Is 5.7 a threat to 9mm dominance?

Status
Not open for further replies.
MedWheeler said:
TTv2 writes:

The .45 has been around for more than ten decades, and still failed to keep the 9mm from passing it by in popularity, which it did more than thirty years ago.
Click to expand...

And the 9mm Luger/Parabellum has been around longer than the 45ACP, albeit only 2 years. As you said, no way the 45 ACP will ever overcome the 9mm; but the 45ACP will always be around that's for sure.
 
Only a handful of companies make 5.7 ammo. And has been around for 30 ish years. If it was on track to be the dominant caliber, there would be much more supply than right now.
 
herrwalther said:
Only a handful of companies make 5.7 ammo. And has been around for 30 ish years. If it was on track to be the dominant caliber, there would be much more supply than right now.
Click to expand...

And it is a PITA to reload and before all this pandemic nonsense it was not even "cheap" to reload.
 
The center fire semiautomatic handguns that I have are 9X19mm and 45ACP. At the mid point of my seventh decade I don't see that changing.
 
We've already been around the block on 5.7.

First of all, the performance on body armor is primarily out of longer barrels of a PDW, where the 50 round capacity magazine and full auto are also features. Even so, notice the performance on body armor is totally inferior to 5.56 in every way. The bottom line for .gov forces that are concerned with defeating body armor while being discreet (Secret Service, Delta Force, etc.), a short AR is better all the way. Back in the day, the 20" barrel A2 didn't seem all that appealing for some roles, but we've made a lot of progress since then and there are AR configurations for a lot of jobs.

In the pistol, 5.7 terminal ballistics suck. Fackler panned it. The Secret Service is the only agency that never listened to him. Even they have abandoned 5.7 now (and 357 Sig, another round Fackler criticized) for an AR and 9mm pistols.

There are some 9mm rounds that are designed to defeat armor and they're not worse than 5.7, but really if that's the job to be done, just get a small AR (of course we're assuming we can't have a BMG or Vulcan canon).
 
Is 5.7 a threat to 9mm dominance?
Click to expand...

Not anytime soon.

The .gov is likely a larger threat to 9mm or any handguns, assault or sniper rifles for that matter.

I would go as far as say electric cars are more of a threat to fuel burning autos and I won’t live long enough to see that take place. Despite many Governments subsidies for the handed out all over the world.

Not to mention reloading…
 
I wouldn't say it's on life support either. The amount of handguns and ammo manufacturers DID double in the last year or so. And ammo is sold out even at a dollar a round.

I don't think it's going anywhere. Not up in popularity and not down
 
The Exile said:
5.7 offers attractive body armor defeating power

So just talking about civilian self defense is there any reason to think that the 5.7 could challenge 9mm
Click to expand...
I don't think so.

Not sure what happened to this ammunition that was made to be "armor piercing" (Jump to 2:45 minute of video for range test segment on body armor)

 
The 5.7 is in no way a challenger to 9mm. It's actually not very good at defeating body armor. Most soft armor now can be had with very light weight trauma plates that will defeat it's best penetrating bullets.

On the other side it's terminal performance isn't anything special. Every SWAT team in the US (that I know of) that adopted it years ago has stopped using it after poor performance in gunfights. Reports from LE shootings and PMC/Mil gunfights with the P90 say that you need to use full auto and hit the bad guys with bursts to be effective. Pretty much everyone has decided that a Mk18 size gun that usually requires 1 or 2 shots is a better idea.

Here is a good video on The P90 and shows that the "defeats body armor" argument isnt really built on a good foundation.

 
Simple answer: NO.

I say this for 2 reasons.

First, your choice of gun is very limited.. You can buy either a FULL SIZE FN for a $1000.00 or a FULL SIZE RUGER for about half or a little more. Their are no mid size versions and their performance may be degraded substantially if you shorten the barrel. Full size guns sell well to police, Federal and military, but less so to the ccw crowd. If you were going to buy a new 9m.m., would it be a GLOCK 19 or 17, a SIG 226 or 229 and what about compacts?

Second problem is that the round is not that great to shoot in a pistol. Yes, recoil is mild, but when I shot one, it was VERY NOISY and had a bright flash. It was less pleasant for me to shoot tha 5.7 than my usual 9m.m. More like +P+ ammo I used to be issued.

Also, the previous posters have pointed out other problems, some of which have real weight on this issue.

The 5.7 will continue to sell, but whether it will be a hit or a flop, it is too soon to tell.

Jim
 
Not anytime soon, it's too pricey and requires handguns that are a good bit bigger than 9mm sized guns. It has merit I'm sure in certain applications but overall no, I don't see it happening.
 
No!

I'd say that 5.7 is just another boutique round. It's the 40 s&w of the current time except the ammo and handguns for it cost much more, the handguns are bigger, and law enforcement have never have and probably never will adopt it on a wide scale. It will fizzle out witg time like others before it.

In short, I'd say that 9mm is a threat to 5.7 more so than the other way around. I know I have no desire for it. I like carry, competition, and range handguns chambered in rounds I can easily find and afford to shoot.
 
TTv2 said:
The biggest threat to 9mm dominance is still and has always been .45 ACP. 9 out of 10 gun owners who own more than one handgun have either a 9 or a .45.
Click to expand...
Your "data" is based on what?:scrutiny:
Certainly not actual market research.:rofl:

.45acp is nowhere close to being a "threat" to 9mm in the US marketplace, much less the ROTW. Up until a few years ago the .40 S&W was a close second to 9mm.....now a very distant second.
 
Last edited:
dogtown tom said:
Your "data" is based on what?:scrutiny:
Certainly not actual market research.:rofl:

.45acp is nowhere close to being a "threat" to 9mm in the US marketplace, much less the ROTW.
Click to expand...
Everytime I go to the range I see as much .45 brass as 9mm. People are shooting .45 and most often when someone is looking for another handgun in a different caliber than 9mm it's usually a .45 that gets bought over any other centerfire caliber.
 
crestoncowboy said:
I wouldn't say it's on life support either.
Click to expand...
Have to agree with this statement.
Now, .32-20, 44russian, 38acp, 30mauser, 8nambu--those might be on life support, but, even then, we'd be quibbling over definitions.
Now the "fat" rimfires, like 38RF or 44RF, or the pinfire cartridges, are decidedly moribund, as are all the Volcanic rounds.
The thing is that firearms last. They outlast mere humans.
Somebody will still want 45gap or 50acp or 38ae or the like probably 50 years' span from now. Much like there are those who still want/need 9longo or 38longue or the like.
 
No, the 5.7 isn't going to replace the 9mm on the global stage. Not sooner, not later. It seems like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, and it's likely not even the best solution at that.

If at any point, anyone is trying to defeat body armor on enemy combatants at handgun range, something went very wrong. The decision making process that led to that predicament isn't going to be remedied by a different caliber---civilian, military, or LE.
dogtown tom said:
You have it backwards.
9mm is cheap due to its popularity.
Go back to 1978 and .38 special was the cheapest and most popular centerfire pistol round.
Click to expand...
It really seems like a yin/yang sorta thing.
 
Howland937 said:
It really seems like a yin/yang sorta thing.
Click to expand...
Economy of scale is more accurate.
Someone looking at buying a box of .25acp wonders why such a tiny cartridge, half the size of a 9x19mm......costs 3-4 times as much. It runs on the same type of machinery, same inspection and manufacturing process. It has less brass, less lead, less powder and the only thing the same is that small pistol primer. The reason .25acp (and many others) cost more than 9x19mm has more to do with volume of sales. Less demand means fewer manufactured means smaller selection means higher price.
 
dogtown tom said:
Economy of scale is more accurate
Click to expand...
Of course that is the case currently...without the popularity of 9mm, ammo wouldn't be so widely available and cheaper in comparison...and guns chambered for it wouldn't be so popular, meaning the demand for ammo wouldn't be so high. It just seems circular to me, that you don't get one without the other. Did it start with the availability of surplus ammo or the guns themselves?
 
I got to shoot 10 rounds out of an FN 5.7 a couple of years ago. Put every round in a little 2” circle at 10 yards. I was impressed and immediately wanted one. Then, I did some research.
Expensive ammo
Hard to find ammo (a year before pandemic)
No variety for the ammo I did find
Expensive gun, then Ruger made theirs, which you cannot buy in CA - it’s not on the roster.
Reloading components were hard to get and expensive.

So, my opinion is: No! The 5.7 will not be more popular than 9mm anytime soon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Palladan44
  • Locked
FN five seven VS Springfield XDM 9mm
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
rkittine
rkittine
T
  • Locked
Between 5.7 and 9mm?
Replies
12
Views
398
Hog huntin Harry
Hog huntin Harry
R
  • Locked
9mm gets no respect...why?
2 3 4 5
Replies
103
Views
6K
Mike U.
M
Sebastian the Ibis
  • Locked
What's the Point of an HK MP7 or FN P90?
Replies
15
Views
4K
Girodin
G
2
  • Locked
Body armor defeating 9mm?
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
151
Views
5K
old lady new shooter
O
Back
Top