Wow, you put a lot of thought into that one.
Distances for shooting steel targets in canada
- Thread starter Slavex
- Start date
Wow, you put a lot of thought into that one.
More important then the angle or lack of angle is the grade of steel used and as Kanada Kidd brought up, surface condition. Using too mild a steel plate will not absorb all the energy and may send the round straight back. Rifle bullets are the worse, but even with a pistol round you can get ricochet. Steel targets made from quality hardened steel with no surface defects will eliminate most of the debris being sent back to the shooter.
the ones with the hook through the hole are just evil, everything is good until you hit the hook then watch out.
I can take no credit for our steel, HeavenIsALie sourced them from GT targets after researching it for months. He knows waaaaay more about Steel Challenge and the targets than I do.
I can take no credit for our steel, HeavenIsALie sourced them from GT targets after researching it for months. He knows waaaaay more about Steel Challenge and the targets than I do.
The ones with the hook through them are the MGM targets version.
G and T targets and action targets make the other style system as well as a few other companies that won't ship to Canada. WRAS makes our own from AR 400 and AR500 steel plate with an adjustable steel stand.
G and T targets and action targets make the other style system as well as a few other companies that won't ship to Canada. WRAS makes our own from AR 400 and AR500 steel plate with an adjustable steel stand.
Unregistered_
Regular
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
GT or Nevco are good. Never use a steel plate with a hook or bolt through it.
OK guys , i need some comment and maybe advice . I've been shooting 10 inch AR500 , 3/8ths plates purchase from a member in the precision rifles forum . Hanging them with chain and/or straps directly facing me or other shooters . All rifle from fmj 7.62x39 and fmj .223 at 75 to 125 yards along with .308 and .300 mag at 200 yards and farther . Very little dimpling to the plates with no craters and nothing coming back , so far . Lots of jackets and lead in a line across the ground in front of the targets and the 2x2 target stands gets chewed up to each side of the targets . The steel is free hanging . Anybody see a problem with this ? The bullets are exploding upon impact with .223 leaving a very slightly deeper dimple that 7.62x39 at the same range . The closest i've shot the plates is 10 yards with buckshot and 25 yards with slugs . Buckshot blows into dust and slugs don't fare much better . Eye protection is worn but nothing has ever come back . A bud borrowed a plate and shot it a couple of hundred times with a Glock 9 mil using 115 fmj's at 20 and 25 yards and nothing came back at him either . Obviously i don't want any of my friends hurt , nor myself so comments and advice are appreciated .
1riot1ranger
CGN Regular
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Ken is correct - from a mathematical point of view.
When the bullet flight path is perfectly "perpendicular" to the steel plate, that is the condition for maximum energy or momentum transfer (with the steel being exactly perpendicular to the flight path, momentum and energy transfers will be the same) to the steel.
Any deviation from perpendicular will produce some amount of bullet energy re-directed into a new vector based on the angle of the steel relative to the flight path of the bullet.
While we may argue about "safe vs. unsafe" directions for the bullets fragment to travel after striking the plate, that is not the point of this discussion.
Bob is arguing that some angle (other than completely flush) offers up a better plane for impact and energy absorbtion/momentum transfer. I would submit that: if Ken is wrong, what angle of plate placement should be used?
To support the discussion, I've attached high-speed video of bullets striking steel (and other stuff...).
[youtube]QfDoQwIAaXg[/youtube]
Compare the strikes at 1:30 to the ones at 6:30. The bullet strike at 6:30 shows a near complete transfer of energy to the plate.
Also, near the 9 minute mark there are impacts on silhouette targets. Some are more "perpendicular" than others, but most of the bullet fragments are observed to leave in a radial pattern that is perpendicular to the flight path.
When the bullet flight path is perfectly "perpendicular" to the steel plate, that is the condition for maximum energy or momentum transfer (with the steel being exactly perpendicular to the flight path, momentum and energy transfers will be the same) to the steel.
Any deviation from perpendicular will produce some amount of bullet energy re-directed into a new vector based on the angle of the steel relative to the flight path of the bullet.
While we may argue about "safe vs. unsafe" directions for the bullets fragment to travel after striking the plate, that is not the point of this discussion.
Bob is arguing that some angle (other than completely flush) offers up a better plane for impact and energy absorbtion/momentum transfer. I would submit that: if Ken is wrong, what angle of plate placement should be used?
To support the discussion, I've attached high-speed video of bullets striking steel (and other stuff...).
[youtube]QfDoQwIAaXg[/youtube]
Compare the strikes at 1:30 to the ones at 6:30. The bullet strike at 6:30 shows a near complete transfer of energy to the plate.
Also, near the 9 minute mark there are impacts on silhouette targets. Some are more "perpendicular" than others, but most of the bullet fragments are observed to leave in a radial pattern that is perpendicular to the flight path.
No Bob is arguing a bullet angled down into the ground is better than having a bullet hit a fixed steel plate perpendicular to the ground where the material might be returned to the shooter. A bullet directed into the ground with most of its energy absorbed is IMHO better than a bullet that may not have all its energy absorbed and be directed back at the shooter.
Here is a perfect example, although a bit extreme.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=YhXtdylBCWc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPZyBLv0ijc
Take Care
Bob
- Location
- big sky country
Wow! Great footage.
another good argument from Bob?
Nope, it's not better, ask some of the cowboys who tried that. Not all of the bullet will deflect down and the part that does't, is redirected back uprange.
Your examples do not show the target design.
- Location
- Peace River, Alberta
You are right neither video does but according to you and your experience it couldn't happen anyway. I am betting the steel is flat, perpandicular to the ground and at eye/muzzle level. Similar to our steel where we experienced bullet material returning up range albeit not with the intensity shown in the videos.
I agree if your Cowboy shooters are shooting at targets lower than their muzzle then it is possible for bullet material to return up range. It is all a matter of angles.
Take care
Bob
