Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 78

Thread: NEW Federal Hydra-Shok Deep

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    106
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Todd.K View Post
    No, but FBI protocol tested ammo performs as consistently as possible, through common barriers, and many have been extensively compared to actual shooting results.
    The key word is common as in most you'll encounter. Not all though. Some barriers aren't going to be the same thickness as used in the tests. Some will be thicker. Some will be thinner. Some will be frozen and coated with ice. Some shots will be further than 10 ft at a lower velocity. The real world isn't going to have the same barriers of the same thickness within the same conditions as those tested.
    Last edited by wtm75; 03-16-18 at 06:08.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    N.E. OH
    Posts
    7,595
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by wtm75 View Post
    The key word is common as in most you'll encounter. Not all though. Some barriers aren't going to be the same thickness as used in the tests. Some will be thicker. Some will be thinner. Some will be frozen and coated with ice. Some shots will be further than 10 ft at a lower velocity. The real world isn't going to have the same barriers of the same thickness within the same conditions as those tested.
    Nothing is 100%. Its about getting the most reliable round for stopping a threat, and the fbi test is currently the best way to determine that, as verified by ois.

    To get something that performs a little better through a barrier that will likely not be encountered while trading off performance in a much more likely situation is counter-productive.
    Last edited by MegademiC; 03-16-18 at 07:52.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,171
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by wtm75 View Post
    The key word is common as in most you'll encounter. Not all though. Some barriers aren't going to be the same thickness as used in the tests. Some will be thicker. Some will be thinner. Some will be frozen and coated with ice. Some shots will be further than 10 ft at a lower velocity. The real world isn't going to have the same barriers of the same thickness within the same conditions as those tested.
    In the video you posted earlier, the gentleman doesn’t even know what type of metal the HST’s jacket is made of (its not brass), and he shoots a G26 with a G17 barrel. He doesn’t even bother to remark on any measurements of the wound cavity or penetration depth. He does not mention calibration, percentage, or temperature of the gelatin he has “formulated”. And he fires ONE round, in a medium that cannot be duplicated for comparison. I feel his credibility is questionable.

    There is a difference in shooting something for funsies, and shooting to collect data. This gentleman does not seem to know that, and has merely produced an anecdote. A very silly anecdote.

    Am I to assume you are going to find out how the Hydra Shok Deep performs in the same “test”?
    RLTW

    Former Action Guy
    Disclosure: I am affiliated PRN with a tactical training center, but I speak only for myself. I have no idea what we sell, other than CLP and training. I receive no income from sale of hard goods.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    106
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MegademiC View Post
    Nothing is 100%. Its about getting the most reliable round for stopping a threat, and the fbi test is currently the best way to determine that, as verified by ois.

    To get something that performs a little better through a barrier that will likely not be encountered while trading off performance in a much more likely situation is counter-productive.
    Agreed. It's the best we have at the moment.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1168 View Post

    Am I to assume you are going to find out how the Hydra Shok Deep performs in the same “test”?
    Don't know. I'm not the guy in the video. I hope he does the same test. I like to see unconventional tests done under normal conditions. It adds to the legitimate tests.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,748
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    Nothing can be determined until someone shoots this round through 10% ord. gel with 4 layer denim. There are alot of rounds that look good in bare gel and fail horribly in the denim test which is the closest to real world performance.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    159
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ggammell View Post
    Oh imagine that a bullet that wasn't designed to be shot through 4 2x4's, a slap of "slightly frozen meat" into ballistic gel doesn't penetrate "enough".

    This is an absurd test.

    What are you gonna do with that Underwood round when you don't have to shoot through an entire Home Depot and the round zings through 2 people behind the target? Sometimes there is such a thing as too much penetration.
    What are you going to do with that HST round when you do?
    Last edited by JaegerOne; 03-31-18 at 00:07.
    US NAVY
    1961-1965

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    106
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JaegerOne View Post
    What are you going to do with that HST round when you do?
    Exactly. Many of us will take our pistols with us even if all we are doing is exiting our drive way and just going down the road to the Dunkin Donuts drive thru and never getting out of the car. The chance of using a pistol is almost zero but we still take our pistol just in case.

    I see the same thing when it comes to carry ammo and will not sacrifice penetration based on the likelihood of front on chest shots alone being the majority of scenarios. The same goes with magazine capacity. Sure one 6 round magazine will be enough in the majority of situations but I take spares with me as well.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    N.E. OH
    Posts
    7,595
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by wtm75 View Post

    I see the same thing when it comes to carry ammo and will not sacrifice penetration based on the likelihood of front on chest shots alone being the majority of scenarios..
    Can you provide a reputable source demontrating fmj performs better through common barriers.
    Last edited by MegademiC; 08-02-18 at 20:50.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    106
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MegademiC View Post
    Then buy a round on Docs list. They are desined to reach vitals from almost any angle, through common barriers, and still offer the best chance of rapid incapacitation a pistol round can.
    Those rounds were tested from 4 and 5 inch barrels. They do not perform the same from 3 inch barrels. Some of those rounds on that list only do 12 to 13 inches. That's the absolute minimum and will not reach vitals from all angles. The Winchester Silvertip does 11.25 inches. That round is what started testing after failing the FBI in reaching vitals. A few more inches in peneration isn't enough for me to buy the Kool aid on hollow points.


  10. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    106
    Feedback Score
    0
    The most popular load from Docs list at 12.25 inches. I cannot put my faith in 1 extra inch compared to the Winchester Silvertip above at 11.25 inches.

    Last edited by wtm75; 08-03-18 at 09:35.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •