Your view on Hydra-Shok ammo?

[el Godfather]

Dear THR,
I wanted to ask your views on application of Hydra-Shok ammo in self defense. Is Hydra-Shok really a potent choice or does it have short comings that I should be aware of?

Thanks

 

[rcmodel]

It is an older bullet design that has been around for a long time.

But it does work, and may give deeper penetration then some other loads.

It generally feeds well in anything.
And 100% reliability trumps magic bullets every time.

rc

 

[TimboKhan]

I use it more or less exclusively for my sd needs. As rc said, it feeds, its reliable and it's proven.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Shipwreck]

I've stuck with it in 9mm all these years - the 124 grain non +p version.

 

[Warp]

el_Godfather]Dear THR,
I wanted to ask your views on application of Hydra-Shok ammo in self defense. Is Hydra-Shok really a potent choice or does it have short comings that I should be aware of?

Thanks

I think it is outdated. If you already have a bunch, have tested it in your gun(s), and it works well then you have a good reason to stick with it.

If you are trying to make a decision on what defensive round(s) to go with, I suggest looking at something from the newer generation. I personally really like Speer Gold Dot. The Federal HST seems very good too. Winchester Ranger would make the cut but they seem to have too many quality control problems.

 

[Rampant_Colt]

I concur with warp

It is notorious for clogging with clothing material, not expanding and overpenetrating. Federal has done a most excellent job of marketing H-S ammo, and interwebz hyperbole in conjunction with the fictional Handgun Stopping Power books that claimed 100% one-shot stopping power (from 5" barrel handguns) keep this ammo alive and selling strong.


Nonsense like this sells ammunition ↑

Hydra-Shok bullets work well when no clothing or barriers are involved.
I'm not certain how many criminals go around without clothing in the wintertime around these parts.

More info here:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs26.htm




Wetpack tests I personally conducted using a 5" Colt 1991A1

I'm certain this post will illicit a deep, emotional resonse from folks who use H-S ammo, but ammunition choices like HST, Ranger-T, DPX, Gold Dot and Golden Saber are readily available and are a much better choice than the 30+ year old design.

Please read THIS

Sent from my computer using my keyboard

 

[Loosedhorse]

the fictional Handgun Stopping Power books that claimed 100% one-shot stopping power (from 5" barrel handguns) keep this ammo alive and selling strong.

There are three tables that include data about the .45 230 gr Hydrashok in the 1992 edition. The two tables in chapters agree exactly, and claim a 88% one-shot-stop rate. The last table, in Appendix C, lists 10 more shootings (and 10 more stops) for a 90% rate. I see no discussion about a 100% rate of one-stot-stops from 5-inch barrels. In fact, I see no discussion separating out the 5-inch barrel shots at all.

 

[krimmie]

Who wears 4 layers of denim?

 

[Warp]

Who wears 4 layers of denim?

They don't have to wear 4 layers of denim for the test to be useful, or even representative of real life situations.

Example: It is not at all uncommon to have somebodies arm between you and their torso/chest. Going through the arm/sleeve is two layers of everything in their sleeve area, as well as the arm itself, and then after that the bullet still must go through all of the clothing on the torso. That can easily add up to far more than 4 layers of clothing.

Even without an arm in the way during cool/cold weather one might be wearing 4+ layers of clothing, which can wreak havoc on a hollow point's ability to open

A bullet that clogs so badly through the 4 layer denim test that it completely fails to open can be considered to have failed.

 

[mljdeckard]

It's perfectly fine. Honestly, in the real world, there is little difference in the performance of premium JHP brands.

I do have to roll my eyes a little, the Hydra-shok was considered to be near the top of the list fo ra long time, and then when the HST came out, people were acting like the Hydra-shok had magically become useless overnight. Just because there is a new one that in some peoples' opinion, in some loads, under some circumstances, might perform somewhat beter, it doesn't render the old one useless.

Having said that, I have carried HSTs for a while now.

 

[JohnBT]

"Wetpack tests"

I was attacked one night by a wetpack. No, not really, just kidding.

 

[meanmrmustard]

I like seeing the ballistic gel tests. It gives an "idea" of what you MAY expect from optimum performance, albeit situations are not always optimum.

 

[Okiegunner]

The Hydra-Shock ammo has stood the test of time and should be perfectly fine for SD use.

However, given the choice I prefer Federal HST or Hornady Critical Defense. I have an ammo box with 200 rounds of each in 9mm and .40

 

[C0untZer0]

I will say this for the Hydra-Shok, it was always really accurate in my handguns.

Maybe it was something about that center post in the hollow point or something - I don't know, but it is one accurate shooting round for me.

Having said that, when tested in media, the Ranger T looks very cool with the little claws and everything, Hydra-Shok with it's limp thingy kind of hanging over... not so much.

 

[krimmie]

I like seeing the ballistic gel tests. It gives an "idea" of what you MAY expect from optimum performance, albeit situations are not always optimum.

Maybe they should add some bone to it.

Example: It is not at all uncommon to have somebodies arm between you and their torso/chest. Going through the arm/sleeve is two layers of everything in their sleeve area, as well as the arm itself, and then after that the bullet still must go through all of the clothing on the torso. That can easily add up to far more than 4 layers of clothing.

Looking at this example, do you really want a bullet to rapidly expand?

There are an infinite number of scenarios out there, each bullet design has it's strengths and weaknesses, so how does one choose?

An incident happened here recently where a criminal fleeing crashed on a busy highway. He shot an officer attempting to give aid, then got into a gunfight with another officer. Traffic had stopped on the highway, and this guys was just walking amongst the vehicles with a gun in his hand. Now if he was to turn towards my vehicle and my window was up(most people have windows up, a.c. on here...it's HOT), I night have to defend myself through the glass...don't think I'd want a rapidly expanding bullet design here.

Here's the story for clarity.
http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/...-Shot-on-Floridas-Turnpike-FHP-151023155.html

 

[Warp]

Looking at this example, do you really want a bullet to rapidly expand?

I want it to expand, yes, absolutely.

I only carry JHP in calibers that are capable of sufficient penetration while also expanding.

An incident happened here recently where a criminal fleeing crashed on a busy highway. He shot an officer attempting to give aid, then got into a gunfight with another officer. Traffic had stopped on the highway, and this guys was just walking amongst the vehicles with a gun in his hand. Now if he was to turn towards my vehicle and my window was up(most people have windows up, a.c. on here...it's HOT), I night have to defend myself through the glass...don't think I'd want a rapidly expanding bullet design here.

Here's the story for clarity.

Car window glass? Are you really worried about a Gold Dot, HST, Golden Saber, etc, failing to perform because you shot through your car's window? I suggest you do more research on handgun wounding ballistics and the performances of various rounds.

BTW: If you were going to talk about through the windshield, something like the Gold dots (bonded) that I first referenced would be outstanding, and definitely preferred over hydrashok.

 

[JTQ]

mljdeckard wrote,
It's perfectly fine. Honestly, in the real world, there is little difference in the performance of premium JHP brands.

I do have to roll my eyes a little, the Hydra-shok was considered to be near the top of the list fo ra long time, and then when the HST came out, people were acting like the Hydra-shok had magically become useless overnight. Just because there is a new one that in some peoples' opinion, in some loads, under some circumstances, might perform somewhat beter, it doesn't render the old one useless.

Having said that, I have carried HSTs for a while now.

This is a valid post.

I always like to think of a room with 10 guys in it. Of those 10, lets say three are carrying a gun (probably a pretty high percentage in the real world). One guy has a pocket .380 since we all know "the gun you have with with you is better than the one you have back in your safe". He has his .380 loaded with HST ammo. Another guy has a .38 Special S&W J-Frame with Speer Gold Dot. You are stuck with either your G17 or your 1911 and only have Hydra-Shok ammo because you are too cheap to upgrade to the new technology rounds. Of the 10 guys in the room, who's do you think is better off? I'll take my chances with the G17 or 1911 even if all I had was ball ammo in either of those pistols.

 

[KenW.]

While it works; after all. There are some who still suggest hardball. Technology has surpassed the Hydra Shock. Look at the more modern bonded bullets like the Gold Dot.

 

[krimmie]

I suggest you do more research on handgun wounding ballistics and the performances of various rounds.

I'll admit warp that I'm more of a shotgunner, I'm not defending Hydra-shok ammo, in fact, I haven't had any in years. I should take your advice and check into performance a bit more though. For the record, I either carry a S&W 6906 with Rem. 147 gr, Golden sabers, or my Kahr K-40 with Win. Ranger 165 gr. JHP.

 

[abq87120]

HST's are awesome. I shot one through three one-gallon milk jugs of water. I found the bullet quite a long way behind the jugs. It had expanded as advertised. A beautiful round. It looked like 100% of it's weight was there.

 

[Warp]

Golden Saber and Ranger are solid choices.

 

[Tomcat47]

Great bullet....have used and still use in 9mm CCW.

I understand the testing with 4 layers of denim...but real world not too applicable!

I used Hyda Shok in .357 Magnum for whitetail deer...and it is a very impressive cartridge on them from 6" Barrel.

 

[krimmie]

Golden Saber and Ranger are solid choices.

Truly by accident on my part.

 

[Rampant_Colt]

Gold Dot bullets are plated, not bonded..


4-layers of denim is a very real-world applicable test. Here's why:




Count how many layers of fabric a bullet may have to penetrate before making contact with center mass.

Some useful information about this subject:
http://demigodllc.com/~zak/firearms/fbi-pistol.php?sort=wv2

http://www.gunthorp.com/wounding_factors.htm

The website linked below briefs the performance standards of the FBI Ballistic Test Protocol:
http://greent.com/40Page/general/fbitest.htm

 

[meanmrmustard]

Gold Dot bullets are plated, not bonded..


4-layers of denim is a very real-world applicable test. Here's why:




Count how many layers of fabric a bullet may have to penetrate before making contact with center mass.

Some useful information about this subject:
http://demigodllc.com/~zak/firearms/fbi-pistol.php?sort=wv2

http://www.gunthorp.com/wounding_factors.htm

The website linked below briefs the performance standards of the FBI Ballistic Test Protocol:
http://greent.com/40Page/general/fbitest.htm

Ha! Hobo wit a shotgun!!!