NOTE: This report has been scrubbed of all names which appeared in the original

report. No part of this report should be construed as advice on the safety of steel
targets. Do your own research before making any decision regarding the safety of
steel targets.

Report and Recommendation Concerning the use of

Jacketed Bullets with Steel Targets at the (Gun Club)
compiled by members of the (Gun Club)

Introduction
This report has been prepared to aid the board of directors of the (GUN CLUB)in determining
whether or not to continue the club's ban on the use of jacketed bullets fired against steel targets. The
tests described in this report were, unless otherwise noted, conducted on (GUN CLUB) property using
(GUN CLUB) steel targets, by (GUN CLUB) members. The targets used were those used by the action
pistol Division in its action pistol events. The tests were designed by (Member 1), a (GUN CLUB)
member employed as a test engineer by (Big Evil Corporation), with help from other (GUN CLUB)
members. The test protocols and procedures were approved by (Safety Officer), the club's Safety
Officer. The tests were designed to simulate typical conditions encountered in action pistol events.
The recommendations found at the end of this report are based on the outcome of these tests in
combination with other research on the topic.

Description of testing procedures

To test what happens when a jacketed bullet is shoot against a steel target three target enclosures
were built to surround individual targets of the type known as sliders. The enclosures were designed
to allow for easily changing internal witness panels which consisted of 1/4 foam bead board of the
type typically used for home insulation. A large tarp was laid down in front of all three enclosures to
enable us to see any bullet fragments that ended up in front of the targets.
The testing procedures were as follows:
a slider target was placed, centered, inside each enclosure and its position was
measured and recorded. The targets are roughly twelve inches square and 3/8 in
thickness, constructed of standard cold-rolled steel;
50 rounds of a given type of ammunition were then fired against each target, with the
bullet type and velocity recorded;
following each 50 rounds pictures were taken of the tarp to record the quantity, type, and
position of bullet fragments in that area;
the front tarp was then swept clean of fragments prior to the start of the next round of
firing;
the interior witness panels were replaced with new panels. The old panels were
photographed, numbered, and stored in the action pistol storage container;
the tests were repeated using different bullet types;
two rounds of these tests were conducted at a distance of 7 yards, which is the minimum
distance recommended for steel targets by the USPSA. A third round of tests was then
fired at a distance of 11 yards to better duplicate typical conditions found in (GUN
1

CLUB) matches. A total of 450 rounds were fired in these tests. NOTE: as part of the
final round of tests one of the targets was subjected to the test under extreme conditions
(Member 2) fired 50 rounds of jacketed .40 S&W ammunition against the target in less
than a two minutes far exceeding anything the target would be subjected to under
normal conditions. This was done to determine whether or not such abuse introduced
additional safety concerns and to find out what would happen to the target itself. This
will be discussed in more detail later in the report.
Further testing was performed using the club's steel, falling plate racks. The testing setup was
modified to take into account the differences in target type and the structure of the plate racks
themselves. Based on our observations of the tests on individual targets it was felt that there was no
need to place cardboard witness panels on the sides of the plate rack. Instead, sheets of black plastic
measuring 10' x 25' and 8' x 25' were placed in front of and to the side of the rack. This was done to
gain more information about the amount of bullet material that was captured within the plate rack itself.
The testing on the plate racks was done in two segments, one designed specifically to address
the question of whether or not large fragments of bullets were being ricocheted more or less directly
back along the line of fire. The other testing was essentially the same as that used for the individual
target enclosures.
To check the question of direct ricochets a piece of cardboard was taped directly in front of one
of the plates. Three stick-on white dots were then attached to the cardboard, opposite the center of the
plate, to provide a point of aim for the shooter. Five shot strings were then fired through the cardboard,
with the plate being reset after each shot. The cardboard was then taken down and examined. The
cardboard was then stored in the action pistol storage container. This process was followed with four
different types of bullets.
For the remaining tests strings of 48 shots were fired. Between strings the black plastic was
examined were bullet fragments and photographs were taken at the end of each stage. The plastic was
then swept clean and the process repeated. This was done with four different types of ammunition and,
as the results were, essentially, the same as those obtained in the individual target tests it was decided to
terminate testing at the chance of getting different results was regarded as unlikely.

Further investigation
Further investigation was continued using resources found on the Internet and other sources.
While there is a great deal of anecdotal evidence, on both sides of the issue, we decided to ignore such
stories. There are a number of problems with anecdotal evidence which seem to us to introduce more
questions than answers to the debate surrounding the safety of jacketed bullets. It is impossible to
verify either the veracity of such stories or to know the exact circumstances surrounding the supposed
event. For instance, it is impossible to know the distances involved; the angular relationship between
the shooter, the target, and the supposed victim (if not the shooter), what the actual bullet type and
velocity were; what type of clothing and other protective gear was in use, etc. All of these items and
more have a bearing on the outcome of any actual event. Given that none of this type of data are either
known or verifiable, anecdotal evidence has not been taken into consideration when developing the
recommendations based on this report.
Given the popularity of steel target shooting those of us involved in the testing believed it would
be relatively easy to find information regarding the performance of jacketed bullets on the Internet.
That turned out not to be the case. Aside from the anecdotal evidence mentioned above there is a
dearth of hard data about how jacketed bullets interact with steel targets on the Internet. One of the

best sources that we found was a sales document from Porta-target, Inc. which describes the company's
products and how to use them. Other information was found in a series of papers put out by Dr. Mohan
Jauhari in The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science in the late 1960s and early
1970s. Other information can be inferred from the safety regulations of organizations such as the
USPSA, The Steel Challenge Shooting Association, and the Hartford Gun Club among others.
The Porta-Target document provided a great deal of information which helped determine the
design of the experiments that were later carried out. Of particular interest is the following section:
Very low-velocity bullets, very heavily jacketed or solid metal (non-lead) bullets designed for deep
penetration, and many types of shotgun pellets, may not fragment at all, even when they hit the target
sqaurely, but may instead deflect as whole bullets or pellets which can travel hundreds of yards...
(Porta-Target Safety Guide pp. 3)
A similar warning can be found in the safety rules of the (Different Gun Club) which cautions that
steel-core, jacketed bullets are not to be used on their steel target ranges. The danger of low-velocity
rounds is also noted in the safety regulations of the USPSA and the SCSA which both require the use of
ammunition with a minimum muzzle velocity of 750fps (irrespective of the type of bullet used). In
order to prevent damage to the targets themselves upper velocities of between 1350fps to 1500fps are
also imposed by various organizations and ranges on which steel targets are used again, the type of
bullet (jacketed or lead) is not at issue.
Aside from the bullet velocity information it was also found that it is well-known that the
splatter-zone of bullets fired at steel targets is in the shape of a cone of 20 relative to the surface of the
target. It is within this zone that the vast majority of bullet splatter was said to occur. Again, this
information comes from the Porta-Target Safety Guide and is illustrated on pp. 8 along with the
following text:
When a bullet hits an upright steel impact plate (such as our plate racks, pepper poppers, knock downs
and falling head plates) at more or less than a 90 degree angle, the bullet usually fragments into many
small pieces of bullet jacket and core. Provided the impact plate is flat and smooth, these fragments
splatter off it at angles of 0 degrees (that is, flat along the surface of the plate) to about 20 degrees from
the surface of the plate. (See Figure 1). This 0-20 degree splatter pattern extends in a complete 360
degree circle (like a clock face) around the impact plate. In other words, on an upright plate, the
splatter pattern extends not only out ot either side and down to the ground, but also straight up from the
plate and into the air above it.
This splatter pattern is taken into account when setting up steel targets for USPSA and SCSA
matches. The stage design documents of those organizations emphasize that shooting stages are to be
set up in such a manner that the 20 degree splatter cone does not extend in such a way that bystanders,
either shooters or spectators, are included within it. The steel stages of matches held here at (GUN
CLUB) follow the recommendations of the USPSA in regard to target placement and minimum range
of engagement. It is important to keep in mind that hundreds of matches, if not thousands, using steel
targets are held in USPSA and SCSA matches every year and no serious injuries have ever been
sustained from bullet fragments, so far as is known.
The papers by Dr. Jauhari provide a more detailed look at what happens when a bullet strikes a
hard surface such as a steel plate. He found that when a bullet strikes a steel plate at low angles of
impact (less than 45 degrees or so) its angle of departure from the plate is less than its angle of impact.

In his paper titled APPROXIMATE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ANGLES OF INCIDENCE AND
RICOCHET FOR PRACTICAL APPLICATION IN THE FIELD OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION he makes
the following statement:
In earlier papers (1, 2, 3, 4) the author had reported the results of bullet ricochet experiments
carried out on targets of diverse nature by firing low velocity handgun cartridges. These experiments brought out a very significant qualitative relationship between the angles of incidence and
ricochet viz. the angle of ricochet is less than the angle of incidence.
Thus, a bullet striking at 20 degrees will leave the plate at an angle of less than 20 degrees.
Dr. Jauhari found other items that are applicable to the question facing the (GUN CLUB) board. He
discovered that bullets hitting plates at any angle are badly deformed, if not totally fragmented, in such
a way as to lower the ballistic coefficient of the bullet so much that it will not travel more than a few
yards or feet. In his paper Bullet Ricochet from Metal Plates he reported:
A review of bullet ricochet data shows that the bullets became unstable after ricochet. During
the course of experiments it was observed that the bullets hit the deal board in all possible ways
after ricochet i.e. sideways, base forward, etc. To ensure that this instability was due to ricochet
and not due to impact on the deal board, paper screens were interposed in the bullet path from
the target to the deal board. The holes on the paper screens confirmed that the bullets were
indeed unstable after ricochet.
Lastly, he found that even impacts at very low angles of obliquity are enough to significantly deform
the bullet and degrade its ballistic coefficient greatly reducing the distance the bullet will travel
following the impact. In the same paper he summed up the results of bullet impacts on hard targets as:
An examination of the fired bullets revealed that they were invariably deformed...The bullets go
flattened on the side which bore the brunt of the impact....As a bullet not only becomes unstable
on account of ricochet but is also deformed, it is clear that it is bound to have an erratic path
after ricochet and lose velocity at a rapid rate.
It is important to understand that the above statements relate to bullets that have not fragmented, but
remained largely intact due to low angles of impact. As is evident even those projectiles are not
capable of traveling very far.
The exact angle of impact varies with the type, caliber, and velocity of the bullet, but in all cases angles
of impact greater than approximately 30 degrees resulted in the fragmentation of the bullet unless the
bullet was moving slower than roughly 700fps. The exception to this rule, which Dr. Jauhari
documented, was with .38 Special Ball ammunition of 600fps velocity, in which case it was necessary
for the bullet to strike the plate at an angle greater than 55 degrees in order to assure bullet destruction.
It is important to note that this round is moving much slower than the recommended 750fps and its
resistance to fragmentation accords with not only Dr. Jauhari's other data, but with the results the we
here at (GUN CLUB) obtained.

Summary of results of (GUN CLUB) experiments

(Member 2) set out to design a set of experiments that would provide us with a picture of what
happens to a bullet after it strikes a steel plate. The structure of these experiments is outlined in the
second section of this report. One of the most important results of the tests is that they confirmed the
information found in the Porta-Target product documentation (information which (Member 2) did not
have when designing the tests) the vast majority of fragments are confined within a 20 degree cone
referenced to the surface of the plate. Our series of tests also produced results that confirm those of Dr.
Jauhari: bullets lose significant ballistic efficiency after striking a hard target if they do not fragment
altogether, they lose most of their energy in the initial collision, and they do not pose a danger of
significant harm after traveling only a few yards following the initial collision.
It was found that standard lead bullets fragment into pieces that are, on average, larger and
heavier than those which result from jacketed bullets. The use of Ranier or similar plated lead
rounds resulted in fragments of significant size certainly capable of inflicting serious injury if moving
at high velocity. The size of the Ranier fragments appeared to be independent of the muzzle velocity of
the round in question. However, as none of the fragments were found more than roughly four feet in
front of the target(s) this is not considered to be a serious safety concern provided that shooting stages
are designed according to USPSA and SCSA guidelines.
It was also found that jacketed bullets, when driven at velocities higher than 750fps
disintegrated into very small pieces smaller than half a little fingernail. In no cases were fragments
found which combined both lead and jacket material. Instead, the pieces that were found were plain
jacket material (with an occasional small smear of lead) of low mass and little penetration power.
In no cases were fragments of significant size found to be projected back toward the firing line.
This was confirmed by two tests: the examination of the front witness panels of the target enclosures
and shooting straight through a cardboard target placed in front of the falling plate target. While some
small fragments were found on the panels the vast majority were not capable of penetrating even foam
bead board at a range of less than two feet. Such fragments obviously pose no threat to either shooters
or bystanders. Meanwhile, no fragments were found to have struck the witness board that was shot
through to a target directly behind it.
Based on the examination of the area in front of the target enclosures, combined with the results
borne out by the front witness panels in the enclosures there is an explanation for how relatively large
pieces of bullets end up in front of the targets. The only conclusion that makes sense based on the
available evidence, combined with what is known about the 20 degree splatter cone, is that the
fragments found in front of the enclosures got there by being ejected from the top of the target at some
angle and then falling in front of the target. This also explains how fragments sometimes travel back to
the firing line and strike shooters and spectators fragments follow a ballistic arc from the top of the
target leading back to the area of the firing line. It further explains the presence of fragments on the
tarp in the area between the target enclosures and the hole through which the bullets were shot. Bullet
fragments traveling upwards but at a non-perpendicular angle would fall to earth in that area.
The tests on the falling plate rack targets were slightly different in that there were a series of
tests in which the target were shot directly through the witness panels as described above. In no case
were any bullets or fragments thereof found in the witness panels, which were made of corrugated
cardboard. When one considers the physics of the impact of a bullet with a stationary target it is easy
to see why this is the case. In order for a bullet to be reflected back more-or-less directly along the line
of incoming fire it would have to come to a total stop before beginning its backward trip. When one
considers that such collisions are non-elastic in nature it is obvious that a bullet cannot reflect in such a
way. Our experiment confirmed this.

One of the questions in the minds of some in regard to the falling plate targets was whether or
not the target movement would affect the resulting splatter pattern. It turned out that the inertia of the
targets is such that they don't move during the length of time it takes for the bullet to be destroyed.
This means that there is no change to the dimension or angle of the splatter cone that is observed with
stationary targets.
One of the things which became more apparent during the plate rack testing is the fall-off in the
size and number of fragments as the distance from the targets increases. This was expected given the
nature of the phenomenon of bullet fragmentation, but, contrary to some expectations, the larger
fragments were found closest to the targets with only small fragments further away. While only highspeed photography would prove it, it is suspected that the large fragments do not retain much velocity
following the collision with the target while the small fragments do, likely because they are ejected late
in the process of bullet destruction after much energy has already been lost.
Another item which became evident is that fragment size is largely an inverse relation to the
velocity of the bullet: the faster the projectile the smaller the fragments produced. It became apparent
during testing that large, slow-moving bullets have the greatest potential for producing large,
potentially dangerous fragments. It is because of this potential that organizations such as USPSA and
SCSA set lower muzzle velocity limits for their matches. Velocities above 750fps are required to
ensure bullet destruction.
It was originally planned to fire more rounds at the plate racks than ended up being the case.
This is because the results of the initial round of plate rack tests were the same as those from the tests
on the stationary targets. As we were not obtaining any different results and no anomalies were
observed in any tests it was decided to terminate the plate rack tests early.

Recommendation
Based on the results of our research and testing the action pistol division has three
recommendations for the Board of Directors to act upon:
1) Set a lower velocity limit of 750fps for all ammunition used on steel targets. This will
help to ensure that all bullets, regardless of type, are destroyed on impact with a steel
target. It was shown during testing at (GUN CLUB) and in that done by Dr. Jauhari
almost forty years ago that lower velocities do not guarantee bullet destruction which
can result in large pieces of flattened lead traveling several yards after impact with the
target. Such pieces have, on occasion, been known to travel as far as the firing line and
can pose a threat of injury, though, likely, still not of a serious nature. This practice is
also in keeping with the practices established by both the USPSA and SCSA in regard to
ammunition velocities.
2) Authorize the purchase of a portable chronograph for use by the action pistol division to
test ammunition for adherence to muzzle velocity guidelines would enable the club to
ensure that all bullets fired meet the established requirements. Up to this time we have
been using chronographs owned by various club members, but there is no guarantee that
those would be available when needed. Having a club-owned chronograph would allow
for the establishment of standard testing procedures in case of there being questions
about any batch of ammunition.
3) Lift the prohibition on the use of jacketed bullets on steel targets. Allowing the use of
jacketed bullets does not present a significant safety issue for either shooters or
spectators. This is borne out by the experiments carried out at (GUN CLUB),

information found from various sources on the Internet, and the fact that hundreds of
matches, if not thousands, are held every year under the auspices of the USPSA and
SCSA without serious injury being suffered by anyone. Given the great amount of
experience that other clubs and organizations have using jacketed bullets on steel targets
there is no credible evidence that such ammunition presents a threat of serious injury
provided that established safety precautions are followed. Will people be struck by
small fragments of bullets from time to time? Yes, that is inevitable given the nature of
the target and bullet combination. However, it is the opinion of those of us who took
part in the tests here at (GUN CLUB) that it is plain lead and plated lead bullets which
present the biggest risk in this area. Again, this is reinforced by the vast amount of
experience that other clubs and organizations have acquired over the last twenty or more
years: experience which has led every other club in the area to allow the use of jacketed
bullets of all types, including hollow points, in their steel target matches.

Acknowledgements
The author of this report would like to thank the following people for help with testing, editing,
data analysis, photography, and the myriad of other tasks which went into putting this paper together.
Those people include (Member 1) for her work in designing the tests and analyzing the results
obtained; (Member 3) for designing and building the target enclosures without which the tests would
have been impossible; (Safety Officer), the (GUN CLUB) Safety Officer for his work in approving the
test design and the methods used to perform the tests; (Club President), (GUN CLUB) President for his
support of the testing process and his advice as to how to get them done. The following persons helped
out by doing the actual shooting: in no particular order they are; (Bunch of GUN CLUB Members) For
helping with communications and coordination, (Member who fills everyone's email inbox with shit).
If I have left anyone out it is my fault and not intended to disparage their help in any way. This was a
large, complex project and the contributions of everyone involved, no matter how small, are
appreciated.
Thanks very much (Action Pistol Director), head of the action pistol Division.