Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 7/22/2008 5:53:38 AM EDT
Just curious.
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 5:54:52 AM EDT
i carry 185 gr hydra-shok in my compact new agent .45...I love them
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 6:00:41 AM EDT
Its an antiquated design. There are better options available such as Gold Dots, Ranger Ts, and HSTs.
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 6:04:22 AM EDT
Because they're crap.
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 6:05:06 AM EDT
I carry Range Ts in my 9 but hydra's in my 45. i just wanted to know why because i think both would transfer all their energy to the target.
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 6:30:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 6:41:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/22/2008 6:42:06 AM EDT by PreemptiveStrike]

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
actually they function as designed and in general perform well. it's just not the latest whizz bang uber round so it gets dissed frequently.

sure there are better/equal performers out there but it's not bad ammo by any means.


I would have to respectfully disagree. I've seen numerous Hydrashocks fail to expand in anything other than plain water. I've never had the luxury of having ballistic gel to play with. But I have fired them through different media like denim and other clothing and also wood and sheetrock and also a few animal carcasses. I my limited, non scientific experience they expanded maybe 50% of the time at best. The nosecone plugs up and they basically became an FMJ round.

Would you trust your life to something that worked 50% of the time? I wouldn’t when there are plenty of other much better performing bullet designs that have a more proven design.

YMMV
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 7:06:41 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 7:17:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By packingXDs:
Its an antiquated design. There are better options available such as Gold Dots, Ranger Ts, and HSTs.


I have the HSTs but it still says hydrashok on em
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 7:33:16 AM EDT
To quote Shawn Dodson from Firearms Tactical:


HydraShok doesn't reliably expand after passing through clothing. There are better, more reliable designs.

The post does not allow cloth plugs to be pushed to the bottom of the hollowpoint cavity. Cloth plugs remain in the cavity mouth, which prevents expansion.

Use a JHP bullet that doesn't have a lead "clog" the center of the cavity.
__________________
Shawn Dodson
FirearmsTactical.com


I think Shawn's above quote from Glocktalk.com provides the best explaination of why Hydra-Shok ammunition is a poor defensive choice - especially when heavy clothing factors in.

...And who wants to pay the same price for 20 rounds [hydra-shok] when you can get 50 cartridges of superior [HST] for a few bucks more?

The reason why HST is less costly than Hydra-Shok is because it is made using a newer, less expensive process.

HST > Hydra-Shok
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 7:35:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/22/2008 7:38:26 AM EDT by Zhukov]
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 8:12:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
I have the HSTs but it still says hydrashok on em

I respectfully disagree.
HST has nothing in common with Hydra-Shok ammo, and are two completely different bullet designs.

I'll eat my socks if ü can produce a photo of this ammo box
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 11:22:34 AM EDT
For me, it's the price. The Silvertips, GoldenSabers, and Hydra-Shoks, are pretty darn expensive to practice enough with.
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 11:44:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/22/2008 11:51:09 AM EDT by bnielsonak47]

Originally Posted By Lazyshooter:
For me, it's the price. The Silvertips, GoldenSabers, and Hydra-Shoks, are pretty darn expensive to practice enough with.


Well you do need to test reliabilty of ammo with your firearm and mags.

BTW I think the reason there is no love for the Hydrashok is because they are getting old and new technology has come out like the T series and HST and Gold Dots.
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 11:51:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By bnielsonak47:

Originally Posted By Lazyshooter:
For me, it's the price. The Silvertips, GoldenSabers, and Hydra-Shoks, are pretty darn expensive to practice enough with.


Well you do need to test reliabilty of ammo with your firearm and mags.

BTW I think the reason there is no love for the Hydrashok is because they are getting old and new technology has come out like the T series and HST and Gold Dots.


Gold dots have been around for a while too i think
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 1:05:41 PM EDT
I have shot hydrashoks into water through denim and they have worked just fine. However, the HST's were mucho better.

Far left row, second from the top. Shot into water through 2 layers of denim; same as all the rest.


Link Posted: 7/22/2008 1:08:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
Gold dots have been around for a while too i think


True, they have, but they have also been proven to be more reliable than Hydrashocks. There is a reason that most LE agencies use either Gold Dots or the Rangers. There is also a reason that Hydrashocks are carried less and less by LEO's and civilians alike, not that they had a big following in the first place. I did my "testing" of them back in the early-mid 90's because a buddy of mine was telling me how great they were. He and I never looked at Federal again after what we saw of the Hydrashocks lack of performance. Once their HST's have a proven track record I would consider using them, they look to be a good performer. I'm actually very surprised the Federal has not stopped production of Hydrashocks.

It's a free country so use what you want. You asked for peoples opinions on why they don't like them and I gave you my reasons.
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 1:11:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
sheet rock,clothing and debris can cause ANY HP ammunition to not properly expand. including gold dots and golden sabers.

are they perfect, nope, are they effective in most typical usage cases, yep.

you'll notice above i said there ae better options


The newest generation (ranger T, HST) does a damn good job of penetrating in nearly any medium...
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 9:39:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:

Originally Posted By packingXDs:
Its an antiquated design. There are better options available such as Gold Dots, Ranger Ts, and HSTs.


I have the HSTs but it still says hydrashok on em


Hydra.Shock.Two
Link Posted: 7/22/2008 9:50:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By packingXDs:

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:

Originally Posted By packingXDs:
Its an antiquated design. There are better options available such as Gold Dots, Ranger Ts, and HSTs.


I have the HSTs but it still says hydrashok on em


Hydra.Shock.Two


You.Are.Wrong.N
Link Posted: 7/23/2008 4:41:37 AM EDT
I still carry Hydrashok's in my .45. At one time they were the top rated round with great stopping statistics. As new 'wonder-bullets' came along they lost advertising space so people began to feel that they were inadquate in some undefined way. Claims that they don't expand or don't do this or don't do that don't matter too much to me. My own limited testing suggests that they perform acceptably FOR ME. They're reliable in my weapon, accurate in my weapon and I've got lots of shooting history with them that suggests I can trust them to do their job.

I guess I'm just an old set-in-his-way's man that doesn't care much about chasing the latest wonder-bullet. At this point I've never seen a round come with a guaranteed expanding bullet, so until I do, I'll assume that ANY round will fail to expand and I'll try to depend on placement to do the job. I honestly don't care about the 'best' bullet, I'm happy with one that's 'good-enough'.
Link Posted: 7/23/2008 4:56:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/23/2008 5:02:20 AM EDT by 53vortec]

Originally Posted By hsvhobbit:
I still carry Hydrashok's in my .45. At one time they were the top rated round with great stopping statistics. As new 'wonder-bullets' came along they lost advertising space so people began to feel that they were inadquate in some undefined way. Claims that they don't expand or don't do this or don't do that don't matter too much to me. My own limited testing suggests that they perform acceptably FOR ME. They're reliable in my weapon, accurate in my weapon and I've got lots of shooting history with them that suggests I can trust them to do their job.

I guess I'm just an old set-in-his-way's man that doesn't care much about chasing the latest wonder-bullet. At this point I've never seen a round come with a guaranteed expanding bullet, so until I do, I'll assume that ANY round will fail to expand and I'll try to depend on placement to do the job. I honestly don't care about the 'best' bullet, I'm happy with one that's 'good-enough'.


Hydra-Shoks were themselves touted as "wonder-bullets," particularly in .45 ACP.

This was mostly due the "top rating" and "great stopping statistics" that we now know to be at the least questionable, and at worst flat out fraudulent.

There's no mysterious "inadequate in some undefined way" stigma. What there is is a great deal of professional testing and research that have repeatedly demonstrated the shortcomings of the Hydra-Shok compared to newer designs.



Regarding the original post, I didn't know that the knowledge that the Hydra-Shok was obsolete was anything new. It's been posted about on this web site for years.
Link Posted: 7/23/2008 7:13:06 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/23/2008 7:04:09 PM EDT
1) Lack of expansion in MY testing hasn't manifested itself. This testing over the years has consisted of: Water jugs, penetrated 3-1 gallon milk jugs of water, didn't penetrate a 4th, Wet phone books: penetration equal to golden saber, greater expansion and more damage to the paper; 1/2" plywood followed by wet phone book: straight trajectory path, some plugging seen with wood around the post, full expansion of bullet, medium denim covering over (yes, you guessed it) wet phone book, identical performance to bare wet phone book, comparable penetration to GS, full expansion

2) Flawed testing? maybe so, but every one of the 230gr .45cal HS bullets I've recovered, including those shot into dry sand, showed classic expansion with one set of exceptions, those exceptions were bullets recovered from 50 yd shooting, they showed less expansion than closer range shots.

Bottom line? I'm confident that the bullet will perform it's job today just as well as it would've when I first started using it. Is there better stuff out there? I'm sure there is, so what? Why should I redo a LOT of reliablity/accuracy/performance testing for a minimal improvement in bullet performance?

I've had terrible success with stuff like Hornady XTP's hardly ever got expansion with that round. Starfire's were ok but my accuracy was pretty bad. I never shot many of the Black Talon's, they were just too hard to find on a regular basis so I didn't bother getting too worked up about it.

My testing with ball ammo gave me awesome penetration but I'm just not happy with THAT much penetration and no chance of expansion.

If YOUR own, personal testing has shown different results, that's great, that's probablly why YOU don't like the bullet and is a perfectly acceptable reason. So basically, I'm satisfied with my choice. When it gets cancelled, I'll make another one.

To the OP; I guess you can tell that SOME of us still have some fondness for the HS, while others don't. Fun question....
Link Posted: 7/23/2008 9:06:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By hsvhobbit:
I still carry Hydrashok's in my .45. At one time they were the top rated round with great stopping statistics. As new 'wonder-bullets' came along they lost advertising space so people began to feel that they were inadquate in some undefined way. Claims that they don't expand or don't do this or don't do that don't matter too much to me. My own limited testing suggests that they perform acceptably FOR ME. They're reliable in my weapon, accurate in my weapon and I've got lots of shooting history with them that suggests I can trust them to do their job.


1) Why doesn't the lack of expansion matter to you? You could just use FMJ if you don't care.

2) If your testing methods are flawed, then how can you accurately form an opinion about the bullet's performance?



For some, the devil they know is better than the devil they don't know.
Link Posted: 7/24/2008 12:11:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hsvhobbit:
I've had terrible success with stuff like Hornady XTP's hardly ever got expansion with that round. Starfire's were ok but my accuracy was pretty bad. I never shot many of the Black Talon's, they were just too hard to find on a regular basis so I didn't bother getting too worked up about it.




You're aware there have been advancements in ammunition design since 1992, correct?
Link Posted: 7/24/2008 12:20:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/24/2008 12:22:06 AM EDT by 45Patriot]

Originally Posted By FAIL-SAFE:

Originally Posted By packingXDs:

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:

Originally Posted By packingXDs:
Its an antiquated design. There are better options available such as Gold Dots, Ranger Ts, and HSTs.


I have the HSTs but it still says hydrashok on em


Hydra.Shock.Two


You.Are.Wrong.N



My understanding is that it stands for Hi Shok Two.


The Hyrda-Shok isn't a bad design, and it does what it is supposed to do. However, as others have stated, there are more modern, cheaper, and better designs available.


I prefer Ranger T and HST, and the edge goes to HST.

shootingmessengers.blogspot.com/2006/09/federal-hst-versus-ranger-t.html
Link Posted: 7/24/2008 6:20:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 45Patriot:

My understanding is that it stands for Hi Shok Two.


The Hyrda-Shok isn't a bad design, and it does what it is supposed to do. However, as others have stated, there are more modern, cheaper, and better designs available.


I prefer Ranger T and HST, and the edge goes to HST.

shootingmessengers.blogspot.com/2006/09/federal-hst-versus-ranger-t.html

The acronym for Federal's HST ammunition has several different unofficial names:

homeland security tactical
hi-shok tactical
home-security tactical
hi-shok technology
hi-shok two

According to Federal, HST does not stand for Hydra-Shok Two or anything like that. The Hydra-Shok's unique feature is a post in the center of the hollowpoint, which the HST does not share.

The reason why HST is less costly than Hydra-Shok is because it is made using a newer, less expensive process.
Link Posted: 7/24/2008 8:09:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By packingXDs:
Its an antiquated design. There are better options available such as Gold Dots, Ranger Ts, and HSTs.

+1

That is why I use Gold Dots in my HD gun!
Link Posted: 7/24/2008 8:47:46 AM EDT
I have some Winchester Silvertip 9x23 that I tested. They expanded to .73"! But I remember that it was the failure of a Silvertip that prompted all of this ammunition R&D. So I take my own testing with a grain of salt and I think that a lot of you should too.
Link Posted: 7/27/2008 7:23:12 AM EDT
Hydrashock JHP should actually be designated Hydrashock JHPWHP......

"Jacketed Hollow Point Without Hollow Point"
Link Posted: 7/28/2008 10:51:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/29/2008 3:57:40 AM EDT by RifleCal30m1n00b]

Originally Posted By PreemptiveStrike:

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
Gold dots have been around for a while too i think


True, they have, but they have also been proven to be more reliable than Hydrashocks. There is a reason that most LE agencies use either Gold Dots or the Rangers. There is also a reason that Hydrashocks are carried less and less by LEO's and civilians alike, not that they had a big following in the first place. I did my "testing" of them back in the early-mid 90's because a buddy of mine was telling me how great they were. He and I never looked at Federal again after what we saw of the Hydrashocks lack of performance. Once their HST's have a proven track record I would consider using them, they look to be a good performer. I'm actually very surprised the Federal has not stopped production of Hydrashocks.

It's a free country so use what you want. You asked for peoples opinions on why they don't like them and I gave you my reasons.



RA40T here ...though I have my misgivings about a 180gr .40S&W out of a G22C, but oh well, I'm not the armorer. Just a reserve.


Edit to fix smiley
Link Posted: 7/29/2008 4:02:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HoodyHoo21:
I have shot hydrashoks into water through denim and they have worked just fine. However, the HST's were mucho better.

Far left row, second from the top. Shot into water through 2 layers of denim; same as all the rest.

img148.imageshack.us/img148/6343/bulletstb9.jpg
img148.imageshack.us/img148/6343/bulletstb9.f4b68f363e.jpg




No round beats the HST in my opinion. Nor do any do it with such crazy beautiful design either. Look at that freakin, and most importantly, RELIABLE expansion and jacket retention. Gimme 9mm 147gr HST @ $20 for 50 rounds and I'm gonna be just fine.

Brent
Link Posted: 7/31/2008 12:51:16 PM EDT
Who cares if it expands or not. As long as there are holes to leak blood everything is just fine.
Link Posted: 7/31/2008 1:58:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dragongoddess:
Who cares if it expands or not. As long as there are holes to leak blood everything is just fine.


Did your friend the SOCOM poser tell you this?
Link Posted: 8/1/2008 12:42:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RifleCal30m1n00b:

Originally Posted By PreemptiveStrike:

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
Gold dots have been around for a while too i think


True, they have, but they have also been proven to be more reliable than Hydrashocks. There is a reason that most LE agencies use either Gold Dots or the Rangers. There is also a reason that Hydrashocks are carried less and less by LEO's and civilians alike, not that they had a big following in the first place. I did my "testing" of them back in the early-mid 90's because a buddy of mine was telling me how great they were. He and I never looked at Federal again after what we saw of the Hydrashocks lack of performance. Once their HST's have a proven track record I would consider using them, they look to be a good performer. I'm actually very surprised the Federal has not stopped production of Hydrashocks.

It's a free country so use what you want. You asked for peoples opinions on why they don't like them and I gave you my reasons.



RA40T here ...though I have my misgivings about a 180gr .40S&W out of a G22C, but oh well, I'm not the armorer. Just a reserve.


Edit to fix smiley


Best Choices For Self Defense Ammo

You're in good shape with RA40T.
Link Posted: 8/1/2008 3:51:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 53vortec:

Originally Posted By RifleCal30m1n00b:

Originally Posted By PreemptiveStrike:

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
Gold dots have been around for a while too i think


True, they have, but they have also been proven to be more reliable than Hydrashocks. There is a reason that most LE agencies use either Gold Dots or the Rangers. There is also a reason that Hydrashocks are carried less and less by LEO's and civilians alike, not that they had a big following in the first place. I did my "testing" of them back in the early-mid 90's because a buddy of mine was telling me how great they were. He and I never looked at Federal again after what we saw of the Hydrashocks lack of performance. Once their HST's have a proven track record I would consider using them, they look to be a good performer. I'm actually very surprised the Federal has not stopped production of Hydrashocks.

It's a free country so use what you want. You asked for peoples opinions on why they don't like them and I gave you my reasons.



RA40T here ...though I have my misgivings about a 180gr .40S&W out of a G22C, but oh well, I'm not the armorer. Just a reserve.


Edit to fix smiley


Best Choices For Self Defense Ammo

You're in good shape with RA40T.



FUCK YEAH HE IS!!!!
Link Posted: 8/2/2008 12:59:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 53vortec:

Originally Posted By RifleCal30m1n00b:

Originally Posted By PreemptiveStrike:

Originally Posted By Rocksarge:
Gold dots have been around for a while too i think


True, they have, but they have also been proven to be more reliable than Hydrashocks. There is a reason that most LE agencies use either Gold Dots or the Rangers. There is also a reason that Hydrashocks are carried less and less by LEO's and civilians alike, not that they had a big following in the first place. I did my "testing" of them back in the early-mid 90's because a buddy of mine was telling me how great they were. He and I never looked at Federal again after what we saw of the Hydrashocks lack of performance. Once their HST's have a proven track record I would consider using them, they look to be a good performer. I'm actually very surprised the Federal has not stopped production of Hydrashocks.

It's a free country so use what you want. You asked for peoples opinions on why they don't like them and I gave you my reasons.



RA40T here ...though I have my misgivings about a 180gr .40S&W out of a G22C, but oh well, I'm not the armorer. Just a reserve.


Edit to fix smiley


Best Choices For Self Defense Ammo

You're in good shape with RA40T.




I should have thought to check first...
Link Posted: 8/5/2008 5:25:11 PM EDT
Where do you guys buy 147 gr Ranger T's?

Locally? Walmart?

Not been able to find them.


Link Posted: 8/6/2008 3:55:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By konger:
Where do you guys buy 147 gr Ranger T's?

Locally? Walmart?

Not been able to find them.




I get mine here.
Top Top