135gr Low Recoil Ammo

D

Dikinalaska

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
937
Reaction score
357
Location
Soldotna, AK
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
 
Register to hide this ad
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
Alpha Sierra said:
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.
Click to expand...

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
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
 
Dikinalaska said:
I never said stopping power. I guess I should've used "energy".
Click to expand...
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
 
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
 
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
 
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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

O
Ammo prices and caliber relevance.
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
Doriangray6
D
ImDrRich
BG 2.0 returned from S&W Service
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
10Mad
10Mad
Doug M.
A hard lesson from John Farnam
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Lemming51
Lemming51
chief38
UPDATED 04/01 Give credit to a Company that WELL deserves it!
Replies
10
Views
652
quikdraw67
quikdraw67
NCBeagle
432UC Ti (Titanium) - A Cautionary Tale re: Ammo Pressure
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
wrangler5
W

Latest posts

Back
Top