Bullet Tests Flawed

Its Time Has Come

"I think a medium should be found that replicates human bone the skull or ribcage of the average man and bullet tests should shoot through that and into ballistic gellatin to test for penetration and expansion. In other words the test through auto glass would be through the auto glass through the material simulating bone and through the ballistic gellatin."

Much has been said about bullet penetration, expansion and realistic test medium. It’s kind of like a hobby horse to ride for those who like merry-go-rounds. It's fun riding around in circles.

Its time has come for the NRA to start a real study for Bullet Penetration and Expansion in Realistic Test Medium.

It’s time for YOU to do your part by DONATING your body to the cause when you die.
 
You can't take the '12" of penetration is OK' to the bank.

The bad guys aren't always going to be facing you with their arms to their sides.

The FBI would actually prefer 18" of penetration.
 
seems to me that the tests are just fine. the OP doesn't like the limits that science sometimes runs into, but that's not a failing of the test. we learn things from doing tests, and then we learn to do better tests. before the Miami shooting, there was no FBI protocol. just shoot what's cheapest. now, we can shoot what has been documented to perform well under certain, repeatable, test conditions that replicate commonly encountered real life situations.
 
G1R2 - you mean that fat is better for tests than muscle? OK, then I volunteer - it's better than being chopped liver for no purpose re "organ donor." What do they want 70+ year old organs for? To feed to lab monkeys and make them barf? Just grill me over some fragrant black oak and spread my ashes on a place that looks like a Lonesome Dove site.
 
The FBI would actually prefer 18" of penetration.
Click to expand...
Actually, the quote is that "up to 18 inches" of penetration is preferable. The implication is that 18" is the maximum acceptable penetration, more than it is the preference.
 
I believe if you asked them if they would like 12" or 18" they would choose the higher rather than the lower.
Click to expand...
It's within their power to set the penetration spec to be anything they want. If they favor more penetration, all they have to do is set the spec accordingly.

Their current spec is no less than 12" and no more than 18". If they wanted it to be higher, say 14" to 19", it would be. No one's stopping them from making it anything they desire.
 
What does 1000FPS have to do with incapacitation?

I also enjoyed the article. The author stated that they were looking for ammo that performed "Better than Average" and established 1000 FPS as the average velocity of the 100 different rounds tested. That meant that in their test, ammo that expanded and penetrated deeply, yet was moving slower than 1000 fps didn't get their stamp of approval as "Better than Average". Interesting test, but flawed. Example: the 230 grain winchester black talon penetrated to a depth of 15 inches and expanded to a factor of 1.66 times its' original diameter, yet didn't make the cut because it wasn't moving fast enough.
 
I've seen several different so called "stopping power" test over the years and they all come up with different results.

I don't really believe any are "flawed", I think they are just different.

I've been to enough autopsies to know that no two bullets react the same way in the same target material.
 
Spent yesterday at the Big Springs Shooting Complex over by Searsboro, Iowa at the 2nd Amendment Rally sponsored by the Iowa Firearms Coalition and Brownells and the NRA. No admission charge,Cowboy Action Shooting, IDPA, 3 Gun, Full Auto Shooting, 50 Caliber and 338 Lapua Long Range Rifle Shooting, Vendors, Food Booths, and Pro 2nd Amendment Politicians and Speakers.

THANK YOU! Iowa Firearms Coalition, Brownells and the NRA.

I had not shot full automatic M-16, M-60, Browning 50 Cal Machine Gun since Viet Nam so I wandered over to the Full Auto Booth and shot 25 to 30 rounds each, HkMp5, Uzi, Thompson 45 Sub, Galil, HK36, AK47, German WWII MG42, and Browning World War water cooled 30 caliber machine gun. Eight guns on full auto for $160 or $20 per gun, at 25-30 rounds per gun that comes out to be 225 rounds for $160 or about .71 cents a round a real bargain and I cannot Thank the Guys at the full auto booth enough, it was literally a blast!

Getting back on subject, it is interesting to see that someone is producing the simulated bone and it does not cost that much Thanks 481, and someone is using the simulated bone product in ballistic tests Thanks rbernie, that it should be in my opinion included in all ballistic tests as even though we cannot control all the variables, and people come in all shapes and sizes the only constant that we will all bring to a gunfight is flesh and bone and we all need to know what penetrates and expands best through both materials.
 
Last edited:
PH/CIB,

No problem.

As to using synbone (or any other analog for bone) in such tests, I see it as a confounding factor. The polyurethane plate is unlike bone in that it doesn't really duplicate the structure and density of actual anatomy none of which exists as a 12"x12" plate. The two main types of bone- cancellous and cortical- possess markedly different mechanical properties and are often both present in a given anatomical structure such as the pelvis and spine.


While I found the article kind of interesting, there were several issues that caught my attention, not the least of which was that block size and other test standards were not mentioned. Hard to say if they were simply omitted for the sake of space or if they were never adhered to in the first place, but I suspect that since AR is not a technical journal there is a different standard being followed.
 
Sounds Great

Dear Mr. Floridaman,

I glad to see that someone is considering stepping forward. Just think, if there were enough of us, every shooting range across the country could have a few in stock.
 
I was disappointed that the American Rifleman article did not include .357sig in it's test. I believe in that caliber, in fact I trust my life with it. I have done some testing of my own that I was quite satisfied with.
 
There is not and can not be testing for real world results. There are far too many variables. There would always be objections.
Click to expand...
While the myriad of ballistic tests are informative and always interesting, I have much greater confidence in the numbers produced in actual shootings by police. Such data necessarily include real-world variables, whatever they may be.

Massad Ayoob takes this approach as well. He recommends loads based on how they actually perform in police shootings.
 
I agree with Kraig that the tests weren't really "flawed", just different. Missing was info on handguns used. For instance the .380 results which normally use pistols with shorter barrels than some of the other calibers. This usually results in velocities lower than 1000fps. The Rem 102gr GS gave good results with both penetration and expansion, yet wasn't on the "approved list".
So, while the NRA article was interesting, it wasn't conclusive, IMO.
og
 
As far as the American Rifleman article goes, I don’t see the value of the author’s conclusions. He picked totally arbitrary criteria and ignored the actual performance of the ammo. One example: He set the minimum acceptable velocity at 1000 fps. That eliminated most of the .45 loads. The result was that some of the most street-proven loads, like the Federal 125 gr .357 and the 230 gr .45 Hydra-Shok, didn’t make the cut.

The results are interesting, but I wouldn’t use his criteria to choose my SD loads.
 
If one does not see value in the article, then simply ignore it and move on. Why is there a need to intellectualize a a piece of data provided by someone who took the time to do some testing ? If people do not like the parameters used by the tester, then set up a test and use alternate parameters. I enjoy reading the results of tests and research on the terms it was accomplished, and thank the testers and researchers for their efforts.
 
Given your emphasis on penetration, be sure to get bonded bullets. They tend to defeat barriers such as glass and doors more effectively than non-bonded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top