9mm, 40SW, 45ACP, 357 SIG vs Body Armor

[InfernoMDM]

I figured a few of you might like to see this. Please note this wasn't done scientifically, and only the basic ability to control this experiment could be accomplished due to the impromptu nature.

A friend of mine had a few pieces of spare armor floating around. Due to the excess pieces he had laying around we decided to shoot it up. The armor was III-A that was housed in a cordura outer shell not photographed. All rounds penetrated the cordura outer shell, and the weatherproof jacket. Statements of penetration are purely based on how many layers of Kevlar the round passed through. After each shot the body armor was flattened and smoothed to prevent the rounds from penetrating crumpled layers. Each shot was done from a distance of 5 feet from the barrel.

9mm Walther P99 - 115 GR, 147 GR SXT RANGER
40 cal Walther P99 - 165 GR
Glock 22 with a 357 SIG barrel - 125 GR
45 cal Springfield 1911A1 - 230 GR

The first photo is of all Ball Winchester White Box shot into the armor. This was a shot after the 9mm 115 GR was shot to show how the kevlar crumpled.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a185/InfernoMDM/Test/BulletPenetration.jpg

The next photo shows the rounds after they were shot. The Rounds shown from left to right begin with 9mm, 40cal, 357 SIG, and then 45ACP. Note the black round is the 9mm RANGER round that has been said to be able to penetrate II-A body armor. The 9mm RANGER was shot into another piece of armor and penetrated 9 layers. I do not have a photo of that piece.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a185/InfernoMDM/Test/DSCN2107.jpg

[LibertyOrDeath]

Thanks for posting this, Inferno.

I'm not surprised the .45 ACP didn't do well. It's a great manstopper against someone without armor, but that fat, slow bullet really sucks against Kevlar. I would have expected the .40 S&W to do better, though. It's not surprising that the .357 Sig did best.

Are you (or anyone else here) familiar with a website called the "Box O' Truth"? It's owned by a retiree who does a lot of this sort of testing, though not so much on body armor as on other materials. Here's the link:

http://www.theboxotruth.com/

One of the most interesting tests was of a 7.62x25 Tokarev pistol against a modern ballistic helmet (which are typically NIJ Class IIIA -- I have one myself). These helmets will NOT stop most rifle rounds. (Certainly not 5.56 NATO, contrary to what the site owner says at the beginning of the test results page. In fact, 5.56 NATO penetrates better at 200 yards than at closer ranges due to the better stability of the bullet at 200 yards). They will stop almost all common pistol rounds. HOWEVER, the 7.62 Tokarev shot through one side of the helmet! Granted, the helmet had already taken some hits in other places by that time, but still...

Here's the direct link to the helmet test:

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot29.htm

[InfernoMDM]

The failure in both are tests are the amount of rounds that impacted the armor.

Unlike civilian III-A as compared to the military standard, the standards are NOT designed to defeat high speed/ larger caliber rounds. The military believed it would have defend against primarily 9mm 45ACP and similar rounds. Although the 7.62x25 is a military round you don't see it often. Also the helmet really isn't designed to stop rifle or pistol rounds. The PSGT (helmet on Box o Truth) MITCH helmets are primarily for shrapnel defense, and pistol calibers.

Also to quote Box o Truth: 4. These helmets were tougher than I would have thought. They're not designed to stop pistol rounds, but seemed to do the job just fine.

[LibertyOrDeath]

Regarding standards, I just saw a note over at BulletProofMe.com (link below) stating that there are no NIJ standards for helmets. I was surprised to see that, since manufacturers routinely state that their helmets are Level II or Level III-A. I suppose that merely means that they have been tested with the same threats named in those standards.

Also, BulletProofMe sells what they say is the standard-issue military helmet and claims that it was tested to stop Level II threats. I would think that the military would use a stronger helmet, although Level II will stop most fragmentation and lesser handgun rounds. I guess fragmentation is mainly what the military is worried about (though that could be different in unconventional warfare).

The following ballistics chart from Pinnacle Armor is one of the most complete charts I've seen, since they fill in their own values that aren't officially part of the NIJ standards (which are in bold):

http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/body-armor/ballistic-chart.php

It's interesting how 7.62x25 at 1440-1540 fps is given its own in-house level just above Level III-A. That would account for the 7.62x25 getting through the helmet when a .357 Mag from a long barrel couldn't. (I do wonder if a .357 Mag FMJ would have done better, though.) Of course, as you said, this wasn't the most scientific test, since a new helmet wasn't used for each round.


Incidentally, for anyone who wants to buy a helmet, they're available to civilians on the Web. I bought one because one day civilian sales will be banned:

http://www.bulletproofme.com/Body_Armor_Complete_Products_LIST.shtml

http://botac.com/heba.html

[Defendu]

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot16.htm

For your information, body armor material is designed to work when worn by a human.
Humans are compressible.
IIIA material will work when put on a person or over 4" of ballistic clay, but if you just put IIIA material over concrete or over boards, it will fail."

PS: I'll be leaving this forum the day it becomes another shitty gun board.

[InfernoMDM]

We had a very soft plywood backing. I need to get that photo off my friends computer, and post it.

LOD - The 357 SIG is I think about 150 fps slower then .357 Mag, and rounds like Double Tap run at the same speed (but are hollow point). I would assume the same results happening in my experiment if a .357 Mag was used.

Defendu - I don't think anyone wants this to be a gun forum, but due to the topics on hand, the use of improvised weapons, and munitions that could play a part, and people building ballistic devices I figured this might be of interest.

[InfernoMDM]

I figured some of you would enjoy seeing the impact on the plywood the armor was hanging on.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a185/InfernoMDM/Test/DSCN2092.jpg

[LibertyOrDeath]

IIIA material will work when put on a person or over 4" of ballistic clay, but if you just put IIIA material over concrete or over boards, it will fail.It looks like the Box O' Truth was at least partially wrong about this, at least regarding the boards. I can definitely see why Kevlar would need to have some "give" in it to be able to stop a bullet, though. After all, it basically acts like a net that disperses the impact force. But I guess plywood is flexible enough.

The two big holes in that pic look pretty ominous. III-A armor is supposed to protect from excessive blunt-force trauma as well as penetration for the rounds it's rated for, but a force that can punch holes in plywood can almost certainly break a couple of ribs, too.

Inferno, do you know which holes in the wood correspond to which rounds? Thanks.

[InfernoMDM]

Inferno, do you know which holes in the wood correspond to which rounds? Thanks.

Yes the correspond with the photo above, except the 9mm and 357 SIG really didn't get photographed well enough. There is substantial damage to the wood at that point, but only a little was knocked out, especially on the 357 SIG side.