Target shooting with 0.22 rifle

[Bongo3]

I belong to a target club were the airguns used are predominately 0.177 with the odd 0.22 being used. There is a belief among some members that if 0.22 rifles are used they cause more damage to the target backplate. Would be grateful if anyone has the knowledge to clarify this without going into too much detail as that would be wasted on myself.

[harvey_s]

All I know is the .177 boys were shooting at an enamel plate at 50 yards at my club and they were chipping and denting it.

My .22 was punching holes in it.... whoops

...and Yes, it was under 12ft/lbs cos' I checked afterwards .

[RobF]

If you check out Chairgun https://www.hawkeoptics.com/chairgun...d-of-life.html it will allow you to compare the downrange energy of your .22 pellet vs the .177 others use. You'll more than likely find it's well within tolerances

[Scott.]

It's nonsense, were it the case then the UKAHFT and many other competition organisers would have banned them from their events.
The only extra damage a .22 does is that it removes slightly more paint from the target than a .177 does

[Bongo3]

If you check out Chairgun https://www.hawkeoptics.com/chairgun...d-of-life.html it will allow you to compare the downrange energy of your .22 pellet vs the .177 others use. You'll more than likely find it's well within tolerances

Thanks for your reply Rob as I understand it the legal limit is in relation to the force required to stop the pellet so taking into consideration the lower speed and bigger surface area of a .22 pellet would it actually cause anymore physical damage to a backplate, personally I think not but thats only my thoughts as I don't have any qualifications in ballistics

[angrybear]

I belong to a target club were the airguns used are predominately 0.177 with the odd 0.22 being used. There is a belief among some members that if 0.22 rifles are used they cause more damage to the target backplate. Would be grateful if anyone has the knowledge to clarify this without going into too much detail as that would be wasted on myself.

12ftlb is the maximum energy that a non FAC air rifle can have at the muzzle.

That predetermined energy is why lighter .177 fly faster than heavier .22, but they both contain the same energy in flight.
The .22 will retain fractionally more energy over distance due to better BC but probably only in the 5-10% range, & at impact that energy has a greater surface area to dissipate over.

They may be confused because in hunting a .22 does more damage, but that is because .177 often exit the target taking wasted energy with them,
with a solid target/backstop all the energy transfers from pellet to target.

[averageplinker]

I think it depends on what the backstop is made out of.

I used to shoot at an indoor range where we had to stop using .22" air. The reason was not damage caused, but due to rebound risk.

.177" air and .22" rimfire would penetrate the ballistic curtain and be stopped by the steel backplate (reputedly a section of scrapped warship hull, but I digress). However .22" air even close to the limit would often bounce back to the firing line.

Could this be the reason at your club?

[Rog5]

I think it depends on what the backstop is made out of.

I used to shoot at an indoor range where we had to stop using .22" air. The reason was not damage caused, but due to rebound risk.

.177" air and .22" rimfire would penetrate the ballistic curtain and be stopped by the steel backplate (reputedly a section of scrapped warship hull, but I digress). However .22" air even close to the limit would often bounce back to the firing line.

Could this be the reason at your club?

And this is the reason that I stopped shooters using.22 on a 25yd indoor range that I ran, bounce back off the linotex, same reason for golf balls

[rapidresponse1]

never really noticed it my self

[martini1215]

I shoot on a 25 yard indoor range at Keelby .22 long rifle shooters and Air rifle users shoot LSR there, but if the airgunners forget to push the linatex out of the way before starting shooting pellets always whizz back through the target with amazing speed. Its far preferable for them to use the pellet catchers the same as the .177 shooters but I have never heard anyone voice an opinion that .22 air rifle damages the backplates more than .177.

[Steyr]

Targets have a limited lifespan anyway. And as .22 and target air rifle work isn't really that common, I would put it down to normal wear and tear and renewable life spans for kit.

Pointed pellets on the other hand do muller plates.

The paddles can always be removed and any dishing hammered flat again.

[Turnup]

Energies being equal, the heavier .22 pellet will have more momentum than the .177 pellet. This may or may not translate into more damage, it all depends on the nature of the target.

As already noted by others, the slower .22 has more tendency for lively rebound.

[cantthinkof1]

When you say "damage" to the backplate, surely it's as simple as a bigger chunk of paint being knocked off. If the backplates were actually at risk of breaking due to a pellet strike, they would obviously not be fit for purpose.

[RobF]

And this is the reason that I stopped shooters using.22 on a 25yd indoor range that I ran, bounce back off the linotex, same reason for golf balls

That happens with .177 of varying powers as well. Linotex isn't suitable for air.

[Bongo3]

Thanks to everyone for their opinions on this topic, and to answer some of the questions raised.
The target backplates are steel and very effective at stopping the pellets dead which is evident in the lead collector directly underneath. There is a a linatex curtain for the rimfire shooters behind their target boards approx 27yrds from the air weapons firing line but there is a further curtain in front of this to prevent pellets from reaching this but even so would a pellet have sufficient energy to travel 27yrds have some of its energy absorbed by the linatex then rebound 27yrds back to the firing line? In these days of Elf and safety probably yes but in the good old days of common sense I doubt it