TexasCHLforum.com

[quote="flechero" I can count on one hand the number of times I have had jacket or lead splash back and hit me. [/quote]

I guess that's my hangup,and maybe I'm just too sensitive about this.
Seems like the first time I had a ricochet, splashback or other type of bullet strike, I would think that it was a little too dangerous.

I don't have much experience shooting steel plates, but I recall an indoor range I used to visit in Houston that had angle iron pieces protecting the target hanger clips. People would hit those regularly. I would almost always feel something hit my leg (if wearing shorts) at some point during the visit. Only once over a few years did I ever get hit hard enough I was afraid it drew blood, but even then it just stung. IMO, wear pants and good safety glasses. You could wear a face shield also.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:...
All that said, I have a question. Has anyone done any testing closer than 10 yds. using handguns and AR500 steel without a spalling barrier?

My "informal testing" (aka, observation)
Earlier this year, I purchased some 10", 12", 18x24" steel plates (AR500, 1/4" thick) to practice Steel Challenge stages.
Several of the stages require target placement at 8 yards from the shooter.
My practice partners and I shoot either 9mm (Glock 34) or .38 Special (S&W something or another).
We use coated lead bullets from http://www.CimarronBullets.com
We use wood target stands placed upon grass covered ground.
After over 30,000 rounds at these targets (20% at 8 yards, 80% at 10-35 yards), still no splatter onto any of us.
I attribute that to the hardness of the steel, the smooth surface of the plates, the downward deflection of the plate upon bullet impact (spring loaded from top bolt), and the grass covered turf.
Judging from the looks of the wood target bases - the bullet splatter seems to deflect straight down to the target stand base & grass turf.

Contrasting experience - using different plates, mounting system, and ground/wall surfaces...
At our club's steel plate matches, we use a mix of AR400 & AR500 steel plates.
These plates are center bolted (flush with plate) to the target stem, and provide no "give" when struck by a projectile.
The ground is more gravel based, the side berms are concrete, the distance is 8-12 yards.
The calibers are 9mm, .40, .45, .38 Super. Lead, jacketed, JHP's are all used.
At these matches, it's not out of the ordinary to be hit by a frag every once in a while.
Probably 99% of the time, it's just a harmless fleck you feel on your leg, arm, cheek, or something that lands on your hat.
Sometimes, it's a bullet jacket "frag" that sticks you enough to draw blood.

My observation...
The quality of the steel (hardness & surface smoothness), the proximity to other deflection points on the range (ground, walls), and the downward angle or "give" of the steel, in addition to the distance from shooter to target - makes a difference in the "fragging" level (spalling) experienced by the shooter.

And ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS wear quality eye protection when anyone on the range is shooting steel targets.

Thanks guys, you've given me enough information to make testing unnecessary.

Chas.

RossA wrote:[quote="flechero" I can count on one hand the number of times I have had jacket or lead splash back and hit me.

I guess that's my hangup,and maybe I'm just too sensitive about this.
Seems like the first time I had a ricochet, splashback or other type of bullet strike, I would think that it was a little too dangerous.[/quote]

Understood- but to be more clear, I NEVER experienced any violent ricochets. I'm talking literally something resembling sand particles. Liken it to a long range "pepper" on the dove field... almost like rain.

Hickok 45 has a pretty good video that contains pretty much the same findings as those detailed below.

I have several 12" square and circle AR500 targets that I practice with with both pistols and rifles at various distances. They are mounted on a downward facing mount that deflects the fragments to the ground... mostly. I have shot it with pistols within about 20 feet with no problem. I have been peppered with copper jackets and will have flecks of copper and lead on my clothes after these "close sessions".

Now, I once - notice that I said "once", shot at these targets within 15 yards with a 20" AR. A piece of a bullet, about 25% of a 55 grain round, came back and buried in my right outside forearm... to the point that I had to kinda dig it out with a multitool. It bled pretty good for a few minutes.

I won't do that again.

pistol rounds at 10-15 yards with downward facing steel should be fine.

I am concerned about one issue related to shooting steel and that's the issue of angle of the target. I talked with the owner of one of the better known manufacturers, not MGM or Action, and he said mounting the target on an angle is to extend the life of the target. He also said that for shooter safety, the target should NOT be on an angle so the bullet will disintegrate better. An angled target deflects the bullet/fragments downward, but the surface into which the bullet or fragment hits will determine the likelihood of it/them being deflected elsewhere, including toward the shooter.

Chas.

I had a project in the local branch of the Federal Reserve. They had their own indoor pistol range. The back stop was a metal plate angled downward with a sand trap below to capture the bullets.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I am concerned about one issue related to shooting steel and that's the issue of angle of the target. I talked with the owner of one of the better known manufacturers, not MGM or Action, and he said mounting the target on an angle is to extend the life of the target. He also said that for shooter safety, the target should NOT be on an angle so the bullet will disintegrate better. An angled target deflects the bullet/fragments downward, but the surface into which the bullet or fragment hits will determine the likelihood of it/them being deflected elsewhere, including toward the shooter.

Chas.

Digging about a 12 inch deep trench below the target or installing about 12 inches of 4 x 4's in front of the target does a pretty good job of catching fragments that might otherwise bounce off the ground, rock, etc. and come back at the shooter.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I am concerned about one issue related to shooting steel and that's the issue of angle of the target. I talked with the owner of one of the better known manufacturers, not MGM or Action, and he said mounting the target on an angle is to extend the life of the target. He also said that for shooter safety, the target should NOT be on an angle so the bullet will disintegrate better. An angled target deflects the bullet/fragments downward, but the surface into which the bullet or fragment hits will determine the likelihood of it/them being deflected elsewhere, including toward the shooter.

Chas.

Angling the target sounds like a good thing for directing splashback, but only if every round is on target. Hit the edge of the steel and you might have a different reflected pattern.

One day at a range near Austin, I was shooting at steel at about 20 yards. My friends later surmised I wristed the shot down and hit a springy drive-in fence post that was supporting the steel rack. Whatever I hit, the round came back at me. I felt a sharp impact on my face which immediately went numb. I explored the area. My fingers came back bloody.

I figured major pain was next, so I walked very carefully to my truck, angled the driver's rearview mirror, and looked for damage. The round had hit just hard enough to make a minor cut or two, cause a numb feeling, and get a good bite on my scraggly beard.

That day taught me a valuable lesson. Don't flinch. And consider not shooting at steel.

Be safe.

I love shooting steel. You get an immediate auditory feedback, it rewards combat accuracy based on the size of the target, not subconsciously pausing to visually check how close your round came to the perfect center "X." It also makes for a great training tool when you have to manage swingers, spinners, or poppers. A good 'ol duelling tree, a friend, and a shot timer can make for fun competition--and a lot of rounds expended--and good way to improve speed balanced with accuracy and short-zone target transition. And there's nothing to make you feel more humble about your handgunning skills than shooting a Texas Star next to someone who's really good at it.

I've been hit by copper splashback a few times. None serious, but even a shallow sharp slice can require a minute to get the bleeding under control.

Just a separate safety note here about range glasses. I may be in the minority, but I think if you plan to shoot steel that facial coverage is more important than ANSI Z87.1 certified lenses.

Most modern eyeglasses are no longer glass, and typically won't shatter into shards like glass from an impact. In fact, many if not most are polycarbonate, which by it's very structure does a pretty good job of being impact resistant, and may meet ANSI standards even if not certified.

BTW, the ANSI Z87.1-2015 impact test consists of the lens surviving a 1/4" steel bearing shot at 150 fps. A heavy round, but pretty slow by firearm standards. As you'd expect, the military takes that up a notch or two. The MIL-PRF-32432 standard is to survive a .15 caliber round at 640fps for eyeglasses, and a .22 caliber round at 550fps for goggles.

Most shooting ranges that I've been to in the last decade will let you wear your regular prescription glasses when shooting. They don't mandate ballistic rated eyewear. How could they enforce that? Make you bring proof of certification with you? Besides, many of us have been shooting for decades: how many times have you heard of a ricochet breaking someone's glasses lens and hitting an eye? It's a pretty rare thing.

However, modern eyewear styles have almost uniformly become smaller in size over the past decade or so. The newer polycarbonate lens materials have gotten stronger while simultaneously allowing smaller, lighter glasses; gone--for the most part--are the big ol' Coke-bottle lenses. But those smaller lenses and frames leave a greater area unprotected and open to possible entry by foreign objects.

A nick on the arm from a tiny piece of a jacketed round's spall is no big deal. A nick on your eyeball from the same splashback is a very big deal.

I have four different pairs of glasses I may wear while shooting at any given time. Two of them are wraparound sports-style frames that also hug my forehead. Good to go for possible tiny shards of flying copper. But these are my everyday, progressive-lens glasses. Ya just don't go into a business meeting wearing your Oakley SI Ballistic M Frames.

So I keep sets of side shields--the kind that slip over the eyeglass arms--in my range bag; always keep spares in there in case I'm shooting with a friend who may need a pair. They're ugly as all get-out, but inexpensive and do the job well. The ones I like best are the "Wingmate" style here: http://www.safetyglassesusa.com/sideshields.html. Three bucks a pair: cheap. Protecting your eyes from tiny little razors of flying metal: priceless.