Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="inquisitorthreefive" data-source="post: 6530226" data-attributes="member: 6790589">That should read "about 1 mm thick." So I'll give you that part. However, math doesn't really come into play. In the US the thickness of sheet metal is codified by law to be 1/20th of an inch thick, or 1.27 mm. In practice it varies a little. Hence the about.I'm not certain where you got your 25.4/18, since gauge is based on weight per a given volume. 1.41 is very close to what I've seen listed for zinc, though.<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/206" target="_blank">http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/206</a>Yeah, I've done a fair amount of destructive testing in my time, too. I've used .357 to knock holes in steel about twice that thickness on occasion and there has definitely been some failures to penetrate there, however I haven't used lead ball to do it and that will make a difference. Frankly, these days it'll likely be difficult to find that without putting more effort into it than I'm willing to, but I'm willing to check the local gun shops and see what's around. Likely the closest I can find is semi-jacketed soft nose without ordering something. There really wasn't any "standard" load like you're describing, except perhaps 158 gr semi-wad cutter. I hope your friends didn't have you shooting cowboy action loads: those have half to 3/4's of the velocity of a .357 loaded to SAAMI pressures and would explain your experience. However, what you said was this: Which is demonstrably false with commonly available ammunition. I'm still willing to go shoot at some 18 gauge steel and I'll even try to find some ammo comparable to what you were using to put alongside it, if you'd like.You're preaching to the choir here, but thanks.Actually, it seems this gentleman has already done the testing for us, using .357 Sig, which was designed to perform as closely as possible to .357 magnum in terms of penetration, 9mm and .45. The steel here was measured at 0.05" (18 gauge, 1.27mm) and there were three plates, all of which were penetrated by the .357 sig at 115 gr and 1600 FPS. The steel wasn't factory fresh, however.<a href="http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/577709_.html" target="_blank">http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/577709_.html</a>Edit: It doesn't say how far he was shooting the plates from. However, he did say he took it to a range which implies a minimum safe distance, plus it looks like the target was resting on the ground.Historically, yes, gambesons were worn. Those would make a difference, yes. However, we weren't talking about gambesons. I'm mostly taking issue with your claim that .357 won't reliably penetrate 18 gauge steel.I never said it was the solution to the problem of firearms in DnD. On that we certainly agree. DnD firearms rules suck and always have.</blockquote>

Verification