5.7x28 for defensive carry

[barnbwt]

'Tis but a flesh wound; I've had worse.

"Look how shallow that 2" wound is. It's a surface divot. A crater."
That is a section-cut about 8" into the 22lb block of pig, buddy. A separate image shows the two side by side, and I think penetration was something like 10"-11" on a diagonal (hard to tell how the meat was oriented originally). Complain about it being cold and not realistic of living tissue if you want to dispute it

I've never seen a 22mag or 22LR make that type of wound, though, 'divot' or otherwise.

"The bullets did not produce enough wound trauma, i.e., the amount of physical tissue damage was inadequate, to compel rapid incapacitation.

The temporary cavity produced was insufficient to cause concussion of the spinal cord."

Ah, so that's the secret to the mythical stop. I always thought it was 'smashing bone,' or 'expanding bullets,' or 'the target realizing they were hit with a round that starts with a 4.' Then why are you carping about wound characteristics in the first place? If hydrostatic shock is the critical factor, we should be trying to measure/replicate that somehow instead (or simply recognizing that with a velocity of over 2000fps, it should be in play to some extent already). Is that why a slower, heavier, wider handgun round is so preferable to the 5.7x28? I understand why you'd want a rifle's power for the purpose, but there are practically no handguns rolling that fast of any practicality for any kind of carry.

As far as inadequate tissue damage, here's a chart we've all seen a zillion times;

Where is the extra order of magnitude of damage from any other those that precludes the need for ten or more hits for effect? Penetration isn't hugely different (another inch or so it seems, at which point most rounds including the 5.7 would have exited anyway), tearing diameter isn't all that much wider, or longer (maybe a half-inch?) So where is the superior effectiveness coming from?

Still no opinions on how easy it is to use an excessive (tactically speaking) number of rounds on a target with both the P90 and five-seven due to their controllability & capacity, and how that fact may play into how many rounds are 'felt' to be needed in practice, all physical evidence to the contrary.

TCB

 

[barnbwt]

Here's another pork shoulder test (with the SS198 lead free round) which did 8" penetration after initial heavy bone strike (which it destroyed) with a respectable wound path width. Only thing not to like is how the guy ruined a good pork roast (most of it could be salvaged, but not the way he trims it ). The LF round is basically a solid copper spritzer, if memory serves. Not bad for a 27gr doo-dad (this stuff is FNH restricted, though, I assume due to too-good penetration of soft armor)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPdYwBo_eeI

The other pics (and other gel tests) of the first roast are here;
http://www.fivesevenforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=57
No, fivesevenforum is hardly an unbiased source, but the author of the photo explains his test & the results fairly enough

TCB

 

[yugorpk]

Here's another pork shoulder test (with the SS198 lead free round) which did 8" penetration after initial heavy bone strike (which it destroyed) with a respectable wound path width. Only thing not to like is how the guy ruined a good pork roast (most of it could be salvaged, but not the way he trims it ). The LF round is basically a solid copper spritzer, if memory serves. Not bad for a 27gr doo-dad (this stuff is FNH restricted, though, I assume due to too-good penetration of soft armor)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPdYwBo_eeI

The other pics (and other gel tests) of the first roast are here;
http://www.fivesevenforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=57
No, fivesevenforum is hardly an unbiased source, but the author of the photo explains his test & the results fairly enough

TCB

Green tip SS198LF is readily available. It says LE/MlL restricted all over the boxes but you can buy it easily from many vendors that sell 5.7X28 ammo. Its not really AP ammo. $30 a box of 50 or less sometimes. Real "armor piercing" steel core SS190 is difficult/impossible to buy but not the 198LF.

Ive got a few boxes but I don't shoot it. 2X the price of the Fiocchi/American Eagle and the tin cans don't care.

 

[Crawfish1]

Any tests with SS192?

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

The whole point of it taking 10+ rounds to stop someone is a little confusing. Did they have to fire each round semi automatically before the badguy was stopped or did they do 2-3 bursts really quick before the guy started falling giving the image of taking too many rounds to stop someone?

 

[481]

This. I think the average self defense shooting are something like 1.75-2.25 shots fired.

There is little difference to be between the 5.7 and a 22short. The 5.7 is just faster which the same thing can be said about most calibers. The 22 short is a really common round used in killing 300+ lb market hogs other common rounds are 25rim fire and 9x17 blanks in bolts guns. All put Down big hogs the same as long as your placement is spot on caliber makes no difference.

If that statistic holds true for any (hand)gunfight that I am unfortunate enough to find myself in, I want a JHP that can expand to largest possible diameter and destroy the most tissue. Most service caliber rounds will do better than the 5.7.

 

[PabloJ]

Green tip SS198LF is readily available. It says LE/MlL restricted all over the boxes but you can buy it easily from many vendors that sell 5.7X28 ammo. Its not really AP ammo. $30 a box of 50 or less sometimes. Real "armor piercing" steel core SS190 is difficult/impossible to buy but not the 198LF.

Ive got a few boxes but I don't shoot it. 2X the price of the Fiocchi/American Eagle and the tin cans don't care.

This gun should be banned. It uses large capacity magazine and light weight cartridges making carrying large quantity possible. Ideal OFFENSIVE terror weapon and we don't need those on the streets.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

This gun should be banned. It uses large capacity magazine and light weight cartridges making carrying large quantity possible. Ideal terror weapon and we don't need those on the streets.

Uh....no....

 

[barnbwt]

"If that statistic holds true for any (hand)gunfight that I am unfortunate enough to find myself in, I want a JHP that can expand to largest possible diameter and destroy the most tissue. Most service caliber rounds will do better than the 5.7."

It's worth mentioning, first off, that the statistic is ostensibly based on all tallied shootings, which likely run the gambit from 22LR to 500S&W (or more ) and is the 'number fired,' not the 'number needed,' which are different quantities (see that Chicago LEO shooting). Second off, that it likely mostly involves 'service rounds' like 9/40/45. Third off, that it likely has more weight toward LEO shootings, since they seem to get better documentation in various stats. My point is there's some selection bias to be expected (if an avg of 1 9mm is needed, that by itself isn't evidence a slightly less powerful round needs more; it only proves that 9mm itself is above the threshold needed to reliably end a scenario in one shot; 5.7x28 could be and likely is above it as well)

Fourth, the avg shots required number includes misses. Which we all know are more likely for more shooters as recoil increases (I would argue the massive blast/concussion of the 5.7x28 is a distinct detriment here as well since it can cause a flinch just as recoil does, but I don't have a ton of experience firing handguns indoors without ear protection; I've heard 9mm/45acp are pretty jarring themselves). Training can supposedly overcome such obstacles regardless of cartridge power, but my way personal experience is the five-seven is a more easy gun to get accurate with than most due to the lack of recoil (possibly backed up by the near-universal praise by online warriors of its 'inherent accuracy' which I suspect is mostly due to them not flinching). It also has rather large (tall) sights which may help shooters.

Fifth, and this is where the five-seven really comes in, that number of rounds you can get off in a scenario is a variable. The school of thought behind the 5.7x28 (agree or disagree) is that its light weight and controllability will likely enable you to get more shots off on the target than you would with, say, a 45acp or 357magnum. Case in point, how somehow 15rnds are typically used on a P90's target because it is 'too weak,' even though it's rate of fire is like 50% higher than other subguns (i.e. the trigger is held down the same length of time due to reflex limits )

But yeah, if you are basing your expectations around One Round, then it makes sense for it to be both large and very fast (357magnum or 38spl +p derringer). Sadly, that requirement conflicts with the secondary goal of backup capacity, due to the size of the cartridges and gun required to run them.

TCB

 

[barnbwt]

"Ideal OFFENSIVE terror weapon and we don't need those on the streets."
As we saw in Ft Hood, you're kinda right; it puts a lot of firepower in the hands of a single person. But the gun was designed from the ground up as a personal defensive aid (alongside the even more pigeon-holed Personal Defense Weapon carbines) so you're definitely wrong.

I know you're just being sarcastic, though. I envy the gang-banger who just finds these on 'the streets.'

"Green tip SS198LF is readily available. It says LE/MlL restricted all over the boxes but you can buy it easily from many vendors that sell 5.7X28 ammo. Its not really AP ammo. $30 a box of 50 or less sometimes. Real "armor piercing" steel core SS190 is difficult/impossible to buy but not the 198LF."
I'm just going by what Wiki says about FNH's dumb sales practices. I'm well aware that none of the FNH 5.7x28 loads are actually classified as Armor Piercing, in the legal/ATF sense. Well, I guess there's been some prototypes built like the 4.6x30 steel-solids, but even cops/mil aren't using them. My understanding is the SS190 'AP' bullet is very similar to the M855; a steel tip atop a main core (aluminum in the case of the SS190 to promote tumbling & muzzle velocity) and copper jacketed. As such, it remains unbanned under LEOPA ammo rules, but FNH didn't want to offend the Bradys so they restricted its sale to departments only (who then resell it to civvies at >1$/rnd ) --I always thought that was the real reason so many departments want a P90 around

TCB

 

[yugorpk]

I shoot a lot of the federal 5.7X28 because it is what it is and thats a great plinking round. I dont hold open fantasies about penetration and "man stopping" when it comes to shooting tin cans and foxes. As a plinking and light hunting round its excellent in the AR-57 SBR upper. FAST follow up shots and the stuff is nowhere near as hard to reload as the "experts" on the internet like to spout off about.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Properly prepared and calibrated ordnance gelatin tears more easily than muscle tissue. The radial cracks observed in ordnance gelatin, produced by a 2-3” diameter temporary cavity when it stretches the gelatin beyond its elastic limits, translates into bruised muscle tissue - a localized blunt trauma surrounding the wound track.

Muscle tissue is elastic and can tolerate the stretch of a 2-3” diameter temporary cavity without tearing. Most soft tissues are resilient. (Whereas brain, spleen, liver, kidney and pancreas tissues are not elastic and will be damaged by the temporary cavity.)

The validity of a pork roast, as a realistic test medium, can be judged by the amount of physical disruption produced by the temporary cavity. When permanent disruption produced in the muscle tissue of a pork roast equals the diameter of the temporary cavity it’s a clue that the damage observed in a pork roast is not a realistic depiction of a bullet’s wounding effects.

Ah, so that's the secret to the mythical stop. I always thought it was 'smashing bone,' or 'expanding bullets,' or 'the target realizing they were hit with a round that starts with a 4.' Then why are you carping about wound characteristics in the first place?

When a person is shot in the torso and immediately collapses the physiological mechanism is disruption of the spinal cord – either physical destruction caused by a penetrating bullet or concussion caused by impact with spinal bones. A person may also suffer emotional fainting, caused when blood vessels suddenly dilate and blood pressure drops.

Where is the extra order of magnitude of damage from any other those that precludes the need for ten or more hits for effect? Penetration isn't hugely different (another inch or so it seems, at which point most rounds including the 5.7 would have exited anyway), tearing diameter isn't all that much wider, or longer (maybe a half-inch?) So where is the superior effectiveness coming from?

The larger diameter hole these bullets poke in soft tissues compared to the 5.7. Small bullets poke small holes. Small holes don’t leak blood as quickly in rate and volume as big holes do.

Each of the bullets in the photo you posted can be counted on to damage only the tissues they come into direct contact with, i.e., the permanent cavity of tissue that is directly contacted and crushed by the penetrating bullet.

The photo can be misleading. Some folks incorrectly believe the disruption depicted in the gelatin by the red dye represents permanent tissue damage, when in fact any disruption in the gelatin larger than the expanded bullet represents the temporary cavity, which may or may not damage inelastic tissues, depending on where these tissues lie along the wound track. Elastic tissues (lung, bowel, nerve, blood vessels, muscle, etc.) will suffer blunt trauma-like damage that will not contribute to rapid physiological incapacitation. Handgun bullets can be counted on to only poke holes. The bigger the bullet the bigger the hole.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

The larger diameter hole these bullets poke in soft tissues compared to the 5.7. Small bullets poke small holes.

You do realize that the 5.7 tumbles right? It does the same thing that 5.56 does when it contacts flesh and I don't see anyone recommending a 45-70 for a rifle for defensive use against badguys.

 

[Zerodefect]

"Blood leaking" isn't the best way to win a gun fight. With 5.7, or .45. You have to hit something more vital and immediate. I'm not going to leak much blood in 3 seconds.

 

[barnbwt]

"Properly prepared and calibrated ordnance gelatin tears more easily than muscle tissue."
But apples to apples, the disturbance is similar between 5.7x28 and 9mm (or at least not radically different), so basically what you are saying is gel tests are not informative; only expanded diameter is.

"Muscle tissue is elastic and can tolerate the stretch of a 2-3” diameter temporary cavity without tearing"
Well, the 5.7x28 does appear to stretch about that much, so tearing should be expected, as also evidenced in the pork roasts (and other meat tests). Besides, if tissue stretches 3" without tearing, why does any projectile under that diameter produce more than a pin-hole wound?

"The validity of a pork roast, as a realistic test medium, can be judged by the amount of physical disruption produced by the temporary cavity. When permanent disruption produced in the muscle tissue of a pork roast equals the diameter of the temporary cavity it’s a clue that the damage observed in a pork roast is not a realistic depiction of a bullet’s wounding effects."
Ah, so meat is no better an indicator of performance in meat than gel engineered to be roughly approximate to meat; gotcha

"When a person is shot in the torso and immediately collapses the physiological mechanism is disruption of the spinal cord – either physical destruction caused by a penetrating bullet or concussion caused by impact with spinal bones. A person may also suffer emotional fainting, caused when blood vessels suddenly dilate and blood pressure drops."
Uh-huh, and that's why I argue a 5.7x28 isn't hugely different in effectiveness than 9mm or other common service round; all require a near direct hit on something electrical, and while it is somewhat small in diameter, the 5.7's velocity causes more of that concussion you referenced (not to mention the predictable tumbling/fragmenting of the service loads)

"The larger diameter hole these bullets poke in soft tissues compared to the 5.7. Small bullets poke small holes. Small holes don’t leak blood as quickly in rate and volume as big holes do."
5.7 deforms and tumbles just as much as any HP bullet, and causes a similar permanent disruption path during the sonic (larger-diameter first half of the path that's spread out; not sure what the technical jargon for that region is called) portion of its impact. By the time the velocity has slowed to where the physical diameter of the projectiles are forming the path, all service rounds have done the vast majority of their damage (and unless you have a crazily diagonal shot, are likely on their way to exiting the target). I happen to place as much or more emphasis on the first half of the wound path, simply since that's where performance is likely the most predictable, reality vs. test (because of fewer variables inside the target)

"Each of the bullets in the photo you posted can be counted on to damage only the tissues they come into direct contact with, i.e., the permanent cavity of tissue that is directly contacted and crushed by the penetrating bullet."
I sort of agree, but only because those rounds are all going so much slower. It is well documented that hydrostatic tearing of a permanent wound track begins to be reliable just under 2000fps, and the duty rounds of the five-seven pistol typically exceed that. Ignoring that fact is akin to comparing 32acp and 7.62x25 hollowpoints, with the expectation that expansion is similar/non-existent for both.

"Handgun bullets can be counted on to only poke holes. The bigger the bullet the bigger the hole."
I'm afraid that's where we ultimately disagree, and I'm not sure how I could possibly convince you otherwise, when you discard out of hand multiple types of testing that contradict your theory (that 5.7x28 should perform markedly worse than a 9mm or other service load), as well as physical phenomena like hydrostatic shock and bullet tumbling that are reliably demonstrated by similar-speed rounds (as well as the aforementioned testing)

TCB

 

[seeker_two]

You do realize that the 5.7 tumbles right? It does the same thing that 5.56 does when it contacts flesh and I don't see anyone recommending a 45-70 for a rifle for defensive use against badguys.

I do....especially if they're hiding behind the refrigerator....at your neighbor's house.

 

[barnbwt]

...or you're Leonardo DiCaprio (bear joke)

 

[seeker_two]

...or you're Leonardo DiCaprio (bear joke)

You absolutely bruined that punchline....

 

[481]

snippety...But yeah, if you are basing your expectations around One Round, then it makes sense for it to be both large and very fast (357magnum or 38spl +p derringer). Sadly, that requirement conflicts with the secondary goal of backup capacity, due to the size of the cartridges and gun required to run them.... snip snip

I am basing my expectations on multiple rounds. If it makes sense for one round, it also makes sense for multiple rounds. There is a reason that the 5.7 isn't dominating the LE market as some would like to believe. That reason is that it is a "niche" round that serves a very narrow purpose and that there are other choices that offer much better performance without the constraints of the 5.7.

Quoted for being a very realistic perspective:

5.7x28 has been dumped by agency after agency because it doesn't quickly stop bad guys, even when they're hosed down by a P90.

It produces virtually the same wound trauma (physical tissue damage) as a .22 Magnum rifle. A modern 9mm jhp cartridge that meets FBI performance criteria produces more tissue damage than the 5.7.

Ft. Hood victims weren't determined, drugged-up terrorists.

 

[barnbwt]

"If it makes sense for one round, it also makes sense for multiple rounds. There is a reason that the 5.7 isn't dominating the LE market as some would like to believe. That reason is that it is a "niche" round that serves a very narrow purpose and that there are other choices that offer much better performance without the constraints of the 5.7."
I'd think it'd plainly evident by now that there's also a lot of bias against the round, in the face of more than enough evidence showing it to be a capable service round (which is not the same as 'the most' capable, btw). I happen to think the niche aspect is almost entirely due to the available weapons, though. A large service handgun in a light chambering is often something of an oxymoron, and the PDW carbine concept has been supplanted by the M4 entirely (mostly because of the realization that nothing but a pistol or dedicated security detail is capable of fulfilling the rear-echelon protection job the P90 was originally dreamed up for, and the remainder because the whole notion of a surprise rear-echelon attack for which you'd need all hands to respond with PDWs was over-exaggerated; 'blue on green' attacks or whatever they're calling the Afghani traitors' betrayls are the closest we've seen, and those are usually one guy which nearby pistols/M4s are more than a match for). I am agreeing that the round/guns were definitely adapted for a niche and remain somewhat stuck in it; I do not agree that this is due to the round itself and that it would not serve well as a defense round in a proper carry gun* (and technically, the thread is about the round, rather than the current single pistol available for it).

Once again, the rimfire 22mag is both a lot more powerful than given credit, and loaded with stubbier bullets than the 5.7 which don't deviate from a narrow through-shot as much. And in the interest of realism, this whole notion of a dozen rounds of any high velocity chambering being necessary for consistent stopping doesn't make any sense, either; the tests & physics simply don't support the claims made from the field (and supposedly the guys setting up the tests are trying to approximate field performance).

I think it's more likely that a gun specifically optimized for highly controllable rapid automatic fire, simply gets used that way more often than harder-recoiling guns (which is every other alternative). And it's understandable, too; why would you use the gun on semi-auto, if it is no more controllable to do so, and will deliver live saving/ending rounds more slowly? That'd be a rather reckless decision to make in a scenario where f/a is an option, just to see if a theory is valid.

Also, inflated expectations. It's rather comical the number of reports you hear about X-agency or LEO replacing PS90s/P90s with 223s; that big of a jump in capability more suggests they were unwise in their assumptions (or desires) when choosing the PDWs in the first place.** I don't know if FNH themselves started it, but it was rumored for a while (and still is in some places, I'm sure) that 5.7x28 somehow rivaled 5.56x45 despite a third the power . I would take comparisons of performance vs. MP5s or UMPs or MPX or the new Skorpions more seriously, since at least the expectations from them are similar; likewise the five-seven vs. Glock 17 or 22TCM pistols.

TCB

*About the closest we have to go on are the 22TCM guns, which for a number of reasons are unlikely to generate much real-world defense anecdotes to draw conclusions from. A commander in TCM loaded to proper levels would likely be very roughly comparable (provided Arsmcorp gets some manufacturers to load decent bullets that do more than punch straight, tiny holes)
**Procurement guys and especially their bosses are notorious for simply misjudging the requirements for the task at hand & being hopelessly out of touch with field conditions, and you end up with cops using 38spl revolvers for decades after good semis came out, and shotguns 'to reduce collateral damage' for decades after the advent of AR15s. I'm sure more than a few departments bought PS90s simply because they were on Stargate, and were replacements for the broken Calicos from several years earlier :banghead:

 

[usp9]

It's hard to understand why this particular pistol generates so much dedicated hate and misinformation from a group of supposed firearm aficionados. Makes no sense to me.

 

[barnbwt]

"why this particular pistol generates so much dedicated hate and misinformation"
Because everyone loves picking on the little guy

What's hilarious is how much unsubstantiated love and admiration there is for the MP7 and 4.6x30, considering it's an even smaller, lighter round going the same speed in many cases, and there isn't so much as a take-down video on that platform on the internet (let alone a way for most folks to buy a gun). I have read that the price of the weapon is on par with the service life, though; 4000 before overhaul . That's 80 mags through the 'delicate' P90 . Yet you will read all the time how 'elite' operator units routinely use the things in covert deadly double ops the public will never know about with stunning results (even though there's essentially zero performance difference in the rounds, especially when armor is not present). Only guys I've seen using MP7s are train station & tourist attraction guards in England & Germany.

 

[481]

What's hilarious is how much unsubstantiated love and admiration there is for the MP7 and 4.6x30...

I've never seen that and I do agree that those cartridges suffer from a greater dose of the things that plague the 5.7. There might be bias against the 5.7, but only if one thinks that there'll be some sort of a "free lunch" in terms of the physical capabilities of the round.

Separating performance from platform (where the cartridge may be held to a niche), unless one needs to get through some sort of armor (hard/soft), there is little that the 5.7 can do that cannot be done by a pistol caliber round. Even then, there are options in other calibers where a change in material and increasing the velocity can address the need to defeat armor (KTW, THV, etc.) if need be that won't be a problem for the .gov of any given nation to obtain and employ.

 

[barnbwt]

"Separating performance from platform (where the cartridge may be held to a niche), unless one needs to get through some sort of armor (hard/soft), there is little that the 5.7 can do that cannot be done by a pistol caliber round. Even then, there are options in other calibers where a change in material and increasing the velocity can address the need to defeat armor (KTW, THV, etc.) if need be that won't be a problem for the .gov of any given nation to obtain and employ."
This is my thinking, also; that in the grand scheme of things, the PDW and pistol rounds can more or less do each other's jobs. Sounds reasonable enough.

TCB

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

How many of the Agencies went to a different subgun like a UMP or went to a 5.56 carbine after dropping the P90? Give the choice I'd rather have a carbine over a PDW.