Competitive rifle shooting- steel target considerations to address frag?

[lanis]

The shrouding requirement in an Ontario thing. We shoot Steel Challenge and no additional protection is required. While rifle projectiles have more kinetic energy, the have very little mass and should have a similar ejecta pattern.

Why is anything required?

Instead of generating a solution for a potentially non-existent problem, why not conduct some tests with layered cardboard shrouding around the steel and compare the relative penetration of plate ejecta (handgun vs. rifle projectiles) on the shroud? There either is a problem or there isn't. The pattern of ejecta will be the same. The mass of ejecta (rifle vs. handgun) will be less (62 gr. vs. 124 gr.). The velocity of ejecta for the rifle bullet will be higher. I'm willing to bet that the penetration in a test media (i.e. cardboard) is the same. If it is, why would you build anything?

There is a problem.

CFO out of control, criminally harassing gun owners in Ontario.

 

[BCRider]

For the sake of our steel, we have asked that steel core ammo not be used on the metal targets ......

It's not only steel core ammo. A range locally also found that steel JACKETED ammo tends to not split and side spatter. Even the mild steel used for jackets tended to bounce back in random directions. Some of them back to the firing line.

Also the steel jacket was harder on even armor steel than copper jackets. Dimpling and some spalling was noticed in the face of the steel armor plate backstop material.

Unfortunately this means that most of the former communist block ammo used by the popular SKS's, Mosin Nagant and SVT40 should not be used on steel targets. Also I've seen some steel jacketed pistol ammo as well. MFS being one brand.

Shrouded or not another factor is to ensure that none of the steel support or hanger structure sticks out in front of the face of the AR500 target. Most bullet spatter moves out along the face of the plate. But it's moving pretty good. If it encounters another face it can be reflected again. So it's best that the support for the plate is all behind the face of the target. Or that the frames are protected from contact by the spatter by the wood shroud which is soft enough to absorb or at least cushion and slow down the spatter.

The spatter has quite a good amount of energy. The walls of our cowboy shooting stages are well peppered and have signs of penetration by the spatter of up to a 1/2 inch into the wood by the bigger fragments. And we normally try to keep the targets a good 4 feet from the wood. At an IPSC match I was at one time the side spatter off a faller was cutting the cardboard target in the spatter plane well enough to produce 6 inch and longer surface tears despite being 10 to 12 feet away.

This was all handguns or slow velocity rounds of course. The spatter from a high velocity rifle would obviously be that much more energetic. So I'd suggest that the wood shrouds be made from 2x6 and even then expect to have to replace the boards probably once a year or more as they become gouged and begin to split.

 

[Sosa]

Due to requirements that the CFO made to one of the ranges we shoot at, some of the steel must be shrouded depending on it's location.

What we have found over the years is:
Properly made and well maintained targets are the biggest issue. If the targets are in good condition then the splatter or frag or whatever all ends up deflecting at about a 20 degree angle from the face of the target, regardless of bullet construction or jacket type.
Also target orientation is very important as well. The targets need to be parallel to the shooting line/shooter.

The fragments have high velocity but very low mass. I have been struck by many while watching all sorts of shooting competitions, but have only had a fragment penetrate clothing twice in 15 years. The most serious frag damage came from a .38 super round hitting a rock in the berm from about 5 yards and having the jacket sink into the calf of the shooter.

We use 2x6 or 2 x 8 boards that get chewed through after several thousand rounds.
The main reason for the heavier wood is the durability and duration. 3/8 plywood will stop the splash, but only for a few dozen rounds or so, we wanted to be able to use ours for multiple matches.

Again, unless mandated by the CFO I see no safety reason or requirement to have shrouding for shooting steel targets with rifle or pistol.

YMMV,

Sosa

 

[hek76]

i fire at the 200m ar 400 plate at poco all day long