Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Mitch

"Bullet resistant" window film

94 posts in this topic

What does anyone out there know about ACE Security Laminates and their claim that their 300-series, 14-mil window film qualifies as bullet resistant (small arms - .38 spl, .357 mag, 9mm FMJ) on 1/2" thick glass? :rollin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a multitude of variables when it comes to so called 'bullet resistant' film applications. Thickness of the glass, type, adhesive, film....etc.... Ace claims that a 14 mil applied to 1/2" glass will work. This may be possible, but I would love to see the owner of the company, who makes these claims, stand on the other side of the glass when I shoot at it. Many manufacturers have touted this before. Some claimed if both sides were fillmed, it would absorb a bullet. Look on the internet for testing information. Many videos exist out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen an Ace demonstration first hand and when they did the demo there is a 14 mil layer on the inside and a 7 mil layer on the outside of the glass. They used a .38, 9mm, shotgun, and also an automatic weapon (can't remember which one). It did stop the first round of the .38, 9mm, and the shotgun but the second round penetrated very easily. The automatic penetrated very easily also. I asked about the 7 mil layer and they said it was only there to stop glass from flying, essentially saying that it was worthless. Their reasoning behind it was that as long as it caught the first bullet you would have time to get away from the scene. Whatever, they were trying to deceive people anyway by saying the outer layer didn't do anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BULLET RESISTANCE is very serious matter. And SOMETIMES in sme cases window film can help. But it is top of idiotism to declare that. We did tests. And there was some good results. I also have video. BUT I NEVER RECCOMEND IT LIKE SERIOUS HELP. ACE - they are dead, so no comments about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The outside, 7 mil layer , is what I have seen before. I was told it neede to be there for different reasons. Fist, it gave a surface on the outside to spread the energy out and keep the surface intact, which made ot stronger. Then, the inside layer, 14 mil or thicker, would 'catch' the projectile. Having both sides done strengthened the glass so it wouldnt fall apart, and gave it the surface tesile strength to allow reductio of the energy in the bullet without haveing full structural breakdown of the glass. This only works once or twice, then all bets are off!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did an independent ballistic test up here with the RCMP - 3 different film thicknesses, 3 types of guns, 3 distances. All failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bullet resistant differant then bullet proof. :thumb a 306 will penatrate both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We did an independent ballistic test up here with the RCMP - 3 different film thicknesses, 3 types of guns, 3 distances. All failed.

First off, you SUCK!!

I have made more than a hundred ballistic tests, with all kind of glass, with all kind of thickness (of glass AND film), shot from different agles AND with different bullets!!

Result:

A 14mil film on a 1/2" will stop an ordinary 9mm bullet fired from a short distance, shot up front, I.e. directly at 90 deg angle. It has not to be ACE to do that, any film of that thickness with such a bullet with such a thick glass will do that, personally I will stand behind that glass!!

A 7mil film in front won't change the result, nor does a 14 or 15mil, nor does if you use laminated glass, tempered glass or normal glass! PERIOD

Believe it or NOT.....

Well, no matter your opinion on who sucks, I would love to have you come here and try that test while standing behind it. Just please sign the full liability release before hand!!! :thumb If you did those tests, lets see the video on it, it would be very interesting. If I may ask, which testing facility and what group helped and witnessed these tests?? Tint Whisperer had the Royal Canadian Mounted Police witness his tests, as he stated.

And, if the mechanical engineering I remember serves me right, a layer of film on the front side of the glass WILL skew the test. By distributing energy accross the front surface, and stretching (even minimally)as the projectile passes through, it reduces the velocity and energy from it enough to make the claim of only needing 14 mil on the rear invalidate the test. Any difference in the structure of the test glass changes the outcome. If the surface it hit by a bullet without film on it, the surface will break away, thereby weakening more than if it had a film on it, which would hold it in place, creating a stronger front surface. The tests done by ACE, all on video, made the claim that the film was there to protect the person firing the test shot, but why would they need that when they were behind a protective barrier already??? Bullet resistant film claims are very dangerous for our industry. This following the southern US states, such as Florida, investigating the advertising of 'HURRICANE PROOF FILMS' after Katrina. These same type of business people will have no problem claiming 'BULLET PROOF" films in the future. Making claims of any bullet resistancy can only perpetuate this and cause more issues in our industry. :gasp

Edited by Customtinting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0