FN 5.7 as home defense gun?

Status
Not open for further replies.
481 said:
Lifting a full can of pop must be challenging if that truly is the case.

For my 110 pound wife who can't open a jar alone, holding a handgun up in the low ready position for 5-10 minutes as she waits on the police, a few ounces could be the difference between her being able to be ready to shoot and having to put the gun down because her arms gave out.

She loves the Five-Seven and it's all she will shoot at the range. She is not a gun person so the 20 rounds is comforting to her, reloads take her a while. The recoil is tolerable to her and she likes the feel of the gun.
 
Another interesting post from someone apparently well informed and with link to actual documentation

We disagree on the utility of this caliber. That is all no reason for me to call you names or vice versa.

Back tot he topic. Assuming there is a 28 grain HP at 2600 fps. That is fine for energy but sorely lack in the momentum department. Momentium is what gives the bullet the ability to penetrate. (the amount of force required to bring a moving object to rest) The load you mention as a power factor of 72. A 127 grain 9mm at 1250 has a power factor of 158. I sincerly doubt you will get a 28 grain jhp to penetrate greater than 12 inches or make a large permanent wound cavity.

All you could want to know about the 5.7 terminal performance or rather lack of is at this link. FN 5.7 x 28 mm - M4Carbine.net Forums
what the heck here is the actual post.
FN 5.7 x 28 mm
Several papers have described the incredibly poor terminal performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm projectiles fired by the FN P90:

--Dahlstrom D, Powley K, and Gordon C: “Wound Profile of the FN Cartridge (SS 190) Fired from the FN P90 Submachine Gun". Wound Ballistic Review. 4(3):21-26; Spring 2000.
--Fackler M: "Errors & Omissions", Wound Ballistic Review. 1(1):46; Winter 1991.
--Fackler M: "More on the Bizarre Fabrique National P-90", Wound Ballistic Review. 3(1):44-45; 1997.
--FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit. FBI Handgun Ammunition Tests 1989-1995. Quantico, U.S. Department of Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation.
--Hayes C: “Personal Defense Weapons—Answer in Search of a Question”, Wound Ballistic Review. 5(1):30-36; Spring 2001.
--Roberts G: “Preliminary Evaluation of the Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 23 Grain FMJ Bullet Fired by the New FN P-90 , Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant”, AFTE Journal. 30(2):326-329, Spring 1998.

The current 31 gr SS-190 FMJ bullet has nearly adequate penetration, but the wound resulting from this projectile has a relatively small permanent crush cavity, as well as an insignificant temporary stretch cavity. Although the 5.7 x 28 mm penetrates soft body armor, wounding potential is at best like a .22 LR or .22 Magnum. Even 9mm NATO FMJ makes a larger wound--and we are all aware of the awe inspiring incapacitation potential of M882 ball from the M9......

A few large U.S. LE agencies adopted 5.7 mm weapons--after being involved in several OIS incidents with P90's, 5.7 mm usage in these agencies plummeted as a result of the poor terminal performance.

It is all basic physics and physiology. Look at the surface areas in contact with tissue for 9 mm FMJ and JHP compared to 5.7 mm. When both are point forward, the 9 mm FMJ crushes more tissue than the 5.7 mm; for the short time that the 5.7 mm is at FULL yaw, it crushes a bit more tissue than the 9 mm FMJ. At no time does the 5.7 mm crush more tissue than the expanded 9 mm JHP--even when the 5.7 mm FMJ is at full yaw, an expanded 9 mm JHP crushes more tissue. The relatively small temporary cavities produced by both the 9 mm and 5.7 mm projectiles are not likely to cause significant injury to the majority of elastic structures of the body. As with any penetrating projectile, if either a 9 mm or 5.7 mm bullet is ideally placed to cause significant damage to the CNS or major cardiovascular organs, a fatal result is likely.



The P90 can definitely penetrate soft body armor, but then so can 9 mm AP rounds. The greater momentum of 9 mm bullets allow them to defeat vehicles and other intermediate barriers better than the 5.7 mm bullets. Standard 9 mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP JHP loads crush more tissue, offer ideal penetration, and are equally likely to not exit the opponent as the 5.7 mm. 5.56 mm and 6.8 mm weapons offer significantly superior terminal effects compared to 5.7 mm. Bottom line—what does the P90 offer that is not already available?


Pat

Colt M16/AR15,1911 & Glock Armorer.
Certified Firearms Instructor & Urban Rifle Instructor.
Completed SWAT Entry Team and SWAT Sniper courses.
NRA Endowment Member
USPSA A 56876 B class

http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/non-xd-handguns/130532-5-7x28-5.html
 
Last edited:
Actually I guess it would be Condition 1, since the XDM is mostly/completely cocked (unlike a Glock) and the trigger/grip safeties are off if I am not touching the weapon.

Glockbite, I use a plastic holster. It isn't going to have the tatter issue that a leather holster will. I also don't get holsters with the strap, because I don't want the strap to enter the trigger guard.

Saturno, people still use the 10mm, though. I'd carry it because if I'm going into the woods, I'd rather have 10mm FMJs than anything else.

I don't remember hearing NATO suspended acceptance of the round...

From Wikipedia:

In 2002 and 2003, NATO conducted a series of tests with the intention of standardizing a PDW cartridge as a replacement for the 9×19mm Parabellum cartridge.[11] The tests compared the relative merits of the 5.7×28mm cartridge and the HK 4.6×30mm cartridge, which was created by German small arms manufacturer Heckler & Koch as a competitor to the 5.7×28mm.[11] The results of the NATO tests were analyzed by a group formed of experts from Canada, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and the group's conclusion was that the 5.7×28mm was "undoubtedly" the more efficient cartridge.[11]

Among other points, the NATO group cited superior effectiveness (27 percent greater) for the 5.7×28mm against unprotected targets and equal effectiveness against protected targets.[11] It also cited less sensitivity to extreme temperatures for the 5.7×28mm, and cited a greater potential risk of barrel erosion with the 4.6×30mm.[11] In addition, the group pointed out that 5.7×28mm is close to the 5.56×45mm NATO by its design and manufacture process, allowing it to be manufactured on existing production lines.[11] The group also pointed out that 5.7×28mm firearms are more mature than 4.6×30mm firearms, and that the 5.7×28mm FN Five-seven pistol was already in production at that time, while the 4.6×30mm Heckler & Koch UCP pistol was only an early concept.[11]

However, the German delegation and others rejected the NATO recommendation that 5.7×28mm be standardized, halting the standardization process indefinitely.[11][21] As a result, both the 4.6×30mm and 5.7×28mm cartridges (and the associated weapons) have been independently adopted by various NATO countries, according to preference; both the P90 and Five-seven are currently in service with military and police forces in over 40 countries throughout the world

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_5.7×28mm

So NATO made a recommendation but standardization has been halted and adoption is up to the individual country.


I love the 10mm....my S&W 1006 is my trusty wood companion....
 
Anyone have any experience with the FN 5.7? Would the 5.7X28mm round might be too hot for home defense? I mean, would a miss go though the walls?

Anyone with one of these that can give an opinion?
Judging from the Ft. Hood shootings I guess it would work okay for home defense.

Will the misses pass through walls?
I guess it depends upon what those walls are made of and how thich they are.
Sheetrock and vinyl siding would pose no real barrier at all.
But a log home might stop a round, or a stone home, maybe.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the FN 5.7.
Should ammo shortages come again (and they will), I wouldn't want to be stuck with such a rare caliber....it would make bartering for ammo that much harder.
I'm also not that wild about FN pistols.
 
Should ammo shortages come again (and they will), I wouldn't want to be stuck with such a rare caliber....it would make bartering for ammo that much harder.

You know it's funny, and maybe just a fluke, but during the ammo shortage the 5.7 was about the only ammo I could get regularly so I actually shot the thing more then and for a while I was considering getting a 5.7 AR upper so I could shoot the AR more since .223 was pretty much impossible to get and I didn't want to dip into my reserves.

Since it isn't as common folks weren't hoarding it maybe?
 
Since it isn't as common folks weren't hoarding it maybe?
Maybe, who knows?
Around here 5.7 ammo is as rare as unicorns, so those who want to shoot it are mostly at the mercy of the internet.
 
Around here 5.7 ammo is as rare as unicorns, so those who want to shoot it are mostly at the mercy of the internet.

Well that's true here too. I have never seen it in an actual store, just online.
 
I don't remember hearing NATO suspended acceptance of the round...

Actually, you're right. HK was being annoying with their 4.6 x 30 round which was found to be less effective through tests. That caused the suspension.
 
But you want to know what could trigger the trigger? Nothing and everything man, your imagination is the limit. Not too long ago somebody had a gun go off and blow a hole in the seat of their car because their leather holster had worn and a piece of it caught the trigger. When they sat down... boom. Had their been a safety... no boom.


Yeah, good one trying to pin it on the gun. That holster should have been retired long before that happened, if you are carrying a lethal weapon and you can't be bothered to maintain a proper holster for it, you deserve the eventual tissue damage you're going to get.

Honestly. Sucks for that dude, but the problem wasn't the gun, it was the owner's unwillingness to take care of his gear and replace a long worn out holster.
 
Holsters are not just load-bearing gear, they are first and foremost safety equipment. using a sh...oddy holster for anything other than very limited static range use is like taking a car with no treads or brakes out and running it 20 MPH over highway speeds. When you crash, it will be unfortunate but no one will feel sorry for you, because it was completely predictable and expected.
 
I don't have or shoot the 5.7, but it's not that hard to find around here (WV, OH, KY). There are at least three places within 10-15 miles that routinely carry it, but it's not cheap.
 
Yeah, good one trying to pin it on the gun. That holster should have been retired long before that happened, if you are carrying a lethal weapon and you can't be bothered to maintain a proper holster for it, you deserve the eventual tissue damage you're going to get.

Honestly. Sucks for that dude, but the problem wasn't the gun, it was the owner's unwillingness to take care of his gear and replace a long worn out holster.

I always get a chuckle out of those who blame the instrument for operator error (in this case negligence). The Glock has three safeties and won't fire unless you do something silly/irresponsible/negligent.

A good design is only as safe as the person using it; fool-proofing something just creates a better class of fool.
 
I don't have or shoot the 5.7, but it's not that hard to find around here (WV, OH, KY). There are at least three places within 10-15 miles that routinely carry it, but it's not cheap.
Not cheap but easy to find. I even see it in Walmart. Cabelas, Bass Pro, and CTD has it on the shelves. I see it a every gun show and usually several vendors with the pistol for sale. I think it is a really interesting idea, just not quite ready for prime time. The ammo price needs to come down to at least the 40 S&W level as well as more choices in guns. If Glock would come out with one, then I think it could really take off.

If practice ammo was priced at $.20 per round and there were multiple pistol vendors, I would get one. The $1000+ price for the gun is not really the part of the equation that keeps most buyers away from this gun.
 
I always get a chuckle out of those who blame the instrument for operator error (in this case negligence). The Glock has three safeties and won't fire unless you do something silly/irresponsible/negligent.

A good design is only as safe as the person using it; fool-proofing something just creates a better class of fool.

Well, 481, we agree on something :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top