Hydrashok vs. Truball (Low recoil versions of both)?

[Unobtanium]

http://www.le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammunition/federal/slug/compare.aspx?compare=706%2C704

It really looks like the Hydrashok performs much better all-around, but especially in the clothed gel portion (which is most analogous to hunting, which is my prime purpose for the ammo, as I've shot far more deer than people...). Is the real-world performance of these that different?

Also, is the TruBall LR that much more accurate (if any) than the Hydrashok LR?

[willie]

For the last several years the TruBall slug has been receiving stellar accuracy reviews by shooters in different gun forums. Reason given is a special wad. I grew up in and hunted in a region where slugs and buckshot were the primary deer killers. I never heard of a slug failing to stop a deer. My unscientific answer to your query is buy the version with a proven accuracy track record--the TruBall.

[Tabasco]

The accuracy potential for the Truball vs. standard slug is most apparent out of a cylinder bore, at least in my shotguns. The idea behind the wad is to center the slug in the bore, and expand the base to fit the bore. Apparently the big issue with foster type slugs is that they can enter the bore at slightly different angles which can cause problems with accuracy. Also, the wad at the base of the standard slug prevents the gases from expanding the base like a Minie ball, I wold guess. I remember reading somewhere an improved cylinder choke can help with foster slug consistency. My Rem. 870 has a IC choke and it shoots Brenneekes into cloverleaf groups at 25 yards, even with my crappy eyes and XS sights FWIW. It would be good to do a test of the various slugs through Cyl. and Imp. Cyl., maybe I'll do that one of these days.

[Unobtanium]

For the last several years the TruBall slug has been receiving stellar accuracy reviews by shooters in different gun forums. Reason given is a special wad. I grew up in and hunted in a region where slugs and buckshot were the primary deer killers. I never heard of a slug failing to stop a deer. My unscientific answer to your query is buy the version with a proven accuracy track record--the TruBall.

This year, I had a slug fail to stop a deer. It was a nice buck at about 30 yards. I had sighted the weapon in meticulously, verified zero both before AND after this incident, and it was dead-on at that distance. I was using a Federal DP slug. The deer was facing me, at about a 45* angle, like this slash: " / ". It had its head down licking/grazing/sucking on a plant. I aimed mid-way up the leg closest to me, as I was elevated roughly 4 meters, I predicted bullet trajectory would enter right at or above slightly the mid-way point of the shoulder facing me, and exit right behind, and slightly low, the off shoulder. I fired, and the deer immediately went DOWN. All 4 feet in the air. DONE. I sat and waited a minute or so, and nada. So I got up out of the stand (I am a novice at this, and I learned today...). I was on my way to the deer when it hauled its arse up, and walked briskly directly away from me. I didn't want to shoot it in the arse and blow its cuts all through its body/meat, and I figured "I hit him well, he just lay there and got more pressure to the pump, he will be down in 30-50 yards anyway, whatever". Well he wasn't. I spent the whole day canvassing the mountain for the deer feeling terrible.

Where did I really hit the deer? Well, we will honestly never 100% know. That is the BIG question here.

That said, I show another deer using the same slug the previous day, and the damage kindof sucked. It punched a clean hole through the lungs and heart. Cookie-cutter. It made a similar hole in and out of the rib-cage as a 5.56 round. Broke less ribs, actually. Deer ran further than the ones hit with 5.56 previous year, too.

In short, I may well have hit that big buck a tad off, and he made off filling with blood and went miles if I only hit lungs, as small a damage that slug did to the lungs. 5.56 SOUPED the lungs. This thing? 1" hole in/out, no bloodshot lung tissue I saw.

Anyway, THAT is my reason for wanting a slug that expands violently and angrily yet holds togather. I still feel bad about the deer, and I know that without finding it, shot placement cannot be confirmed, so there's that. I also learned when it's down...give it time (this is the first time I've seen a deer shot do that). Also...if it's moving SHOOT IT SHOOT IT SHOOT IT! Treat it like a guy with a gun. Better get little meat, than NO meat and a wounded animal :(

So that is why I am moved away from the Federal DP slugs. Minimal damage on the deer I DID recover, and a lost deer (right or wrong, my fault or the slug's fault, thats the "why" of my feelings on it. You can blame me, the shooter, and I fully accept that blame in absence of a recovered deer. However, the deer I DID recover, my 5.56 does more damage by far. I want a slug that hits like a 5.56, as stupid as that may sound...).

[Unobtanium]

I have shot Tru-ball regular slugs before, and did note excessive leading. Have others noted this as well? Does it even matter, or does the wad from each shot wipe out anything truly excessive, etc?

[willie]

You provided us with an interesting and informative narrative of your experience with slugs. A 12 gauge slug's diameter is .729. You have recent experience. At this point I have an opinion, which is that slug prowess depends on diameter and not expansion for its effectiveness. I'm not certain that you will find a slug loading that has the same impressive result as a .223 hollowpoint round at close range. One reason is velocity difference. Let me research the question and report back. In my brain's dim recesses, I think I remember a slug load that may be what you're seeking. It also may be a gimmick.

[Unobtanium]

You provided us with an interesting and informative narrative of your experience with slugs. A 12 gauge slug's diameter is .729. You have recent experience. At this point I have an opinion, which is that slug prowess depends on diameter and not expansion for its effectiveness. I'm not certain that you will find a slug loading that has the same impressive result as a .223 hollowpoint round at close range. One reason is velocity difference. Let me research the question and report back. In my brain's dim recesses, I think I remember a slug load that may be what you're seeking. It also may be a gimmick.

I prefer to stick with known quantities. The round I used in 5.56 was the RA556B ranger Bonded, and saw the deer killed by my friends using 75gr Gold Dot.
The expanding slug may not perform like the 5.56, but it should perform 30% better than what I used, should it expand to 1" or so as shown in gel...

30% improvement is...30%. It may also dump more energy into the deer which should result in a larger TC which may indeed cause more damage by far.

[willie]

Check out this link for an advanced shotgun shell slug load. Midwayusa has some of this ammo in stock.

http://ddupleks-usa.com

[Unobtanium]

Check out this link for an advanced shotgun shell slug load. Midwayusa has some of this ammo in stock.

http://ddupleks-usa.com

I've tried it before. Accuracy was erratic for me. Several rounds grouped well, then one would fly 6 to 8 inches off at 50y. Not good enough on the accuracy front for me to test it further

[Unobtanium]

Another random thing. I have noted significant fleet yaw of equal amount from Hydrashok and Truball DP slugs, but none, or not noticeable, from Remington slugger.

[GJM]

Most people who hunt with slugs do it because they are forced to by regulation, not because they think shotguns and slugs are preferable to rifles and rifle cartridges for harvesting game.

[Unobtanium]

Most people who hunt with slugs do it because they are forced to by regulation, not because they think shotguns and slugs are preferable to rifles and rifle cartridges for harvesting game.

I was under the impression that 0-50 yards they were pretty effective, considering how much positive talk is given them by people who use them on bears/other people./etc

[scjbash]

I was under the impression that 0-50 yards they were pretty effective, considering how much positive talk is given them by people who use them on bears/other people./etc

I grew up with a deer processing business in my garage and have seen thousands of deer after they've been shot. Had a lot of conversations with the head processor as well. In my opinion from 0-50 a rifle has more wounding potential than a shotgun. It also has the potential to do less. With a slug you kind of know what you're going to get. FWIW the guy who has processed more deer than most of us will ever see uses a shotgun with slugs.

[DocGKR]

Slugs punch large permanent holes through things.

Slugs like a Brenneke or Federal DP are designed for use on tough animals, like large bears and also work well against vehicles. On smaller, lighter game like a deer, they are definitely going to shoot through the animal and may not provide as much tissue stretch and damage as other projectiles optimized for that type of game.

The wound track with these slugs are going to be somewhat similar to those from large bore muskets from the time of the American Revolution to the American Civil War. Read some of the war surgery reports from that time to assess the effects on human tissue...

[GJM]

Slugs punch large permanent holes through things.

Slugs like a Brenneke or Federal DP are designed for use on tough animals, like large bears and also work well against vehicles. On smaller, lighter game like a deer, they are definitely going to shoot through the animal and may not provide as much tissue stretch and damage as other projectiles optimized for that type of game.

The wound track with these slugs are going to be somewhat similar to those from large bore muskets from the time of the American Revolution to the American Civil War. Read some of the war surgery reports from that time to assess the effects on human tissue...

Exactly. Slugs make .68, or whatever gauge they are holes through things. For reaching the spine, brain, or increasing the capability of a common shotgun, they do that job amazingly well. Think of them as the equivalent of a rifle shooting a solid. Unless shooting an elephant or for following up a wounded Cape buffalo, all the Professional Hunters I know rely on expanding bullets for increasing the lethality of their shots.

[GJM]

One more thought as to your experience with that one slug on the deer. Folks that have hunted for a while have come to realize that bullets occasionally do weird things on actual animals when entering the body. They sometimes deflect on intermediate objects, hit different than intended because of the hunter’s trigger press when under time or emotional pressure, or there is some mechanical issue like a loose or damaged scope or iron sight.

[Joe Mac]

It's been some time since we used LE127RS at work; we now use the LEB127LRS, and there were years of Brenneke in between, before their QC went south.

The Truball is distinctly more accurate -- 3 shot cloverleafs at 50 yards are not uncommon (these are 14-18" IC barrels). The older hydra-shok style slugs were not nearly as accurate.

Both have worked very well on people; deer, I can't speak to.

[Unobtanium]

Slugs punch large permanent holes through things.

Slugs like a Brenneke or Federal DP are designed for use on tough animals, like large bears and also work well against vehicles. On smaller, lighter game like a deer, they are definitely going to shoot through the animal and may not provide as much tissue stretch and damage as other projectiles optimized for that type of game.

The wound track with these slugs are going to be somewhat similar to those from large bore muskets from the time of the American Revolution to the American Civil War. Read some of the war surgery reports from that time to assess the effects on human tissue...

and that's what I got. Nearly zero damage from tissue stretch, and a permanent hole through everything the slug touched. I'd rather have a 30% larger hole and more tissue damage though, as apparently "it matters". Hence my quest for an expanding slug.

I also chronographed the 1610fps Hydrashok slug, and the 1350fps DP slug. Out of my 18.5" SNT, the full power slug only managed a whopping 100-150fps advantage. Not at all worth the blast etc. I am starting, having shot more and more slugs, to appreciate the main differences are blast/muzzle-flash, which is a pretty big difference, even if recoil feels similar to me. One is much more obnoxious than the other.

[Unobtanium]

One more thought as to your experience with that one slug on the deer. Folks that have hunted for a while have come to realize that bullets occasionally do weird things on actual animals when entering the body. They sometimes deflect on intermediate objects, hit different than intended because of the hunter’s trigger press when under time or emotional pressure, or there is some mechanical issue like a loose or damaged scope or iron sight.

There were zero intermediate objects (open air shot, NOTHING in between).
The weapon zero was verified prior AND after the incident.
I felt "good" for the shot, but freely admit an error could have been made, for sure! Of all the possibilities listed, I am most apt to blame, as always, the organic component of this equation.

[Unobtanium]

It's been some time since we used LE127RS at work; we now use the LEB127LRS, and there were years of Brenneke in between, before their QC went south.

The Truball is distinctly more accurate -- 3 shot cloverleafs at 50 yards are not uncommon (these are 14-18" IC barrels). The older hydra-shok style slugs were not nearly as accurate.

Both have worked very well on people; deer, I can't speak to.

Accuracy aside, terminally, "did it matter"?

AS in, did the HS usually provide more pass-through with same expansion, or did the TB "usually fragment while the HS did not", or any other some sort of measurable difference, or could you even tell a HS hit perp from a TB hit perp on the morgue table?

[GJM]

It's been some time since we used LE127RS at work; we now use the LEB127LRS, and there were years of Brenneke in between, before their QC went south.

The Truball is distinctly more accurate -- 3 shot cloverleafs at 50 yards are not uncommon (these are 14-18" IC barrels). The older hydra-shok style slugs were not nearly as accurate.

Both have worked very well on people; deer, I can't speak to.

Tell me more about Brenneke QC issues?

[Joe Mac]

Tell me more about Brenneke QC issues?

I didn't encounter any problems personally, but I think the main issues were out-of-spec hulls that were either too long or too thick -- wouldn't chamber, or once chambered wouldn't extract. I think Brenneke problems were written about here on the forum as well, no? I can only find one thread on a quick search, but I thought there were more...

[Joe Mac]

Accuracy aside, terminally, "did it matter"?

AS in, did the HS usually provide more pass-through with same expansion, or did the TB "usually fragment while the HS did not", or any other some sort of measurable difference, or could you even tell a HS hit perp from a TB hit perp on the morgue table?

We don't have that many shotgun OIS, maybe one per year at best, so only a handful with either load. I think both have expanded/flattened and been decisive.

[GJM]

I didn't encounter any problems personally, but I think the main issues were out-of-spec hulls that were either too long or too thick -- wouldn't chamber, or once chambered wouldn't extract. I think Brenneke problems were written about here on the forum as well, no? I can only find one thread on a quick search, but I thought there were more...


If it was the thread I am thinking of, I think there was some confusion. I have been using Brenneke Classic Magnum slugs for the last 25 years with excellent results, and no hint of quality issues.

[Joe Mac]

Ours were the "tactical home defense" load. I have a vague memory of reading about different Brenneke loads (or components) being made/sourced in different places, and one of those being troublesome..?

Sorry I can't be more precise; I had no problems with the stuff myself, only saw one other shooter with a round that wouldn't chamber, then was told it was a frequent enough problem that we were going back to Federal. I'm actually an instructor in the shotgun program, and only saw it once in a class I happened to be working.

[GJM]

Ours were the "tactical home defense" load. I have a vague memory of reading about different Brenneke loads (or components) being made/sourced in different places, and one of those being troublesome..?

Sorry I can't be more precise; I had no problems with the stuff myself, only saw one other shooter with a round that wouldn't chamber, then was told it was a frequent enough problem that we were going back to Federal. I'm actually an instructor in the shotgun program, and only saw it once in a class I happened to be working.


It has been a while, and possible my recollection is fuzzy, but I think the Brenneke “problems” were reported about the time Federal introduced a new slug. Supposedly the Brenneke slugs were suddenly being made somewhere else, with reported quality issues, even though my Brenneke boxes did not indicate a change in the place of manufacture. I always wondered if the “problems” were perhaps encouraged by a zealous Federal sales guy, although that is complete speculation on my part.

[Joe Mac]

Here's an example of accuracy from the Truball load – I took this while zeroing new sights. We zero at 25 yards for urban cop work; the lower group w/ red sharpie is at 25 yards, and the blue sharpie at 50. Not my best efforts, but good enough to convince me to stop f'n with the sights!

The Truball is comparable in accuracy to the prior Brenneke THD, with perhaps a slight edge to the Brenneke. Both are significantly more accurate than the older Federal hydra-shok style slug – I use my remaining stash of that for practice only.

[GJM]

Here's an example of accuracy from the Truball load – I took this while zeroing new sights. We zero at 25 yards for urban cop work; the lower group w/ red sharpie is at 25 yards, and the blue sharpie at 50. Not my best efforts, but good enough to convince me to stop f'n with the sights!

The Truball is comparable in accuracy to the prior Brenneke THD, with perhaps a slight edge to the Brenneke. Both are significantly more accurate than the older Federal hydra-shok style slug – I use my remaining stash of that for practice only.

Perfect illustration of the difference between a 25 and 50 yard zero. I zero at 25, which puts me a bit high at 50, on again at 75, and a bit low at 100.

[Joe Mac]

Perfect illustration of the difference between a 25 and 50 yard zero. I zero at 25, which puts me a bit high at 50, on again at 75, and a bit low at 100.

Yup – I think 25 is the way to go for a defensive shotgun. At 100 I still hold center chest, and they're starting to dip toward the gut, but that's fine; I'm not going to try to get artsy with a neck hold, with my >45 eyes... :)