What are the pratical range limitation of semi auto calibers?

General rules are belt size service handgun maximum effective range is 50 meters with 25 meters being the effective combat conditions range.

Pocket size and caliber semi auto handgun maximum effective range is 25 meters with maximum combat effective range of 10 meters.

These figures reflect the modern service handgun calibers of .45 acp- 9mm Parabellum-.40 S&W-.357 Sig and the modern common pocket calibers of .380 acp & .32 acp

There are better and worse calibers that are not factored due to obsolescence and/or low numbers of actual use as combat/service weapon calibers.

There is no difference between calibers as to how an individual shooter would or might aim the handgun and everyone has an individual practice in this matter. hth

For the distances normally applied to defensive semi-auto pistol shooting is there also a significant caliber restriction or difference with regard to effective range limitation?

Click to expand...

Not a practical one. "Defensive" distances are usually thought of as close. Citizen defensive shootings are not usually considered to be taking place outside of 10-15 yards, with the big fat part of the probability curve located at the "contact-to-5 yds" end of the chart. All of the common service cartridges work just fine at those sorts of distances.

In other words, shooting across a 20 foot room for example, is there any notable difference in how you might aim a .380 as opposed to a .40?

Click to expand...

No. Bullet trajectory of all of those cartridges is really pretty flat out as far as you'd be willing/compelled to shoot defensively.

How far back would you have to be from a target to render the smaller calibers as unsuitable?

Click to expand...

That's one of those impossible to really answer questions. In defensive use distances you aren't going to be worrying about "drop" due to trajectory, so the other thing to consider is energy sufficient to cause penetration. How much damage/penetration/expansion a bullet can achieve will depend on a lot of factors but in the end, if you can hit the attacker in the torso at a given distance, your bullet will probably be pretty effective at changing his plans. But a hit with a .32 at 20 yards may break off the attack in one situation, and a hit with a .45 at contact distance might not stop another. There aren't any guarantees. That's why we practice to shoot (and HIT!) until the threat stops.

I am wondering if the only real difference is that they would both strike their target OK but with varying results?

Click to expand...

I guess the answer would be "yes." There will be no difference in aiming, and any cartridge is as capable of hitting a human-sized target at >100 yds as any other. (If your skill can put it where it's supposed to go.) How deeply it penetrates that target when it gets there will vary to some degree.

Not a great answer, but: No, no, and no to each of your three questions.

In my opinion more pertinent factors would be, (1) Shot placement. (2) Bullet velocity. (3) Recoil impulse, especially as it relates to a cartridge's peak ignition pressure; and below 1200 FPS the conventional pistol ballistic standbys of: (4) bullet weight, hardness, meplat design, and (cross) sectional density. (5) A potential bullet penetration of greater than 12 inches in ballistic gelatin.

As for useful muzzle energy? Dr. Michael Courtney (Whose hydrostatic shock theories become more and more validated with each passing year.) likes bullets that are able to equal or exceed a minimum of 500 ft-lb of energy. (I believe at the muzzle.) Anyway, I agree with the good doctor and think he’s taken far more criticism and abuse from internet gun forum, ‘peanut galleries’ than he rightfully deserves to hear.

Translation? It's usually tougher to shoot a 40 caliber or 10mm handgun than it is to shoot a 38 Special or 9 x 19mm. More cartridge ignition pressure equals greater difficulty in managing your front sight dwell time and/or controlling the recoil, especially between shots. Below 12 FPS bigger, heavier, and harder bullets with more (cross) sectional density tend to perform better than softer, lighter, more pointed bullet designs.

e.g., http://www.chuckhawks.com/sd_beginners.htm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stopping_power, and http://arxiv.org/pdf/0803.3051.pdf .

http://xn--http-996a//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stopping_power”

"This webpage is not available"


Which is probably about the best thing anyone ever said about handgun stopping power.

Range limitation is primarily decided by combined capability of shooter and gun.

With a capable shooter, and even without being a IDPA champion, a good shooter with most good quality service pistol can engage a man sized target even out to 100m, which may be plausible if engaging an active shooter in open.


While you won't have to worry much about drop, you DO have to consider aim point adjustment for elevation at longer distance because most mass produced pistols are not actually "zeroed." If your pistol hits 3 inch below aim point at 25m, probably not because of "drop" but the way the sights are, then you may have to aim considerably higher at 50m, and even higher at 75m.

I've seen some pistols that hit ridiculously low or high even within 30m.

Even a 22 LR is plenty lethal at 100m. But, depending on bullet construction, you might see less reliable hollow point expansion when speed of the bullet drops below certain point.

Not fully proven, it seems

Hokkmike said:

For the distances normally applied to defensive semi-auto pistol shooting is there also a significant caliber restriction or difference with regard to effective range limitation?

Click to expand...

There are two parts to your question;
1. How does accuracy change with distance? And,
2. How does incapacitation change with distance?

Accuracy is not particularly affected at all. Smaller calibers tend to have less overall range, so they tend to 'drop' faster. But not enough to affect accuracy.

"Effective range" is the distance where a projectile hit on target has a good probability of incapacitating the target. This, by the way is completely independent of any thoughts or theories about how far one 'should' be shooting to defend one's self.

One can also make the argument that no handgun has an "effective range"; that is, no handgun will reliably incapacitate an attacker. However, that's another argumentative position with little direct bearing on the question here.

Hokkmike said:

In other words, shooting across a 20 foot room for example, is there any notable difference in how you might aim a .380 as opposed to a .40? How far back would you have to be from a target to render the smaller calibers as unsuitable?

Click to expand...

Within twenty feet, no. Yes, there will be a 'measurable' difference in impact sites - if the testing is rigorous and scientific. But not enough to make any material difference.

Hokkmike said:

I am wondering if the only real difference is that they would both strike their target OK but with varying results?

Click to expand...

This is the real substance of the discussion. Within 'common' self-defense ranges - usually five to ten FEET - impact is not going to matter. However, all other factors being equal, a bullet with more momentum and/or kinetic energy will have more effect than a bullet with less energy.

No doubt you've heard the proverb, "A good hit with a small caliber beats a bad hit with a large caliber". It is true. However, a good hit with a large caliber beats a good hit with a small caliber.

One of the problems with self-defense shooting is the typical inability to make good, accurate hits on the attacker. My conclusion is one needs all the margin of error one can get. So one's defense sidearm should be as much as one can properly handle.

Multiple discussions refer to the tightest groups at 20' etc, and imply that this equals adequate self-defense skills.

I never read much about attackers (civilian settings) being so far away, or standing still like a static target....

The effective range for full-size service pistols can be as far as 100 yards (.45 1911) or 200 meters (9mm Browning Hi-Power) as has been proven on targets and in actual use. My point? It's not the gun but the shooters skill that defines limitations.

To a smaller degree smaller pocket pistols are also effective at longer distances then most people think, but they are handicapped because of (usually) small, hard to see, sights and lighter weight.

So for practical considerations you don't have to worry about distance - in and of itself. What is more important is the shooter's marksmanship skills under stress, and terminal ballistics performance of the ammunition being used.