...or not... They actually look quite comparable, right down to the total penetration (i.e. the 9mm pill was stuck in the front face of the milk jug, the 5.7 appeared to have bounced off the jug after exiting the meat)
The 9mm didn't break the bone, interestingly, but did shed some bullet mass against it (I assume the 5.7 was more square-on)
"In live tissue the physical damage will be only what is physically touched and crushed by either bullet."
The 5.7 bullet is about 1" long and is spinning around end-over-end through the target; exactly why the path is about 1". According to your own logic, why would a 9mm bullet, dimensionally smaller than that 1" at any orientation/expansion, create a hole twice as wide?
"It created a 1" temporary cavity. The amount of permanent disruption is no greater than what is physically contacted by the penetrating bullet."
BTW, the 1" I refer to is what appears in the vivisected meat in the pork shoulder video; every gel test I've seen for 5.7 (the only way to see/measure the temporary cavity) in slo-mo shows like a 2"-3" ballooning, much like 9mm IIRC. The actual 'pulled-pork-region' or whatever you call the tearing left after all is said and done that we supposedly are interested in, is on the order of 1", same as a 9mm expanding cartridge, with marginally lower ultimate penetration than the venerable parabellum. The fact the 9mm couldn't punch a milk jug after exiting a pork roast where it glanced off a bone, and neither did a 5.7 SS198LF, while both did ~two fingers' width worth of damage is the closest non-gel comparison I've yet seen. Much like gel tests, the performance between 9mm and 5.7mm seems 'comparable,' much as 9mm and 45acp are 'comparable,' that is to say 5.7x28 appears by all demonstrated evidence (not supposition, not testimony, not anecdotes, not department purchase decisions) to be viable as a defense round.
475 Wildey is also 'viable,' but that does not mean that other factors beyond effectiveness come into play in making a decision.
"Think air soft version of a G17"
Not a bad description, though I wouldn't be surprised if A/S might actually be heavier (haven't checked) since the firing mechanisms they use are sometimes chunky. The loaded five-seven weighs a bit less than an G17 w/o magazine, though. Wrap an extra 1/4" onto the grip of the G17 and it's probably similar.
"There's no cheap way to shoot it. It seems like an overpriced Kel tec PMR-30 (oooh yeah I said it!)"
Ooh, yeah, you and everyone else who hasn't shot one
. PMR's not nearly as well made; I'll put that right up front. I will say the gun is overpriced, so much so I've long wondered why no one has thought to make a cheaper competitor (it can be done, all right) and grow the market by 2X in a year or so. Now, in practice, for plinking/target shooting/competition the distinction between the two is probably offset by the extra capacity of the PMR. But 22WMR is simply another notch below 5.7, and while IMO it is still viable for a practiced hand in self defense (i.e. shot placement begins to become more important, same as with 5.7) the fact remains that it is a rimfire. Rimmed cartridges simply don't tend to be as reliable, and rimfire tends to be less reliable than centerfire. Contrast that with the near infallibility of my five-seven (and most others I have heard about) and I count it as a negative; doesn't mean the PMR isn't still sufficiently reliable for whatever, but I think the five-seven is likely mo-betta in that respect.
The five-seven also has what are probably the easiest to load magazines of any production pistol out there, today, being double-feed just like a rifle magazine. I understand the PMR's are something of a nutter-butter to load up barehanded. The ammo is priced about like 45acp most of the time, but it's not like 45acp guys aren't constantly complaining about ammo price. If you think you get a better 'deal' by having the same number of shots, heavier, I guess the savings goes to 45acp. It's a wash if you choose to practice with, say, a box of fifty rounds per visit to stay topped off, though. 9mm is uniquely cheap among all cartridges, btw, obviously due to NATO procurement effects, so I wouldn't use it in particular to compare any pricing, unless 9mm is the topic of discussion itself
. I think 223 is even cheaper than 9mm these days, too, so why aren't we all carrying Heizer Pocket AR derringers?
I have to assume the PMR also gets pretty filthy, like all other blowbacks & rimfires (or blowback rimfires). The five-seven is notoriously clean after use, better even than the true locked-breech 22TCMs (which have a bad habit of fouling up the chamber more than you'd think from a locked-breech). If 22mag doesn't do the blowback grunge thing, disregard.
"I shot 200 rounds of 55 grain 5.7X28 subsonics today. Easy shooting round. Then I loaded 200 more. I'm still trying to figure out what people are talking about when they say its a difficult round to load. Its sure a lot easier to load than the 22 magnum."
I think people mostly mean that the consequences for not getting it right are higher; they are, the gun will blow up spectacularly if you double charge the poor thing. Same can probably be said for the 22mag, but as you mention, it's not like there are many people reloading for it. I will be it's easier to lose 5.7 brass than the larger calibers, though (even if it doesn't send brass into orbit)
TCB
