Shooting through auto glass

NATO 124g hardball is not too bad at going through a windscreen. Better out of an MP5 than a pistol.

Yes, auto glass impacts really do change bullet direction and condition... On the other hand - at times a barrier impact on a car door has minimal impact on the eventual bullet's course. One of my officers fired a single shot at an angle one night with .45 ammo at an auto thief seated in a car (who appeared to have a handgun in his hand.....) from a distance of about five feet. That round went through the car door (the window was up...), through the car seat on an angle (about 8" worth..), then through the offender, transverse from side to side without showing hardly any expansion at all... Penetration through the chest cavity was a minimum of 15" - and no the BG didn't survive the experience... In my era (1973 -1995) handgun rounds, no matter how much they were advertised to expand.... rarely did, period.

It was at night in a partially lit theater parking lot and the weapon my officer saw moving towards him in the offender's hand was actually a 1/2" socket drive with the socket attached that had just been used to break out the car's ignition.... My officer had a very bad time afterwards since he'd been certain he was facing a close quarters gun - but he did get over it. On the plus side of the equation my city had zero auto thefts for a few months afterwards.... All of this in Dade county, north of Miami.

Me, I'm still very glad to be out of that line of work....

If you don't have a car in the backyard that you can shoot up (doesn't everyone?), Sig Academy offers a 1 day class that teaches the finer points of automobiles and gunfire. It was not a waster of money.

Jeff White said:

This is from a police chase that happened in my area Saturday morning. Several rounds (.45) through the windshield of the squad car and the officer escapes serious injury.

Man fires at Sunset Hills police in chase ending with crash at Carondelet Park in St. Louis http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_993f8bbe-c72e-5166-b9da-206fadc3fb71.html

Bullets do strange things when they hit glass, especially reinforced glass like you find in an automobile. If you've never done so, take some glass to the range and shoot through it. You will be surprised at how it changes the terminal effects of your ammunition.

What can the armed citizen take away from this? You are more protected then it seems in your vehicle. Useful information in a carjacking.

And there is no effective way to engage someone in an automobile with small arms.

Click to expand...

Thank goodness for the officer.

But in the contents of the article, I dont see anything more than (a great deal of) luck supported. What did you read that lead to you to your last 2 statements?

ClickClickD'oh said:

If you don't have a car in the backyard that you can shoot up (doesn't everyone?), Sig Academy offers a 1 day class that teaches the finer points of automobiles and gunfire. It was not a waster of money.

Click to expand...

Now that sounds interesting.

Jeff White said:

I didn't read anything in the article that supported my statements. The photo says everything that needs to be said. If you look at the bullet holes in the windshield you will think that the officer was extremely lucky. While I haven't attended the Sig class, I have shot up a couple cars and an assortment of glass on the range in an experiment. I will see if I can locate my photos from that day. A friend and I spent a day on the police range shooting through these barriers with everything from .22 short to 7.62x51 M118 Special Match. I even had some bullet resistant glass from a HUMWV. It makes little sense to shoot at someone inside a vehicle if you are going to have to punch through the metal, glass and plastic they are constructed from. Your chances of making a disabling hit are really dependent on luck

Click to expand...

I guess it's like seeing the glass half empty or half full. I just see that it's still totally a matter of luck and the risk is high if you are in the car. (And I dont picture myself shooting into a car but it's not impossible I suppose, to attempt to stop a terrorist, but that's pure speculation).

with a windshield you want to aim lower...like at the steering wheel. That will deflect the bullet between the head and chest area. most bullets will go through auto glass just fine. yes there will be a terminal effect, and that will depend on if its a soft hollow point, FMJ, or a tougher shank hollow point like the hornady critical duty...which is suppose to have better barrier penetration.
the body of a normal car door is made up of either light steel or aluminum and a plastic like panel....either way, bullets will go through it and a person. However, the front of a car where the engine is is a decent place for cover and has enough solid material to give sufficient cover against small arms.
More mass the bullet has the better it will penetrate glass. Depending on bullet design sometimes how it hits glass it can have jacket separation and the core can split peppering targets.
I've been there, ive seent it. Ive done it.

Duck below dashboard...gas ON until you feel the thump thump of your tires running over the bad man with the gun. Better still...duck below dashboard...gas ON until you crush the bastard between your car and the car in front of you.

No, it won't always be available, but buy oh boy a 21 MILLION grain projectile, even at subsonic velocities, has a lot of so-called stopping power.

In all seriousness...many people forget that their automobile can be one helluva defensive weapon. I am NOT saying drive willy nilly through a crowd...but if you're being fired at and the planets align and this option is available, then don't hesitate. If it stops the attacker from firing at you long enough for you to escape, then Happy Meal.

Jeff, I read the article you referenced in the OP and your comments above. I was curious, so I thought that I would see what the internet says (this has to be true, of course!) about the performance of my carry ammo, Ranger T-series (examples:



and

http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2009/12/01/winchester-ranger-ammo-comparison/ ) through auto glass. (Caveats: this information may, or may not be repeatable or realistic in the real world, of course. In particular, the Ranger information may not be generally applicable to all, most, or even some other handgun projectiles. I'm not advocating Ranger T-series or any other particular product...I just mention it because it is what I carry.)

Based on this information, it appears that:

1) the .45 caliber projectiles fired by the perps (projectile type, velocity, and cartridge unknown) seem to have penetrated the officer's windshield six out of seven times.
2) A shot through a windshield left a lot of glass particles imbedded on the surface of the downrange gel block in the Twang-n-bang video.
3) The 9mm projectile in the video, after the lead core shed its jacket, penetrated deeply into the downrange gel block.
4) Winchester's tests on the Ranger RA45T (my particular carry ammo) indicate that this round expands to 0.58", retains 79% of original weight, and penetrates 12" in gel after passing through auto glass. The bonded version of this bullet ( RA45B ) retains more weight, and has slightly greater expansion and penetration.
5) The RA45T penetrated 16.5" and the RA45B 14.8" of gel after passing through sheet steel (of unknown thickness or composition).

I haven't done any first-hand experimentation on sheet steel or auto glass. I don't have a car in my back yard that I can go shoot. Nor have I taken one to the range or into the desert to test. You have done these things. I have no doubt about the strange things that happen to projectiles when they pass through glass, and especially reinforced glass.

If your point here

Jeff White said:

It makes little sense to shoot at someone inside a vehicle if you are going to have to punch through the metal, glass and plastic they are constructed from. Your chances of making a disabling hit are really dependent on luck

Click to expand...

was that the trajectories of bullets are weird once they pass inside a vehicle, then I'm good with that.

However, it appears that at least some handgun projectiles can still pass through vehicle components and penetrate deeply enough into gel (and perhaps human tissue) to cause disabling, or perhaps even fatal injuries. These observations don't seem to be consistent with this statement:

Jeff White said:

What can the armed citizen take away from this? You are more protected then it seems in your vehicle. Useful information in a carjacking.

And there is no effective way to engage someone in an automobile with small arms.

Click to expand...

Were the results of your testing very different than the video or the Winchester table? If so, can you describe what you saw? Are there other observations/experiences over the course of your career that led you to these last conclusions?

Help me understand (at least until I can get a vehicle or auto glass out to the range to see for myself!).

Jeff White wrote:
What can the armed citizen take away from this? You are more protected then it seems in your vehicle. Useful information in a carjacking.

Click to expand...

Be careful how much you take away from this.

The windshield of a car is made of laminated glass and is thicker than the side window and the glass in the read window/deck lid. In the case of my car, the windshield is 0.208 inches thick while the other glass is 0.163 inches thick.

If the carjacker is pointing at the driver's side door glass, you have much less protection than if he/she were aiming at you through the windshield.

hdwhit said:

The windshield of a car is made of laminated glass and is thicker than the side window and the glass in the read window/deck lid. In the case of my car, the windshield is 0.208 inches thick while the other glass is 0.163 inches thick.

If the carjacker is pointing at the driver's side door glass, you have much less protection than if he/she were aiming at you through the windshield.

Click to expand...

Exactly.
Side and rear auto glass is generally only tempered, and not laminated. Certainly no where near the 15/16" thickness for "bullet resistant" glass (bank teller window glass is typically 1 5/16" thick laminated material.

Not to mention if they are just shooting thru the door panel.

We carry handguns because they are portable, not because they are powerful.

Having said that, I attended a training class where we did two things. Shot handguns into vehicles through the body and the glass, and shot out of a vehicle from the driver seat through the body and the glass. The best performers were longer bullets of every caliber, ie: 147gr 9mm, 180gr 40cal, 230fmj 45cal....etc. Cookie cutter light weight bullets did not perform well. Structures such as mirrors, door panel mechanisms to roll up windows, metal locking links had a big effect slowing down and deflecting bullets. The higher and closer you were in relation to the glass, ensured better penetration, and less deflection off targets. Sitting and prone shooting at the outside of a vehicle often resulted in a glance off on window glass. Shooting out was pretty straight forward, hit were achieved easily on targets 10 yards off the end of the vehicle, but the spalling and glass dust would have been blinding, if not for our protective gear. One conclusion we came to, although you have the tendency to shoot an attacker through the glass, you might be better off shooting through the body of the car, however unseen and unwanted targets/innocents could be below the window line.

JeffG said:

We carry handguns because they are portable, not because they are powerful.

Having said that, I attended a training class where we did two things. Shot handguns into vehicles through the body and the glass, and shot out of a vehicle from the driver seat through the body and the glass. The best performers were longer bullets of every caliber, ie: 147gr 9mm, 180gr 40cal, 230fmj 45cal....etc. Cookie cutter light weight bullets did not perform well. Structures such as mirrors, door panel mechanisms to roll up windows, metal locking links had a big effect slowing down and deflecting bullets. The higher and closer you were in relation to the glass, ensured better penetration, and less deflection off targets. Sitting and prone shooting at the outside of a vehicle often resulted in a glance off on window glass. Shooting out was pretty straight forward, hit were achieved easily on targets 10 yards off the end of the vehicle, but the spalling and glass dust would have been blinding, if not for our protective gear. One conclusion we came to, although you have the tendency to shoot an attacker through the glass, you might be better off shooting through the body of the car, however unseen and unwanted targets/innocents could be below the window line.

Click to expand...

Yep. Welcome to the 80's, right? Seriously, I have little doubt but that this was known to cops working before then, too.

A close friend of mine (a younger firearms instructor) told me much the same thing after he returned from an outside training class. He was amazed by how well handguns and the shotgun did against common surface areas of a car. If I remember right, he said that one shotgun slug perforated both front doors, side-to-side, when fired into the car. It gave him more confidence in his duty weapons.

I remember hearing this subject discussed among a number of working cops/firearms instructors in the early 2000's, when attending a hosted gel test event. The consensus among the experienced cops/instructors was that pistol bullet weight (for caliber) was more important when attempting to shoot through windshield glass than other factors. One of the guys who was voicing this opinion was from an agency who was carrying 115gr +P+ duty ammo, too.

Bullets can still do some unpredictable things when impacting glass, though.

Another friend of mine, who entered LE from the military at the beginning of the 80's, once told me he'd learned (in the military) that the closer to the bottom edge of the windshield a .45 ball round impacted, with the shooter squarely facing the windshield, the less chance of deflection and the better chance of hitting the intended target behind the windshield.

Another retired state cop once told me that his agency preferred the 158gr .357 Magnum loads for defeating vehicle windshields and doors. This subject came up when we were discussing how some agencies (back in revolver days) hadn't necessarily jumped on the 125gr bandwagon.

An additional factor to consider when looking at how ammo behaves going through auto glass isn't just the thickness and composition of the glass - it's the angle of the glass that you're forced to shoot through... From the side of a vehicle you're pretty close to a right angle impact... From the front of the vehicle (with it's angled windshield...) you're in a much different proposition. Consider how modern armored vehicles try to have their armor sloped and never straight up and down - it makes a very big difference... To get a right angle shot through a windshield you'd need to be be quite a bit higher than the car if firing from the front and the angle is even worse if you're not directly in front (and with that height...).

In my opinion any shot through a windshield is a crap shoot as far as where your round will impact after hitting the glass -unless a you've already punched a hole in that same glass.... I'd be much, much more confident of where the secondary impact would be with a right angle shot through the side glass....

By the way I've actually seen more than a few shootings into vehicles after the fact - both from officers and incidents on the streets between citizens (or offenders -take your pick) ... Predicting how the occupants would fare isn't something I'd like to try.... Multiple shots resulted in no woundings at all while an occasional single shot hit the mark (whether actually intended or not....). Like I said predicting the outcome of rounds fired into a vehicle is just a crapshoot (but that's not very comforting if you're the one on the receiving end...). While all of this discussion is aimed towards handguns - when military grade long guns enter the picture everything changes since rounds from any hunting rifle will just go right through a vehicle - although subject to the same deflection problems that any round encounters after going through an initial barrier...

I carry lead wadcutters(45 colt). Any experiments on there performance through glass?

fastbolt said:

Yep. Welcome to the 80's, right? Seriously, I have little doubt but that this was known to cops working before then, too.

Click to expand...

There were, and are so many misconceptions about what a handgun was capable of because of the silver screen. (Dirty Harry) The introductions of the new "super duper new and improved" has endured even now. The age old question out of a lot of LEO managers and chiefs,(and the public) "Why do you need an AR15? " is answered by fundamental knowledge of a handgun's limitations. Most people still don't understand that a handgun is not the Hammer of Thor.

Thank heavens a standard riot gun with 00 buck (basic round - 2 3/4") comes as close to "Thor's hammer" as anything you'll ever need for close quarters work... Shame so many agencies have gotten away from them. A 12ga. with standard 00buck at ranges under 15 meters is pretty much a fight ender with a solid center of mass hit - with a single round...

Me, I always thought that a pistol was what you used because it was all you had with you.... In close quarters work a stopping shot from a pistol may not stop your opponent anywhere quick enough, period.

"...reinforced glass..." It's tempered not reinforced or laminated. Any bullet will be deflected by auto glass depending on the bullet's shape. The old .38 Special RN was known to bounce off windshields.
Really stupid idea to try a stop a vehicle by shooting driver though. Creates an uncontrolled one plus ton projectile that isn't going to explode like cars do on TV. Justas stupid to try and stop a one plus ton vehicle with a hand gun. Ain't gonna happen.
"...close to "Thor's hammer"..." Not against a vehicle is doesn't.

Much of this discussion seems to be based on "what will a SINGLE handgun bullet do if fired into or out of a vehicle?"

I've shot at a moving car once, and shot stationary cars or car doors/windows close to a dozen times. I've also had an opportunity to examine over a hundred shot up cars to determine penetration. Lots of those exams involved dismantling or cutting apart the cars.

One shot into a car is a crap shoot. A shot into a door panel may stop completely inside the door if it hits part of the locking mechanism, while an identical projectile striking just a few inches away may completely perforate the door.

A single shot into a windshield may deflect without penetrating, or may grossly deflect. The second shot will generally have less deflection and a better chance of perforating. (The 20th shot is probably sailing right through.)

Jacketed handgun rounds through side windows frequently shred and lose their jackets. Rifle rounds (.223 REM) through side windows tend to disintegrate and produce copper confetti. But for both rifle and handgun rounds, there is a world of difference in performance between the first shot into an undamaged side window, and followup shots into an already fractured window.

My entirely anecdotal takeaway? Heavier is better. It seems that 230 grain .45 ACP GoldDot penetrates better than the comparable bullet in 124 grain 9mm +P. Both do better than non-bonded JHP bullets in .223 REM.

More is also better with number of shots. Multiple shots means you increase the chance of hitting that sweet void in the door that will allow a bullet to pass through. Multiple shots also means that both front and side glass are degraded, increasing the odds of putting one into the greenhouse. Like anything else, keep firing until the threat is neutralized (or you're out of ammo). If the threat is in a car, it may be more shots than you expected.

The windshield is much tougher than people give it credit.

I prefer .40 and .357 for cars. .40 will swiss cheese just about everything on a GM Express van.