANSWER". I just think that we have come to a point in firearms and firearm ammunition where a great deal of what is deemed the BEST has a lot to do with marketing and sales....................................Enter the .45 Glock and to a lesser extent the .40 S&W.
FWIW
Chris
Ohh yeah I own and like .40 caliber handguns so I wasn't bashing the round but I also don't think we would be ill armed if it had never come into being.
Shawn Dodson
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 3,207
Dean asks:
It consistently fails to expand when tested against 4 layers of denim cloth. Several testers have observed this, including myself, David DiFabio and Gary Roberts.
...but Hydra-Shok is a really scary-cool distinctive name, and one might opine that Federal would do well to keep it in some form, at least from a marketing point of view.Dean Speir
Member
Okay, but I believe that even Doctor Roberts will concur that what you've just posted is "anecdotal." I'm not interested in what people "heard" somewhere, or think they read somewhere but can't remember where or who wrote it or said it.
So Dean asks again… this is based on what study or report? Cite please.
Nor have I, Archer, but people persist in talking about things when they don't even know the name of what they're discussing. (Hint: look at the name on the ammo box!)
Roger that! It's not only a scary cool and distinctive name, it's a long time market leader, and there's gonna be a helluva lot of agencies and departments that want their Hydra-Shoks the way others a generation ago wanted their MayPo!
Shawn Dodson
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 3,207
http://www.firearmstactical.com/test_data/45acp/fed45-165pdhs-g30.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/test_data/45acp/fed45-230hs-g30.htm
http://www.ammolab.com/Test Results.htm
Search "HydraShok" at TacticalForums.com, Terminal Effects forum
Cheers!
http://www.firearmstactical.com/test_data/45acp/fed45-230hs-g30.htm
http://www.ammolab.com/Test Results.htm
Search "HydraShok" at TacticalForums.com, Terminal Effects forum
Cheers!
Grump
Member
Well, the anecdotal evidence seems reasonable enough.
Next: Has anyone else replicated it? If so, it becomes close to gospel truth, within the sometimes not-so-obvious limits of Jello (c) testing.
After reading Facker's (or wuzzit someone else's?) description of how expansion was unaffected in expansion tests when the Hydra-Shok post was removed, I also noticed that the deeper penetration in some tests contrasted with some other bullets' LESS than 12-inch penetration after going though the same barriers. IIRC, it appeared that the post was a benefit not to enhance expansion as originally conceived, but to poke a bit better penetration when things got tough. Anywhooze, that iteration of the H-Shok was passing the FBI protocol.
And could we let up on the name-calling? Any reasonable reader will be able to decipher Hydro-Shock or any variation thereof as being the Federal round with the Buz... however HIS name is spelled bullet. Gentle correction is okay, just don't get testy about it.
Standard disclaimers because I'm working on memory, but I HAVE followed this in the Gunzines since Hydra-Shok was a backwards-loaded .38 Special HBWC with a post added. IN FACT, wasn't increased accuracy one of the benefits of the first version, as compared to handloader experiments?
Dean, I'm counting on you to have da facts as previously published...
Next: Has anyone else replicated it? If so, it becomes close to gospel truth, within the sometimes not-so-obvious limits of Jello (c) testing.
After reading Facker's (or wuzzit someone else's?) description of how expansion was unaffected in expansion tests when the Hydra-Shok post was removed, I also noticed that the deeper penetration in some tests contrasted with some other bullets' LESS than 12-inch penetration after going though the same barriers. IIRC, it appeared that the post was a benefit not to enhance expansion as originally conceived, but to poke a bit better penetration when things got tough. Anywhooze, that iteration of the H-Shok was passing the FBI protocol.
And could we let up on the name-calling? Any reasonable reader will be able to decipher Hydro-Shock or any variation thereof as being the Federal round with the Buz... however HIS name is spelled bullet. Gentle correction is okay, just don't get testy about it.
Standard disclaimers because I'm working on memory, but I HAVE followed this in the Gunzines since Hydra-Shok was a backwards-loaded .38 Special HBWC with a post added. IN FACT, wasn't increased accuracy one of the benefits of the first version, as compared to handloader experiments?
Dean, I'm counting on you to have da facts as previously published...
45crittergitter
Member
Tom Gresham said today (Oct 12, 2003) that the EMFJ is the Hydrashock replacement, according to Federal.
Hydra-Shok has an excellent reputation, and dropped the French Alpine goats in the controversial test almost as fast as 125 grain JHP's did. It also holds together and gets in deep. It's what I carry in .357, and often, in .38 Special.
I have several boxes and it's plain that the earlier bullets have narrower cavities than later bullets, which also have notches around the ogive to let the bullet open sooner and peel back more.
If these stories are true, I'll miss Hydra-Shok, whch shoots extremely well for me.
Lone Star
I have several boxes and it's plain that the earlier bullets have narrower cavities than later bullets, which also have notches around the ogive to let the bullet open sooner and peel back more.
If these stories are true, I'll miss Hydra-Shok, whch shoots extremely well for me.
Lone Star
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Hydra-Shok Flop
The only real experience that I've had with Hydra-Shok was the defensive
shooting of a large, aggressive dog. The shot was taken at 5 feet or
so, front chest. The dog turned to run and made about 10 feet before he fell. He died within a minute, as near as I could tell. The bullet exited
just above the hip, near the tail root.
After the animal control officers left with the dog, I found the bullet
about 10 feet from where I made the shot. If it weren't for the rifling
marks, it could have been reloaded and fired again. The cavity was
plugged with the dog's short hair, and the only deformation was a
small ding right at the edge of the cavity.
In fairness, this was from an old lot of Hydra-Shok that I bought
in early 1991. Federal may have improved the 230 Hydra-Shok
since that lot was produced. The ammunition was very accurate
in all my pistols, though, and chronograph tests showed that it
was consistently in the 870-890 fps range from a 5-inch Colt
1911...820-840 from three different Commanders.
All I can tell ya.
Tuner
The only real experience that I've had with Hydra-Shok was the defensive
shooting of a large, aggressive dog. The shot was taken at 5 feet or
so, front chest. The dog turned to run and made about 10 feet before he fell. He died within a minute, as near as I could tell. The bullet exited
just above the hip, near the tail root.
After the animal control officers left with the dog, I found the bullet
about 10 feet from where I made the shot. If it weren't for the rifling
marks, it could have been reloaded and fired again. The cavity was
plugged with the dog's short hair, and the only deformation was a
small ding right at the edge of the cavity.
In fairness, this was from an old lot of Hydra-Shok that I bought
in early 1991. Federal may have improved the 230 Hydra-Shok
since that lot was produced. The ammunition was very accurate
in all my pistols, though, and chronograph tests showed that it
was consistently in the 870-890 fps range from a 5-inch Colt
1911...820-840 from three different Commanders.
All I can tell ya.
Tuner
- Status
