Mythbusters: Garand vs Shark Lozenge SCUBA Tank

Status
Not open for further replies.

hso

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 3, 2003
Messages
66,177
Location
0 hrs east of TN
Mythbusters has demonstrated that a 30.06 fired into a standard SCUBA tank at pressure will not result in an explosion. The bullet penetrated the tank. The tank jetted instead of exploded.

I think every time these guys show that firearms don't have the exagerated "hollywood" power people are brainwashed with the better it is for us.
 
I did see a few years ago someone firing a 30.06 at a gas (hydrogen, oxygen?) tank that did erupt in a fireball. Probably hydrogen but still very impressive.

When I was a kid I shot a regular Bic lighter with a BB gun that somehow ignited and made a nice fireworks display. Tried it the other day and the butane simply puffed into a cloud.
 
Mythbusters routinely do experiments using guns in one way or the other, and though I don't know what thier personal feelings on guns are, they seem to present guns and what they can do (or, maybe even better, what they CAN'T do0 in a reasonable manner. That is one of my favorite programs, actually.
 
Gotta love mythbusters for not being BS'ers...most of teh time. People complain that their tests arnet accurate- if the were accurate it wouldnt be funny/entertaining!
 
Chris, it was probably a methane/natural gas tank. Either that or an almost empty gasoline tank. Hydrogen burns with a blue flame, and rises so quickly you can't really get a fireball out of it.
 
Steel or aluminum tank?

This makes a big difference. Aluminum tanks have been responsible for turning several bottle filling stations into so much scrap and have killed and maimed several people in the process.
 
I am pretty sure Jamie is into guns...I think that the episode on how far you had to be underwater to be protected from a gunshot the blackpower rifle was his because they mentioned, "His homemade blackpowder bullet". They also seem to like to use firearms whenever they can.
 
slowworm said:
This makes a big difference. Aluminum tanks have been responsible for turning several bottle filling stations into so much scrap and have killed and maimed several people in the process.

All 3 tanks they destroyed were aluminum. The only one that failed catastrophically was the one that was blown with C4.
 
I tried shooting some small (1 liter) propane tanks with incendiary ammo, and they would usually jet off in various directions but not explode. The ammo was definitely working (see pic), but the propane wouldn't ignite (my guess is that this was because the propane was in liquid form rather than vapor) :(

propane.jpg
 
Tanks of flammable compressed gases should not explode from an incendiary bullet. The contents of the tank are pure product and there shouldn't be any air (oxygen) inside the tank to support combustion, therefore no explosion. Just another flashy hollywood special effect that has become more accepted as fact (But it has to be, I saw it on TV) than the boring facts. 50 bmgs blowing up above ground storage tank is such a myth not borne out by fact.

If you rupture a tank and put the combustible gases into the air you can get a fuel air explosion if you have a source of ignition.
 
I recall that in the new Dawn of The Dead movie, lit flares were duct taped to propane tanks then the propane tanks were shot which resulted in an explosion. I wonder if the flare would really make the difference?
Biker
 
Biker - I didn't try that, but I did something similar. I lit a fire a few inches behind the propane tank, and then shot it. Unfortunately, the whoosh of propane exiting the tank blew out my fire. It would be interesting to try a road flare...
 
You've got to split the tank to get enough gas released all at once to get an explosion so duct taping flares only gives a prompt ignition source for the gas jetting out of the tank.
 
The Myth Buster guys are definitely not Anti-gunners. Forgot which one, but he wears a "Jackson Arms" t-shirt quite regularly. Jackson Arms is the local indoor range in the SF Area.

I loved how they disproved that shooting a bullet through an pressurized airplane would not cause it to explode like the anti's say it will. Believe one of the guys even mentioned that on this episode.

Or the one where they shot a 180 pound pig carcass to see if it would fly back like in the movies. They used a 44, MP5 in auto and shotgun. Pig only moved back a inch or two with the shotgun and slugs. :rolleyes:

Far as I'm concerned they are dispelling myths created by Hollywood about how "deadly" guns are.
 
All 3 tanks they destroyed were aluminum. The only one that failed catastrophically was the one that was blown with C4.---

Did they have aluminum tanks in 1973ish?

Would that matter?


Respectfully,


jdkelly
 
I gotta wonder, wouldnt just shooting the shark in the head work too?

I've shot a lot of flares during night shoots and have always managed to put them out, but I keep trying to light them too, so far unsuccessfully. There is also an old propane tank on the range that just begs to be shot everytime I'm out there.
 
It was an aluminum tank, not a steel one. The instances of aluminum tanks blowing up when refilled were the fault of a fault in the aluminum, not a hole. A tank in good working order is strong enough to turn into a rocket without blowing up. The same cannot be said of household propane tanks or the little ones Coleman makes. They have very thin walls and will detonate. Shoot one of those and BAM! They'd turn a great white into jelly.

They also confirmed that the tank used in the original film was aluminum.
 
I recall that in the new Dawn of The Dead movie, lit flares were duct taped to propane tanks then the propane tanks were shot which resulted in an explosion. I wonder if the flare would really make the difference?

YES! Propane tanks are not at all the same as compressed air tanks. SCUBA tanks are very tough and have a lot more metal than a portable propane tank. Plus, propane and flame are a bad combination. I've shot the little propane tanks and they make an explosion like a flash bang grenade. If you're inside with one, it will knock you back. If you're smoking inside with one, you'd better hope the blast knocks the flame out! In liquid form the propane isn't a problem, but if there's still flame around when it's in gas form in the air--KABOOM! A flare's flame would likely survive the initial blast.

I know of cases in Alaska where detonations at propane refill stations have seriously burned and injured people. It's ironic that a gas as dangerous as propane gets put into crappy old containers that would never pass SCUBA muster for mere compressed air.

Sharks are mostly soft tissue, so if you could shoot a great white's head when it was out of the water you could kill it pretty easily. Elmer Keith used to kill sharks with his .44 revolvers. My bet is a bullet from a .30'06 at point blank into the shark's head would be lethal, esp. if it was SP ammo.
 
I can vouch for the flare/propane tanks.

I stocked up on the little lantern ones when they were 2 for a buck at tractor supply last year, and for targets its money well spent. I like to set em out at about 150-200 yds and zap em with my garand or 22-250. nothing catastropic, but its entertaining to watch the canisters do flaming cartwheels across the field. no shrapnel to speak of either. i'd like to try a bigger "grill" tank, but thems expensive.
 
Trust me, you don't want to try a "grill" size tank unless you're behind sandbags :D One of those pups detonating in Seward a few years ago sent one man flying twenty feet and left another with third degree burns over most of his body.
 
The bigger BBQ "grill" tanks are the ones I was curious about. Be damned if I ain't paranoid about discussing this on the Net!
Biker
 
Course, proportionately a shark's brain is pretty small. I'm not sure much of a near miss would do good. The cartilidge it is encased in is pretty elastic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top