I tested a few defensive hardgun rounds for hard barrier penetration today
The Plywood
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HardwoodPenetration001.jpg

The Weapons used in the test, right to left 4" Model-19, Springfiled 1911 with 10 round Chip McCormack magazine and a 4" Model-57 Smith in 41 Mag

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HardwoodPenetration002.jpg

The rounds tested were 185 grain DPX, Buffalo Bore 230 Gold Dot +P, Hornady 230 grain XTP +P, in 45 ACP
In 357 Mag the 145 grain Silver Tip and the 158 Gold Dot by Speer mwere tested
In the 41 Mag the 170 JHC load by Buffalo Bore. This load does 1550 FPS from a 4" barrel S&W Mountain Gun

The 230 grain XTP +P made it into the 3rd board, the DPX, the 230 B.B +P Gold Dot load in 45 ACP,and the 145 grain Silvertip in 357 Mag. made it into the 4th board and dented the 5th
The 170 grain JHC in 41 Mag made it into the 5th board and dented the 6th and the 158 grain Gold Dot in 357 Mag penetrated into the 6th board

Picture of front side of 4th board
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HardwoodPenetration007.jpg
158 grain Gold Dot in 6th board. Notice the dent in upper ride of plywood from the 41 Mag

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HardwoodPenetration009.jpg

Back side of 4th board
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HardwoodPenetration013.jpg

Nice work.

That was awsome. Shoot for group next time and see the variation between rounds also. Good visual. thanks.

Interesting. Just curious, what are you trying to test exactly? Meaning, what scenario are you testing for? Penetration of defense loads in home walls? Expansion of hollowpoints? Number of hardwood doors you can shoot through and still cause damage? Or just what penetrates the most wood? If you're just testing for penetration, how about throwing some hard cast or FMJ bullets in the mix?

Also, were the plywood pieces stacked together or was there an air gap between each one? This will make a difference.

Not saying you can't or shouldn't shoot some plywood for fun, I'm just wondering what you were hoping to prove, disprove, or test for?

Testing was done as a way to see how much hard barrier penetration thes defensive rounds would give. Judging from the test home walls would slow them down little. The wood was back to back as illistrated in the following picture. Hollow points do not open in wood and generaly give as much or more pentration as hardball in my experience..

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HardwoodPenetration003.jpg

As fun as this sort of experiment is, I really scratch my head over whether there's any point to it, beyond just "gee, I wonder what'll hapen...?". Hard barrier penetration is important for military use, but virtually irrelevant for self defense. Optimize for penetration and you're crippling the primary intended use for the ammo -- soft target/close range. And, if you look for a single projectile to give optimum performance against both soft and hard targets -- well, it ain't been invented yet, sorta like "lightweight, easy-to-pack dehydrated water".

I beg to differ with you on this, wouldn't you like to know how many walls your round might penetrate, as their may be inocents behind them. Also I used hollow point ammo for this test, as I have allready posted the results from the water soaked paper with 4 layers of denium covering it.

Many times an advesary will take cover and not simply stand in the open to give one an un-obstructed shot..

i can see his point.. plus he probaly had fun finding out which expansion rd would penetrate
the best..these protection rds are something of an mystery.. we would do well,, to know what to expect from them..also lets face it ,,its fun..

Why does there need to be a reason. Shooting stuff is fun. Seeing what happens when you shoot different stuff is just a little funner. Haven't you ever read the box o truth? If you haven't you should. http://www.theboxotruth.com/ It's fun too. :D

+1 snew. Why is the board not a pile of toothpics? Seems lile you let it get off easy. :D

I beg to differ with you on this, wouldn't you like to know how many walls your round might penetrate, as their may be inocents behind them. Also I used hollow point ammo for this test, as I have allready posted the results from the water soaked paper with 4 layers of denium covering it.

Many times an advesary will take cover and not simply stand in the open to give one an un-obstructed shot..

Well, all this test proves is that he's pretty safe if he's standing behind seven 3/4" plywood sheets stacked right against each other. And, yes, in a military context your adversary will often be behind cover, but I am willing to wager that this rarely is the case in pure self defense -- not unheard-of, but rare.

Besides, I don't know anyone with 3/4" plywood walls in their house, although I am sure someone has them -- although I'd really scratch my head at 6 or 7 layers of it. Generally, you're talking sheetrock, and the sheets are not stacked but spaced approx. 4" apart, with wiring, pipes, and framing spaced throughout.

All you're proving is that for any given caliber and velocity the lightest bullet will penetrate the least, hardly a revelation. If you really want to try to wrap your brain around something, consider that the best scientific testing conducted yet in simulated walls has shown that 45 and 55gr. JHP bullets fired from a .223 carbine penetrate far less than any typical pistol round.

Pisgah, I know what home walls are made of, would like to submit your walls for testing? Of course the hard wood that these plywood boards are made of will limit penetration as compared to sheet rock or paneling walls. The wood used was scrap from a cabinet making shop.
All it takes is one time for an advesary to be behind a hard barrier and you are involved in the incounter to make it a problem. Since you are willing to bet that does not happen that is fine with me...

Well, since your experiment pretty well shows that a handgun is useless against such a barrier, and you seem to feel it's something we should reasonably be prepared for, I guess we all need to start looking for something in the way of a concealable .50 BMG...

Well, since your experiment pretty well shows that a handgun is useless against such a barrier, and you seem to feel it's something we should reasonably be prepared for, I guess we all need to start looking for something in the way of a concealable .50 BMG...



Again your missed the point. A handgun with standard defensive ammo (Hollow points) is very penetrative on these barriers. As I have noted in an earlier post the Oak plywood is much more difficult to penetrate than a homes wall. I feel that thy offer more than enough penetration

Even on auto doors

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/CardoorPenetration004.jpg

I really don't see what your problem is with jwp's test. Knowing what your ammunition will and won't do is just standard operating procedure. As far as walls go, many older houses around here have exterior walls equivalent to seven 3/4" sheets of plywood or more, including the house I was raised in.

Bye
Jack

A lot of old farm houses have at least: a couple layers of Mud, lathe, fiberglass insulation, 1 (maybe 2 or more) layer(s) of 3/4" to 7/8" OSB/Plywood/Fiberboard, Tyvek (or equivalent) and siding. And sometimes some strange asphalt or asbestos layer in there as well. While it may not be valid for in-home, interior wall penetration/protection, it is definitely good for exterior wall containment testing.

The way I look at it is that my 1911 will have plenty of power to stop someone, but will not go through my walls, travel 50 yards to my neighbor's house, penetrate his walls and hurt his family. But my 357 mag might, and my 44 mag probably would too.

Plus it is fun.

When I get home, I have some rough-sawn 2x8s that I am going to shoot, along with some treated 8x8 scraps from my pole barn. Why? Because its fun to shoot stuff. Knowledge, whatever it may be, only makes you better. Good work . I can't wait to test my own. Definitely going to build some "Test walls" too. The Box-O-Truth doesn't have insulation in it, nor does it have any other obstructions normally found in/on walls.

I really don't see what your problem is with jwp's test. Knowing what your ammunition will and won't do is just standard operating procedure. As far as walls go, many older houses around here have exterior walls equivalent to seven 3/4" sheets of plywood or more, including the house I was raised in.

Bye
Jack

My house was originally constructed as a radio station. Exterior walls consist of a layer of brick on top of a 1" layer of foan insulation board on top of 8" concrete block filled with foam insulation, then 4" of fiberglass insulation and an interior wall of 5/8" sheetrock. Yep, over a foot thick. My point -- the plywoofd tells me nothing about how bullets will perforn in my wall ,only in multiple layers of plywood. Results in one medium cannot be accurately extrapolated to guage performance in any other medium. Especially when the experiment is performed as this one was.

There was no control. The very first shot gives a representation of what that bullet might be expected to do against that medium. After that, you're shooting at a different medium -- plywood that's been shot. You must assume that the medium has been altered, and its strength compromised, by that first shot and every subsequent one. Thus, you cannot draw any substantive comparative conclusions. In order to do so you would need to prepare separate targets as nearly identical as possible for each and every shot.

I am looking forward to your test that address all of your concerns.......

I am looking forward to your test that address all of your concerns.......


You keep making my point for me. Thank you!;)

My point -- there is no experiment, even properly designed, that will address anything more than the narrowly-defined concern of that experiment. Yours doesn't even achieve a valid comparison of penetration in plywood by the rounds you've tested.

I dissagree with your assessment, and respectfull contend that one can make reasonable choices from such tests. If you don't take anything useful from the info that's fine by me..

I dissagree with your assessment, and respectfull contend that one can make reasonable choices from such tests. If you don't take anything useful from the info that's fine by me..

With respect from me, as well...

You certainly could draw some reasonable conclusions regarding these rounds' penetration in your chosen media IF you were consistent in your media. Let's say you're testing 4 different rounds, and you want to test them for penetration of 7 sheets of 3/4 ply -- well, then, you make up 4 targets consisting of 7 sheets of 3/4ply each, and you make them as nearly identical as possible. Then, you shoot Round A into Target A, Round B into Target B, etc.

THEN you can make a resonable assumption that A will likely out-penetrate B in 3/4 plywood, or whatever.

If you use only one target, what you learn is -- A penetrates X number of 3/4 ply sheets. B penetrates Y number of 3/4 ply sheets THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY SHOT WITH A. C penetrates Z number of 3/4 ply sheets THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY SHOT WITH A AND B. And, so forth.

Why weren't Glaser Safety Slugs tested ?

If you're testing for penetration in walls, you might try spacing the plywood apart at least an inch or two; it will change the results. Even better would be to set up your target as sheetrock - insulation - plywood layers to simulate your wall. You may find that a bullet that penetrates the most in stacked plywood doesn't penetrate the most in a real wall, especially when you're talking about hollowpoints. Some can and will expand slightly in dry mediums such as sheetrock, some won't. Very few will expand at all in wood.

I have no issue in shooting plywood for fun; I was just wondering (since you posted your results) what conclusions you were getting from it. When you are "testing" something, it's important to make sure your test is a valid test, otherwise your conclusions will be incorrect.

Also, here's another thought: even if you prove that your defense ammo won't go through your walls, what about a window? Any ammo that won't shoot through a couple sheets of glass is pretty much worthless for defense.

The whole idea of thinking your neighbors are safe if you fire your gun in the house is flawed and foolish, no matter what your tests might say about bullet penetration through walls. I see this discussed a lot, where people say "I want a bullet that will stop the bad guy but not go through a wall and hurt somebody else." It's really a kind of foolish idea, that probably has more application for armchair commando / mall ninja discussions than anything else. Bullets are deadly, there's no substitute for being aware of where you're firing and who or what is behind your target

dang the only thing i know thats gone up more than ammo is plywood and lumber..oops forgot gas.. spensive test but i know its for the greater good. having fun

i've alway thought it would be kinda fun to go into different houses of different eras and test for bullet performance.... i shoot 150gr home cast .357 and .38 spl loads exclusively so that's what i'd use... i've also thought about shooting at cars from different eras to see the same thing......

Okay, if we have looked at the boxotruth site, we all know that most pistol ammo will penetrate at least two sheets of sheet rock. Seems like plywood won't stop a bullet very well either no matter how many or how few times you shoot holes in it. So we have at least seen some people shooting holes in sheet materials.

Having some two by lumber around, I shot a few holes in that.

.357 magnum using 158 grain JSP and JHP handloads at 1200 fps and 180 hard cast at 1050 fps.

.45 Colt using 255 grain RNFP lead cowboy loads and 240 grain JHC at 1270 fps and 300 grain JSP and 300 grain WFNGC at 1040.


Results were this.

Shooting two by fours through their narrow side all bullets penetrated one piece 3.5 inches thick, completely.

Shooting two by sixes through their narrow side all bullets penetrated one piece 5.5 inches thick, completely.

Results were these as far as Im willing to say:

It makes decent kindling and lots of holes in the lumber.
I do not expect a sheetrocked wall built either two by four or two by six stick framing would stop a bullet like the ones I used.

If someone would be good enough to shoot from their living room through their exterior wall and post pics, I would be happy to look and examine their results. ;)

JWP,
I enjoyed your testing and photos. Keep them coming.

Me too. Always like those real life accounts.

Interestingly enough in the years before calibrated gellatin testing it was common to see comparisons of different handguns/cartridges' punch by using the number of boards penetrated.

I have a copy of the "Law Enforcement Handgun Digest", 1982, and on page 193 there is picture of splinters flying as a rack of boards is hit. It was in a chapter on bullet expansion.

:)

It is totally instinctual behavior to get behind any available cover when bullets are coming at you--please--if you can't figure that out you are behind the curve.

Iron Addict

I see nothing wrong with John's testing......seems like he was testing various bullet designs to see how they would stand up.
I have attached one of our tests done for law enfoencement, using a heavy truck door with the window rolled down. The standard Foster did not cut through! The Dixie Teminator went throgh and then tore up the truck seat. Did this have anything to do with general use? Not much, but it opened some eyes as to how sorry the ammo being issued was, and would be on a road block, etc situation.
Keep testing, John!
Regards, James