Aye Dave!

December 15, 2006

Is there any testing or data that you know of on 1 or 2 layers of 15mil and bullet resistance? :DD

I've seen a few videos but it sure doesn't look like a scientific approach... :beer I know no one would be crazy enough to go out on a limb and market such a thing but that doesn't prevent them from testing. Can you disclose?

TINT · December 15, 2006

December 15, 2006

There was some ballistic testing done some time ago, with 12 mil (3 ply construction) and 15 mil (also 3 ply), but it was conducted on 1/2", 3/4" & 1" glazing. I have not seen any on layering the safety films tough.

The thick glazing is what actually stoped the bullet, the film just holds it together so multiple shots can be made. As there is very little glazing this thick in the real world, the testing has little merit.

If you want copies of the test I'm refering too, let me know and I'll dig it out for you.

Andy

December 15, 2006

Is there any testing or data that you know of on 1 or 2 layers of 15mil and bullet resistance?
I've seen a few videos but it sure doesn't look like a scientific approach... I know no one would be crazy enough to go out on a limb and market such a thing but that doesn't prevent them from testing. Can you disclose?

I, too, have seen a video done by a competitive product... dubious is a word that comes to mind. The reason I say this it because if you pay close attention they speak of one thickness of glass during the video and speak of a greater thickness as an end notation. Also, looking at the glass panel they are firing their weapon at, there are small patches of material in place that appear to be targeting spots for when they fire. What is that target patch material made of (kevlar)?

There are no official tests by independent laboratories that are known to have been conducted on the question of ballistic resistance of any PET film product.

A rep for CP (Japan) conducted his own testing years ago and videotaped it for documentation. He used, I believe, a 9mm pistol and a shot gun as weapons of choice. Results were striking (pardon the pun)... however, it was conducted using 15 mil on 12mm glass, which is the thinnest glass used to produce bullet-proof glass. The 15 mil may have only acted as a spall shield in this case and no one wants to draw any other conclusions from this test.

Another story, Someone I know in Kenya (uses LLumar) was commissioned to apply 15 mil to a vehicle's glass that belonged to a security officer high up in the gov't there. Word from my friend is that when the guy came to pick the car up, he drew his 9mm pistol and shot three times at the passenger side window. Again, the results were interesting. However, I cannot go further in detail than this.

You a smart guy... you, too, understand the numerous variables involved in attempting to reach a classification know as bullet-proof or even bullet-resistant? Once it is achieved in a formal test, it would only be as valid in the field as passing the Dade County large missle test protocol; I.e., worked on that framing, that glass, that silicone, that particular run of PET product, at that distance and speed, with room temperature at this point and the wind coming from this direction. You get my drift!

December 15, 2006

:thumb Thanks, yes I get your drift... yes it would be a very complex set of circustances to even beging to travel down a road that would end with the term "bullet resistant." I'm just hearing a lot of requests for a cheaper aftermarket solution, you know how much money (GSA likes spending on projects :thumb ) so I'm curious to see if there has been any formal testing lately aside from a few boys in company shirts at the local firing range. :thumb

Some rightfully paranoid circut court judges wonder if sttacked 15mil might alter the course of a low velocity munition. I said that if there was a strong likelyhood of people shooting at me :lol6 then I'd be certain to get something that covers high velocity munitions too. :thumb But the bottom line is that no formal R&D is being done in films. Liquid coatings is another story...

December 15, 2006

I heard once that being shot through glazing is so dangerous because the glass fragments that fly into you are hard to find and get out (don't show up on x-ray like the bullet does). So, if I had the fear of being shot through glazing, please put film on it!

Also, was once approached by a gentlemen at a trade show, who said your automotive tint saved his life. When I questioned him further, he said "I was in my benz, driving in a bad part of the world (better leave the exact location out), someone came up to the passenger side window and shot at me several times." The first shot broke the glass, hit him in the right shoulder, then he layed down in the front seat, and was shot a couple times in the butt. He said if the film wasn't on the glass, the first shot would have left an opening, and a clear shot at him.

Not saying bullet proof, or even bullet resistant, but Spall Sheild would be more correct IMO.

Andy

December 15, 2006

Yeah, glass fragments would be a problem but for industry professionals to know how bad a problem they would need medical information which has become strictly private these days.

I spoke with a ballistics officer and he was telling me about how the armor piercing bullets are designed to focus energy into a single small point which makes it hard for a surface to absorb and distribute that energy effectively thus failing.