Effective Range of Pistols, Rifles, & Shotguns

[Annihilator]

Good article and information on the effective range of your firearms, be it pistol, rifle or shotgun, good read.

effective-range-pistols-rifles-shotguns

 

[Talyn]

Good article.

If one doesn't practice shooting at medium/long distances to become proficent, then they should not assume that mearly buying an AR and/or long-range rifle will automatically make them so.

BTW - shooting a rimfire round accurately out to 100 yds takes some skill, and out further even more so. So, I disagree with the article's statement that rimfire "light bullets excel within 100-200 yds". They can hit something but their trajectory isn't anywhere near flat, their velocity/energy is rapidly declining at those ranges especially against a substantial target, and light bulelts are very susceptible to even light winds.

 

[TEXASforLIFE]

Still some unanswered questions on effective range? Maybe it's an average effective range that is answered? Not just muzzle energy, but the bullet weight and velocity. Bullets close to the same weight with the lighter having more velocity too equal the same ME can still be up to 200 yards short on effective range with long and extended ranges. I guess knowing the minimum velocity of the bullet for proper expansion would be more informative or precise on range? For comparison I've noticed that there is or have seen only 200 yards difference on listed effective range between the 300wm and 338lm. I thing to myself "How can this be"? Is "keyholing" effective? Paper maybe, when effective range doesn't count.

 

[Bassbob]

I don't agree with everything in the article. The guy says that a very skilled shooter can take a pistol out to 100 yards but it usually requires magnified optics. First of all, I can hit a 9" plate at 100 yards pretty much every time with my 8.5" unscoped .44 magnum. And second of all, I am not "Very skilled".

The author also obviously hasn't seen what a 30-06 will do to a deer at 30 or 40 yards. It isn't a small hole poked all the way through.

 

[iklwa]

The old standard of being able to keep all of one’s shots on a paper plate at X yards distance with your hunting weapon of choice is good but doesn’t tell the whole story.

Just because one can reliably make those hits doesn’t mean your projectile will do its job adequately. It is all the rage these days for archers to make 50, 60 and even 70-yard shots on game animals using 70 pound draw weight bows and ultra-light arrows. Even though you may be able to reliably hit that paper plate at those distances, will your arrow/broadhead combination retain enough energy to fully penetrate the intended target.

A moose, elk or bear is not a foam target and merely hitting the intended area is not enough to ensure a humane kill.

Also, even the slightest of variations at those extended ranges can and often does produce a shot to the paunch, rump or heavily muscled shoulder which results in a wounded game animal wandering into the woods and experiencing an excruciating, extended death. As responsible hunter, this is the last thing we should want and our greatest fear.

The hunting shows rarely, if ever, show these horrific wounding shots and lost game. I know of one show in particular that continually depicts the male star taking 60-yard shots like these on almost a weekly basis. The ending trajectory of these arrows looks like the end of a distant rainbow. The arrow is falling downward into the target and nowhere near being flown.

Exactly the same principals apply to the use of firearms. Missing a steel target at one thousand yards results in some degree of frustration and a cloud of dust whereas that stray bullet, when fired into a living animal is just like shooting a poorly aimed arrow from too far away…pain and tortured death.

The paper plate is a fair judge of hunting accuracy, but the individual must exercise moral judgement when pointing their device at game.

Combat and covering fire is different than hunting.

“Know thyself” is good advice as well as thinking about if your kids would appreciate the shot(s) you are taking and their results.

We no longer need “common sense”. What we need is uncommon sense combined with moral restraint.

Now, I’ll get down off my soap box.

 

[Bassbob]

The old standard of being able to keep all of one’s shots on a paper plate at X yards distance with your hunting weapon of choice is good but doesn’t tell the whole story.

Just because one can reliably make those hits doesn’t mean your projectile will do its job adequately. It is all the rage these days for archers to make 50, 60 and even 70-yard shots on game animals using 70 pound draw weight bows and ultra-light arrows. Even though you may be able to reliably hit that paper plate at those distances, will your arrow/broadhead combination retain enough energy to fully penetrate the intended target.

A moose, elk or bear is not a foam target and merely hitting the intended area is not enough to ensure a humane kill.

Also, even the slightest of variations at those extended ranges can and often does produce a shot to the paunch, rump or heavily muscled shoulder which results in a wounded game animal wandering into the woods and experiencing an excruciating, extended death. As responsible hunter, this is the last thing we should want and our greatest fear.

The hunting shows rarely, if ever, show these horrific wounding shots and lost game. I know of one show in particular that continually depicts the male star taking 60-yard shots like these on almost a weekly basis. The ending trajectory of these arrows looks like the end of a distant rainbow. The arrow is falling downward into the target and nowhere near being flown.

Exactly the same principals apply to the use of firearms. Missing a steel target at one thousand yards results in some degree of frustration and a cloud of dust whereas that stray bullet, when fired into a living animal is just like shooting a poorly aimed arrow from too far away…pain and tortured death.

The paper plate is a fair judge of hunting accuracy, but the individual must exercise moral judgement when pointing their device at game.

Combat and covering fire is different than hunting.

“Know thyself” is good advice as well as thinking about if your kids would appreciate the shot(s) you are taking and their results.

We no longer need “common sense”. What we need is uncommon sense combined with moral restraint.

Now, I’ll get down off my soap box.

This was a 90 yard headshot. I normally don't take head shots, but it was near the end of the last day of season and he was in tall grass, it was the only shot I had that wouldn't have been a guess. And I knew I could hit it because I can hit a paper plate at 100 yards. I have taken many deer from similar distances with this handgun and it definitely puts them down and hard.

I do somewhat agree with you though. Even though I can hit 60 yard shots consistently with my bow, I never take shots longer than 40. But with the 30-06 I have killed deer at 30 yards and I have killed deer at over 400 yards.

 

[iklwa]

This was a 90 yard headshot. I normally don't take head shots, but it was near the end of the last day of season and he was in tall grass, it was the only shot I had that wouldn't have been a guess. And I knew I could hit it because I can hit a paper plate at 100 yards. I have taken many deer from similar distances with this handgun and it definitely puts them down and hard.

I do somewhat agree with you though. Even though I can hit 60 yard shots consistently with my bow, I never take shots longer than 40. But with the 30-06 I have killed deer at 30 yards and I have killed deer at over 400 yards.

It must be nice to have eyes!
I did, once, long, long ago...

 

[Bassbob]

It must be nice to have eyes!
I did, once, long, long ago...

Full disclosure, this picture was taken about 20 years ago. My long range vision hasn't diminished since then, although these days my arms have grown kinda too short for reading.