AAR: INGO Box of Truth, June 19 2010

[glock34]

First let me say i am more jealous than I was before of your shooting area after watching the video of getting to the range area.

All the videos are great. Good Job!!

 

[Fenway]

Fantastic report Gentlemen! +rep

 

[zoglog]

Is there some sort of setting to expand the default posts per page? I show this thread is already 50% through page 2.

Yes there is and I love it! I dont remember where it is but maybe someone will bump the thread that it was in.

Great information keep it coming!

 

[remymartin]

EXCELLENT report fellas. Very well done, I can't wait to see more.

 

[lovemywoods]

More of the INGO Box-O-Truth AAR

Techres has provided the INGO community with a staggering string of videos that capture what happened during the first INGO Box-O-Truth testing.

I want to add some of the more mundane data to document the results and have some fun with numbers!



Here is a tabular listing of what was shot, what we used to shoot it, what we shot it with, and what happened when we shot it!

I am a lover of charts and graphs, so I had to create some charts, no matter how silly (this is what 30 years in corporate America will do to you!).

Finally, I offer some non-scientific observations about the day and what I took away from the experience (in no particular order…).

-- Techres is a lot of fun to be around. He is creative and thoughtful and he likes to shoot stuff!

-- .223 HP penetration was surprisingly shallow in water. It fragmented and gave up all its energy after 2-3 jugs. That’s about 6-9” in flesh. That’s about right!

-- Drywall is no barrier to penetration. When there were 10 sheets of drywall in the Box and no wood, everything went all the way through, even .22LR!

-- Buckshot in a shotgun is just plain CRAZY when it hits stuff, whether it’s water or drywall. Stuff flies!

-- Tannerite should be one of the seven wonders of modern civilization. It’s safe to ship, safe to store, and makes a prodigious BOOM when detonated. (It makes grown people giggle like kids!)

-- I have very tolerant and patient neighbors. They’ve never complained about my shooting (even the 15,000 rounds at last year’s NFA Weekend).

-- I love the way videos document what happened, but the number of videos posted above is impossible for my crappy satellite system. I drove to Bloomington to get the video files on a memory stick!

-- And finally, to steal shamelessly from the original Box-O-Truth site, “Shooting stuff is fun!”

 

[infidel]

I wonder how many water jugs it takes to simulate a human torso???

 

[lovemywoods]

I wonder how many water jugs it takes to simulate a human torso???

I have read in the past that 2" of water is roughly equivalent to 1" of ballistic gel and the ballistic gel was designed to approximate behavior in flesh. If this is true and you want to achieve a minimum of 12” of penetration in flesh for any defensive round, then you would want 24” of penetration in water. That’s 4 jugs.

It's pretty obvious that neither water or gel are substitutes for real flesh with bone, muscle, tendons, etc. Flesh is an extraordinarily complex material.

All that said, water can be a cheap and safe way to compare rounds against other rounds. You have to be very cautious in trying to make ammunition performance predictions in flesh based on performance in ballistic gel and should be even more reticent to do that based on testing in water.

 

[tuoder]

I wonder how many water jugs it takes to simulate a human torso???

My understanding is that you take water penetration and divide by 2 to get flesh penetration. I'd estimate anything over 4 jugs would be enough penetration.

EDIT: lovemywoods beat me to the punch!

 

[pudly]

Some thoughts after watching the videos:

-Techres does great commentary.

-You might want to consider putting more than one shot per video, for example the early .38 special videos were too broken up. Later ones can have the wall-only and wall+stud shots for a single round type joined into a single video.

-You might want to consider marking old shots with circles or X-s so that it is clear which holes are new, particularly in your unfortunate "neighbor".

-Did I understand correctly that you used frangibles for the early plasterboard tests and regular hollow points for the water jugs?

-I agree with SafeShootingDad. It would be good to see if spacing out the plasterboard and inserting insulation makes any significant difference. Related ideas- seeing how vinyl siding, aluminum siding, and brick affect results.

-Been to LoveMyWoods place once. It is a great place. Thanks for the excellent site and videos!

-Don't hesitate to put out calls for cash/supplies/specific firearms. I don't think you will have any problems getting support.

-At some point, you'll have to try the 7.62x54 and .50 just for the pure carnage.

Super videos.

 

[Roadie]

Fan freakin tastic!

Reps inbound!

(ugh, stupid rep system wont let me get techres! #*&$(^%#)

 

[techres]

Some thoughts after watching the videos:

-Did I understand correctly that you used frangibles for the early plasterboard tests and regular hollow points for the water jugs?

Actually they were all hollowpoints. None were the compressed tungsten frangible type. I was using the term frangible loosely and should not have.

As for 7.62x54r, I have an idea for the.

 

[techres]

Ok! Pictures time. Let's start with the really good ones (the professional ones).

Setting up for a test:

Water Runneth:

Shooting the Python:

Shooting some video:

I always have fun at a LMW's event. Always:

I will post some of the video stills in a bit. They do not compare to the professional ones though.

 

[techres]

These are low quality, but still full of win:

 

[esrice]

First let me say i am more jealous than I was before of your shooting area after watching the video of getting to the range area.

That wasn't even the "real" range.

*kicks self for not being able to be there*

 

[nighthawk80]

This is to awesome!!!
Great job guys!

 

[SSGSAD]

Fan freakin tastic!

Reps inbound!

(ugh, stupid rep system wont let me get techres! #*&$(^%#)

Got him for ya !!!!!

 

[lovemywoods]

These are low quality, but still full of win:

I liked all the action-stopping still shots, but in particular, this one showing two jets of drywall dust is cool!

 

[OEF5]

I'm still fail on the photos and vids at work and was too busy to even watch last night at home.

I did Rep both of you because of the work that I've not seen, I did see the charts and understood them!!

 

[rycollier]

good pictures

Those are some great action shots

 

[lovemywoods]

Like SafeShootingDad's comment, I would be interested in having the box-o-truth built with a width of 16" on center (if it's not already) as this span would technically be the largest span between the studs in a home and if hit on center between the studs would be the weakest section of the drywall, etc.

CCG, I appreciate your comments and have given it some thought. Forgive me if I get a bit geeky, but you should be used to it being surrounded by tekkies at your workplace.

You are suggesting a full-width mock-up of a wall to test the drywall at the center (and assumed weakest point). I don't think that the structural strength of the drywall is what matters here. If I was punching through the drywall with a large and slow-moving object (say a fist), then the full-sized model would be necessary. However, with a fast-moving bullet, I believe the bullet passes through the drywall before the internal structure of the drywall has a chance to react to any significant degree. The large mass and inertia of the drywall at rest would tend to remain at rest. Only the structural characteristics of the drywall directly in the path of the bullet matter. Therefore, I believe the drywall would behave the same whether the impact was 8" from a stud or right next to the stud. If that is the case, the size of the drywall sample has little affect on the test.

Just my musings with no hard data to back it up.

I do like the suggestion one member offered to mock up some layers of insulation along with a brick or block outer wall.