i was looking at my stock pile the other day when loading my .38 for carry that day and notice there was a fair amount of variance in the rim thickness at the opening of the hollowpoint. I was just curious if anybody has ever noticed a correlation between thickness and expansion. I thought it was kinda odd seeing as how federal hydroshoks were so highly regarded. i would have thought they'd be more uniform if this does infact have any bearing on performance.
hydro shock expansion
- Thread starter hightower
- Start date
troy_mclure
New member
my .40 hydrashocks performed well in a milk jug test, but the casings are too thin and crimp/dent up real bad.
i got to looking at them more as i have hydroshoks in .38 .40 .45 and .44 mag and with the .40's and above the opening of the hollow point is very uniform but the .38's all seemed to vary, just made me wonder. I know that physics would lead me to believe the ones with the thick mouth would take more energy to expand while the ones that barely show lead inside the opening of the copper jacket are going to expand more easily...possibly fragment? I know no manufacturing is 100% but i thought for a dollar and a quarter a round they'd put alittle more q/a into their products if this does make a difference like i'm thinking. but then again i'm not exactly a seasoned shooter, and a bonafide newb when it comes to projectiles themselves.
Okay, so you managed to get me to look at 3 boxes of 129g Hydrashok ammo to see if there was any variance.
Within each box they seem to be uniform, but one box has what you might consider a slightly thicker "rim". Doesn't worry me one wit though.
I'm an old phart and the best ammo we had in the late 70's would only expand maybe 25%-35% of the time. The hydrashoks you buy today are a 3rd generation of them. The original manufacturer was bought up by Federal and they made a change in the post size. Later they also changed the thickness of the jacketing and the nose.
My guess is that these are all within specification. And they'll certainly expand much more reliably than the stuff we used to use (i.e. see Winchester USA JHP stuff - that was first-line Super-X ammo 25 years ago).
Within each box they seem to be uniform, but one box has what you might consider a slightly thicker "rim". Doesn't worry me one wit though.
I'm an old phart and the best ammo we had in the late 70's would only expand maybe 25%-35% of the time. The hydrashoks you buy today are a 3rd generation of them. The original manufacturer was bought up by Federal and they made a change in the post size. Later they also changed the thickness of the jacketing and the nose.
My guess is that these are all within specification. And they'll certainly expand much more reliably than the stuff we used to use (i.e. see Winchester USA JHP stuff - that was first-line Super-X ammo 25 years ago).
chris in va
New member
Doesn't worry me one whit though
damn i work in a stereo shop and i was working on a lowrider, so all i could think about about was hydro's as in hydraulics. also as i stated earlier i'm a bit of an ammo newb! thanks for keeping me honest guys.
back on topic i'm sure the hydrAshok projectile will expand pretty reliable, i was just thinking the different rim size might lead to fragmentation. But then again there are always hst!
i guess i need a hobby, to keep my mind from wandering and posting it on the intraweb
back on topic i'm sure the hydrAshok projectile will expand pretty reliable, i was just thinking the different rim size might lead to fragmentation. But then again there are always hst!
i guess i need a hobby, to keep my mind from wandering and posting it on the intraweb
Glocksterr
New member
actually hydrashok's have a rep. for not expanding.
go figure.
go figure.
