I have several older stubbies (S&W model 36 a stainless Rossi and Charter Arms Under Cover...first model) It is my understanding that I should not use a steady diet of +P ammo or even fire any +P in these revolvers. I am a avid reloader but also have been told that you shouldn't use hand loads for defense purposes. What rounds should I use? I used to use Federal Nyclads but they are discontinued. What about Federal low recoil 110 grain hydra schoks? I don't see +P on the box or on the head stamp? Any other suggestions? I have a 442 and a model 60 and understand that +P is okey for these guns. Any suggestions will be welcome.
Federal low recoil hydra shoks 110 grain
- Thread starter bamacisa
- Start date
- Status
The Lone Haranguer
Member
I am unsure how the Charter or - to a lesser extent - the Rossi would hold up, but +Ps in the steel Smith will likely wear your hand out before the gun. 
I have shot the 110-gr. standard pressure "Personal Defense" Hydra-Shok in a Colt Agent, a larger but lighter gun than yours. It did indeed have lighter recoil than a heavier bullet, and also shot exactly to point of aim in that gun, whereas heavier loads shot a little high. This is what I used when I carried it. I never chronographed or gelatin tested it or anything of that sort, let alone got into a gunfight with it. But I see no reason why it would not be effective (working within the limits of all snubnose revolvers, of course).
For your practice ammo, you can of course handload, and save the factory ammo for defense. It should be easy for you to work out a load that approximates the recoil and point of aim of whatever defensive load you choose.
I have shot the 110-gr. standard pressure "Personal Defense" Hydra-Shok in a Colt Agent, a larger but lighter gun than yours. It did indeed have lighter recoil than a heavier bullet, and also shot exactly to point of aim in that gun, whereas heavier loads shot a little high. This is what I used when I carried it. I never chronographed or gelatin tested it or anything of that sort, let alone got into a gunfight with it.
But I see no reason why it would not be effective (working within the limits of all snubnose revolvers, of course). For your practice ammo, you can of course handload, and save the factory ammo for defense. It should be easy for you to work out a load that approximates the recoil and point of aim of whatever defensive load you choose.
OH25shooter
Member
I use the Federal 110 grain Hydra-Shok in my S&W M36 "snub nose" for conceal carry. I like them, and for me, at 15 feet, they are dead center.
James T Thomas
Member
to be or not to be
I would recommend against the 110 grain projectiles, for "theoretical" reason only, but please bear with me.
If you are not familiar with the abstract ballistics of bullets; there is a phenomenon called Sectional Density. It is simply an index number that relates very well in the applied and real world of bullet penetration.
Essentially, and bullet with a long body, that is shank, will penetrate the target deeper than a stubby or short bullet.
The 110 grain round you refer to, if it expands as it is designed to, will perhaps expand to a diameter of 50 caliber, at best, and therefor will have a much larger frontal cross section and having used up much of it's body or shank to produce this expansion, will then have become short and stubby.
Now, the desired expantion in this type of round usually occurs quickly upon penetrating the target. That is within a few inches of entry.
You will be trying to reach your assailant's vitals with bullets that are basically "coins." You may ruin his weekend for him, but he may be the last man standing.
By rapid expansion, most of the important Sectional Density has been converted into a stubby projectile which now has limited penetration quality!
You may inflict a "shallow wound" on the target.
All this assumes that the bullet we are describing has not lost any of its mass as it travels into the target. Fragmenting, splintering, or jacket shedding.
Some retain their mass well, and many do not.
There goes even more S.D. that you need.
I would recommend a heavier round of "controlled expansion" design and good, but not high velocity.
Even a "semi wadcutter" style works well for self defense.
The Buffalo Bore round is good.
If you must have reduced recoil, try different grips on you firearm, or purchase another gun that is heavier than the one you now have.
I would not rely on a lightweight, rapidly expanding round to defend myself or my loved ones; from a handgun.
I would recommend against the 110 grain projectiles, for "theoretical" reason only, but please bear with me.
If you are not familiar with the abstract ballistics of bullets; there is a phenomenon called Sectional Density. It is simply an index number that relates very well in the applied and real world of bullet penetration.
Essentially, and bullet with a long body, that is shank, will penetrate the target deeper than a stubby or short bullet.
The 110 grain round you refer to, if it expands as it is designed to, will perhaps expand to a diameter of 50 caliber, at best, and therefor will have a much larger frontal cross section and having used up much of it's body or shank to produce this expansion, will then have become short and stubby.
Now, the desired expantion in this type of round usually occurs quickly upon penetrating the target. That is within a few inches of entry.
You will be trying to reach your assailant's vitals with bullets that are basically "coins." You may ruin his weekend for him, but he may be the last man standing.
By rapid expansion, most of the important Sectional Density has been converted into a stubby projectile which now has limited penetration quality!
You may inflict a "shallow wound" on the target.
All this assumes that the bullet we are describing has not lost any of its mass as it travels into the target. Fragmenting, splintering, or jacket shedding.
Some retain their mass well, and many do not.
There goes even more S.D. that you need.
I would recommend a heavier round of "controlled expansion" design and good, but not high velocity.
Even a "semi wadcutter" style works well for self defense.
The Buffalo Bore round is good.
If you must have reduced recoil, try different grips on you firearm, or purchase another gun that is heavier than the one you now have.
I would not rely on a lightweight, rapidly expanding round to defend myself or my loved ones; from a handgun.
Last edited:
Jim March
Member
In addition to theory, the Federals have a bad rep for low performance.
I would go with plain lead 158s or 148s for practice and pony up for the Buffalo Bore 38Spl standard pressure combat stuff for carry/defense:
http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#standard38
I would go with plain lead 158s or 148s for practice and pony up for the Buffalo Bore 38Spl standard pressure combat stuff for carry/defense:
http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#standard38
Jkwas
Member
If you're comfortable with the 110gn federal and it shoots good in your gun, then carry it. My wife carries it in her M36 and it shoots like a champ. It is also high quality which adds to it's consistency and reliability. If one isn't a stopper, you've got up to 4 more, and at close range that should count for something. I carry 6 shots of 92gn .380 FMJ, so you are way ahead of me. Are we as well off as if we were carrying .45 or .40 caliber? No, but something is better than nothing and I guess you can never really have enough gun.
weregunner
Member
Here's some links for the ammo query.
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=3595.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=2349.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=2132.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=2144.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=2689.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=775.0
Everything I was going to say is in here somehwere and the others who posted in the links were very helpful.
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=3595.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=2349.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=2132.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=2144.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=2689.0
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=775.0
Everything I was going to say is in here somehwere and the others who posted in the links were very helpful.
OH25shooter
Member
Then how do you account for the hundreds who died from a .22 round?
I'd have to believe a manufacturer like Federal has reseached and tested the 110 grain round for personal defense. I'm sure others may be slightly better, but that round works for me at the 15 feet I'm comfortable with for a "defensive shooting distance".
wcwhitey
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,814
I am sorry I don't have the link but a few (maybe 6) months ago a gentleman had done some ballistic gel tests and included the 110 grain Federal low recoil in the test. From what I recall it had limited penetration and unreliable expansion. Maybe someone had saved the link and can repost it. Prior to Buffalo Bore introducing the standard pressure round and with the standard pressure NYCLAD round being dropped it was left to the Federal and Winchester Silver tip in an non Plus P. I will second what Jim March mentioned that I would go with either the BB round or a true standard pressure SWC. Sectional density and penetration are two important considerations. However the most important thing is being able to hit quickly and accurately from the holster. I would suggest practice with some good SWC's that are cheaper by the 50 than the Federals are by the 20. If you aim for a vital the SWC will make it all the way to it, no quarantee with the Federal based on what I have seen. Bill
James T Thomas
Member
working knowledge
"OH25:"
I think the accounting for the fatalities from the lowly 22 round is that there are so many guns "on the books" for that round. Therefore, there are a proportionate number of deaths from it. Statistics are tricky things.
In "Strategies and Tactics" is a post by Sgt.Dusk. He wonders about the 22 also.
If you can find some data that classifies all those deaths as to immediate or later; delayed, then you may have a better insight into the 22 as a self defense round.
I suspect many of the deaths are after some time has elapsed, and is not time critical to self defense.
I do not know first hand what Federal or the other manufacturers test for; self defense, or sales, but I suspect the later.
Sorry, I'm older and my cynicism is creeping up on me. That round will "work" for you, fifteen feet, etc., but be careful how you are percieving "work." I would hope that you never have an encounter or occasion to find that, well, that round didn't work as I thought it would.
And for the reasons I stated it my previous post.
"Wcwhitey:"
My own considerations are somewhat different than yours are.
I place quick draw from a holster lower in priority than accuracy -where you and I agree, and S.D. -penetration second.
I'm not in L.E. and my reasoning is that should someone have gun in hand or be in the process of drawing, I am in trouble from the start. That may happen, but I take all actions to preclude it.
"OH25:"
I think the accounting for the fatalities from the lowly 22 round is that there are so many guns "on the books" for that round. Therefore, there are a proportionate number of deaths from it. Statistics are tricky things.
In "Strategies and Tactics" is a post by Sgt.Dusk. He wonders about the 22 also.
If you can find some data that classifies all those deaths as to immediate or later; delayed, then you may have a better insight into the 22 as a self defense round.
I suspect many of the deaths are after some time has elapsed, and is not time critical to self defense.
I do not know first hand what Federal or the other manufacturers test for; self defense, or sales, but I suspect the later.
Sorry, I'm older and my cynicism is creeping up on me. That round will "work" for you, fifteen feet, etc., but be careful how you are percieving "work." I would hope that you never have an encounter or occasion to find that, well, that round didn't work as I thought it would.
And for the reasons I stated it my previous post.
"Wcwhitey:"
My own considerations are somewhat different than yours are.
I place quick draw from a holster lower in priority than accuracy -where you and I agree, and S.D. -penetration second.
I'm not in L.E. and my reasoning is that should someone have gun in hand or be in the process of drawing, I am in trouble from the start. That may happen, but I take all actions to preclude it.
Last edited:
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
I practice with my handloaded (standard velocity & pressure) ammo in my
S&W old model 60 (.38 Special), 37, 442, and 642; but switch to the 129
grain Federal Hydra-Shok +P rounds for defensive purposes~!
FootNote: using any handloaded ammunition in a defensive carry gun
is a bad idea, as it could malfunction (FTF) causing serious bodily harm
or even death; not to mention all of the wrongful death lawsuits filed by
a deceased perpetrators estate, in case you were forced to blow some
crack head/meth addict, druggie away.
S&W old model 60 (.38 Special), 37, 442, and 642; but switch to the 129
grain Federal Hydra-Shok +P rounds for defensive purposes~!
FootNote: using any handloaded ammunition in a defensive carry gun
is a bad idea
, as it could malfunction (FTF) causing serious bodily harmor even death
; not to mention all of the wrongful death lawsuits filed bya deceased perpetrators estate, in case you were forced to blow some
crack head/meth addict, druggie away.
OH25shooter
Member
BINGO!
I fear civil law attorney's more than criminals. Than again, maybe they're one in the same.
jfh
Member.
maybe a segue is in order here
to work over the canard about factory / reloaded PD ammo and liability exposure.
First, IANAL. But, given the anecdotal history from authorities, I'm not too sure just how often this happens except in the Movies or on TV. Ayoob--who does recommend factory ammo, IIRC--has prognosticated on this concern, and I think he has said it is not a big factor.
I got to thinking about this issue this year--as people who post and read in the reloading section probably will recall, I've shot about 5000 rounds in the last six months through j-frame carry guns--4000 or so from a 640, and 700 or so from a M&P340. 95% of these rounds were "replica rounds" for the Speer 135-gr 38+P PD round. Speer has published data for both the 38+P cartridge and the 357 round--with 2" barrels, the bullet runs about 880 fps from the 38 Special case, and about 1000 fps from the 357 Magnum case.
A fair number of these replica rounds were new recipes set up 357 Magnum cases--that is, I replicated the "feel" of the 38+P round in a 357 setup--for obvious reasons--less cleaning issues in a 38 / 357 revolver, and for reloaders the ability to start pushing the load up for more power.
The round I carry is that Speer factory round. It costs about $1.00 a shot OTC retail (about $0.30 if you buy 1000 at a time from an online resource)--but I could build reloads for about $.23 (using the actual GDSB135JHP bullet) or for about $.11 (using 140 lead bullets)--and those costs include a 1.5-cent case amortization.
At one point, as I speculated on those cost issues, I wondered just what would happen were I involved in a PD shooting with those "357-lite" reloads in the gun. You know, getting to say something like "Yessir, those were reloads--they were downloaded 357 rounds; I'm an old man, and my hands are too sore to shoot full house loads anymore."
Now, we could speculate about how the prosecution / liability lawer would parry that--but that's my point. I agree that there are valid concerns about such issues shaping the result of any legal action--but mostly, those concerns are what I call mental masturbation: In social groups (like forums), individuals respond with comments designed to enhance their group standing. Intelligent reflection, comment, and query is a desired value 'mongst such groups--so we really waltz and dance with each other this way, and it may not have much bearing on the actual event (here, the implied legal action / trial).
Can anyone cite an actual case where handloaded ammunition actually impacted the decision--sentence, civil award, whatever?
Ala Dan's concern about (home) handloaded reliability can be valid reason not carry self-reloaded ammo--but I wonder if the liability exposure issue for reloads is a sophisticated version of an urban myth.
Jim H.
to work over the canard about factory / reloaded PD ammo and liability exposure.
First, IANAL. But, given the anecdotal history from authorities, I'm not too sure just how often this happens except in the Movies or on TV. Ayoob--who does recommend factory ammo, IIRC--has prognosticated on this concern, and I think he has said it is not a big factor.
I got to thinking about this issue this year--as people who post and read in the reloading section probably will recall, I've shot about 5000 rounds in the last six months through j-frame carry guns--4000 or so from a 640, and 700 or so from a M&P340. 95% of these rounds were "replica rounds" for the Speer 135-gr 38+P PD round. Speer has published data for both the 38+P cartridge and the 357 round--with 2" barrels, the bullet runs about 880 fps from the 38 Special case, and about 1000 fps from the 357 Magnum case.
A fair number of these replica rounds were new recipes set up 357 Magnum cases--that is, I replicated the "feel" of the 38+P round in a 357 setup--for obvious reasons--less cleaning issues in a 38 / 357 revolver, and for reloaders the ability to start pushing the load up for more power.
The round I carry is that Speer factory round. It costs about $1.00 a shot OTC retail (about $0.30 if you buy 1000 at a time from an online resource)--but I could build reloads for about $.23 (using the actual GDSB135JHP bullet) or for about $.11 (using 140 lead bullets)--and those costs include a 1.5-cent case amortization.
At one point, as I speculated on those cost issues, I wondered just what would happen were I involved in a PD shooting with those "357-lite" reloads in the gun. You know, getting to say something like "Yessir, those were reloads--they were downloaded 357 rounds; I'm an old man, and my hands are too sore to shoot full house loads anymore."
Now, we could speculate about how the prosecution / liability lawer would parry that--but that's my point. I agree that there are valid concerns about such issues shaping the result of any legal action--but mostly, those concerns are what I call mental masturbation: In social groups (like forums), individuals respond with comments designed to enhance their group standing. Intelligent reflection, comment, and query is a desired value 'mongst such groups--so we really waltz and dance with each other this way, and it may not have much bearing on the actual event (here, the implied legal action / trial).
Can anyone cite an actual case where handloaded ammunition actually impacted the decision--sentence, civil award, whatever?
Ala Dan's concern about (home) handloaded reliability can be valid reason not carry self-reloaded ammo--but I wonder if the liability exposure issue for reloads is a sophisticated version of an urban myth.
Jim H.
James T Thomas
Member
addendum
For "bamacisa, jkwas and OH25shooter:"
As an after thought. Please read the thread found in Gen.Guns, titled:
"1986 FBI Miami Shootout."
The murderer, Plat was struck with a 115 gn Silvertip; expanding, 9mm / 35 cal approx. bullet, and the analysis was that if failed -because it stopped shortof penetrating the heart.
That round is quite close to what we have been discussing. Somewhat greater velocity, and slightly heavier.
When it is stated that there are four supplamental rounds, or five, remaining and available, it is presuming that the defender will have critical time to get them off.
Be careful on what is presumed.
For example: Somethings are better than nothing for sure, how ever somethings are better than other things too.
For "bamacisa, jkwas and OH25shooter:"
As an after thought. Please read the thread found in Gen.Guns, titled:
"1986 FBI Miami Shootout."
The murderer, Plat was struck with a 115 gn Silvertip; expanding, 9mm / 35 cal approx. bullet, and the analysis was that if failed -because it stopped shortof penetrating the heart.
That round is quite close to what we have been discussing. Somewhat greater velocity, and slightly heavier.
When it is stated that there are four supplamental rounds, or five, remaining and available, it is presuming that the defender will have critical time to get them off.
Be careful on what is presumed.
For example: Somethings are better than nothing for sure, how ever somethings are better than other things too.
- Status
