Why are we not talking about the Ruger 5.7 Yet?

Status
Not open for further replies.
crestoncowboy said:
How are the front frame rails. On the FN they aren't typical rails that lock the slide down, but are ears that stick straight up into the slide rather than go out into the slide. More of a guide than a typical rail
Click to expand...

The lock-up comes from this toggle affair. The toggle is down in this picture and cams out of the way with the disassembly/takedown lever. The toggle fits around the barrel on both sides and fits into cuts in the slide.

c99e58bbe369abdb54b9e7bd334720e1.jpg
 
lower price point than 5.7 makes it very interesting to me. also I like the safety setup. I think we have a lot of win here, but ammo prices and ease of availability of ammo are gonna hold it back......
 
A simple question:

If it is hammer-fired and has a manual safety, why does it have one of those poxxy Glock-esque trigger safeties?

Has that weirdness become so ingrained and tech-fasion necessary that it is infecting platforms that neither need, nor specifically benefit from it?

If that is the case, time to nip that nonsense in the bud like the mag-disconnectors that just won't DIE!

Todd.
 
What is the appeal of 5.7x28 in today's market? I understand the FN was a result of a NATO contest that was ultimately canceled, and has remained popular with the drug cartels. Is Ruger hoping for those sales? What is the appeal to them anyway? Is it the potential AP performance of some types of 5.7x28 and barrel lengths?

5.7x28 is kind of expensive to shoot in a range toy.
It's one of the least amenable cartridges to reloading.
It's not used in competition to my knowledge.
It has very poor terminal ballistics on unarmored personnel -- the IWBA thoroughly panned its ballistic performance.
Its armor-penetrating performance is weak and inconsistent, especially from short barrels like the Ruger's 5". With longer barrels, 5.56x45 green-tips make more sense in every way.

$799, even after accounting for a lower actual street price, is a lot higher than most semi-automatic pistols like the ubiquitous polymer, striker-fired 9's and things like the PMR-30. It's anywhere from 50% to 100% more costly.

I know there are people that buy more than a half-dozen guns every year and they will probably buy one of these at some point. Is Ruger just hoping to sell those people one more gun? Or is there another interest in 5.7x28 I haven't understood?
 
ApacheCoTodd said:
A simple question:

If it is hammer-fired and has a manual safety, why does it have one of those poxxy Glock-esque trigger safeties?

Has that weirdness become so ingrained and tech-fasion necessary that it is infecting platforms that neither need, nor specifically benefit from it?

If that is the case, time to nip that nonsense in the bud like the mag-disconnectors that just won't DIE!

Todd.
Click to expand...

The pistol's going to be "SAFE" there's no doubt about that. Ruger pretty much covered all the bases here with the exception of the mag disconnect.

The little trigger dingus is there, I assume, because Ruger will release a "pro" model at some point. Like they did with the American Pistol.
 
labnoti said:
What is the appeal of 5.7x28 in today's market? I understand the FN was a result of a NATO contest that was ultimately canceled, and has remained popular with the drug cartels. Is Ruger hoping for those sales? What is the appeal to them anyway? Is it the potential AP performance of some types of 5.7x28 and barrel lengths?

5.7x28 is kind of expensive to shoot in a range toy.
It's one of the least amenable cartridges to reloading.
It's not used in competition to my knowledge.
It has very poor terminal ballistics on unarmored personnel -- the IWBA thoroughly panned its ballistic performance.
Its armor-penetrating performance is weak and inconsistent, especially from short barrels like the Ruger's 5". With longer barrels, 5.56x45 green-tips make more sense in every way.

$799, even after accounting for a lower actual street price, is a lot higher than most semi-automatic pistols like the ubiquitous polymer, striker-fired 9's and things like the PMR-30. It's anywhere from 50% to 100% more costly.

I know there are people that buy more than a half-dozen guns every year and they will probably buy one of these at some point. Is Ruger just hoping to sell those people one more gun? Or is there another interest in 5.7x28 I haven't understood?
Click to expand...

All valid points. I think Ruger's taking a big gamble here. My prediction is the gun will sell quite well for about six months. Then all the 5.7 aficionados will have one and that will be that.

Odd thing about this gun is that it is based on the 5.7 and not readily adaptable to something else. I doubt an unlocked/blowback action can be adapted to 7.62X25 or .30 Carbine. What else can they do with it?
 
@labnoti I agree, the 5.7 round separated from it's AP bullets doesn't impress. Even with it's AP projectiles it still fits a very narrow niche. I would rather take a PMR 30 type gun with refinements (don't care for Keltec's "erector set" feel to their firearms), a .22WMR provides great penetration, velocity, flat trajectory, limited recoil and 30 rounds to the magazine. Personally, the only downside is it being rimfire in regards to reliable ignition and reloadability.
 
<*(((>< said:
@labnoti I agree, the 5.7 round separated from it's AP bullets doesn't impress. Even with it's AP projectiles it still fits a very narrow niche. I would rather take a PMR 30 type gun with refinements (don't care for Keltec's "erector set" feel to their firearms), a .22WMR provides great penetration, velocity, flat trajectory, limited recoil and 30 rounds to the magazine. Personally, the only downside is it being rimfire in regards to reliable ignition and reloadability.
Click to expand...

Generally speaking of course I believe a firearm has to be useful in order to be a success. A hunting or self-defense application. If it does not have a practical use that then it needs to be cheap to shoot. Hence the popularity of some of the Soviet Bloc import stuff from years back. Would anyone buy a Tokarev pistol nowadays if ammo was $.40 a round? Yeah there are collectors of such things but, by and large, that's a small small market.

This is kind of how I see the Ruger-57. A nifty gun that's not particularly suited for carry or defense and not cheap to shoot.
 
ApacheCoTodd said:
I have no time for frenchified or even new-to-me calibers but I DO recognize the intelligence of the 5.7 and applaud Ruger's adventure into this arena.

Now, don't mind me while I silently hold my breath over here for the fall-out and to await their new 7.62x25, .38 Super and 9x23.;)

Wait, on second thought, they may have just obsoleted my PMR-30.... DAMMIT!

Todd.
Click to expand...
I thought they had a .38 Super in the SR1911? That's mostly a comeptition shooting calibers here in the US, but I could see people who use .38 Super for competitions being interested in a lighter polymer gun in the same caliber for carrying. It is a lot easier reloading .38 Super than it is .357 Sig, so there's potential in a .38 Super R57.

7.62x25 in a polymer pistol is... I... it's a fantasy of mine that would give a Priest a heart attack.

As for this Ruger 5.7 obsoleting the PMR-30... the draw of the PMR has been and always will be price. I see they can be found for $325 and the ammo is of course a lot cheaper and more available than 5.7 is, but if over time the price on this new Ruger goes down to $500-ish and ammo also starts to drop in price to 30-35 cents a round, it will kill the PMR-30.
 
B_Li_Ber_Tar_Ian said:
I notice in my email from Ruger it states full size models available in both 10 and 20 rnd configurations. Wondering if that means there's a compact in the works?
Click to expand...
No, they just want to be able to sell them in Massachusetts, NY/NJ, Maryland, etc.
 
ApacheCoTodd said:
If it is hammer-fired and has a manual safety, why does it have one of those poxxy Glock-esque trigger safeties?

Has that weirdness become so ingrained and tech-fasion necessary that it is infecting platforms that neither need, nor specifically benefit from it?
Click to expand...
Upon seeing more photos, I was wondering the same thing.

I don't see this thing taking off, or the price of ammo for it dropping. To me it seems like a niche firearm for which there's really … no niche these days.
 
USBP379 said:
Generally speaking of course I believe a firearm has to be useful in order to be a success. A hunting or self-defense application. If it does not have a practical use that then it needs to be cheap to shoot. Hence the popularity of some of the Soviet Bloc import stuff from years back. Would anyone buy a Tokarev pistol nowadays if ammo was $.40 a round? Yeah there are collectors of such things but, by and large, that's a small small market.

This is kind of how I see the Ruger-57. A nifty gun that's not particularly suited for carry or defense and not cheap to shoot.
Click to expand...
The thing about 7.62x25 is that while it's not capable of shooting extremely light bullets at over 2000 fps like 5.7 can, it is much more powerful and it has the ability to shoot good hollow point bullets that will be effective and penetrate well, yet with a proper bullet would also be capable of defeating soft body armor to some extent. It would not do it as well as 5.7, but what 7.62x25 can do better than 5.7 is be a good stopper against an aggressor because the bullet is double the weight.

The 5.7 is just too light of a projectile and the spitzer bullet wouldn't do well with hollow points, nor do I think soft points would be moving fast enough to expand from a 5 inch barrel and the 5.7 was never intended to use those types of projectiles; it was built to NOT expand (Geneva Convention), beat body armor, and tumble in soft tissue to cause damage.

If you want a light weight bullet that moves very fast from a handgun that tumbles in soft tissue to do damage, then Inceptor 9mm+P is the answer and last I checked it was $8 cheaper a box and oh yeah, it's 9mm!

IMO, for the civilian shooter, 7.62x25 is the better choice, but for LE/Military 5.7 is better.
 
TTv2 said:
The thing about 7.62x25 is that while it's not capable of shooting extremely light bullets at over 2000 fps like 5.7 can, it is much more powerful and it has the ability to shoot good hollow point bullets that will be effective and penetrate well, yet with a proper bullet would also be capable of defeating soft body armor to some extent. It would not do it as well as 5.7, but what 7.62x25 can do better than 5.7 is be a good stopper against an aggressor because the bullet is double the weight.

The 5.7 is just too light of a projectile and the spitzer bullet wouldn't do well with hollow points, nor do I think soft points would be moving fast enough to expand from a 5 inch barrel and the 5.7 was never intended to use those types of projectiles; it was built to NOT expand (Geneva Convention), beat body armor, and tumble in soft tissue to cause damage.

If you want a light weight bullet that moves very fast from a handgun that tumbles in soft tissue to do damage, then Inceptor 9mm+P is the answer and last I checked it was $8 cheaper a box and oh yeah, it's 9mm!

IMO, for the civilian shooter, 7.62x25 is the better choice, but for LE/Military 5.7 is better.
Click to expand...

Moot points about the 5.7 vs 7.62x25 since there's never really been civilian defensive ammo for either. Yeah there have been a few loads here and there and I think S&B (maybe PPU?) still sells a 7.62 JHP. But the draw to 7.62 was that ammo and guns were dirt cheap. Nobody would buy a newly-produced Tokarev or CZ52 for what it would cost to make such a gun. Doubly so with ammo that was pushing fifty cents per...
 
Here is my take on the 57: I bet Ruger has a partner for new defensive/practice ammo and we already know that a 40 grain Gold Dot is being released. I agree that expensive ammo will send this gun to CDNN before the end of summer. I also believe that another manufacturer will release a 5.7 pistol this year. Add in the CCMG Banshee and there becomes a bigger market for ammunition manufacturers. Kind of like Wolf producing 6.5 Grendel.

The industry also needs a next big thing and this tends to happen across manufacturers. The 5.7 just might be it this time around.

Ruger is pretty savvy and I am sure they put some thought into this. It will be interesting to see where this goes.

Anyways I am happy to be living in a time where so many new products are introduced each year. It at least makes life a bit more interesting.

Sorry for any mistakes and the rambling tone; I had to type this out on my tablet.
 
TTv2 said:
The thing about 7.62x25 is that while it's not capable of shooting extremely light bullets at over 2000 fps like 5.7 can, it is much more powerful and it has the ability to shoot good hollow point bullets that will be effective and penetrate well, yet with a proper bullet would also be capable of defeating soft body armor to some extent. It would not do it as well as 5.7, but what 7.62x25 can do better than 5.7 is be a good stopper against an aggressor because the bullet is double the weight.

The 5.7 is just too light of a projectile and the spitzer bullet wouldn't do well with hollow points, nor do I think soft points would be moving fast enough to expand from a 5 inch barrel and the 5.7 was never intended to use those types of projectiles; it was built to NOT expand (Geneva Convention), beat body armor, and tumble in soft tissue to cause damage.

If you want a light weight bullet that moves very fast from a handgun that tumbles in soft tissue to do damage, then Inceptor 9mm+P is the answer and last I checked it was $8 cheaper a box and oh yeah, it's 9mm!

IMO, for the civilian shooter, 7.62x25 is the better choice, but for LE/Military 5.7 is better.
Click to expand...

I do not own nor have plans to buy one but the 40 gr Vmax Bullet rounds expand just fine. Follow up shots are extremely rapid. In a test I saw the 40 gr Vmax also.went through 3A Body Armor. So I guess if you expected to be assailed by multiple assailant's in 3A Body Armor it could have it's use. For me personally I will stick to to my 9, 40 and 45 pistols.
 
Cheaper ammo cannot make the 5.7 a good choice for anything practical. It will never be as cheap as .22 WMR or .22 LR both of which have similar practical uses with the exception of AP.

The wounding potential of 5.7 of any bullet design and at any cost is much less than 9x19. Unless an expansion in the market for handguns that defeat soft body armor is expected, more 5.7's make no sense. Even if performance on body armor became more important, it's doubtful the 5.7 is the most sensible choice among other alternatives.
 
You guys are frikken killing me!

First: I won't look twice, it's more idiotic 5.7 upon already existing idiocy!

Then, wait, what if I think of it as an alternative to my PMR?.... Maybe....

Then, BS on that noise, it's too short to capitalize on the round. NO WAY JOSE!

Then, yeah, but it's cheap and looks kinda fun!

Then, why bother if I have to hunt for rounds?

Then, maybe I think of it as a .22 Mag for the Terminator-set?

Then, nah, it'll be a fad....

Dammit all, I guess I'm screwed if I see a cheap one at the very least. I used to say many of the same things about my PMR before it was MY PMR.:rofl:


Todd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
5.7 x 28 ammo. WTH
2
Replies
30
Views
921
Double Naught Spy
Double Naught Spy
I
  • Locked
Fn 5.7
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
NG VI
N
F
  • Locked
Can't imagine 5.7 is the best choice for personal defense
Replies
20
Views
2K
Selfdfenz
S
Palladan44
  • Locked
FN five seven VS Springfield XDM 9mm
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
rkittine
rkittine
B
  • Locked
Buying a glock and a conversion barrel
Replies
6
Views
523
Randyc74
Randyc74
Back
Top