FN Five-seveN Why aren't we all carrying one?

[Marcus L.]

Outside of the "police use better ammo than you can" that's nearly impossible to overcome, the fact is that a rifle is a rifle and a pistol is a pistol. One-shot stops from *any* pistol are not to be counted on, period. However, I want something that has widespread use and known effectiveness with ammunition that is available to me, in a service-weapon-sized platform with an established history as a primary sidearm.

Don't get me wrong, a gun is a gun and better than no gun - but there is a reason why 'we're all not carrying them.'

If he had actually read and attempted to understand what Agent Patrick described in the section of "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness" that I posted earlier, he would probably not be talking about "one-shot" drops every other post.

Once someone invests a considerable amount of time, money, and confidence in a caliber and platform it takes nothing short of an epiphany to break them of it. Before I actually started reading and researching into the history and science of wound ballistics I thought the .357sig was the ultimate manstopper. It took a while to break me of that.

 

[Gunnerpalace]

If you haven't practiced enough to accomplish that (and who is to define "average" practice is a good question, I suppose) then why in the world do you think that you'll be able to put 20 shots (of even5.7) where you want them when facing a violent attacker

The Five-Seven has low recoil thus allowing for accurate and rapid fire.

 

[rfurtkamp]

The Five-Seven has low recoil thus allowing for accurate and rapid fire.

So does an all-steel 1911 in .45, or a service-sized weapon in 9mm.

Lack of practice with any of them, or a 5-7, will not magically place rounds on target.

Again, what's the advantage?

 

[Gunnerpalace]

Five Seven Light low recoil

M1911 Heavy low recoil,

Keeping size out of this (It wont be though) FS has the weight advantage.

EDIT:
I just watched the Brady video (thankfully didn't hear too much garbage) They shot a vest with a FS, .40 cal, 12ga shot, and 12ga slug,
Now the FS penetrated so IF they using LE ammo is so then point may be there, but if not I may be right.

 

[rfurtkamp]

Five Seven Light low recoil

M1911 Heavy low recoil,

I just don't know what to say there.

Mozambique drills with a 1911 aren't any more difficult than they are with a 9mm or the 5.7 or a Ruger 10/22 - nor do they take up any more time to execute with practice.

100 pound women can handle the recoil of a 1911. Seriously.

Youth shooters I've taught as young as 8 (and I'm a certified instructor) can handle the recoil of a 1911 providing the weapon isn't too large for their hand.

Where's the 'heavy recoil' here - do you have a disability of some type?

And if you're referencing the weight of the weapon, well, it's still a service sized handgun. Bulk kicks in as a factor, and if you can't carry a service handgun because of weight, you've either got severe lower back issues or need a better holster/belt combo.

 

[Crow1108]

Because for the price of one FN Five-Seven, I could buy two of something else, or one of something else with alot of accessories and ammo to become proficient with. It's a neat concept, but not $900 neat.

Five Seven Light low recoil

M1911 Heavy low recoil,

I'm not bothered at all by the recoil of my 1911. I shoot it better than any other handgun I've ever fired, and 25 rounds ( 8+1 in the gun, 8 in 2 extra mags) is more than enough ammo to deal with anything I am likely to encounter even in the worst of scenarios.

 

[Aka Zero]

I like how some people say "5.7 is too small", but swear by the m-4. 5.56, and 5.7......

I like 9mm, good fast, decent sized. and plenty of rounds. 16-19 per mag in full frame czs, and you could carry spare 19 rounds mags and stick them in a 75 compact. start with 14, have plenty to spare.

But most SD situations end in few bullets. Most people never have to reload.

comparing the 5.7 to anything is apples to oranges, it's meant for a different purpose, (light a.p.) not knockdown. So it does it's job, but the gun itself is a bit big for ccw. I would ccw the p-90, just a little bigger. (j/k)

 

[Gunnerpalace]

Let me rephrase,


Five Seven-----Weight: Light-------= low recoil



M1911 --------Weight: Heavy-------= low recoil,

 

[rfurtkamp]

Five Seven-----Weight: Light-------= low recoil



M1911 --------Weight: Heavy-------= low recoil,[

So with the speed of effective shooting removed, the size of the weapon being of no advantage, we're down to weight.

So why not a Glock, XD, original stamped slide Sig, or similar medium-weight pistol similar to the 5-7?

 

[Gunnerpalace]

Ammo capacity

 

[rfurtkamp]

Ammo capacity

So 1-3 rounds at most makes the difference when you're comparing it to Beretta 92s, CZs, Sigs, Hks, etc?

 

[RX-178]

PRICE.

Five sevens are EXPENSIVE. Ammunition is EXPENSIVE. Mags are EXPENSIVE.

For me, it has nothing to do with the stopping power argument. Of course, I'm from Texas, and the words of one of the more famous Texas Rangers influences my thinking:

A .22 magnum put in the right place will kill them just as fast as a .38 special.

I'm almost positive that I've misquoted him, but the jist of it is the same.

That said, the .22 magnum is a lot less expensive than 5.7mm.

 

[piranha45]

I think a .22 magnum hits alot harder than a .38 special anyway...

 

[hankdatank1362]

Springfield XDm 9mm - 19+1 rounds of 9mm = 20 rounds overall
Weight - 32oz (2lbs)(unloaded)

FN FiveSeven 5.7mm - 20+1 rounds of 5.7mm = 21 rounds overall
Weight - 19oz (barely over 1 lb)(unloaded)

 

[Vanzpp]

There's a good article about it in this month's Concealed Carry Magazine.

Bottom line: ammo is too expensive with choice very limited, and the gun is too bulky for CCW.

BTW: The author of the article tested some rounds against a Kevlar vest. They DON'T pass through Kevlar, contrary to rumors that the Five-seveN rounds are "armor-piercing."

 

[SniperStraz]

Thanx for all the interesting feedback guys. I really enjoyed it.

 

[Gunnerpalace]

If people have an issue with this round they have an issue with it, the "stopping power" factor is one I (and a few others) could care less about,

It looks cool (is that a problem?)

It holds 20 rounds (which is more than 15)

And it as of this point in time has a one-two shot severe wound/kill rate (there was a report of a homeowner (Civilian) who did a one shot drop on a homeowner), this looks good enough for me even if the bullet is different, point being in the end I will CCW this and IF I have to defend myself and the cartridge fails causing me serious harm or death then yes it would suck, and this forum could dredge up these post to highlight my choice.
If it doesn't fail but stops the threat the my point is made.

In the the it is my choice and the OP's choice to make, the 2nd amendment gives us that choice and freedom. (In most places)

 

[sinistr]

i had one,they are very easy to cc its actually kind of surprising.accuracy, recoil ,trigger were all good.shot about 800 rounds through it before i traded it,couldn't get past the calibre.

 

[Eightball]

the "stopping power" factor is one I (and a few others) could care less about,

But, isn't this your whole point for carrying it? Heck, if I didn't care about stopping power, I'd carry a rock.

And it as of this point in time has a one-two shot severe wound/kill rate

With a very, very small amount of evidence to even support this, and most of it is with the ammunition type you cannot legally own.

IF I have to defend myself and the cartridge fails causing me serious harm or death then yes it would suck

We're here trying to keep you from carrying something that could get you killed because you're basing your faith in a very small sample of evidence where the success rate is based on ammunition you CANNOT USE.

If you wish to use a full-size "duty" type firearm, and a 1911 is "heavy" to you, I question your logic. Relying on a double-digit small sample-size rather than the millions of soldiers who've used .45ACP or 9mm or any of the more common things makes me question your sanity.

A F-S looks cool and holds a lot of rounds, no one's begrudging you that. It's stopping power is close to a .22 Magnum, which, while better than nothing, isn't the wisest choice. And the platform's size is larger than many other very capable, proven, and lightweight firearms that are designed for CCW-ing in mind, and they have gotten their track record with ammo you can legally own and use.

While it's your choice to carry the thing (and no one's denying you that right......yet), I would hope that an overarching concern for your friends and family would cause you to take pause and consider your choice of carry piece, since it seems like most of your opinion of it is based on a very small sample size whose statistics are based on the ammunition type you cannot legally own/use.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

The point is to kill somebody

No, the point is to stop the threat, so you don't die.

 

[jpatterson]

I would be interested to see the Box O' Truth fella do an experiment on the 5.7 round.

Or has he already?

 

[rfurtkamp]

If people have an issue with this round they have an issue with it, the "stopping power" factor is one I (and a few others) could care less about,

That's the thing. I want to make sure that for the safety of myself, my family, and my fellow citizens that a threat worthy of using a weapon on is stopped in its tracks with minimal problem.

I have range toys that don't have to fit that mold. I have guns that are among my favorite in that regard; if not *the* favorite guns in my stupidly large collection. However, you won't catch me telling anyone they should be carrying a C96 Mauser no matter how cool or fun it is. Or use a .22 lever gun out of preference for self-defense. Or use a FAL as an entry weapon.

That's the difference. I understand toys v. defensive firearms.

Defensive firearms are expected to fit a particular use and effect, that main one being to stop an immediate threat to my life or the lives of those around me. It could be pained neon orange and I'd use an effective tool in this regard.

Range toys are just that. I'd use one in an emergency, or if it was the best I had.

But when you're talking about $900 handguns....this isn't about using the best you can afford. It's about suggesting others should use what's basically a novelty toy with available ammunition for serious purposes.

It looks cool (is that a problem?)

For a range toy, no.

For a defensive weapon, the bad guy(s) don't give points for style.

It holds 20 rounds (which is more than 15)

And what we've been telling you this whole thread is flush-fit, reliable magazines from Mecgar, the major OEM manufacturer of magazines for almost anything you might buy, including FN's traditional Hi-Power....offer 17, 18, or more rounds in a same-sized package in a traditional service weapon.

My Sig 226, proven effective and reliable in over 25 years of use, holds 18+1.
If I wanted a striker-fired gun, my Glock 17 could hold 19+1.

Why should I trade that for a cartridge of dubious power without proven reputation?

And it as of this point in time has a one-two shot severe wound/kill rate (there was a report of a homeowner (Civilian) who did a one shot drop on a homeowner), this looks good enough for me even if the bullet is different, point being in the end I will CCW this and IF I have to defend myself and the cartridge fails causing me serious harm or death then yes it would suck, and this forum could dredge up these post to highlight my choice.
If it doesn't fail but stops the threat the my point is made.

Chances of that happening are remote; color me strange but I don't want to be a testbed for unproven things where the lives of those I value are on the line.

This is where you're getting opposition: this thread isn't about what cockamamey choices an individual has made rather than addressing the basic question of the thread title: "Why aren't we carrying the 5-7?"

In the the it is my choice and the OP's choice to make, the 2nd amendment gives us that choice and freedom. (In most places)

Yes, it does. For the purposes of this thread, though, the claims made have been baseless, that somehow this is a gun for everyone. What you do is up to you - I don't begrudge you that right. Enjoy choice.

 

[Marcus L.]

I think a good resource to bring up would be Russian handgun cartridge evolution. The Russians have experimented with small caliber, super high velocity handgun loads for years with various domestic hollow point designs used by their police and militaries. After all, it was the Russians that came up with using a hollow nose cavity in the 5.45x39mm round that made it much more lethal.....yet questionable as to being Hague Convension compliant.

Most of us are familiar with the 7.62x25mm in the Tokarev which fires a .30 caliber bullet at high velocities. This cartridge was dropped from Russian police and military use in the early 1950s and replaced with the 9x18mm which seemed to have better terminal effects. Then the Russians decided that they needed an armour piercing round with mild recoil that the 9x18mm couldn't do. So, they designed the 5.45x18mm for special purpose use. This round wasn't all that impressive in the terminal effects department either, so in the mid 1990s the Russians developed the 9x21mm armour piercing load. However, this load had too much recoil and was too hard on firearms. So, in the late 1990s the Russians adopted the standard 9x19mm. Kinda reminds me of the FBI trying out the 10mm Auto, and then settling on the .40S&W. The Russians developed special 9mm+P+ armour piercing loads which they are still using today in SMGs and the Yarygin PYa pistol. The Russians, although not quite as advanced in ballistics testing as the USA is, determined that the smaller PDW type calibers just didn't get the job done. Armour piercing ability was needed, but PDW calibers were just too weak overall. So, they got the bright idea to just improve on the classic 9mm bullet and turn it into a round that can penetrate level II soft armour. The Russians have also developed larger caliber mid ranged weaponry for armour piercing SMGs and carbines such as the 9x39mm with a 260gr bullet. It has almost double the sectional density of most rifle calibers so that it pushes its way with incredibly high momentum through body armour.

The difference between the PDW calibers and assault rifle cartridges such as the 5.56 and 5.45 is bullet sectional density, velocity, and mass. These three important attributes allow assault rifle calibers to yaw, tumble, and in some cases fragment to deep levels of penetration while creating large permanent wound cavities and impressive temporary stretch cavities that actually tear surrounding tissue. The PDW calibers have been tested and do not have these capabilities. The Russians have been there, done that, moved on, and are not looking back.

 

[Gunnerpalace]

ammunition type you cannot legally own

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=113593184

There's more where that came from.

I'd carry a rock.

So shooting somebody in the head with the Five Seven will not kill them?

The stooping power you guys are thinking of is the aggressive people, the stopping power I am thinking of in CNS, But I'm starting to think this is a lost cause, Whatever.

 

[ezypikns]

My guess is......

they're easier to carry concealed than you might think, more than accurate enough, and the caliber is mor ethan adequate.
Problem is, I like to shoot....a lot. So either 9mm or .45 ACP seem to be both more economical to buy, or reload for that matter.