Question from the movie RONIN

[Musketeer]

I know this movie has been mentioned from time to time. I think it is one of the better spy/gunfight movies out there and the chase seens were spectacular without being "Hollywood Impossible."

I watched this film again the other day with the director's commentary. One thing that stuck with me was that they had a member of the SAS on hand to arrange the ambush seen for authenticity. That would explain why it looked so good. (The chase seens were also filmed at real speed, which surprised me!)

One thing made me scratch my head though... Late in the film Sam (DeNiro) is hit with a ricochet during the gunfight in the Roman arena ruins. When they dig the bullet out of him (they had a French ER doctor who often handles gunshots present for the seen for authenticity) Sam makes the statement that they "sprayed the bullet with teflon" this would be so it would punch through the Kevlar vest he was wearing (the vest was a damn nice touch though, never mentioned before but it made perfect sense and was just sort of accepted as normal for the characters.)

That little comment about spraying the bullet with teflon struck me as complete Hollywood manure but I figured I would check in here. PERHAPS, if using ball ammo and the bullet were just sprayed it might make a difference but I doubt it. It certainly should not have worked after a ricochet, which would have deformed the bullet some (we are talking a handgun round, not a rifle). What does everyone here ahve to say?

It would have, in my opinion, been far more plausible that the round had missed the kevlar and struck Sam in the side where there was a lack of protection. Sam making a simple statement like "It just missed the damn vest" would have sufficed.

Other than that I though the movie was very well done (intelligent and exciting) and is a great addition to the DVD collection for any fan of movies with spys, mercenaries or gunfights.

 

[mete]

The green teflon coated 'cop killer' bullets the politicians talk about so much !! Actually the bullet was hard bronze which made them penetrate much better . Teflon had little to do with it . A good "shoot 'im up " movie !!

 

[UniversalFrost]

+1 for a great movie and one of the best chase seens ever.

I agree that the teflon sprayed bullet it a bit bogus, especially after the richochet. One thing that would have been more plausable would have been for the bullet to hit on the side where the vest offers little to no protection. I have a couple of under shirt vests and they offer great front and rear protection, but they don't have anything on the sides except for velcro straps. You can pull them close together to minimize the gap, but there is still a gap on both sides.

Good catch in the movie. Other than that, everything was fairly good. Always wondered what was in the case though, nuke, chem warfare stuff, diamonds, etc...? Too bad they never told us.

 

[DesertShooter]

Spraying a bullet with Teflon won't do a thing. It's been awhile since I watched that movie, and I must not have caught that idiotic statement.

The movie industry, when filming "shoot-out" scenes, they are required to have firearms experts available to teach the "Do's" and "Don't do's" to the actors. One of the basic "Don't do's" is to drill it into them that "blank guns" can still be lethal. Do NOT aim a blank gun at another actor, or yourself! (Actor John Hexum learned this rule the "hard way", by playing Russian Roulette with a blank gun....that fired the "blank" gases into his brain and killed him).

The firearms expert WOULD know that Teflon spray wouldn't cause a bullet to be able to penetrate through body armor, BUT the expertise aspect is thrown out the window when the DIRECTOR of the movie decides to add some sort of "agenda" to the scene. Just like the firearms experts KNOW that holding a handgun "gangsta style" (canted to one side) lessens accuracy, that doesn't matter to the DIRECTOR! The director might simply think that it "looks cool"!

In the movie "Ronin", it sounds like the director must have read something about "cop killer bullets", and decided to throw in the Teflon spray thing. Maybe he thought that it "sounded cool", or perhaps "knowledgeable".

 

[Musketeer]

Since you only learn of the "teflon bullet" when Sam is being cut open in a different scene it is entirely possible the consultant never even knew such hogwash was being spread. Even in the scene when he is operated on it lookedt to me more like the bullet hit the side of the vest, not the panel.

I do think this was a combination of the director's view on guns, his commentary seemed slightly anti but not overly so, and wanting to give the audience some "insider info", teflon spray on bullets. Looking into this online I see the idea of spraying teflon on bullets has been mentioned elsewhere, including one web article from a moron who went on to state that body armor that can stop a rifle round for soldiers would be more dangerous for troops. The impact on the vest would cause internal damage that would be harder to fix.... right, and the bullet tearing through the torso would be better? I digress. He also staated the Afghanis sprayed teflon on their bullets against the Soviets... I don't know where he got this but it has obviously become part of "internet lore."

Overall I think the movie was done very well. Watch the alternate ending to see where Diedre goes...

 

[TargetTerror]

one web article from a moron who went on to state that body armor that can stop a rifle round for soldiers would be more dangerous for troops

Do you have a link to this article? Now I'm curious

 

[Musketeer]

Here you go... Warning, I have not read all or even most of it...

http://www.military-sf.com/futtroop.htm

In addition to facing higher velocity rounds there is the kinetic force to worry about. Bullets do not bounce off bullet proof vests, they slam into them leaving bruises and welts underneath the vest. If a trooper, equipped with a Bullet Proof Vest (BPV) were hit with a high velocity assault round then he might suffer broken bones, internal bleeding, ect.

Internal injuries make it much harder to treat a wound. The soldier would probably be out of the fight and doctors would need a great number of specialized devices to determine what is going on inside the body. For a police officer who is close to highly advanced medical facilities that (usually) aren't overloaded with casualties, it may be worth it. For a soldier who is much farther from immediate medical assistance it could be another story.

...


I've heard it said that in Afghanistan the Mujahideen used a teflon spray on their bullets and turned regular bullets into armor piercers that would penetrate Soviet BPV's.

 

[hksigwalther]

If a trooper, equipped with a Bullet Proof Vest (BPV) were hit with a high velocity assault round then he might suffer broken bones, internal bleeding, ect.

Oh yes, this is much worse than being...dead.

 

[TargetTerror]

Here you go... Warning, I have not read all or even most of it...

http://www.military-sf.com/futtroop.htm

thanks Muskateer.

While this guy is definitely questionable given his "teflon bullets" comments, I do have to support him on your original point of contention. He doesn't say that "body armor that can stop a rifle round for soldiers would be more dangerous for troops." Rather, he offers an analysis of why Uncle Sam doesn't pony up the money to pay for such armor.

He basically says that to be effective, it would need to be too heavy to be practical. I can't fault him too much on that point

That said, who the hell is this guy, and why does he think we should listen to him? I couldn't find any "about" or credentials anywhere on his site...

 

[44 AMP]

Teflon coating

The origin of the "teflon armor piercing" or as later dubbed "cop killer" bullets came from ammo made by KTW back in the 70s. It was armor piercing (intended to shoot cars) handgun ammo, and featured sharp pointed bronze alloy (and maybe some tungsten, I don't recall for sure). The bullets were teflon coated, not as an aid to penetration, but to protect the bore of the firearm.

KTW rounds were never sold legally to anyone but police agencies, and to the best of my knowledge have never been used to kill any police officer, anywhere.

"Cop Killer" is a term made up by gun banning bigots to emphasize the fact that they would penetrate a bullet "proof" vest.

There has never been, and never will be a true bullet proof anything. Just look at tanks. In the gun/armor race, the gun always wins.

 

[Musketeer]

He basically says that to be effective, it would need to be too heavy to be practical. I can't fault him too much on that point

Then he goes on to say...

If a trooper, equipped with a Bullet Proof Vest (BPV) were hit with a high velocity assault round then he might suffer broken bones, internal bleeding, ect.

Internal injuries make it much harder to treat a wound.

...

For a police officer who is close to highly advanced medical facilities that (usually) aren't overloaded with casualties, it may be worth it. For a soldier who is much farther from immediate medical assistance it could be another story.

He is stating that the internal injuries sufferred if armor stopped a rifle round would be so severe that it is not worth using. That is plain stupid.

Anyway, the best "inbetween" solution has seemed to be plate inserts added to Kevlar vests in order to defeat rifle rounds over the most vital areas.

He is also stating that the medical help avaiable to LEOs is better than to soldiers. I would state the opposite. There are far more medically trained corpsman and such with a military unit to provide immediate care for bullet wounds than for LEOs. It is expected to happen to a military unit but only a possiblity with LEOs. After immediate help then they are transported to a medical facility that deals primarily with bullet wounds and such.