Are there any official standards for close, medium, and long range?

[Jason_W]

This is something I've always wondered about. At what point does close range become medium range and medium range become long range?

Obviously definitions will change according to weapon type. A 100 yard shot is not a problem with a rifle, but it's quite a feat with a handgun.

 

[Hondo 60]

Not AFAIK.
It depends on the gun.
Are you talking handgun? rifle? shotgun?

I think it's kinda obvious that long range for a handgun is gonna be a lot shorter than long range for a 30-06.

 

[torqem]

a lot depends upon the gun, size of target, mobility of target, firing position, load, the lighting and shootist, really. Using a derringer, firing with both barrels, on a dodging man, in the dark, arm's length distance is "long range" for most shooters. So is hitting a barn, in daylight at more than 30 yds. From sitting braced, using an Xp100, scoped, hitting a playing card at 100 yds is nothing much. and some can do it at 200 yds. An XP is a pretty extreme case for a "handgun" , but some of the target .22's will reliably hit a hen's egg at 50 yds, using iron sights, from sitting braced. A lot of "gun-people" can't do that with an ironsighted rifle, from standing unsupported. This is especially true if the rifle is a milsurp clunker bolt, without ear protection.

Put a scope on that 06 bolt, demand hits on bobbing heads, around cover, in the dark, and the effective range is going to be pretty short. Especially during the few minute duration that the muzzle flash has ruined your night-adapted vision.

There's really no agreed upon, hard and fast definitions for "good accuracy" or "rapidfire" or "high-powered", "short' (or long) barreled", or "fast draw", either. Some people "think" that a shot every 5 seconds, with a single shot rifle, is really humping, and others, like Jerry Miculek, know that they are loafing along at 1/4 second per shot.

 

[Jason_W]

For a rifle, I would personally call less than 100 yards close range, 100-300 yards medium range, 301-500 yards long range, and anything past 500 yards to be extremely long range.

 

[Skribs]

You bring up an interesting point, Hondo. See, I've lumped em all together. Ranges where pistols/shotguns are effective is "short range". Ranges where small-caliber rifles are effective are "medium range" and where you want a scope and some beef behind that bullet, it's "long range". My definition would be 0-100 short, 100-500 medium, and 500+ long. But like I said, that's my definition.

 

[MutinousDoug]

NRA defines "Short Range" as out to 200yds; "Medium range" out to 600yds and "Long Range" as 800 to 1000yds for competitive shooting.
I would describe "hunting" ranges as something less than those.

 

[bldsmith]

For me, Short range is when I can hit the target with ease, every time.

Medium range is where it takes me a couple seconds to check breathing from a decent rest and can hit the tgt.

Long range is where I need a good steady rest, prone, fence post ect, calm down check breathing do all the stuff they teach you. Run the scenario wind range etc before I take the shot.

I feel it will depend on the individual. Different for each of us.

 

[holdencm9]

Point Blank Range for the M16 is something like 350 yards or so. So I guess that is short range.

Seriously though, it brings up another point. One could argue that short range is before the first zero, medium range is between the zeros, and long range is beyond the second zero, or beyond MPBR (therefore requiring you adjust for elevation).

(PS I just checked...For a 62 grain at 3000 fps, 50 yard zero, the second zero will be at about 220 yards, and at 325 yards it is 9 inches low.)

 

[Chief 101]

25 yards is long range for my SP101 with a 2" bbl

 

[Warp]

This is something I've always wondered about. At what point does close range become medium range and medium range become long range?

Obviously definitions will change according to weapon type. A 100 yard shot is not a problem with a rifle, but it's quite a feat with a handgun.

There is no answer to this question.

Those are subjective terms that vary by context.

A 100 shot could be a huge problem for a rifle. It depends on what the shot is. If you have an iron sighted AK pattern rifle and somebody is shooting at you from cover at 100 yards with nothing but their muzzle and forehead area showing, that shot could be a huge problem for you.

Hitting a stationary fully exposed man or deer sized target at 100 yards from a stationary supported position with an accurate sighted in rifle, well, that's entirely different and should not be a problem.

I can put every shot from my carry gun onto a full size silhouette at 50 yards standing unsupported. But that's a FULL size silhouette facing me head on, motionless, while I stand still, and I take my time. What does that apply to in the real world? Not very much, probably.

 

[ball3006]

The different ranges will become appearant when you can no longer hit the target at the ranges you are shooting at. If you determine that a different gun is needed to shoot further, practice comes into play....chris3

 

[torqem]

even 25 yd pistol work doesn't apply to civilian justified self defense, really. Nobody has ever proven that they could do it, reliably, while they were being shot at. What we always see is lots of misses, or one fluke hit/shot. Without ear protection, things get much, much harder, on top of the stress of a lethal encounter, moving target, etc.

What is normally seen is at best, 50% hits on the chest, 50% misses, at 5 yds,much less 15 yds. 50 yds is out of the question. Perhaps from a braced firing position, ambush, with ear protection, if you were a merc in Iraq, or something like that. But you're a fool to stand there, fully exposed, trying to hit men with a pistol at 25 yds. What you'll do is empty your mag, and hit nothing, most likely. Save your ammo and use the many seconds of time you aint wasting by moving to cover, preferably laterally and to your rear. If they can hit you while you are running across their front, they'd also have hit you a lot sooner if you stood there.

 

[Cee Zee]

A 100 yard shot is not a problem with a rifle, but it's quite a feat with a handgun.

Some handguns can do that 100 yards easily. I shoot my S&W 629 out to 175 yards with decent accuracy (defined by me as being able to hit a man size torso on pretty much every shot). If I mounted a scope on that pistol I'm sure I could get accuracy at even longer distances. And yes it's drilled and tapped so you can mount a scope. I've seen a truly great shooter (Bob Munden) do very well with a snub nose S&W (2 inch barrel) at 250 yards. He held the gun upside down to shoot it too. I believe that actually gave him an advantage though. Bob was declared the "fastest gun" that ever lived (he's not the gun - they used the old west term for a fast draw) by the Guinness Book Of World Records (which no longer includes shooting records unfortunately due to pressure from school library book buyers who refused to buy copies of the book if it included gun records. There are certainly other shooters who could challenge for that title now but Munden always argued that they used heavily modifed guns while he used what he called "real firearms". I'm in awe of all those people personally.

As for your question I think many people use the NRA guidelines to define close, medium and long range for rifles.

 

[gym]

To me short range is a distance that I can easily hit the target pretty much every time without aiming. That is different for everyone. Medium range is different with each weapon, generally it would be a distance that required one to aim, and focus prior to firing the gun.
Long range I think of an assisted aiming device, perhaps a scope. A higher level of concentration and focus, some training in order to accomplish a consistent pattern of hitting the target 75% of the time of more.
This is highly subjective and different for everyone. Everyone requires a different level of training.

 

[TRX]

Beats me. I'm still stuck on how the .223 came to be called a "high power rifle" cartridge...

 

[gym]

Yes I agree with you on that point also. I remember my uncles used them on woodchucks , and other varmints. And they were all hunters all of their lives plus one was a gunsmith and all were ex military. Deer rifles were 30-06. they had 223, 243, 270, and several others for small game. Different times and different ammo, but the 223 has become the end all rifle for everything, and it really is not. There are better calibers for specific options.
I have an Ar also, it's a great all around gun if you don't have access to others.