.177 pellet ballistic gel penetration test

[lloyd-ss]

Here is a pdf of a penetration test of various .177 cal pellets shot into homemade ballistic gel. The gel recipe was a super concentrated Knox unflavored gelatin, poured into a 12 x 6 x 3 plastic storage box. After it set overnight in the fridge, I cut off one end of the box with tin snips to give a nice surface to shoot into.

Two shots were done of each pellet, and they were shot one over the top of the other, and that is why they appear to be following the same path.

The gun was a Gamo 1000 break barrel, a fairly powerful .177 springer. All the pellets kept their original shape EXCEPT FOR the Beeman Crow Magnums. Actually, I was kind of shocked at how they mushroomed out to .24" in diameter 4" into the gel.

Making the gel was definitely the hardest part of the test. When the mix on the stove gets that concentrated, it foams a lot, and you have to skim the foam off so that the gel stays clear. Fun test, though.
(Seems like you have to click on the pdf link to make it display.)

[Geoff]

Thanks Lloyd.  Checking it out now

do you happen to have FPE or FPS for any of the pellets ?    I am curious what kind of numbers are needed to get the penetration you show.   

I have considered trying this .... a couple questions ..

Does the gel start melting quickly ?
Can you melt it and form it back into a block ?

Thanks

[nced]

Here is a pdf of a penetration test of various .177 cal pellets shot into homemade ballistic gel. The gel recipe was a super concentrated Knox unflavored gelatin, poured into a 12 x 6 x 3 plastic storage box. After it set overnight in the fridge, I cut off one end of the box with tin snips to give a nice surface to shoot into.

Two shots were done of each pellet, and they were shot one over the top of the other, and that is why they appear to be following the same path.

The gun was a Gamo 1000 break barrel, a fairly powerful .177 springer. All the pellets kept their original shape EXCEPT FOR the Beeman Crow Magnums. Actually, I was kind of shocked at how they mushroomed out to .24" in diameter 4" into the gel.

Making the gel was definitely the hardest part of the test. When the mix on the stove gets that concentrated, it foams a lot, and you have to skim the foam off so that the gel stays clear. Fun test, though.
(Seems like you have to click on the pdf link to make it display.)

Interesting test! What was the actual fpe for your Gamo 1000 pellets to get the penetration shown?

Hope I didn't overstep your post but I did a screen shot of the pic. Here is the screen shot posted............


When my brother first started shooting a home tuned springer I sold him, he used 10.5 grain CP heavies exclusively for squirrel henting because of the deep penetration and better wind resistance than the 7.9 grain version, plus he got excellent accuracy with his R9 and CPH..........

When my brother was using the .177 CP "heavies" we went on a squirrel hunt and were cleaning the squirrels we took on that day. My brother had a knack for angling the CP heavies long ways through the squirrels to penetrate the vitals and the CPH penetrating ability from his Beeman R9 at 14.5 fpe was on display. He had hit a squirrel in the left hip and that CPL penetrated long ways through the body for a measured 9" and it was found mangled up lodged in the spinal column at the base of the neck!

Anywhoo...... after a couple seasons he started using the 7.9 grain die lot marked and dated Crosman Premiers (you didn't include that one in the test) because he found that the flatter trajectory of the "lights" trumped the greater penetration of the "heavies", however he wasn't able to take "long way through the squirrel" shots with the "lights".

[lloyd-ss]

Thanks Lloyd.  Checking it out now

do you happen to have FPE or FPS for any of the pellets ?    I am curious what kind of numbers are needed to get the penetration you show.   

I have considered trying this .... a couple questions ..

Does the gel start melting quickly ?
Can you melt it and form it back into a block ?

Thanks

Hi Geoff, Its been a while since I shot the Gamo 1000, but I think it was shooting about 15fpe (10.5 at 800fps), but not sure.

It was definitely best to use the gelatin on a cool or cold day, because it would definitely melt in hot weather. And unfortunately, it is literally a one shot deal, like humpty-dumpty.  I jury rigged up a rest for the rifle and then shifted the tray of gel side to side and up and down so as to fit the max number of shots into the block of gel. Frankly, it was a fair amount of trouble, but glad I did it.

NCED, no problem with doing the screen shot, in fact, thank you! All info is helpful.

[rsterne]

I did similar tests a couple of years ago using melt-and-pour soap.... It is a lot firmer than ballistics gel, so the penetration is less and the expansion of the hollowpoints is greater.... Here is the test block for the .177 Hollowpoints I tested.... Shots from the top at 12 FPE, from the bottom at 15 FPE.... Block was shot left to right on the bottom row, right to left on the top row.... pellet from right is Baracuda Hunter @ 18 FPE, the one from the left is the Benjamin Discovery HP @ 18 FPE....



and here are the recovered pellets.... Top row were shot at 12 FPE, middle row at 15 FPE, and the two at the bottom at 18 FPE....



From left to right the pellets are.... RWS SuperHollowPoint.... H&N Terminator.... Crosman Destroyer.... Crosman Premier HP.... Predator Polymag.... H&N Crow Magnum.... H&N Baracuda Hunter.... Benjamin Discovery HP....

At 12 FPE the penetration ran from 42mm for the Polymag to 74mm for the Discovery HP.... At 15 FPE it ran from 49 for the Premier HP to 81 for the Discovery.... At 18 FPE it was 50mm for the H&N Hunter and 85mm for the Discovery HP.... For comparison, JSB Exact Express penetrated 64mm at 12 FPE and 77mm at 15 FPE, with NO expansion, although at 15 FPE it was shortened slightly....

The only pellets both Lloyd and I tested were the Crosman Premier HP and the Crow Magnum.... Since I also tested at 15 FPE, we can compare the medium with those pellets....

Ballistics Gel
Premier HP.... 5.2 & 6.2"
Crow Magnum.... 3.8 & 4.1"

Melt-and-pour Soap
Premier HP.... 1.93"
Crow Magnum.... 2.28" (shed the nose and the base kept going)

So there you go, for what it's worth.... 

Bob

PS, just because it's a really kewl photo I love posting.... Here are some .257 bullets at 130 FPE in the same soap....



The bullets from the left are the same ones, but FN instead of HP.... and had already travelled through another 9" long block of soap.... 

RBS

[Nvreloader]

Thank you all,
for these photo's, Great info etc.   

It gives a good idea of the best hunting pellets to use at what ever approx fps shot, for the 17 cal..

Has anyone done some 22 calibers?

I have done some testing at approx 650+ fps and have not had any pellets show any expansion,
with the dozen or so pellets, I tested in the swimming pool test.

Tia,
Don

[rsterne]

Don, I did extensive penetration and expansion testing using the melt-and-pour soap a few years back.... Basically you get little expansion below about 650 fps IMPACT velocity.... and virtually none at 500 fps.... even with hollowpoint pellets.... If you drive wadcutters at about 800 fps, they flatten and shorten somewhat.... round nose and pointed pellets basically don't expand.... With hollowpoint pellets, the larger the cavity (eg. Crow Magnums) the lower the velocity required to expand.... A pellet like the Crosman Premier HP (round with a dimple) needs about 900 fps to expand at all.... Once a HP pellet starts to expand, the faster you drive it after that the more it expands or comes apart....

Basically, the harder the medium you shoot into the more a pellet expands, and the more it expands the less it penetrates.... The higher the velocity the more tendency to expand, or at least flatten on impact.... Round nose and pointed pellets or bullets tend to just punch through.... Bullets with a Meplat don't penetrate as far and create a larger wound channel.... I think there is a relationship between the VOLUME of the wound channel and the FPE on impact.... and when you get less penetration because of expansion, the wound channel gets larger in diameter to make up for it....

Penetration tests depend on a consistent medium to mean anything.... Ballistics Gel can be "calibrated" by firing a round BB into it at a specific velocity (500 fps?) and measuring the penetration.... but as Lloyd says, it is temperature dependant.... I use the soap because it is consistent and reusable (melt and repour).... and stable over normal temperatures.... Plus I like the fact the penetration is less, so you can compare a wider range of pellets/bullets without have many feet of Gel.... A .22LR high velocity RN solid bullet (@ 140 FPE) only penetrates about 11", for example.... You can photograph the wound channels, they don't collapse behind the bullet (like happens with ballistics gel), and you can also cut it apart and measure the wound channel (can't do that with water).... What's not to like?....

Bob

[Nvreloader]

Bob

Thank you,

Can you tell me the name of this soap you are using?

I have never seen any soap like this.
I can't find anything on google for this ballistic soap etc.
I would like to do some testing with HP pellets. 

Tia,
Don

[Gertrude]

Bob

Thank you,

Can you tell me the name of this soap you are using?

I have never seen any soap like this.
I can't find anything on google for this ballistic soap etc.
I would like to do some testing with HP pellets. 

Tia,
Don

Go onto Amazon and search for Clear Glycerin Soap or Melt and Pour Soap.
You will see many examples.

[lloyd-ss]

The real-world penetration tests are always fun, too. This was a 73 gn .257 at 80 yds into a 4x4. A little prying with a screw driver popped it apart.

[Nvreloader]

Thanks Guys

Ron, I'll check this melt and pour soap, I was looking for Ballistic soap, 

I am attempting to build a a HP jig for the standard HP type pellets,
for maximum expansion at AG fps, for the 17/22 cal.

Tia,
Don

[rsterne]

I have never heard of "ballistics soap".... Here is what I purchased....

https://www.newdirectionsaromatics.ca/products/melt-pour-soap-bases/melt-and-pour-soap-base-clear.html

I bought a case of 12 bricks, which is LOTS.... It does get slighty dirty/cloudy after you remelt it a few times.... I use metal loaf pans and baking pans, by the name of "Bakers Secret" for the moulds, you can get them in many sizes.... Let it harden, run a knife around the outside edge, invert and bang the pan on the counter and it falls right out....

Bob

[rsterne]

Here are some test blocks in .22 cal.... I can't be bothered digging out all the data to do with them, but it gives you an idea of how differently pellets can perform.... These were shot from a PCP at about 20 FPE at impact....

RWS, Crosman and Gamo....



JSB, H&N & EunJin....



One VERY interesting thing.... Bottom row, L to R, the first 5 pellets are all JSB Exacts, 5 different weights, from lightest (13.4 gr) to heaviest (25.3 gr.).... Although all are shot from the same gun, heavier pellets penetrate further.... Most pellets did not expand or even deform.... but some certainly did....



Here are a few of the above pellets, tested at about 37 FPE at impact....



Left to Right from bottom.... JSB Exact Heavy and Monster (original).... H&N Baracuda.... EunJin Domed and Pointed.... H&N Rabbit Magnum and Crow Magnum.... Predator Polymag.... and from the top ( R to L ).... H&N Baracuda Hunter and Hunter Extreme.... 

Penetration of the RN and Pointed pellets ran from 116 to 137 mm.... the HPs ran from 52-85 mm.... Here is a photo of the bottom edge of that block, showing the entrance holes....



Notice how much larger they are for the two HPs on the right....

Bob

[lloyd-ss]

Bob, you were definitely having fun doing that testing!

It appears from the photos, that the total volume of the hole might be similar for most of the pellets shot at a single FPE, i.e., long skinny holes vs short fat holes.  Displacing the same amount of material, maybe. What do you think?
Thanks,
Lloyd

[Nvreloader]

Bob
Thank you,
It appears that you have done a very good test of these types of pellets,
with outstanding photo's/info etc.

That bursts my bubble, for what I was thinking of doing for my tests etc.   

Tia,
Don

[lloyd-ss]

Bob, that soap looks a whole lot more user-friendly than the gelatin.

[Nvreloader]

Lloyd

+2 on that soap,
I am very interested in it,
nice and easy to work with and reusable etc. 

Tia,
Don

[rsterne]

Yes, Lloyd, I mentioned that in Reply #6.... the relationship between wound channel volume and FPE.... and that HPs trade off a wider channel for reduced penetration.... with similar volume at the same FPE.... At least that's what my calibrated eyeball tells me.... *LOL*....

I can't tell you guys how many different media I went through before finding the soap.... Phone books are way too hard, even when wet.... Wood is too inconsistent in hardness and which part of the grain you hit, and even balsa wood is too hard.... Duct seal is way too hard, and plumbers putty is too soft and really changes with temperature.... Paraffin wax works pretty decent and is reusable, but way too hard as well.... and IMO ballistics gel is too soft and not stable at normal temperatures for long.... By "too soft" I mean the penetration is too great, you simply need too much of it for anything bigger than .22 cal.... I'm sure a .22LR bullet would go through at least 2 feet of the stuff.... To me, that means it is not a good representation of flesh, which of course has many textures too.... I settled on the soap as requiring manageable depths to stop a bullet (even a 127 gr. FN in .357 at 180 FPE stops in less than a foot).... it seems to be VERY consistent over typical temperatures.... reusable, holds the wound cavities, and clear enough you can photograph them through it.... Plus, round nose and pointed pellets don't expand in it.... bullets with a Meplat penetrate less, flatten some and punch a bigger hole.... wadcutters flatten out with less penetration.... and hollowpoints expand, leaving big nasty holes but way less penetration.... just like you see when they impact an animal at similar velocities....

Bob

[Nvreloader]

Thank you Bob.

IMHO, the hardness of the lead has a great deal to do with the amount of expansion or lack of, for HP type pellets also.

I don't know the hardness of pellets,
only speaking of my experience with casting lead bullets from pure lead thru HARD Linotype materials,
in several calibers from 22 thru 44 mag etc.
I know, a soft almost pure lead and Linotype lead, shot at the same fps will show a marked differences, and performance, expansion from recovered bullets taken from wild hogs/deer etc.

Bob,
In your experiences with your pellet testing of 17/22 calibers,
what would be your thoughts be on the softest and hardest pellet brands, commonly available?

Tia,
Don

[rsterne]

JSB are nearly pure lead, from my experience.... and since they are the most accurate in most of my guns that is what I use.... Hollowpoint pellets are a great idea, but seldom do I find one that shoots accurately.... Some guys swear by Predator Polymags, but none of my guns like them past about 40 yards.... I have a couple of guns that are OK with RWS SuperHollowPoints out to 30 yards or so.... The RN pellets have a much better BC, which means they have less wind drift (the cause of most misses, IMO).... and deliver more velocity and energy to the quarry.... Yeah, they punch through, but hitting what you are aiming at (which is usually the fusebox of a Grouse or Ground Squirrel, and pretty tiny) is more important than the energy.... I mean pretty much any pellet is going to pass through those tiny heads....

No question, if you can get a HP to be accurate in your rifle, then they make sense, especially for heart/lung shots.... When you start using bullets, which often have a Meplat, then the HP has no loss in BC other than the slight weight reduction.... and MAN do HP slugs hit hard.... and often they are more accurate than the FN bullet they are made from.... but you need a lot of FPE to use slugs because of the weight....

Bob