5.7x28 - gimmick or useful SD round?

[MachIVshooter]

It's not a "gimmick", but in the Five-seveN platform, I don't consider it a serious self defense round either. The cartridge was created for a very specific purpose in a specific weapon, and that cartridge/bullet/weapon combo performs as designed. Handicap the ammo and then further diminish it's performance by putting it into a short handgun barrel, and now you have what is, IMO, an expensive plinker.

That's the thing. The fiveseven does its damage with cavitation trauma. The bullet is traveling fast enough to cause the stretch cavity to expand beyond the tissue's elastic point

No, it's really not. Around 2,000 FPS is where we see that effect start to factor in, but it does not really become a reliable wounding mechanism until you get over 2,500-2,600 FPS. There is a great deal of information out there showing how dramatically decreased the effectiveness of the 5.56mm NATO is once velocity drops below that point.

Even the hottest botique 5.7mm ammo barely gets into the 2,500 FPS range from the Five-seveN pistol. Most loads are 1,800-2,000 FPS.

That comes to one hundred thirty-one thousandths difference which is roughly equal to the size of the following underscore mark _.

Dude, you need a micrometer or a set of feeler gauges. .130" is more than 1/8", which is about the height of a capitalized letter character on most screens. The underscore is more like 0.008".

 

[Skribs]

No, it's really not. Around 2,000 FPS is where we see that effect start to factor in, but it does not really become a reliable wounding mechanism until you get over 2,500-2,600 FPS. There is a great deal of information out there showing how dramatically decreased the effectiveness of the 5.56mm NATO is once velocity drops below that point.

It always factors in, in the form of the temporary wound channel, 2000 FPS is the threshold where it starts breaking the elastic point. The thing about the 5.56 is the military ammo doesn't reliably fracture below 2700 FPS, which is why the M4 isn't good out past 300 yards (but the M16 is) and just zips through, creating a smaller wound channel.

Dude, you need a micrometer or a set of feeler gauges. .130" is more than 1/8", which is about the height of a lower case letter character on most screens. The underscore is more like 0.008".

I think he meant width, not height of the underscore, and that will be different based on screen size/resolution. But I agree, 0.13 inches (easier stated as "thirteen hundredths" than "one-hundred-thirty thousandths) isn't a small difference. 0.13 inches is bigger than the difference between 9mm and .45. But, the yawing aspect adds to the size of the wound channel before cavitation is factored in, and the damage by the cavitation makes up for it.

 

[HKGuns]

You are comparing first with 9mm NATO, which is the worst pistol round you can get.

Somebody just lost all credibility. I like 45ACP as much as the next person, but to call 9mm the worst pistol round you can get is simply not true.

 

[mljdeckard]

Ok. It's magical. It's the next new thing. It is to ballistics what Glock is to pistol design.

I don't consider anything smaller than a 9mm a service pistol round. (And for you pocket pistol fans, save it.) And actually, there are now a lot of .380 rounds that will outperform a 9mm NATO. As for recoil......I guess I just picked up a .45 and never had a problem with it. But even in that direct comparison, I'm going to trust the 15+1 147 gr HSTs in my XD-9.

Call it a feeling, in ten years, It won't have MORE of the market share than it has now. If I'm wrong, you can hold it up in front of my face.

 

[Skribs]

Ml, whether or not you're right depends entirely on what other manufacturers decide. If FN is still the only one to make it, you're right. If others decide to take the plunge and design a new frame for their models to house the round, then you will most likely be wrong.

Like I said, there's a lot of people on the fence about it, and the price/availability of the gun and the ammo, as well as the lack of options for the caliber (your only option from a known manufacturer is a single-action with safety, I don't see DA/SA, DAO, or Striker variants), is what is really holding people back from getting it. When more guns are made for it, more ammo will be made for it, prices will drop, and people will actually get it.

 

[ec4321]

I don't consider anything smaller than a 9mm a service pistol round.

By that standard, a NATO 556 is too small for you.

 

[mljdeckard]

I said SERVICE PISTOL ROUND.

I really don't think there are that many people on the fence. It's been several years, it's not a secret. If it hasn't caught on yet, what will make the difference?

 

[ec4321]

I said SERVICE PISTOL ROUND.

That didn't escape me, I even quoted it.

If a pistol could be made with it, by the standard you set - the NATO 556 wouldn't be good enough for you.

Point is, the caliber isn't the only factor. Clearly rounds smaller in diameter than a 9mm can vastly out perform it.

 

[Skribs]

A 5.56 pistol wouldn't be a very good service round in an AR pistol. To low velocity for military ammo (below 2700 FPS it doesn't reliably fracture).

Nothing smaller than 9mm is a service pistol round, but the original comment in post #49 was that it is the worst pistol round. While it is the weakest, I'd hardly say it's the worst. There are redeeming qualities to the 9 over the .40 or .45 (hence why many people use it).

 

[mljdeckard]

I never said that. And as MachIV pointed out, there's a big difference in how a given bullet performs from a 5.7 shell casing and a 5.56 shell casing, or a pistol barrel or a rifle barrel. 5.56 NATO does a LOT of damage for the size of bullet it is. But that performance drops way off out of shorter barrels and with lower velocity. I can deliver a lot more accurate fire with an M-4 at greater distances. I plan on hitting targets repeatedly.

On the other hand, if I were hunting game the same size as a human, I would want a round that is going to do the job decisively with one good hit. The reason there are so many different cartridges, even for the same bullet, is that there are many different applications. No one but YOU was comparing a 9mm pistol round to a 5.56 rifle round.

 

[barnbwt]

Around 2,000 FPS is where we see that effect start to factor in

the hottest botique 5.7mm ammo barely gets into the 2,500 FPS range

So, the 5.7x28 should be capable of at least some of the "cavitation" damage that was mentioned, right? Even if not terribly reliably? That's still a pretty unique ability among current pistol calibers, you'd have to admit, and implies the round does more damage (potentially) than its small size would indicate.

Now, whether that increased damage is worth the trouble, is a question I can't answer or take opinion on without an expensive scientific study just yet. Since I don't have one of those, and I'm a gun-optimist, I give the 5.7 the benefit of the doubt, knowing that it will at least seriously mess up an attacker if I do my part. The fact I can shoot well with it justifies that decision (is that good logic? )

I'm sure it can cause cavity trauma. I'm still sticking to my .45 HSTs.

I commend you on your choice of caliber, since you appear to have put real thought into the decision. I believe the 5.7x28 is a viable round for most SD scenarios, since I have satisfied myself of its ability to inflict sufficient damage. Let's all of us hold hands and join in some swaying...

Having said that, since we're now treading into the more, "esoteric" traits of the round (wounding mechanics, soon to be followed by psi/velocity quotes, and the Fort Hood Shooting, I'm sure), the conversation will most likely become more heated, and less relevant to interested shooters . I'd just like to thank everyone so far for providing good, chill commentary on this undeniably interesting round and its platforms . Always good to hear there is still interest in it, even if it provokes strong opinions in people.

Hopefully the OP is now up to speed on what the 5.7x28 is all about, and can make an informed decision about which side of the "pitched battle" they will be on . Try to keep it civil; there is a lot of good info on this thread that people will refer back to...

TCB

 

[ec4321]

The reason there are so many different cartridges, even for the same bullet, is that there are many different applications..

Agreed. Like multiple targets (21rds) or targets with bullet proof vests....

 

[barnbwt]

I don't consider anything smaller than a 9mm a service pistol round.

Pretty sure MLJ was referring to the relative "power" brought to bear by the 9mm, not the bullet's physical size, right? I think the 5.7 catridge is at the extreme limit for pistols, as far as overall length is concerned. But it's narrow profile is at the minimum, allowing for extremely high capacity. The round is literally the polar opposite of the .45ACP, which also gets frequent grip-size complaints. Go figure. I'm not saying that the Five-seveN is as powerful/effective as a .45 pistol, I'm saying it's intended for a different role, despite also being a large sized pistol.

If I am engaging something that 8+1 won't solve, or people actually wearing armor, NO PISTOL is going to save me.

Amen

TCB

 

[Skribs]

I never said that. And as MachIV pointed out, there's a big difference in how a given bullet performs from a 5.7 shell casing and a 5.56 shell casing, or a pistol barrel or a rifle barrel. 5.56 NATO does a LOT of damage for the size of bullet it is. But that performance drops way off out of shorter barrels and with lower velocity. I can deliver a lot more accurate fire with an M-4 at greater distances. I plan on hitting targets repeatedly.

Like I said, the reason the 5.56 is poor below 2700 FPS has to do with how the bullet fragments, and not the cavitation trauma. 2000 FPS is where you start to notice the difference that the cavitation makes. Even if its only slight at 2000-2200, it is there, and enough to catch up to some of the larger service calibers.

But the benefit of the 5.7 isn't that it makes a big hole (although it makes a bigger one than the caliber would suggest), it's how fast you can get follow-up shots on target.

 

[mljdeckard]

If I am engaging something that 8+1 won't solve, or people actually wearing armor, NO PISTOL is going to save me.

The possibility of bad guys in body armor is so small, it doesn't factor into my plan. Where the heck do you live? Even when I was at war, wearing body armor and trauma plates, I never expected to encounter bad guys in body armor. If I REALLY think I'm facing bad guys in body armor I actually plan to shoot, I'm not grabbing a pistol at all.

 

[Skribs]

If I am engaging something that 8+1 won't solve, or people actually wearing armor, NO PISTOL is going to save me.

Not true at all. If you are in a situation where 8+1 won't solve, you might just need a few more. Considering how many shots are likely to hit an attacker, and how reliable any pistol is at stopping on one hit, if you have three attackers, you might need more than 8+1 to end the confrontation. I'm not saying you're wrong for carrying only 8, but it is very easily possible that if 8 isn't enough, another 8 might be.

On the other part, armor: there are armor-piercing rounds for most common handgun calibers, including the 9mm. They work better in something like a .357 Sig or a larger (heavier) bullet, but the speed at which the FiveseveN moves gives it a lot of potential if you use an armor-piercing round.
If you don't have armor-piercing rounds, then yeah, you're smegged. But if you have them, any gun will work, some just do it easier.

However, you are right in that the majority of situations, you probably don't need more than 8+1 rounds. That doesn't stop me from wanting as many as I can get. If I were carrying a .45, I'd go for the 13-round pistols. I'm looking at 17 with a 9.

 

[flyskater]

Here's the glorified 22 at work on a pistol.

 

[mljdeckard]

Today I was carrying 14+1. I carry extra magazines to be able to clear a malfunction. Not for more rounds. I keep a rifle in my truck pretty much everywhere. The purpose of my pistol is to get me back to it.

 

[Ash]

22lr has been used to take deer - the poacher's round of choice - and people. It must be a great round, too.

I have nothing wrong with the round per se, but it ain't Thor's hammer. And if you shoot a guy defensively 14 times with a 5.7, even Johnny C. back from the grave won't keep you out of prison.

 

[45_auto]

Lots of good info in this thread.

Ml, whether or not you're right depends entirely on what other manufacturers decide.

And all those stupid teachers taught me that the manufacturers build things BECAUSE the public buys them. Even Ruger finally figured that out and started making 1911's and AR15's. You really believe that if all the manufacturer's started making Highpoint style pistols (blowbacks) then that would create a bigger demand for them????

And if you shoot a guy defensively 14 times with a 5.7, even Johnny C. back from the grave won't keep you out of prison.

How many times can you shoot someone trying to kill you and stay out of prison?

 

[HKGuns]

Ok. It's magical. It's the next new thing. It is to ballistics what Glock is to pistol design.

I don't consider anything smaller than a 9mm a service pistol round. (And for you pocket pistol fans, save it.) And actually, there are now a lot of .380 rounds that will outperform a 9mm NATO. As for recoil......I guess I just picked up a .45 and never had a problem with it. But even in that direct comparison, I'm going to trust the 15+1 147 gr HSTs in my XD-9.

Call it a feeling, in ten years, It won't have MORE of the market share than it has now. If I'm wrong, you can hold it up in front of my face.

Isn't it funny how your statements have absolutely nothing to do with the original question. This thread isn't about whether or not this round is going to replace all other pistol calibers or even become mainstream.

It is about whether it is effective. Given the cost and availability it will never likely be mainstream. -That isn't what this thread is about, so please stay on topic or don't contribute.

 

[Ash]

I don't need to shoot a man 14 times. If my round is so ineffective, then instead of justifying why so many are needed, perhaps something better is needed. I'm not interested in dropping my soap in the shower with bubba behind me. There is nothing definitive, but as we know in Florida, one time is enough to go to jail (making no judgement on the case, mind you, since I was not there).

10 rounds of 45acp in an ASAI One Pro or 6 rounds of 357 in a Colt Trooper do the job nicely for me. You want the 5.7? Fine by me, too. Following Katrina, I discovered my 15 round CZ in 9mm stayed in the safe while my 10 round 45acp Tanfoglio rode my side - and then all of a day because in Mississippi, where the eye hit, we didn't go Lord of the Flies, we just got to work and did not need to arm ourselves. For me, the 5.7 does not do - especially since I'm not a fan of striker-fired polymer pistols, and that is the only handgun platform that currently supports the 5.7. For others, they feel fine with it. The reality is, most of us here will never fire a gun in anger outside of combat. My family has thrice used handguns in self-defense, the first time with a Hopkins and Allen revolver in the 1950's, the second time with a Colt New Service following Hurricane Camille while the third time was in the 1980's with a S&W Model 10 at a Florida rest stop during that rest stop shooting spree. In none of the instances was a round even fired. In each case, the family was protected. In two cases, the baddies fled, while in one, the two scumbags ended up arrested.

You find that 17 rounds are needed to do the job, okay, too. You think a bunch of baddies are coming at you (and are the type that when two of their kind drop to the ground in the gurgling throes of death they keep coming instead of running away), then I suggest you should have used both better judgement in where you went, and barring that, should have gone belt-fed.

 

[45_auto]

I don't need to shoot a man 14 times.

Better hope the guy coming after you isn't named Platt. Actually he only took 12 hits to stop him, and I'm sure you're good enough that you never miss, so that would still leave you 2 in the gun in case you drop your soap or go Lord of the Flies!

 

[ec4321]

The possibility of bad guys in body armor is so small, it doesn't factor into my plan. Where the heck do you live?

Some people do because they need to, others do not because they don't.

As you said, different tools for different jobs.

 

[Ash]

Yeah, but we don't live in the first-shooter realm of carrying 25 different arms, including rocket launchers.

As for shooting, I will live or I will die. If I die, then I'm ready for that. If the other guy dies, I'm ready for that, too. If 6 rounds of 357 is no good, or 10 rounds of 45 is no good, then I guess I'll just chew his throat out.