I did a search, but on my phone on the Tapatalk App returned no topics so please direct me if there is a thread already. But I was going to get some more carry ammo and while I was there the gentleman showed me their (new to them) 135gr Federal Hydrashock personal defense "Low Recoil" 40 rounds. Does anyone have any experience with these? Thought I'd ask before trying them out. My Fiancé carries my .40 while I'm away sometimes over her 9. They're both Shields. Any help would be greatly appreciated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

HydraShok is good premium ammo for SD and expands like it should. I would YouTube the ammo and see if there are any gel tests on the low recoil version.

__________________
I'm Proud To Be An American!

Good idea. Thanks 3dots


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

One of the things you ought to be able to trust is the quality of name-brand ammo like that. Not merely assembly quality, but the fact they've probably put SOME sort of testing into the product. I would imagine this to be a very LOW penetration design, due to the lighter grain-weight. Plus, 'low-recoil' means it's moving slower. This would most likely be one of the most controllable loadings in .40 out there.

I have a healthy skepticism about many of these "low recoil" loads. Bought some Federal (IIRC) low recoil in .357 and tried it in my Model 65 and it was downright nasty. Kicked worse than the 125gr 1400 fps stuff from Winchester.

The only .40 S&W ammo I ever used that had 135 grain bullets was made by CorBon and definitely wasn't low recoil! My duty ammo is 158 grain Federal HydraShok .357 Magnum, but recoil isn't bad due to the weight of my 4 inch S&W Model 686.

__________________
CPT, Armor (Ret)
Luke 22:36

I'll have to find it again, but I saw a post where someone did some testing with these, and they said that they did not expand consistently, and expanded only about 30% of the time.

The name "hydra shok" being printed on the box is no guarantee whatsoever of their performance. Hydra shok is very old hollow point technology and has not performed very well in any test I have ever seen.

If low recoil was desired, I would switch to that 9mm. I wouldn't use low recoil .40--what's the point?

Well she already carries a Shield 9, I was just wondering if the "low recoil" .40 was worth her carrying the .40 if it had more power than the 9. Hers has a laser on it so she likes my holster better. I've been just swapping slides and mags when I leave so she can use my holster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

There isn't a tinker's damn worth of difference in "stopping power" between .40 S&W and 9 mm Luger mostly because "stopping power" is something that rifles and shotguns have in spades but handguns do not.

Your GF is better armed with modern high quality 9mm 124 grain +P (Federal HST, Winchester PDX, Speer Gold Dot to name the three most popular) than with some weak load pushing an antiquated bullet design that happens to be .045" larger in diameter.

The lowest recoil .40SW ammo I've ever used was pretty much anything in 180gr. The worst has always been any of the 155gr or 165gr ammo.

I never said stopping power. I guess I should've used "energy". Sorry for the confusion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

Well I finally got the time to check out Youtube and here's a ballistics/denim test that's kind of interesting. A couple of the other videos showed shooting them into water and gel and they seem to have pretty decent expansion rates. I think I'll just get some and do some testing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSN1jl0q-jE&sns=em


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

Thanks for the constructive input


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

Same thing. The only thing that matters is tissue destruction and there is little difference between all modern auto pistol cartridges loaded with modern expanding bullets.

Ok well thank you for that too. I tried to stay on topic, but it just keeps getting pushed off course. I really just wanted any experience info from anybody that had tried these. I didn't ask for input on whether she should just stick to the 9. So please, if you don't have experience with the ammo in question, just pass on this thread. So thank you 3dots, VictorLouis, LVSteve, elm_creek_smith, and cyphertext, for staying on topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

Well I got a little upset, so sorry for the last post. But since it was pushed so hard on the "why?" I looked a little into it. So the Federal 135gr "low recoil" is marketed as 1190fps, making 424 ft./lb of muzzle energy. The Federal Hydra-Shok 147 gr 9mm is marketed at 1000fps with 326 ft./lb muzzle energy. So the low recoil 40 has about 100 more ft/lbs of muzzle energy. That's a THIRD more! So no that's not +p, but that's what she carries because it's most accurate in her gun. So I looked into some +p and for argument's sake I'll use Winchester Supreme Elite Self Defense Ammunition 9mm Luger +P 124 Grain Bonded PDX1 Jacketed Hollow Point based on your 124 gr +p recommendation. Now these are marketed at 1200fps with 396 ft/lb muzzle energy. So 424 might not be that much more muzzle energy than 396, but also in this comparison we're talking about a +p load in the 9, which I don't remember if the Shield manual suggests +p use or not, but why wear out parts and push her barrel when I could go the low recoil 40 route and actually be gentler on the 40 Shield parts. So Alpha Sierra I see no valid points in your post whatsoever.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

Have you checked out the Federal Guard Dog ammo? They have a 135gr load that hits 1200fps at the muzzle, and 432 ft lbs of energy. And being a FMJ style round, but expandable, it should feed reliably in just about every pistol...

L8R,
Matt

__________________
SD40-VE owner and proud of it!

I have not actually. Thank you for turning me on to that. Maybe when I get home I'll look into both and do a comparison to see which works best and has lowest felt recoil


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik

The .40S&W is a bit snappy to begin with. But not much more than shooting my Wife's Taurus 85S with 158gr ammo. Here's an 8 min. video on a test shot. Also an article in the American Rifleman found them to reliably expand/compress regardless of what it was fired into.

Federal Guard Dog 40 S&W 135gr Ballistic Gel Test - YouTube

L8R,
Matt

__________________
SD40-VE owner and proud of it!

As a alternative to 135gr Low-Recoil round being considered, Might take a look at this round. Mass of the projectile, and the muzzle energy being produced, are factors in the felt recoil of a round. This combination might be considered...

Thanks,

Attached Images

	Scan_Pic0001.jpg (124.3 KB, 14 views)
	Scan_Pic0002.jpg (216.2 KB, 7 views)

__________________
Have Fun, Shoot Safe!
John

This is actually the round I use as my carry ammo. I'll have to add it into the "Felt Recoil Test".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
-Dik