There seem to be regular discussions on here about a couple of common issues with FEOs, being (i) not to allow anything more powerful than a .243 for newcomers, and (ii) to be extremely difficult about anything larger than .30 cal, either refusing an application or putting utterly stupid conditions on them.
Now, the purpose here isn't to argue about whether a backstop for one cartridge is good enough for another but to consider whether there is any truth to the idea that a more powerful rifle is actually more dangerous to the public if used negligently, i,e. without a backstop.
So, I've plugged some figures into a ballistic calculator for some varmint, deer, big bore and long range sniping cartridges at muzzle, 250m, 500m, 750m and 1000m.
I’ve put big bore cartridges in red.
.223 Rem: 1,209 - 607 - 274 - 129 - 87
.22-250 Rem: 1,562 - 806 - 380 - 167 - 99
.243 Win: 1,933 - 1,239 - 757 - 447 - 278
6.5 Creedmoor: 2,402 - 1,826 - 1,364 - 1,000 - 724
.270 Win: 2,686 - 1,872 - 1,268 - 830 - 535
.308 Win: 2,620 - 1,830 - 1,241 - 832 - 553
.300 Win Mag: 3,598 - 2,542 - 1,747 - 1,165 - 764
.338 Lap Mag: 4,787 - 3,858 - 3,076 - 2,424 - 1,889
.375 H&H: 4,614 - 2,901 - 1,738 - 1,027 - 685
.416 Rem Mag: 5,117 - 2,838 - 1,512 - 934 - 703
.458 Win Mag: 5,133 - 2,638 - 1,400 - 964 - 749
.50 BMG: 13,058 - 11,127 - 9,430 - 7,940 - 6,642
.505 Gibbs: 5,903 - 2,873 - 1,442 - 975 - 747
What jumps out is that while the big bore cartridges have very high muzzle energy, they don’t keep it. Beyond 500m there is very little to call in terms of the energy difference. I would also add that, aside from the 6.5 Creedmoor, I used bullets with ‘average’ BCs rather than ELDs etc, so the ‘normal’ cartridges could close the small gap with a change of bullet.
Making a bit of an assumption, I would think the risk to the public (what little there is) is more likely to be at longer range than shorter, when looking at negligent shots with poor backstops.
Having done this, I’d go so far as to say there is no appreciable difference between the big bores and normal deer cartridges out passed 500-600m in terms of the energy on target. Given how robust most big bore bullets are, I’d wager they may be less dangerous to a human than a more frangible deer bullet at those ranges but that is a little beside the point.
Based on this, I cannot see any particular justification for the approach that FEOs take to big bores. If you’re hit with a centrefire anything within 400-500m (the range where the big bore has a particular advantage) your day is going to be ruined regardless of what cartridge. Beyond that, it’s still going to be ruined but there is little difference to by how much.
I guess the bad news is it does show a real difference in ballistics at those ranges between varmint and deer cartridges, with even the .243 lagging behind in the long range energy department. So could justify a slightly different approach between say a .223 and .308.
Also, the long range sniping cartridges (apologies, I couldn’t think of a better name) do show much better energy retention and, on that metric alone, could justify a more cautious approach by the FEO.
Other views are appreciated, so please comment away! I just thought it would be interesting to put some figures to what many of us probably suspected.
Now, the purpose here isn't to argue about whether a backstop for one cartridge is good enough for another but to consider whether there is any truth to the idea that a more powerful rifle is actually more dangerous to the public if used negligently, i,e. without a backstop.
So, I've plugged some figures into a ballistic calculator for some varmint, deer, big bore and long range sniping cartridges at muzzle, 250m, 500m, 750m and 1000m.
I’ve put big bore cartridges in red.
.223 Rem: 1,209 - 607 - 274 - 129 - 87
.22-250 Rem: 1,562 - 806 - 380 - 167 - 99
.243 Win: 1,933 - 1,239 - 757 - 447 - 278
6.5 Creedmoor: 2,402 - 1,826 - 1,364 - 1,000 - 724
.270 Win: 2,686 - 1,872 - 1,268 - 830 - 535
.308 Win: 2,620 - 1,830 - 1,241 - 832 - 553
.300 Win Mag: 3,598 - 2,542 - 1,747 - 1,165 - 764
.338 Lap Mag: 4,787 - 3,858 - 3,076 - 2,424 - 1,889
.375 H&H: 4,614 - 2,901 - 1,738 - 1,027 - 685
.416 Rem Mag: 5,117 - 2,838 - 1,512 - 934 - 703
.458 Win Mag: 5,133 - 2,638 - 1,400 - 964 - 749
.50 BMG: 13,058 - 11,127 - 9,430 - 7,940 - 6,642
.505 Gibbs: 5,903 - 2,873 - 1,442 - 975 - 747
What jumps out is that while the big bore cartridges have very high muzzle energy, they don’t keep it. Beyond 500m there is very little to call in terms of the energy difference. I would also add that, aside from the 6.5 Creedmoor, I used bullets with ‘average’ BCs rather than ELDs etc, so the ‘normal’ cartridges could close the small gap with a change of bullet.
Making a bit of an assumption, I would think the risk to the public (what little there is) is more likely to be at longer range than shorter, when looking at negligent shots with poor backstops.
Having done this, I’d go so far as to say there is no appreciable difference between the big bores and normal deer cartridges out passed 500-600m in terms of the energy on target. Given how robust most big bore bullets are, I’d wager they may be less dangerous to a human than a more frangible deer bullet at those ranges but that is a little beside the point.
Based on this, I cannot see any particular justification for the approach that FEOs take to big bores. If you’re hit with a centrefire anything within 400-500m (the range where the big bore has a particular advantage) your day is going to be ruined regardless of what cartridge. Beyond that, it’s still going to be ruined but there is little difference to by how much.
I guess the bad news is it does show a real difference in ballistics at those ranges between varmint and deer cartridges, with even the .243 lagging behind in the long range energy department. So could justify a slightly different approach between say a .223 and .308.
Also, the long range sniping cartridges (apologies, I couldn’t think of a better name) do show much better energy retention and, on that metric alone, could justify a more cautious approach by the FEO.
Other views are appreciated, so please comment away! I just thought it would be interesting to put some figures to what many of us probably suspected.
Last edited:
