Bullets vs Car Doors - Ballistics Test!

This video tests the penetration capabilities of a 9mm bullet through different types of pans. A 9mm round successfully penetrated a granite non-stick pan but was stopped by a stainless steel pan, which bulged significantly. A cast iron pan behind the others was untouched. The experiment highlights how common household items can potentially stop or impede projectiles.

This video tests a single military sandbag's ability to stop various firearm calibers, from 9mm to .50 BMG. Handgun rounds and intermediate rifle calibers like 5.56 NATO and .450 Bushmaster were successfully stopped. However, the sandbag was completely penetrated by a .50 BMG round, highlighting its limitations against heavy anti-materiel ammunition.

This video tests the penetration capabilities of various .22 LR rounds through a car door. While some lower-velocity rounds failed to penetrate fully, high-velocity options like the CCI 'Stangers' demonstrated significant penetration, embedding into the interior door panel. The test highlights how ammunition choice and velocity impact terminal ballistics against vehicle barriers.

This video features a ballistic gel test of 9mm Winchester Ranger One 147gr ammunition. The test utilizes two popular firearms, the CZ 75 pistol and the Sig P365, to fire the rounds into clear ballistic gel. The objective is to observe the expansion, penetration, and overall performance of this specific ammunition from different handgun platforms.

This video features James from Pilgrim Ammunition joining Omer for a range demonstration of their defense ammunition. The focus is on showcasing the effectiveness of Pilgrim's ammo, engineered for maximum force transfer. Omer conducts both recoil and gel block tests to objectively evaluate the ammunition's performance, aiming to answer whether its claims are more than just a gimmick. The video highlights that Shark Coast employees trust Pilgrim Ammo, and this demonstration aims to explain why.

This YouTube video explores the surprising question of whether an iPhone can stop a bullet. While the description is brief, it clearly indicates that the content will involve shooting an iPhone to observe the results. The video is presented by 'God Family and Guns' and appears to be a test or demonstration rather than a review or training session.

This video rigorously tests the self-defense capabilities of various airguns against a realistic human head ballistic target. The expert instructor demonstrates that low-power BB guns like the Daisy Red Rider offer minimal threat, while even full-auto CO2 BB guns fail to penetrate the skull. However, a high-velocity Gamo pellet rifle proves capable of causing significant damage, cracking the skull. The instructor concludes that BB guns are unsuitable for self-defense, and while pellet rifles are dangerous, they lack the immediate stopping power of conventional firearms.

This video tests the BulletSafe VP3 Level IIIA vest against various calibers up to .44 Magnum using a realistic human torso dummy. While the vest stopped all tested rounds, including a .44 Magnum and 12-gauge buckshot, significant backface deformation and blunt force trauma were evident, especially with higher-energy rounds. The dummy's shoulder blade was broken by buckshot, and severe bruising was indicated by the .44 Magnum impact.

This review of the Crosman DPMS SBR full-auto BB gun highlights its realistic AR-15 SBR aesthetics and select-fire capability. The host demonstrates its operation, including loading with a speedloader and the dual CO2 power system. Performance metrics like 1400 RPM and 430 FPS are discussed, along with its accuracy and destructive potential on targets like watermelons. The device is recommended for realistic training or plinking where live firearms are impractical.

This video tests the effectiveness and dangers of using a flare gun for self-defense. While a flare gun can ignite materials and cause internal damage to a ballistic torso, its single-shot capacity, slow reload, and high risk of starting fires make it an irresponsible and dangerous choice for defense. The test highlights the unpredictable nature and significant fire hazard associated with using flare guns in a defensive scenario.