FNH Five-Seven USG 5.7x28 - good or bad?

[firestarter]

I saw it at the store for almost a grand. It caught my eye cause its a pistol that uses a rifle caliber, seems pretty neat. Any opinion on this pistol guys? Thanks.
http://www.fnhusa.com/le/products/firearms/model.asp?fid=FNF003&gid=FNG001&mid=FNM0004

(pic from wikipedia)

 

[FieroCDSP]

The Five-seveN is an interesting gun, and I have yet to hear complaints from anyone that has one. But I think it's a gun to address an issue that didn't really exist in the civilian market.

The idea of the gun was to team it up with the P-90 SMG for SWAT and paramilitary applications. Same round used in both guns. With the restricted types of ammo, it's supposed to be a great man-stopper.

The big problem with it in the civilian market is that you're basicly getting a high powered 22 caliber pistol. While the non-restricted rounds might fragment on impact, you're still going to have to put a few into a target to get it to stop. If you're going to do that anyway, why not spend less on a 9mm, 40, or 45?

The benefits of the Five-Seven cartridge is great accuracy out to fifty yards and incredibly low recoil. The downsides are listed above, plus the only company making ammo for it is FNH, so they dictate the price.

If you want a shooter and can justify the cost, go ahead. If you're actually looking for a carry piece, you might find something easier to feed.

 

[jlbraun]

I do hear it's stone reliable as well.

 

[LightningMan]

Elite Ammo makes better ammunition than what you normally find in gun stores. Here's the link to the FiveseveN forum about Elite ammunition; http://fivesevenforum.net/forumdisplay.php?f=93

 

[NWdude83]

Some indoor ranges won't let you shoot it there.

 

[Gunnerpalace]

The big problem with it in the civilian market is that you're basicly getting a high powered 22 caliber pistol. While the non-restricted rounds might fragment on impact, you're still going to have to put a few into a target to get it to stop

Big misconception,

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=164608

 

[Flopsy]

I got to fire one once. The recoil was so light I had to check the target to make sure it wasn't a squib. And the gun itself was possibly the lightest I've ever handled. Interesting, but for the price probably an unnecessary novelty. If I hit the lottery I'd buy one for plinking.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Doesn't turn my crank, but it pisses off the liberal gun banners and sheeple, so it must be good.

 

[RancidSumo]

Feels really "plastic" to me. U fondled one in the local shop and just didn't really like the "feel" of it. Even the slide felt like plastic.

 

[Ash]

The slide IS plastic. The gun is mostly polymer. Remember, though, that it does not use a rifle caliber, but rather a submachinegun round.

Ash

 

[RPCVYemen]

Heck they're (almost) all good. I love to have one of about every handgun ever made - and the time to shoot them. How can a gun or caliber be bad?

Mike

 

[BSlacker]

The slide is steel the cover is plastic. Here is a picture of the back portion of the slide with the cover off.

 

[Moonclip]

Gun is costly, ammo that is for it's original intended purpose is not available to "civilians", ammo is somewhat pricey also. Also I don't feel entirely comfortable defending myself with a handgun that basically produces .22mag rifle ballistics.

Gun looks neat though and pisses off liberals which is a plus. Many guns I own are just for fun but most of them didn't cost as much as a 5.7

Maybe I'd be more inclined to own a rifle so chambered. Does anyone here carry one?

 

[Gun Slinger]

I'd have to take a "pass" on it due to the .22 Magnum ballistics for the purpose of Self Defense/Home Protection. There are better choices available in the handgun calibers such as 9mm, .357 Magnum, .357 Sig, .40 S&W, 10mm, .45 ACP (take your pick) that have proven themselves appropriate to the task and I'd be hesitant to place myself in the role of "guinea pig" by using an unproven, underpowered caliber in order to protect me and mine. I suppose that there are those that would be willing to do so, but I would question the wisdom of such a choice.

Might make a good prairie dog/varmint gun, though...

 

[Geronimo45]

High-priced gun, high-priced ammo. I like notion behind it, and I'd be happy with one myself for primary HD/CC duties. The wallet simply ain't gonna sustain that at the moment.
Nice idea for safety positioning, too.

 

[PTK]

I carry one every day. I love it dearly - light recoil, way more powerful than people think (.22mag? Riiiight. It's closer to .45ACP muzzle energy, folks) lightweight, etc. FNH makes great products.

5.7x28mm ammo testing

.22mag ammo testing

The .22mag penetrates further, but look at the wound cavity on that 5.7 round. Twenty of those suckers per magazine. It's a killer, make no mistake.

 

[Ash]

I think I would still say the slide is polymer with a steel insert. That might be unforgiving perhaps, and fully within the realm of semantics, but having held and fired one...

Ash

 

[PTK]

Oh, I fully agree. The slide is mainly polymer with a steel insert. Mine has held up for over 5k rounds now, only one failure to feed, no visible damage to the slide. The steel insert does the job very well.

 

[Jason_G]

I carry one every day. I love it dearly - light recoil, way more powerful than people think (.22mag? Riiiight. It's closer to .45ACP muzzle energy, folks) lightweight, etc. FNH makes great products.

5.7x28mm ammo testing

.22mag ammo testing

The .22mag penetrates further, but look at the wound cavity on that 5.7 round. Twenty of those suckers per magazine. It's a killer, make no mistake.

If you like the gun and shoot it well, then whether you carry it or not is certainly none of my business, but I disagree with some of your thoughts on the ballistics of the cartridge:

Energy stats are about the most useless piece of data you can look at when selecting a caliber. If you already have a caliber in mind, then look at the energy stats to pick the load you want. I surely wouldn't compare the 5.7 to the .45. From the same website you pulled the 5.7/.22 comparison from (look at penetration, FBI recommends at least 12" I think):

5.7x28 from FN Five seveN:

Shot 3 - FN 5.7 firing SS197 at heavy clothing. Shot impacted at 1932 ft/sec, penetrated to 10.6"
Shot 5 - FN 5.7 firing SS195 at heavy clothing. Shot impacted at 1999 ft/sec, penetrated to 9.3" depth with total core/jacket separation. Bullet tumbled at ~ 4.0" penetration and the core and jacket separated tracks at ~ 6.7" depth.

.45 ACP:

Shot 1 : Penetrated 13.1" and exited side of block. Not recovered.

Shot 2 : Penetrated 13.7" and expanded to 0.706" diameter.

Shot 3 : Penetrated 13.1" and exited side of block. Recovered diameter 0.696"

Shot 4 : Penetrated 13.2" and expanded to 0.697".

Average expanded diameter was 0.700"

SXT average impact velocity was 849 ft/sec.

Also,

The .22mag penetrates further, but look at the wound cavity on that 5.7 round.

That's a temporary cavity. Don't expect it to do that in a person. The "real" damage is the permanent cavity (the part that resembles a tunnel) at the entrance end of the block. The block is made to simulate the same resistance the bullet would encounter in soft tissue, but it has nowhere near the resilience of tissue. That big area that you're looking at would mean almost nada in terms of real wounding potential.

Just my 2 cents.

Jason

 

[Moonclip]

PTK, the .22mag ballistic link you show shows ballistics for a 2" revolver in .22mag. I said .22mag RIFLE ballistics.

Also do you reload for the 5.7? I'd assume you do with high volume shooting and ammo costs.
If I ever got a 5.7 I'd almost certainly reload for it.

 

[FieroCDSP]

Gunnerpalace, what part is the misconception?
I'll admit I was ill-informed on the fragmenting of the round, but the penetration is lacking compared to most defensive loads, and the permanent cavity is not all that better than a 9mm. The shock value of the round is impressive, as it dumps a lot of energy, but it just doesn't seem like it's worth the money or risk as a defensive piece.
The test that PTK linked to gives me serious concern for it's capabilities against heavy clothing. The lack of penetration is also a concern. While you don't have to worry about over-penetration, I'd be worried whether that round is going to go through the target's clothes, seven layers of skin, fat, muscle, and bone to reach a vital spot to maximize the chance of incapacitation.

Obviously the low number of shootings with this round limits the data, and we'll see better info in a few years, but a thousand dollar gun with a limited stopping power history is one to be considered carefully.

 

[Shipwreck]

We have some members who did some tests of their own with the 5.7 round at the Fn Forum.

I have a PS90 and a Five Seven pistol. Both are great weapons

 

[Gun Slinger]

Even if it possesses the kinetic energy of a .45 ACP 230 grain bullet at 850 fps. (~369 fpe), I'll still take a "pass" on it.

It lacks not only the mass (bullet weight) and bore cross-sectional area of the more commonly accepted, time-proven, self-defense rounds, but also offers no proven "real-world" advantage over any of the other rounds (9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, etc...) and I cannot see the sense in betting what I value (namely, my butt) on such an 'unknown quantity'.

Carry it if you wish, but I just cannot get excited about a round that makes the 9mm look "big"...

 

[mtgale00]

There is no way to make an apples to apples comparison between the 5.7X28 and any civilian pistol caliber. If you want to compare it to NATO 9mm, it is absolutely heads and tails superior. NATO 9mm only transfers about 30% of its energy into the target. The 5.7 transfers over 80%. Second only to this is the fact it was designed to, and will, penetrate most body armor. It is a pure military carttridge and should be limited to that context when discussing it. For those of us lucky enough to have SS190 out the waazoo, it is worth every cent of a thousand dollars.

By the way, I think trying to compare it to .22 Mag is laughable at best...

 

[Tribal]

I haven't shot one, but in checking it out at my local shop it was a lot bigger than I expected. I think if it were closer to a Hi-Power in size and the ammunition weren't expensive and uncommon it might have merited a closer look from me. I figure for a grand I can get a decent-quality 1911, but that's me. If it floats your boat, I doubt anyone here's going to say not to get it.