Bullet penetration

Gun, shooting and equipment discussions unrelated to CHL issues

Moderator: carlson1

Post Reply

Topic author
cmgee67
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1163
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:45 pm

Bullet penetration

#1

Post by cmgee67 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:44 am

I am very curious as to where and why the 12” mark in bullet penetration is the standard. Most YouTube ammo tests I have seen all say you must have 12” to 14” to be effective. #1 where did they get that data? #2 have they even been in a self defense situtation where 12” wasn’t enough? And #3 unless you are a huge body builder whose chest cavity is 12” - 14” deep? I know mine is not. I would say 7-10 is in the optimal range as 6” is in the range of most vitals. 12” your starting to get into over penetration territory. If people were so worried about how deep a bullet goes wouldn’t they carry ball ammo? What are your thoughts?
I Am Freedoms Safest Place :txflag:


Acronym Esq
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 11:40 am
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Bullet penetration

#2

Post by Acronym Esq » Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:38 am

cmgee67 wrote:I am very curious as to where and why the 12” mark in bullet penetration is the standard. Most YouTube ammo tests I have seen all say you must have 12” to 14” to be effective. #1 where did they get that data? #2 have they even been in a self defense situtation where 12” wasn’t enough? And #3 unless you are a huge body builder whose chest cavity is 12” - 14” deep?
My favorite ballistics resource is Lucky Gunner. They cite the 12" requirement as FBI data and explain with some discussion summarized this way:
We have to account for a human target that may be turned slightly toward or away form us at an angle, or possibly even above or below us, or with arms partially obscuring the torso.
cmgee67 wrote:If people were so worried about how deep a bullet goes wouldn’t they carry ball ammo?
Ironically, I haven't seen much testing of ball ammo. Does it really penetrate better?

acronym 11/29/2017 9:34 AM


MechAg94
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1578
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:28 pm

Re: Bullet penetration

#3

Post by MechAg94 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:48 am

I thought it was just the FBI test protocol. I don't think 12" of penetration in ballistic gelatin that is a homogeneous mass is necessarily the same as penetration in a human body. I have never heard what the basis was for selecting that number.

Short of testing on pigs or other animal, I am not sure there is a better way to do it. I like the "meat target" used by Paul Harrell on youtube, but I don't know that it is definitive either.


NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1025
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: Bullet penetration

#4

Post by NotRPB » Wed Nov 29, 2017 11:37 am

I've wondered for many years the same thing, I'm not 12" thick, well ok maybe now but wasn't before the 1970s,
The issue with 12" in gelatin is that there's no ribs in it
Add hitting a rib bone to decrease the penetration depth...
Pig tests are good, they have ribs
If they're going to standardize tests using gelatin, they need to put a rack of ribs in front of the Jello .... Mom always said no desert until after the main course
Ribs then Jello


Topic author
cmgee67
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1163
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:45 pm

Re: Bullet penetration

#5

Post by cmgee67 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:22 pm

NotRPB wrote:I've wondered for many years the same thing, I'm not 12" thick, well ok maybe now but wasn't before the 1970s,
The issue with 12" in gelatin is that there's no ribs in it
Add hitting a rib bone to decrease the penetration depth...
Pig tests are good, they have ribs
If they're going to standardize tests using gelatin, they need to put a rack of ribs in front of the Jello .... Mom always said no desert until after the main course
Ribs then Jello
Yes I agreee with is hypothesis. They should really use pig with denim in front of it.
I Am Freedoms Safest Place :txflag:


WTR
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1382
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:41 pm

Re: Bullet penetration

#6

Post by WTR » Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:23 pm

The FBI and the IWBA take into account velocity loss , wound diameter, and tissue crushing at multiple angles to establish depths from 12.5 " to 18". Google bullet penetration depth.

User avatar

oljames3
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 1:21 pm
Location: Elgin, Texas
Contact:

Re: Bullet penetration

#7

Post by oljames3 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:05 pm

The late Paul Gomez discusses ballistics and much more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dA36NYLqns
O. Lee James, III Captain, US Army (Retired 2012), Honorable Order of St. Barbara
2/19FA, 1st Cavalry Division 73-78; 56FA BDE (Pershing) 78-81
NRA Distinguished Life Member (Disabled Vet), TSRA, NAR L1


flechero
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1680
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Central Texas

Re: Bullet penetration

#8

Post by flechero » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:32 pm

cmgee67 wrote: What are your thoughts?
12" of gelatin probably also accounts for the sternum.


jason812
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 683
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:41 pm
Location: Central Texas

Re: Bullet penetration

#9

Post by jason812 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:45 pm

cmgee67 wrote:
NotRPB wrote:I've wondered for many years the same thing, I'm not 12" thick, well ok maybe now but wasn't before the 1970s,
The issue with 12" in gelatin is that there's no ribs in it
Add hitting a rib bone to decrease the penetration depth...
Pig tests are good, they have ribs
If they're going to standardize tests using gelatin, they need to put a rack of ribs in front of the Jello .... Mom always said no desert until after the main course
Ribs then Jello
Yes I agreee with is hypothesis. They should really use pig with denim in front of it.
Been done, just not with the denim jacket. .40 HST had an average penetration of 18.5" on Lucky Gunner's test but did not exit a 60-80lb pig.

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-d ... tic-tests/

http://www.activeresponsetraining.net/p ... istics-lab
There was essentially no discernible difference between the Federal HST .40 and 9mm wound channel. Both rounds penetrated through chest and pelvic cavities leaving small but ragged wound channels. Both penetrated through interceding bone leaving comminuted fractures (to include sturdy structures such as scapula and pelvis.) Neither round exited the opposite side of the carcass. The 9mm round that had gone through the chest cavity was found under the skin of the opposite shoulder and retrieved. The round appeared intact and had fully mushroomed. Conclusion: “9 is fine.” Users of a high quality 9mm round should not feel outgunned.

Post Reply

Return to “General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion”