Roundball penetration test

[Mountainman56]

I’m planning a roundball penetration test in the next couple weeks. I intend to test a .45, a .50 and a .54 calibre. Each one will be fired from a 32” barrel. I’d like to try a couple more calibres as well but I can’t convince my bride I need two more rifles right away. My idea is to make a container that I will fill with newspapers and water. The end I shoot through will be cardboard that I can replace each shot. I think this should give a pretty good idea on the difference in penetration. What do y’all think?

Also do you think I should go for similar velocity (I do have a chronograph) or the same powder charge, say 80 grains in each?

What range would be most representative of the average distance most people shoot?

 

[Little Wattsy]

IF you have the time and powder to burn it would be cool to see results with same velocity AND same powder charge.
As a whole this sounds very feesable and I am looking foreword to your results!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[tjohnson56]

I'd like to see the results also. A few years back I read about a test where phone books were soaked in water over night then compressed together and the penetration could be gauged down to the page.

I would find it really interesting to see how the different calibers did at the same velocity.

 

[BrownBear]

I've done a fair bit of this over the years using similar techniques, but with cartridge guns. It's been on my list to do it for RBs, but my to-its are all square. (I haven't got a round to it.)

On the one hand I have never found any medium to be a good predictor of what will happen in flesh. There are just too many variables. The real value is simply in comparing how different projectiles at different velocities compare with each other in the same medium.

After saying those things, I have to say that I long ago gave up on wetting the newspaper. You just wouldn't believe the weight and the mess! I use dry paper and less of it is required.

If you've got a recycling center anywhere near, you can often borrow bundled newspaper, shoot it, rebundle it and return it. Pretty handy, but it takes congenial relations with the managers to set it up. That's what I do, and it's sure a lot easier and faster than accumulating enough paper on your own.

I also vote for separate tests comparing calibers at same velocities, as well as with the same charge. Do you have access to a 58? With some shooting buds I've been shooting a couple recently along with 54s, 50s, 36s and 32s, retrieving the balls in a bucket of sand. No measure of penetration or similar velocities involved, but it's sure impressive to compare how much lead is left with each caliber.

In other words, if you could include a 58 in your list, it would save me a trip to the recylcing center!!!! :hatsoff:

 

[Vaino]

The results of your tests should be interesting and I'm looking forward to seeing them. There are variables that should be eliminated and some consistencies that should be observed. Wet newspapers {how wet?} have been used before and although they don't simulate flesh and bone, would be acceptable for comparison tests. Equal, known velocities of the various calibers would be mandatory instead of a standard powder charge which would produce varying velocities in each caliber. This is a big undertaking "to do it right" and it's a lot of work to ideally bundle wet newspapers for every shot or possibly for 2-4 shots if the shots aren't too close to the edge. How do you intend to measure the penetration? Possibly if the hole is large enough, a small dia. probe could be used? IMO, 40 yds would be a good choice, but other distances could be used. Good luck with this undertaking.....Fred

 

[gjkershul]

In direct reply to your question to the forum, I shoot at 50yds to sight in my hunting guns and I would appreciate seeing your results at that range. The 80 grains sounds good too.
BTW was your pig edible?

 

[lonewarrior]

The best testing medium to simulate ballistic gellatin is one gallon jugs of water stacked back to back. Ckeck out the testing done by Old Painless:

BP testing

 

[paulvallandigham]

Since you lose 25% of your MV at 50 yards, all you have to do is reduce the powder charge to lower the MV by 25% and shoot the penetration test at the normal, close distance. You get the same result as shooting the full load, out at a 50 yd. target.

 

[J.D.]

The best testing medium to simulate ballistic gellatin is one gallon jugs of water stacked back to back. Ckeck out the testing done by Old Painless:

BP testing

I have done similar tests with flint rifles with completely different results.

Naturally, a larger bore will penetrate farther than a small one. Moreover, impact of a round ball pushed at respectable velocities will have an explosive effect on plastic jugs filled with water, though not as much as modern ammunition.

The last water jug test I did was using a Pedersoli 32 flint gun loaded with 30 gr FFFG.

The jugs were 1 liter sports drink bottles filled with water shot at a range of about 20 yards.

The Gatoraid bottles are thicker than standard milk jugs or soft drink bottles, so they might have given a better idea of what might be the result of hitting flesh.

The 310 cal ball penetrated three bottles but only dimpled the back side of the third bottle. The first bottle opened up with a large split front and back. The second also opened up, but with a smaller split. The third bottle had a small split in the front and a dimple on the back of the bottle.

The front of the ball had flattened and expanded somewhat, but I don't remember the dimensions.

Not bad for a puny 32 loaded fairly light.

Unfortunately, I didn't have enough bottles to test heavier charges or the effects of a 32 maxie.

 

[renovato]

I'd think that the charges should be what you would use for a hunting load in each gun. Afterall, that's when penetration is important. Wet newsprint is a pretty reliable method of comparing penetration. It doesn't give much information on a projectile's performance in flesh, but it does give good information about a projectile's performance compared to another projectile.

 

[slowpokebr549]

I have used stacked phone books in the past. They were easier to deal with.I stacked them into fruit cases and soaked with a hose.Viola! instant test media.

 

[longcruise]

Since you lose 25% of your MV at 50 yards, all you have to do is reduce the powder charge to lower the MV by 25% and shoot the penetration test at the normal, close distance. You get the same result as shooting the full load, out at a 50 yd. target.

Paul, I think you are right on the money with that suggestion. I'd put the chrono at about 12 feet and the media at about 15 to 17 feet and do the testing with increasing velocities for each caliber. That would give an independent picture of each caliber at various velocities and they could also be compared across calibres if that is of interest.

 

[Grizzled Roberts]

I had to capture some .615 ball out of my Ferguson
so I took six Charlotte NC phone books ( 3-1/2 to 4 inches thick, Done shot em up so I can't measure ) I put them in a 10 gallon plastic bucket, Filled the bucket with water, and kept the water level over the paper for 4 days.
At the range I just poured out the excess water
and laid the bucket on its side paper side out.
I proped up the open/ paper end of the bucket until the path of my ball would go through the center of the bucket. With a .615 ball and 60 grains of Schutzen 3F, the Ferguson balls went through 3, 1/2 phone books. The paper was so soaked the balls were recovered intact for my display. My early made Narraganssett Ferguson will only hold 60 grains in the chamber.
With 20 more grains it might make it through a few more books. I can't wait to see your results :thumbsup:

 

[nchawkeye]

I bought my first flintlock (a .45) back in the 70's...With 75grs of FFF Goex and a .440 ball, I found that it would put a ball through a 2x4 at 50 yards... After killing several deer with it, I found that it would go through ribs, lungs or shoulder blades and end up under the hide on the off side if shots were within 60 yards or so...

A .54 with 80grs does a bit better, never tried it for penetration on any other medium than deer...

 

[BrownBear]

That's kind of reflects my experience, though I haven't shot any 2x4's for comparison with your experiences on deer.

I guess that's my problem with shooting anything but flesh and trying to say what it will do in flesh. Animals are just not uniform, and each shot is kind of a rule unto itself. Whatever medium you use it will give you a good comparison between the various calibers and velocities in that medium, but I haven't seen any medium yet that will come even a little bit close to predicting what will happen on flesh. I've "autopsied" well over 100 deer and no small number of elk, and a few moose. Tracing the wound channel is just a normal part of dressing an animal to me. Some that should penetrat fully based on previous experience didn't. And some that shouldn't penetrate completely, do so.

I haven't shot any deer with a 45 ML, but on two neck shots with a 54 cal RB on top of 100 grains of 2f, the one at 50 yards failed to exit, and the one at 20 feet took out a pretty good chunk of spine and exited.

A hunting pard whacked one straight on in the brisket with a 50 cal mini launched by 80 grains of 3f at 50 yards and we recovered it under the hide in the left hindquarter. Another popped his deer through the lungs at 60 yards with a 58 cal RB on top of 90 grains of 3f and the ball whistled on through.

 

[roundball]

"...My idea is to make a container that I will fill with newspapers and water..."
"...I think this should give a pretty good idea on the difference in penetration. What do y’all think?..."

I've played around with soaked phone books a time or two over the years, and have also seen an article expressing questions similar to some I had when I did it...and that is the worry that one ball might penetrate mostly straight forward, but another one might hit the media and then start sliding/glancing off on an angle upon hitting the slippery media. And while we also know that very thing might happen inside an animal, for your testing it might give misleading results. Even using different sets of phone books (newspapers, etc) might have different amounts of water in them producing different results.

I think the best commercial test media for penetration testing are the blocks of gelatin.

Lacking that, a long box full of white play sand (or suitable container) then filled just barely brimming with water would produce a pretty consistent repeatable media from test to test.

35 yards is about the average eastern woods shot at deer that I've had over the years.

I really like testing / experimenting...look forward to your results

 

[gmww]

I'll sure be looking forward to your results. Here is a link on a discussion about ballistic gel for the home user. Your way is much cheaper though.
http://www.ktog.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1203719018

 

[Kentuckywindage]

.530 homecast round ball with 80g pyrodex p and a 15 grain booster of 4f. 58 yards into very damp sand. Ball went 7" and made a big cavity inside the sand.

ball,

 

[paulvallandigham]

Yep. That is what you should expect from that ball in wet sand.

 

[jtmattison]

A .54 with 80grs does a bit better, never tried it for penetration on any other medium than deer...

I tried one of my .54's on pressure treated 2x6's at 50 yards. With 90 grains of Goex 2f the ball plowed clean through the doubled up boards. After going through 4 inches of wood the ball didn't expand much. The exit hole was maybe twice the size of the entry hole.

.54's are pretty good thumpers.

HD