Bullet expansion & Penetration tests

[dodgestdshift]

I decided to test the bullets I use, in 44 Magnum, by comparing their penetration and expansion in an expansion medium. Since I live in an area where the local newspaper is crazy liberal, I don't have access to much newsprint to soak. Also, it's messy and hard to transport. I settled on milk jugs line up to try to test the bullets, fired from a Ruger Redhawk fired at first from 25 yds, and later from 50 yds. The terminal velocities are calculated from chronograph readings at 10 feet, and calculated to 25 yds.

The results of 2 Speer bullets, I have tested are as follows:

Bullet: Speer 240 gr Gold Dot hollow point Caliber 44 (.429 in)
Range: 25 yds Calculated Terminal Velocity 1335
Rotational Speed 50940 rpm

Shot 1

Remaining Wgt 237 gr Measured Terminal Diameter .672 in.
Penetration Depth 23.5-24 in
Comments Penetrated 4 plugged water jugs nicked the 5th. Textbook looking recovered bullet.

Shot 2

Remaining Wgt 238.8 Measured Terminal Diameter .672 in
Penetration Depth 24in
Comments Penetrated 4 plugged water jugs damaged the last one but did not enter. Another beautiful recovered bullet.


Bullet: Speer 210 gr Gold Dot hollow point Caliber 44 (.429 in)
Range: 25 yds Calculated Terminal Velocity 1446
Rotational Speed 55512 rpm

Shot 1

Remaining Wgt 209.2 gr Measured Terminal Diameter .766 in.
Penetration Depth 6-12 in
Comments Penetrated 2 plugged water jugs. Bullet found in second jug. Textbook looking recovered bullet. Expanded more than the 240.

Shot 2

Remaining Wgt 207.6 gr Measured Terminal Diameter .861 in.
Penetration Depth 12 in
Comments Penetrated 2 plugged water jugs. Hit third but did not penetrate.
Another good looking bullet. Expanded slightly more than the first shot.


As far as I can see, these are excellant results from the bullets. I am not a
scientist but as a shooter, I am impressed. The 240 grain bullet looks tougher than the 210, but that was expected.

Today I tried shooting the Speer 240 grain "Mag Tip" hollow point bullet, but I had some problems. Therefore these bullets will have to be shot again to get complete information. I can also report on what I was able to determine from this bullet test.

It is not as tough as the previous 2 bullets. It expanded but the petals of the expansion began to come off after penetrating the second jug. One shot (out of 3) lost its jacket and its recovered weight was 165.9 gr. with a measured diameter of 192 gr. The jacket was found in the third jug, the bullets of all three were found in the fourth jug, with pieces penetrating the 5th jug. The two bullets that didn't lose their jackets weighed 192 gr and 191.6 gr.

I intend to retest the 240 Mag Tip bullet at 25 yds, and all of them at 50 yards, and will report back. I will have to drink more milk to get more jugs.

[P95Carry]

Interesting results Don ..... but having worked out the energies at 25 yd region .. it seems odd that the penetration was so much less on the 210 grainer. The 240 calculates to 950 ft lbs and the 210 to 975 ft lbs.

Any thoughts?

[Dave R]

In case you want to try newsprint instead of jugs....

I like the newsprint because it leaves a "wound channel" that can give you more data than busted jugs.

Here's how I prepare wet newsprint media. You need:

-A rubbermaid tub about the size of a folded newspaper (i.e. about 1ft by 2ft).

-Lots of newspapers. Collect 'em, or ask the neighbors, the local fast-food joint, etc. Oruse old phone directories when the new ones come out.

-Twine.

Stack the newspapers in the tub as you collect 'em. When the tub is nearly full, take it outside and fill with water. Let the paper get thoroughly soaked. An hour or more.

Set out an "X" of twine, long enough to wrap around the completed bundle o' papers.

Pull a 6" group of the newspaper out of the water and set it on the X of twine. Repeat. Keep stacking until you get them all there. Stack carefully, so they don't tip.

Tie 'em up.

Then let 'em drain to the desired consistency. You want them damp, but not leaking water all over your car as you tranport them. I often use the rubbermaid tub to tranport 'em. Set the tub over the stack of paper, then roll the tub/paper group upright. Paper is in the tub. They're heavy, so two people helps to lift.

After you shoot 'em, you can 'flip" through the newsprint and get a 3D view of the "wound channel" you have created.

The only bad thing about .44 mag is you will not be able to shoot the same block of newsprint as many times as I can with .380acp and 9MM.

[dodgestdshift]

P95carry:

The 210 gr. opened up quicker and expanded its energy on the 2 jugs, the 240 opened slower and took 4 jugs to stop. I don't have a digital camera or I would post the pictures of the bullets. You could see the 210 gr. bullet opened much further than the 240, and that is what stopped penetration. This happened with 2 shots not just one. It is to be noted that in my incomplete 240 gr. Mag Tip (non bonded) bullet test the 240 gr started to come apart after 2 jugs. I think you will find that energy is not a good predictor of penetration. Bullet construction, weight, and caliber (really sectional density) with velocity as a negative to penetration (usually - it has to have enough velocity, but too much is detremental to maximum penetration).

Dave:

I realize newsprint would give me a wound channel to look at, but it is a lot easier to transport 16 full milk jugs than lots of wet newsprint. I am also exploring a way to get somewhat of a wound channel using the jugs, by inserting paper or cardboard between the jugs. If you test any of these bullets in newsprint, I would be interested in comparing your test results to mine.

I have saved up enough jugs to try the Speer 240 gr. Mag Tip hollow point again and the 200 gr. Mag Tip Hollow point. I will then post these results.

[P95Carry]

Don ... yeah, I can see how different expansion would influence things ... sure. I guess what also made it seem unusual to have such a difference was that the bullets are effectively same basic design.

However .. just goes to show how different things can be .. useful info to have. With .44 mag I have always been in the 240-250 grain camp .. doubt I've ever shot lighter ... and also for most part have used own cast.

[dodgestdshift]

P95carry:

Why don't you try shooting into milk jugs with the bullets you use and post the results. It would be interesting to compare the results. My tests were at 25 yds. All you need is about 6 jugs for the test, filled and capped. Place on a board so they are a couple of feet off the ground (ricochets not wanted off the ground). It is spectacular to see the jugs when the bullet hits.

[P95Carry]

Don, just might do that ..... well in fact I guess I have in past but just funnin then .. no records or pics. Spectacular tho .... oh YEAH!!

I need to cast up more bullets and load some more ... but will add this to my (long!) list of proposed tests!

[snuffy]

I posted this on several other forums, some of you may have seen it. I have results from the 165 interbond I did last summer, ask and I'll post those here also.

Dodgestdshft, do you stand the jugs up or lay them down like I do? Laying them end-to-end gives you a longer column of water, uses fewer jugs.

And the results are in------------well some of them anyway. I’ll call this my shake down cruise. LITERALLY! There is a bunch of energy being released when a bullet hits those jugs. The board I used to lay the jugs on started coming apart after the third hit. I ended up nearly breaking it in half! There went $30.00 worth of lumber and a couple hours and hardware to build. Back to the drawing board. Pics to follow.

As to the results, well here goes. I got to test 5 different bullets. 1. the 180 Hornady interbond. 2. the 180 Nozler accu-bond. 3.The 180 Hornady SST. 4.The 180 Remington core-loct round nose. 5. The 190 sierra match king.

Here’s the 3 Nozler accu-bonds



retained weight, 119.1, 121.7, 121.9 Expansion .875, .645, .665. Percentage of weight retention is around 67% The .875 is the one on the left with a piece of jacket sticking out, otherwise it would be like the other 2. Now for where a person has to choose one over the other,(AB over IB). All 3 AB’s went through 3 jugs and into the fourth. The interbond was found in the third jug, just like the 165’s I tested last summer.



Here’s the only interbond I could capture. Problems with the stand caused one other one to be lost in the grass. Retained weight 140.1, expansion .715, weight retention, 77%. Like I said it and the lost one only penetrated 3 jugs.



I had a partial box of 25 year old Rem core-locts sitting around. I thought, ”I wonder how the dark ages technology compares with today’s newest?” Well it fits between the interbond and accubond. Ret. Weight. 131.0 expansion .625, 72% retention. Also the prettiest most uniform mushroom of all.

No pics for the MK! Couldn’t find enough of 2 bullets to weigh or take pics of. Total disintegration! Same for the SST. Blown to pieces, just shards of lead and copper jacket in the last,(third), jug.

All loads were 68.5 grains of R-19, except the MK was 66.0 R-19. Velocities were between 3000 and 3050 fps @ 15 feet/muzzle.

Oh here’s the set-up;



This WAS a 10 X 2 , 6 feet long. The legs were nailed, screwed and gorilla glued to the notched ends of the board. All I have left are the legs! The board was cracked and nearly broken in half right under where the first jug was sitting. I screwed and gorilla glued 1 X 4 pine under the board to keep it from splitting lengthwise. Oh well, next time I may just make it out of steel!

[dodgestdshift]

Snuffy:

My test had jugs standing upright. I wonder if your jugs on end could cause differences in results due to the far end of each jug not being at right angles to the path of the bullet? I may try to place cardboard or paper between the jugs to get an idea of the wound channel.


I may get a chance to test 2 more bullets tomorrow, depending on weather, and other factors. If I do I will post.

[ancien]

dodgestdshift
Not exactly sure what your tests reveals. Typically the loads your testing penetrate in the low teens, or less, when tested in a medium of soaked newsprint/telephone books or ballistic gelatin.
The url listed below covers a full range of bullets/calibers, mostly rifle, but also
some pistol bullets as well. This is the best information I've found to-date regarding terminal ballistics that wasn't filled with "opinions" and pseudo-science. Check it out.

http://www.mindspring.com/~ulfhere/b.../wounding.html

[snuffy]

Here's a new testing medium from Corbin. Quite expensive, but much more consistant that water filled jugs, wet or dry paper, or even ballistic gelatin.

http://www.corbins.com/sim-test.htm

Sim-test looks like the answer to an amature expansion/penetration testers dream. While it's expensive, it is re-useable, or recastable with heat.

I read part of one page of the mindspring.com stuff. Looks like I should spend a lot more time there. Steves pages has a section in it where Steve Ricciardelli compiled tests done by Carmon Crapson mostly all handgun projectiles with pics.

http://stevespages.com/page8f.htm

My only purpose in doing these tests, was to see how much expansion would result, after running into solid water. Weight retention also can be acertained. Penetration could only be approzimate by where the fired bullet came to rest. Wound channel is only to be guessed at, by noting how much the jugs were torn up.

Since the bonded Hornady and Nosler are so new, I thought this would be interesting. I really haven't made up my mind yet on which bullet I would use on bigger game like elk and buffalo. I chose the 165 interbond for WI whitetails, after last years test.