Evaluating Whether an Existing Range Is Worth Upgrading

For many range owners, the question is not whether their facility could perform better. It is whether upgrading the existing range makes sense at all.

Older shooting ranges often remain operational for decades, even as training demands increase, safety expectations evolve, and equipment ages beyond its original design life. Some facilities can be successfully modernized. Others reach a point where upgrades become a costly cycle of temporary fixes rather than a true improvement.

Knowing the difference requires more than a surface inspection. It requires a structured evaluation of performance, safety, lifecycle cost, and long-term usability.

This guide walks through how to determine whether an existing range is a strong candidate for upgrades or whether a more comprehensive redesign or replacement should be considered.

Why This Decision Is More Complex Than It Looks

Many shooting range owners approach upgrades reactively. A backstop is wearing faster than expected. Target carriers are failing more often. Maintenance downtime is increasing. At first glance, these feel like isolated problems.

In reality, they are often symptoms of deeper design limitations.

Most older ranges were built around assumptions that no longer match how the facility is actually used. Firing volumes may be higher. Training blocks may be longer. Caliber mix may have shifted. Expectations around safety margins and operational efficiency may be higher than when the range was originally designed.

Upgrading without understanding those underlying mismatches can lock a facility into years of incremental spending without ever solving the root problem.

Step One: Clarify the Range’s Current Role

Before evaluating shooting range equipment or infrastructure, the first question to answer is simple.

What is this range actually being used for today?

Many ranges evolve far beyond their original purpose. A facility built for casual public use may now support structured training. A range designed for occasional qualification may now operate daily with back-to-back sessions.

Key questions to ask include:

• Who uses the range most frequently
• What types of training occur regularly
• How long sessions typically last
• Whether multiple skill levels use the space
• How often instructors are actively managing the firing line

If the range’s current role no longer aligns with how it was designed, upgrades may need to address more than just worn components.

Evaluating Structural Viability First

Before looking at backstops or target systems, it is essential to confirm that the physical structure can support meaningful upgrades.

Some constraints cannot be economically changed.

Consider the following structural factors:

• Lane length and ceiling height
• Wall geometry and containment boundaries
• Load bearing capacity for new equipment
• Space for safe downrange access and maintenance
• Ability to support modern ventilation and lighting layouts

If structural limitations prevent proper equipment placement or safe maintenance access, upgrades may be restricted to partial solutions.

A range can be operational yet still structurally misaligned with modern safety and performance expectations.

Understanding Backstop Condition Versus Backstop Design

Backstop wear alone does not automatically justify replacement or upgrade. The more important question is whether the backstop was designed for the way the range is currently used.

Evaluate not only visible wear but also design compatibility.

Important considerations include:

• Calibers currently being fired versus original design assumptions
• Firing distance consistency across lanes
• Angle of impact and projectile behavior
• Fragment containment predictability
• Ease of maintenance and service access

In many older ranges, accelerated wear occurs because the backstop was never designed for the firing volume or usage pattern now demanded of it.

Upgrading a backstop may be worthwhile if the surrounding structure supports proper integration and future serviceability. If not, replacement may only delay recurring issues.

Projectile Behavior Matters More Than Surface Condition

One of the most overlooked upgrade considerations is projectile behavior.

Modern range design places heavy emphasis on predictable deflection and fragment control. Older systems often focused primarily on stopping the projectile, with less attention paid to how fragments behave after impact.

Warning signs include:

• Excessive ricochet patterns
• Unpredictable fragment travel
• Damage occurring outside expected impact zones
• Increased need for protective secondary containment

If projectile behavior is inconsistent, upgrades must address geometry and integration, not just surface materials.

Target Systems and Their Hidden Impact on Operations

Target systems are often upgraded for convenience or reliability. However, their impact on range operations runs deeper than many owners realize.

Older systems may:

• Require frequent manual intervention
• Limit instructor control
• Increase downtime during failures
• Create inconsistent shooter experience across lanes

When evaluating whether to upgrade target systems, it is important to consider how they support the range’s primary users.

Instructor led environments benefit from systems that allow centralized control and predictable operation. Public ranges may prioritize simplicity and durability.

If target system limitations are actively shaping how training is conducted, an upgrade may deliver value far beyond mechanical reliability.

Throughput and Scheduling Efficiency

One of the strongest indicators that a range may be worth upgrading is throughput strain.

Signs include:

• Difficulty maintaining consistent session schedules
• Frequent delays between groups
• Increased reset time between training blocks
• Instructor workload rising faster than shooter count

These issues are rarely solved by equipment alone. They often stem from layout and system integration.

Upgrades that improve flow, reduce downtime, and support back to back sessions can significantly increase a range’s usable capacity without expanding square footage.

Maintenance Reality Versus Maintenance Intentions

Many facilities intend to follow preventive maintenance schedules. Few are actually designed to make that easy.

When evaluating upgrade potential, assess how maintenance is currently performed in practice.

Key questions include:

• How often downrange access is required
• Whether maintenance can occur without shutting down lanes
• How safe and efficient service access is
• Whether components are modular or require full removal

If maintenance is disruptive, risky, or deferred due to design constraints, upgrades that improve serviceability can dramatically extend facility life.

Lifecycle Cost Versus Initial Upgrade Cost

A common mistake in upgrade decisions is focusing solely on upfront cost.

A more useful comparison looks at lifecycle cost.

Consider:

• Expected service life of upgraded components
• Maintenance frequency and labor requirements
• Downtime impact on operations
• Replacement cost if upgrades fail prematurely

An upgrade that costs less initially but requires frequent service or early replacement may be more expensive over time than a more comprehensive solution.

Evaluating Retrofit Compatibility

Not every range is a good candidate for retrofitting modern systems.

Compatibility depends on:

• Structural alignment with current equipment standards
• Space for safe integration
• Ability to meet modern safety expectations
• Capacity to support future upgrades

In some cases, retrofitting forces compromises that undermine the benefits of the upgrade itself.

An honest evaluation may reveal that a partial upgrade introduces complexity without delivering proportional performance gains.

Risk Management and Liability Considerations

Range upgrades are often driven by risk mitigation.

Design plays a critical role in how incidents are prevented, managed, and reviewed.

Facilities with outdated layouts may:

• Rely too heavily on procedural controls
• Lack passive safety features
• Create blind spots for supervision
• Increase the impact of shooter error

Upgrades that improve predictability, containment, and supervision can reduce both incident frequency and severity.

If liability exposure is increasing, it may be a signal that design limitations are becoming unacceptable.

When Upgrading Makes Strategic Sense

Upgrading an existing range is often the right choice when:

• The structure supports modern systems
• Usage patterns are stable and well understood
• Maintenance access can be improved
• Safety and containment can be meaningfully enhanced
• Lifecycle cost reductions outweigh initial investment

In these cases, upgrades can extend facility life while improving performance and user experience.

When Replacement or Major Redesign Is the Better Option

Sometimes the most responsible conclusion is that upgrades will not solve the underlying issues.

Indicators include:

• Structural constraints that limit safe integration
• Mismatch between facility layout and current use
• Escalating maintenance costs with diminishing returns
• Inability to meet modern safety expectations
• Lack of flexibility for future needs

In these situations, continuing to invest in upgrades may delay but not prevent larger problems.

A Systems-Based Evaluation Approach

The most effective upgrade decisions come from evaluating the range as a system rather than a collection of components.

This includes:

• How backstops, target systems, and layout interact
• How design supports actual training behavior
• How maintenance and operations are affected over time
• How safety is reinforced through passive design

This systems perspective is central to how Spire Ranges approaches both upgrades and new builds.

Rather than focusing on individual products, the goal is to create facilities that perform predictably, age gracefully, and support real world use without constant intervention.

Making the Decision With Confidence

Evaluating whether an existing range is worth upgrading is not a decision that should be made in isolation or based on equipment alone. It requires a clear understanding of how the facility is used, where design limitations exist, and whether targeted improvements can realistically deliver safer, more predictable performance over time. For range owners weighing these questions, working with a partner who understands shooting range systems as a whole can bring clarity to the process. Spire Ranges helps owners evaluate existing facilities, identify upgrade paths, and determine when a retrofit makes sense versus when a more comprehensive redesign is the smarter investment. Contact Spire Ranges to start a thoughtful, data-driven evaluation of your facility’s next step.