Handguns and Ammunition Forum banner

How is the Federal 135grn low-recoil 9mm?

8488 Views 5 Replies 5 Participants Last post by  Guest
The "Hydrashocks"....

It feeds real well in my PM9 and shoots accurately enough. I know it's not the latest and greatest, but is it a viable choice?
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Howdy Mr. Wlson,

I have no personal exposure to this particular round. But I have been issued both the 124 gr and 147 grain Federal Hydra-Shoks as duty rounds. Yes it may not be the newest technology, but I always felt well armed when using either round.

Assuming it is indeed the same projectile (is there a small post visible in the center of the hollow cavity?), my best thoughts would be it would do you find for self-defense. But you would probably want to listen more carefully to any member who has first hand experience with this particular round too. I can only talk in general terms, relating it to the other two carry rounds I used in the past.

Hope this may help a bit, but I would certainly not call my response definitive.

Mr. Wilsoncqb1911--

I'm fairly sure that some of the folks on this forum tested that Federal 135gr. PD hydrashok load. Check out some of the older posts for the link... I recall it was pretty good in the test.
The 135gr Hydrashok is marketed as a low recoil, personal defense loading.

It does indeed have mild recoil, and I used it, along with the c9bp (115gr 9mm JHP Classic) as my first carry loads.

My first ammunition test was of a 9mm 147gr Golden Saber, 1st generation, in standard pressure. The gun used was the same one as is on my side now, my Taurus PT92AF. Though I do not have the facts and figures written down (test was conducted about 10 years ago when I first started carrying) I do remember that the Golden Saber penetrated one water filled milk jug, blew it to bits, and did a nosedive into the ground, penetrating maybe 2" into the earth.

A bit later I tested the c9bp and the 135gr Hydra-Shok. The c9bp exibited the most dynamic expansion in five gallon water jugs, and the 135gr penetrated further, usually exiting, but with less dynamic expansion.

I believe what happened was that they simply took a 115gr loading's powder charge and topped it with a bullet weighing 20 grains more, thereby dampening the recoil somewhat - the recoil feels slower but it's definitely there.

I can no longer find this stuff around here; even the c9bp has dried up and I don't like ordering off the web as my parents just had their credit card number stolen and I'm running a similar IP#. However, I would suggest that, before carrying the stuff, you line up a bunch of one gallon milk jugs filled with water and shoot it to see how you like its performance.

It has had good terminal effects on critters I've shot, coyote sized and down.

Josh <><
See less See more
I like the idea of a 135. This load gives about 1040 fps in my Browning.

I much preferred the Triton Hi-Vel 135 which got nearly 1200 fps but it was +P.

I have a good bit of Federal .356 TSW which I think has this same 125 H-S loaded to 1270 fps - it impresses the varmints!

Jim H.
From an article by Charles E. Petty in the 2-97 American Rifleman:

Fed 135/9 PD in gel:

bare 11.5/.72
heavy cloth 14.5/.60

Recoil energy in Walther P99:

135 PD 1067 fps/5.37 ft lbs
124 HS 1120/5.13
147 HS 925/4.75

FBI shows the 147 HS at about 13/.62 bare, 15/.57 cloth
See less See more
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.