Re: A reality in Hollywood - No Audi Content

["Mark Rutherford" <mark@afnetinc.com>]

I totaly agree with you Robert.  Having shot rifles, shotguns and pistols
for the past 20 years at everything from pop cans to elk, moose and all
other large and small game in North America I have had alot of experience on
what a bullet will do.  It is complete stupidity to depend on anything to
stop a bullet.  Almost all High powered rifles will shoot completly through
a car long ways including the engine block.  As far as hiding behind a car
door to stop a bullet all this will do is start the bullet expanding and
instead of getting hit with a bulled that is .22" to .5" it will be .75" to
1.5".  The biggest mistake anyone can do is to underestimate the destructive
power of guns and bullets.

mark@afnetinc.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Houk - WorkGroup Server Firmware <Robert.Houk@East.Sun.COM>
To: quattro@coimbra.ans.net <quattro@coimbra.ans.net>
Date: Wednesday, September 30, 1998 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: A reality in Hollywood - No Audi Content


>   > > A .357 magnum round can and has been demonstrated to pass completely
>   > > through an old Murican cast arn engine block, end to end after
>   > penetrating
>
>Aargh!
>
>   > What I saw with my own eyes was a guy shooting all kinds of firearms
into
>   > the
>   > car through the door at the point-blank range (1.5-2m away) after
which
>   > the door
>   > was opened and the inner door panel was removed and examined for the
>   > presence of
>   > exit holes. It turned out that they found only two holes: the 7.62mm
>   > (AK47) and
>   > that of a sniper rifle. The rest of the projectiles were fished out of
the
>   > door
>   > bottom, all squashed and looking like daisies.
>   >
>   The only weapons that _reliably_ (over 75%) penetrated a car door was a
.50
>   caliber sniper rifle and shotgun slugs (military combat shotgun issue.
>
>I strived mightily to stay out of this one . . . BUT!
>
>Comparing a .50 "Sniper" round (I assume ".50 BMG", and not ".50
>minnie ball") with a (presumably) 12ga slug is like comparing (or
>lumping together) a bicycle with an UrQuattro.
>
>A 12ga slug has only slightly more "penetration" than a well-swung
>baseball bat or tire iron (which is not to say it doesn't pack a hell
>of a whallop!), whereas the .50BMG traces its origin to an anti-tank
>round, with a target penetration of (as I recall) about 4 *inches* of
>armor steel (a 12ga slug will just flatten out on the armor plate,
>probably severly smearing any paint job on the armor plate). A .308
>(7.62mm NATO) will penetrate almost .5 inch steel plate at 200yds,
>while a .223 (5.56mm NATO) puts a nice dimple in that same plate,
>turning to "dust" in the process, and a 12ga slug will be lucky to
>make it that far and still be able to hit anything reliably.  Any
>"regular" handgun load (.38, .357, 9mm, .45) will just flatten out on
>that same plate, hardly even denting it. (I am referring to "standard"
>jacketed lead core bullets here, not harded tungsten carbide
>penetrators; KTW, and the like; SS-109 "steel-tip" .223/5.56mm for
>example holds together and "penetrates" much better, but is still no
>match for the brute force of a standard .308/7.62mm...)
>
>A .38Spcl 200g round-nose lead bullet, fired from a 2inch "snubbie"
>at "point blank" (in this context, means a few feet) stands about
>a 50/50 chance of penetrating standard car window safety glass.
>A 9mm is 100% effective in the same test. Ditto a .357.
>
>The "skin" of a car door is no impediment to a 9mm, nor a .357
>(.45 is not nearly as effective, a .38 even less so); however a
>side-impact steel beam will probably stop a .308 rifle bullet.
>It all depends on where you try to penetrate the door. Tell me
>what you want to prove, and I'll come up with a tailored bench-
>mark to prove it... There's a LOT of variation in the RealWorld.
>
>Depending on a car door for cover is pure stupidity. As is (for some
>more Hollywood realism) hiding behind a normal wall, or a door, or a
>table. Ditto the digging out of a "spent slug" from a plaster wall
>coating (unless it just happened to be slowed down by a body or two
>first...). Ditto the idea that a body hit with a bullet is picked up
>and flung through the nearest wall (or, preferably, plate glass
>window).  Depending on an entire car is only slightly less stupid,
>although that at least tends to hide the actual "target" behind the
>car. As to an engine block, there are some very thin portions that
>would provide little challenge to a .357 at just the right angle;
>however *in general* the concept of a .357 plowing through an entire
>engine block is silly (which is not to say it won't put a nice hole or
>crack in the block, effectively disabling the engine). Most likely,
>it'll just bounce off in an unpredictable direction. Even a .50BMG
>won't be able to penetrate a "whole car" if you just happen to align
>just right with a nice steel drive shaft...
>
>Oh good, it's late enough to go home now . . .
>
> -RDH
>