With the cool weather still here, the pool is a little too cold for a dip. But instead of paying those water and electricity bills for nothing, I thought I should put the damn thing to some sort of use.

That got me thinking about a bullet test. I don't have the time or patience to play with ballistics geletain, but I am curious about a couple of .30 cal hunting bullets in terms of how they will expand. Do they look just like the pretty pictures we see on manufacturer's websites? Hmmmm...

For my pool bottom's sake, I was wondering how far the bullets would penetrate the water. My knee jerk reation is that there is no risk because the bullets will expand and dissipate their energy quickly.

So, I think I might shoot in the deep end at about a 30 degree angle and see what happens.

C'mon, naysayers! What do you think? Lemme have it!

-Kenati

================================
================================

By the way, I remembered an episode on Mythbusters about shooting underwater and found the summary here:

Mythbusers - Bulletproof Water episode
---------------------------------------------
Bulletproof Water
Myth: "Water will protect you from being shot by bullets"

They know that water will eventually stop a bullet, so they want to test to see how deep you have to dive to avoid being shot.

Gun selection
The various guns they tested during the myth were:

-9mm pistol
-M1 Garand/.30-06
-Replica Civil War black powder rifle
-Shotgun
-.50 cal rifle

Water tank tests
They built a 'ballistic tank' out of 1" thick acrylic and iron girders. They stuck a block of ballistics gel into the tank that could be raised up and down to different depths.

9mm @ 6ft: the bullet went straight through the ballistic gel -- fatal

9mm @ 7ft: the bullet went straight through again -- fatal

9mm @ 8ft: the bullet only went 1/2" into the gel -- non-fatal

3" deer slug + Shotgun @ 6ft: As one might have expected, firing a shotgun into a narrow tank of water shattered the tank and sent everyone running to turn off all the lights to prevent short circuits. The slug shot went through the ballistics gel -- fatal
The shotgun test was the end of that particular test setup.

Pool tests
A vertical rig was a worst-case scenario. In order to make it easier to test and also to make it correspond better with a real-world scenario, they decided to make their new rig be at a 30 degree angle. At a 30 degree angle with an 8 ft penetrating bullet, you would only have to be 4ft underwater.

Someone strangely agreed to allowing Adam and Jamie to shoot off guns in their pool. Adam made a new 20 ft railway for the ballistics gel target and they mounted it at a 23 degree angle.

For the first test they used a replica Civil War black powder rifle shooting Jamie's homemade bullets at 1000 ft/s.

Replica Civil War rifle @ 15 ft: The bullet veered way off target.

Replica Civil War rifle@ 5 ft: they couldn't find the bullet and the ballistics gel was still intact -- nonfatal

Replica Civil War rifle @ 3 ft: The bullet went through the gel -- fatal. At this distance, though, the gel was only 2 ft underwater because of the angle.

They switched to a .223 rifle, which shoots at 2500 ft/s

.223 rifle @ 10 ft: the full metal jacket bullet shattered into tiny bits upon hitting the water -- nonfatal

223 rifle@ 3 ft: once again the bullet broke up. The tip of the bullet was resting on the ballistics gel -- nonfatal (myth confirmed)

The next gun up was the M1, which shoots at 2800 ft/s. In their Bulletproof Glass mythbusting, the M1 was capable of penetrating 2.5" of bulletproof glass.

M1@ 10 ft: tiny bullet fragments once again

M1@ 2 ft: the bullet only pierced the gel 4", which would be enough to just pierce the skin.

They finally broke out the big gun, the .50 cal with armor-piercing rounds, which are shot at 3000 ft/s.
Adam: "Hopefully we'll be gone before the pool fully drains"

.50 cal @ 10 ft: even though the water exploded, the ballistics gel was intact. Water made it all the way up to the ceiling. As it was with the previous guns, the bullet round came apart on impact. It lost all of it's energy within the first 3 ft. You would be safe 14" underwater at a 23 angle from a .50 cal.

Confirmed:
You can protect yourself from a bullet by diving underwater. If the shooter were directly overhead, you would probably be safe from most guns at 8 ft. At a 30 degree angle, you would only have to be 3 ft underwater to be safe.

I don't know for sure how far it will travel, since it "impacts" the water. Like all things, it will depend on bullet construction.

BTW, they did a subsequent test on firing a pistol under water and found that the 45 bullet from the Springfield went at least 15 feet, being fired without the impact of the water.

This was just shown on Mythbusters recently on TV. Rifle bullets didn't go very far and broke up upon impact. They shot a 30-06 or 308. They were picking tiny bullet pieces up off the bottom of the pool. Pistol bullets did a lot better but travel a lot slower too.

They even shot a 50 BMG and it didn't go but about 3 or 4 feet.

Both the British and the Americans did studies - 303 and 30-06 before and during WWI and WWII of the penetration of their service cartridges at various ranges into various materials.

So NONE of the "Myth Busters" work is either new or "astounding". A lot of the 30-06 figures you can find in "Hatcher's Notebook"! The 303 figures in, I think, the "British Textbook of Smallarms 1929".

Some curious facts emerge. Penetration of wood is GREATER at LONG RANGE than short range. Actually should be obvious why - the bullet has settled down and is no longer yawing as much.

Also, I think, sandbags filled with DRY sand protects (less penetration) better than sandbags filled with WET sand...or the other way around, but a significant difference.

Water Tests were re-visited again, especially by the US, in the Pacific War to establish how much protection the sea would give ditched airmen against Japanese Zero strafing attacks.

I no longer have a copy of "Hatcher" but the figures are there.

I was working on a 22lr rifle and needed to testfire it a couple times.

So I of course had the bright idea of firing it into water, it was only a 22lr after all.

Well anyway I set up a 5 gallon bucket full of water put a lid on it to contain the splash and prepared to fire the rifle through the hole in the lid. Remember this is just a good ole 22 Long Rifle.

OK so I fired the rifle straight down. The Water geysered up straight through the hole in the lid and hit me right in the face.
The tiny little 22 bullet went all the way though the bottom of the bucket leaving a 22 caliber hole in the bottom and made the bucket jump up, popped off the lid and splashed a gallon more of water over the part of me that didn't get splashed by the water coming through the hole.

Of course water also started leaking out of the 22 caliber hole in the bottom of the bucket but I didn't notice for a while because I was drying off. It managed to leak all over the garage floor and got every nearby cardboard box lying on the floor soaking wet.

I guess Allan and Jamie had better luck with their test.

Oh, and if anyone doesn't beleive my story PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE attempt the same stunt yourself. Just be sure to have someone film it so I can see another wet D.A. on You-Tube!................ ...................DJ

Interesting thread.

No one mentioned that, at low angles of incidence, bullets can ricochet from a water surface. (I am not sure how low, probably depends on the shape of the bullet, weight and speed.)

Might be another "Mythbusters" in it.

Larry (Lost Sheep)

DJ-

Haha!! I can sympathize with you on that one! I'm usually the jackass at the recieving end of many hard lessons learned. My headstone will likely read, "He learned the hard way."

I find it hard to believe that of all the gun nuts on here, no one has chimmed in with a story of their own about shooting into a swimming pool. Either it's a really bad idea, has a really embarassing outcome, or both!

Or is it the good old commandment: "Be sure of your target—and of what is beyond it."

According to these studies, there's an extremely slim chance of ricochet:

1. Nennstiel, R., "Study of Bullet Ricochet on a Water Surface," AFTE Journal, Vol. 16, No. 3, July 1984, pp. 88-93.

2. Haag, L.C., "Bullet Ricochet from Water," AFTE Journal, Vol. 11, No. 3, July 1979, pp. 27-34.

quote:

Originally posted by Kenati:
...According to these studies, there's an extremely slim chance of ricochet: ...

Hey Kenati, I've had the opportunity to shoot at lots of things in water in both a Military and Civilian capacity. It always impressed me just how easy it was to get a ricochet.

I don't doubt the Reports you mention say just what you claim. Just that my first-hand experience has been significantly different.

Best of luck to you.

Hey Hotcore-

So I guess you don't want to join me for the tests, huh?

I'll be sure to have a pocket full of each of these:

I would think shooting into plastic gallon milk jugs lined up in a row would be a safer way to measure penetration. I HAVE to do it that way as I don't have a swimming pool.

Not to mention that most swimming pools are located places that are technically illegal to shoot guns...

None of these details would stop the true experimentor!


Dan

You are right about that Dan!

New Orleans, being the murder capital of the U.S., will hardly bat an eye with a little bit of gunfire.

Combined with the fresh memories of Mardi Gras three weeks ago, any decrease in the chaos from my backyard and pool (it was heated then) will certainly go unnoticed by neighbors as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Kenati:
...So I guess you don't want to join me for the tests, huh? ...

Hey Kenati, I did not mean that to discourage your Tests. I'm all for any kind of Testing you desire.

Just don't be surprised if a bullet goes flying off.

Best of luck to you.

i too have had many ricochets from water and 22 lr's while shooting turtles. these shots can get lengthy depending on how big the pond is, and usually from a low angle, but i have had several bullets whizzing through the trees on the other side of the pond. i would think at around 30* you should be at enough of an angle to negate ricochet, though i'm just guessing there. let us know how the testing goes.

Kenati,
If you go back and WATCH the Myth Busters you will see that they used a soft point with the 50 BMG. I believe if they had in fact used an AP or depleted uranium projectile, someone would have been pouring concrete for a new pool.

Andy

In order to get a bank flop bullet placement is very important. roger

quote:

Originally posted by djpaintles:
I was working on a 22lr rifle and needed to testfire it a couple times.

So I of course had the bright idea of firing it into water, it was only a 22lr after all.

Well anyway I set up a 5 gallon bucket full of water put a lid on it to contain the splash and prepared to fire the rifle through the hole in the lid. Remember this is just a good ole 22 Long Rifle.

OK so I fired the rifle straight down. The Water geysered up straight through the hole in the lid and hit me right in the face.
The tiny little 22 bullet went all the way though the bottom of the bucket leaving a 22 caliber hole in the bottom and made the bucket jump up, popped off the lid and splashed a gallon more of water over the part of me that didn't get splashed by the water coming through the hole.

Of course water also started leaking out of the 22 caliber hole in the bottom of the bucket but I didn't notice for a while because I was drying off. It managed to leak all over the garage floor and got every nearby cardboard box lying on the floor soaking wet.

I guess Allan and Jamie had better luck with their test.

Oh, and if anyone doesn't beleive my story PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE attempt the same stunt yourself. Just be sure to have someone film it so I can see another wet D.A. on You-Tube!................ ...................DJ

That could not possibly happen again.I`ll bet you 50 cents.

You'll have to get in the cold winter pool to retrieve the spent bullets, ideally after each shot.... refraction, dirty water and hypothermia are variable you might consider in recovering the data.

quote:

Originally posted by trans-pond:
You'll have to get in the cold winter pool to retrieve the spent bullets, ideally after each shot.... refraction, dirty water and hypothermia are variable you might consider in recovering the data.

Isn't that what you have teenagers for?

Larry (Lost Sheep)

lee did this years ago, in testing how powder charges affect pressure. results were very interestng and can be found in his book, MODERN RELOADING.

I've fired rifles into our pool. We have a second floor deck overlooking the pool that makes it possible to fire at an almost vertical angle, so no ricochet. It's about 5 ft deep at that end, so it's easy to recover bullets, or pieces thereof. Nothing I've fired has damaged the liner, up to 270, 44 mag, & 375 win.

Even firing from the second floor deck....YOU WILL GET SOAKED. The rifle will get soaked, and everything around will get soaked. This is certainly better to do in the summertime.

You can download to simulate performance at long range. It's pretty interesting to see the differences between bullets.

John

-------------------UPDATE ---------------------

Okay, enough talk already... "JUST DO IT!"

300 WSM
150 gr factory Winchester Supreme Ballistic Tips

(Caveat: I really don't like ballistic tips, but I was desperate for brass and that's all that was in stock at the time)

Anyway, standing on top of the hot tub with my rig wrapped in a garbage bag, I let 'er rip into the depths of the pool.

Here's what I came up with:






Results:

97.7 grains retained weight = 65%

What is interesting is that it matches the results found by the (unknown) author of this study in which the Nosler Ballistic tip also retained 65% of it's weight at 3100 fps. Not conclusive, of course, but interestingly coincidental.



Well, this was all just for fun, but in the near future I could definitely see myself blasting some of the GS Custom bulletitos (Spanglish for small bullet) into the bowels of my backyard.

Have a great weekend everyone!

quote:

Originally posted by Lost Sheep:
Interesting thread.

No one mentioned that, at low angles of incidence, bullets can ricochet from a water surface. (I am not sure how low, probably depends on the shape of the bullet, weight and speed.)

Might be another "Mythbusters" in it.

Larry (Lost Sheep)

Oh jeez... there was a study done by the japanese imperial navy on what naval rifle (I.E. battleship guns) armor-piercing projectiles did when striking water.

In general they would shed their aluminum nse cones briefly tumble UNDER WATER, quickly restabilize "flying" (swimming?) under water and curving back to the surface where they'd leave the water at about 1/2 the angle of their original impact...

It was kinda weird...

Not to mention weird that they went into the detail that they did...

Do understand that while a naval AP projectile
is smoothly streamlined with a big aluminum nosecone what's under the nose cone is kinda suprising, but a seperate discussion.

AD

how far did it travel?

quote:

Originally posted by delloro:
how far did it travel?

They had it all graphed depending on angle of incidence and expressed in how many "calibers" it would travel before stabilizing in tail first "flight" and how many calibers it would travel before broaching again...

Other than the fact that it curved back to the surface on impacts with less than 25degrees angle of incidence it was all pretty "dry" reading.

AD

AD

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:
I would think shooting into plastic gallon milk jugs lined up in a row would be a safer way to measure penetration. I HAVE to do it that way as I don't have a swimming pool.

Been there, done that.
Safer? Maybe. Easier? Not.
When Black Talons first came out (1993?) I tried to get one to open up by shooting at lined up milk jugs on a big old growth stump. After 6 or so attempts I finally got a 9mm Black Talon opened up in about the 4th jug back. Just about the time I was running out of jugs.

I had to move closer to the jugs with each attempt as the bullets were coming out of the sides of the 3rd or 4th (exploding) jugs. I only started at about 12 feet away in the first place. And yes, you will get wet.

Next time I will start about 2 feet away, line up 7 jugs and resign myself to getting wet.

BTW, the bullet looked exacty like the perfectly mushroomed ones in the print ads.

quote:

Originally posted by Kenati:
...What is interesting is that it matches the results found by the (unknown) author of this study in which the Nosler Ballistic tip also retained 65% of it's weight at 3100 fps. Not conclusive, of course, but interestingly coincidental. ...

Hey Kenati, That was done by Gary Sciuchetti. It is the very best Bullet Comparison I've seen in the civilian world. The entire Test can be found at the Best Bullet Test.

Mr. Sciuchetti has prints of that chart and all the details available for $15, which includes Shipping, and it is well worth the cost. He can be reached at:
Gary D. Sciuchetti
14610 E. Bill Gulch Road
Mead, WA 99021
gsciuchetti@yahoo.com
-----

If you compare the Bullets in the chart to those recovered from Game, they are very close to reality. Close enough to be able to draw rational comparisons between the Bullet Designs.

"More Power to you!" - Briscoe Darling

I have fond a medium that does not wet you (not too much anyway). It is simply furniture padding wool, saturated with water. My container is a plastic bottle or a pair of beer cans, placed inside a steel tube, end on end. The bullet is caught in a folded up rag in the end of the tube. This is supposed to more closely resemble flesh than plain water. The great thing is that the degree of shock and penetration is 'recorded' in the shattered cans. (Two can are enough for a hornet - bigger calibers are going to need a lot more wet wool and a bigger and longer tube.

My 'test tube' is housed inside a ‘firing tube’, which enables to me to test fire in the middle of the night in a built up area with no-one hearing a thing! It sounds as loud as a car door closing.

I'm surprised a 44 mag didn't hurt the pool, going slow and having a heavy bullet. Anyone brave enough to shoot a big heavy 45-70 bullet going a medium speed into their pool?

Hot Core-
Thanks for the contact info regarding the bullet test and giving credit where credit is due. It looks like the test was a hell of a lot of work

303Guy-
Sounds like a neat setup. Do you have any pictures you could post?