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

[rfurtkamp]

Not "i've shot a friend's fn 5.7 a few times.", but "Put demo models through tests against known good service pistols."

The gun just doesn't impress me.

I've put 500+ rounds through the IOM and USG, neither one is a substantial improvement (and I prefer the grip and ergonomics of the original model IOM by a mile).

And I still go back to the same point I found in learning to use it:

What does it do that another pistol that is already proven does not (with civilian-available ammunition)?

As I've gone over above, it offers no real ammunition capacity advantage over modern 9mms, no practical shooting advantages, and uses an untested caliber with subpar ammunition versus what LEOs can use.

And as always, I'll harp back to the original thread title, "Why are't we all carrying one"?

The answer is simple. As a civilian pistol, with available civilian ammo, it offers no real positives and massive negatives.

 

[Girodin]

there's more powerful and reliable items, and if not, there's items still smaller and stronger, and so it goes.

I agree with power, smaller and stronger. I also agree there are much better carry guns as I have previously stated. That said in my experience the five seven has been very reliable pistol. I'm sure I have not shot as many rounds as others so they may chime in on that point. In hundreds of rounds I've never seen a problem however.

 

[SniperStraz]

This isn't a 'I like my 5-7 thread' - it's a 'you all should have one' evangelising thread, and evangelism elicits a backlash, and rightly so when the claims are as ludicrous as have been made.

I clearly stated that I dont know anything about the 5-7 nor do I own one.

 

[asilomar]

Nice gun, M2. The pic influenced me when trying to find a laser/taclight for my five-seven. The TLR-2 actually seems to be the smallest, although heaviest.

Anyway, I like my Five-seven. Why? Can't say really. It's just fun to shoot small projectiles at near 2000fps, with the recoil of a .22. I can shoot it all day long. Yes, ammo is expensive, but I've found that .40 S&W ammo costs slightly more. $25 for 50 rounds of 5.7 and $27 for 50 rounds of .40 S&W. Also, you can get 5.7 for less at certain places, like Bass Pro shop. If I wanted cheap, I wouldn't have traded in my 9mm.

For a carry or self defense weapon, I'd still prefer my .40. But if say, all hell and anarchy broke out (such as lawlessness during a natural disaster, riots, or the occasional zombie invasion), I'd prefer the five-seven because it's light and easy to carry all day (not conceal, carry), and medium to medium-long range (accurate up to 200 yds) as opposed to close-up man-stoppers like the .45. In civilian defensive situations, yeah, I'd want to knock someone out with one shot, fast, and it will probably be close range. In survival situations, I'd want longer range, less recoil, penetration, and accuracy...a 30 round clip sure helps too!

As for stopping power, according to some, the 5.7 hollow-tip yaws quickly after impact. I've read this and also heard it from people who've done a few "backyard tests". Now, this isn't going to equal a .45, but a bunch of small razors ripping up your insides will get the job done just as well as one large, gaping hole, in my opinion. Keep in mind, I can regain sight picture with the 5.7 a lot faster than I can with my .40...but I need practice. So for me, I can get more rounds off with the 5.7, but can't speak for everyone.

It's a fun weapon, but not for everyone. Want to know the main reason I decided to buy it? The anti-gun crowd hates this gun. That influenced me a bit. If they outlaw it, I'm holding on to it until they pry it from my cold lifeless fingers.

As for it being "not intimidating" or ugly...well, yea, I'll say it's a bit ugly...but would you like to be on the business end of this...and 30 high speed, highly accurate rounds?



By the way, here's a good article on the five-seven. It re-iterates what I'm saying, which is the five-seven is good for what's it's intended for. Not to be compared to popular defensive loads by US standards. Yes, the civilian version of the ammo destroys the weapons potential, but it's still not useless...and still fun to shoot.

http://savvysurvivor.com/fn_5.htm

 

[rfurtkamp]

Yes, ammo is expensive, but I've found that .40 S&W ammo costs slightly more. $25 for 50 rounds of 5.7 and $27 for 50 rounds of .40 S&W.

All I can say is you're getting *killed* on ammo prices, seriously. Even at current obscene prices, you're looking at $18-19 a box for .40.

Want to know the main reason I decided to buy it? The anti-gun crowd hates this gun. That influenced me a bit. If they outlaw it, I'm holding on to it until they pry it from my cold lifeless fingers.

The anti-gun crowd hates any gun, and their disapproval makes no difference in stopping an immediate threat to my person.

The rest of the points you bring up (mag capacity etc) are addressed quite well in this thread already.

Carry what you're happy with, but the gun itself presents no practical advantage over other choices given the various restrictions in place.

 

[JaxNovice]

(such as lawlessness during a natural disaster, riots, or the occasional zombie invasion), I'd prefer the five-seven because it's light and easy to carry all day (not conceal, carry), and medium to medium-long range (accurate up to 200 yds)

You would have a fairly tough time claiming you shot someone in self defense from two hundred yards.

 

[Darthbauer]

All I can say is you're getting *killed* on ammo prices, seriously. Even at current obscene prices, you're looking at $18-19 a box for .40.

I have found 5.7 jhp's for $19 per 50 rounds. And that was hallow points. How much is a 50 round box of .40S&W jhp?

 

[asilomar]

I have found 5.7 jhp's for $19 per 50 rounds. And that was hallow points. How much is a 50 round box of .40S&W jhp?

$23 for 20 rounds of .40 JHP, and that's range prices, so yeah I am getting killed on ammo prices. But even if I got the .40 S&W at lower, more affordable prices, it wouldn't be much of a difference to the 5.7.

Oh, and if I shot someone at 200 yards, it wouldn't be in self defense. It would be more like...taking the initiative. Like I said, it would all depend on the situation. I would rather carry my .40 in normal day to day life...but the Five-seveN has it's role in other situations. Aside from a survivalist point of view, this makes a great backpacking gun since it's so light.

The anti gun crowd does hate all guns, but only pushes for bans on some. Those are usually the ones I want.

 

[nwilliams]

Remember that the ammo available for the 5.7x28 is pretty good stuff, not cheap Russian crap.

The big problem with the 5.7x28 is NOT that its expensive. The problem is there is no cheap plinking ammo available like there is in other calibers.

 

[screechjet1]

My local gun dealer simply will not sell them.....because he has been contacted by a couple of DEA offecers about two that were investigating drug crimes that were committed by individuals having them. He will not even stock them any more.

***? "Get those uber-killing pistols off the street!"

In this instance, the Five-sevenN is little more than a fashion accessory for some undocumented pharmaceutical salesman, rather than evidence of its hyper-dealing killing capability.

And I'm a fan of the PS90.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page1078.htm
This is why we aren't all carrying one. It never went more than 7" in to the gel, far less than the FBI reccomended minimum of 12.

 

[grendelbane]

Some people are missing some thing extremely important. Yes, I agree, it is not the most effective handgun caliber out there.

But, the 5.7 pistol is accurate and reliable. It is flat shooting. With a central nervous system hit, it will be as effective as anything else.

I hurt my hand some time ago. For a while, I could not carry my beloved .45 ACP. (Well, I could carry it, I just couldn't shoot it effectively.) I did carry my .38 Super. Then, I came across the 5.7!

Now, I am back to healthy again. Still, I am getting older. I remember my next door neighbor, and his liking for smaller caliber cartridges. Having survived the Normandy invasion, I don't think it was because he was a sissy, but he had deteriorated with age. It happens. The 5.7 is a good choice for those who simply are not capable of shooting a heavier recoiling round.

Properly placed, it will do the job.

"nuff said."

 

[asilomar]

http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page1078.htm
This is why we aren't all carrying one. It never went more than 7" in to the gel, far less than the FBI reccomended minimum of 12.

Um...that says it penetrated 7" past a kevlar vest. With the SS195, hollow tip round. It doesn't look like it yawed as much as I hoped, but that's still good enough for me. Your heart is not more than 7" past a kevlar vest....not to mention, with something this accurate and low on recoil, you could just aim for the head.

 

[Girodin]

Your heart is not more than 7" past a kevlar vest..

Ballistic gelatin doesn't have the exact make up of the human body. It notably lacks things such as bone. That is part of the reason that a greater depth in gel is deemed necessary for it to be adequate for self defense. To put it simply 7" in gel does not forcedly equal 7" in a human body. That is why the FBI number was twelve.

Those who have deviated into the five seven being good for niche roles ie a person who cannot shoot anything else may have a point but they have missed the fact that the discussion on this thread was about why we aren't all carrying one.

 

[burningsquirrels]

why not? it's expensive as hell, and ammo is too. not to mention it's all hard to come by. give me a used CZ for $250 and a hundred 40sw for $29. i ain't rich, lol.

 

[sinistr]

the 5.7 round is effective out to 200 yards in the CARBINE.

 

[EdLaver]

I dont care what all the Five SeveN nay-sayers say, the round is effective. I killed a hog with mine, shot him in the ear at about 25-30 yards away. He stumbled and fell about five feet later. Its all about shot placement with this gun and its damn accurate to do that with.

 

[hoosier8]

Want a rifle round (MG) in a handgun, how about the 7.62x25 in T33 or CZ52? Same idea except that the pistols are around $200 and cheap ammo around $150 for over 1000 rounds. Can't beat that price but then you get to the problem of a small high velocity round.

I read somewhere else that Russian police would shoot a perp with the 7.62x25 knowing that the round would penetrate winter clothing and go right through without too much damage and that the perp would show up in the hospital a few days later with everyone knowing that they were guilty of something.

I guess it depends on what you expect. I carry a few different rounds, .380, 9mm, 45. My guess is that the 5.7 round would have to be an awfully good design and could be designed for different situations. Like the Russian, winter clothing would make a difference.

 

[jjohnson]

Because I'm Satisfied with What I Have.

Not to put the Five SeveN down, but many of us are more or less happy with premium expanding bullets launched from anything from .380 to .45 Colt, with all the magnums in between. By "premium expanding bullets" I'm talking about ammo that's packaged as "self defense" in packages of 25 or fewer, whether they're from big ammo companies like Hornady, Remington et al or specialty folks like Cor-Bon or Glaser. We could argue all day over which one is a bit better, but the fact remains that we have lots of choices in the general category of "pretty impressive killing power."

The answer may depend on the question about why you'd want to carry.

If you're of the mentality that you're preparing for a gunfight, maybe firepower in terms of the ability to engage in an extended exchange of both sides shooting long enough to need to reload is a priority.

If you're of the mind that self defense means the ability to end a fight with one person with no reload - like a home intruder or a mugger - maybe 5 shots out of a revolver is all you need.

For my money, I figure scenario #2 is more likely, so a Five seveN just doesn't
have an advantage. If I can't end an altercation with, say, five rounds of .44 Special hollow points, I must be in a firefight, and chose poorly. I just doubt that will happen.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

with something this accurate and low on recoil,

Can you really reasonably expect to be able to shoot better than the mechanical accuracy of any good full-size pistol will allow, under stress?

And even then, the Five-seveN fires a lightweight projectile, which could be deflected by the bones.

 

[JaxNovice]

Can you really reasonably expect to be able to shoot better than the mechanical accuracy of any good full-size pistol will allow, under stress?

One of the most wise comments I have heard on THR.

 

[asilomar]

Can you really reasonably expect to be able to shoot better than the mechanical accuracy of (that) any good full-size pistol will allow, under stress?

Taking range into account, with the right training...Yes, well enough to place shots instead of aiming for center mass and just spraying-and-praying.

 

[Deanimator]

But, the 5.7 pistol is accurate and reliable. It is flat shooting. With a central nervous system hit, it will be as effective as anything else.

What handgun are you going to shoot that's not "flat shooting" enough to hit an assailant center of mass at seven yards? A .577 Webley?

I don't own a single centerfire handgun that's not "flat shooting" enough to settle 99.99% of civilian gunfights. I own one that's maybe not accurate enough, but that's because some time between 1919 and 1968, some guy in Mexico apparently decided to convert a Colt New Service in .45 Colt to .45acp. You couldn't hit Rosie O'Donnell in the behind with it from seven INCHES, but he also nickeled it and it sure is pretty. Some day I'll buy some .454 or .455 diameter bullets for it.

 

[grimjaw]

If I wanted a weapon I could afford to practice with on a regular basis, that was oversized (20 rounds or not) with a trigger that really isn't that great I'd get a CZ52, and I HATE the CZ52. I've only put 20 rounds through a 5.7 handgun, belonged to a friend of mine. Neither he nor I felt that enamored with it. He's a Browning/FN collector and he ended up selling it.

Can the 5.7 round do the job? Probably. Can (and have) other rounds do the same or better? Definitely, and for less money during the vast majority of circumstances I'll be presented with.

Sorry to dogpile on an exhausted thread.

jm

 

[conhntr]

>>Probably more people in this country have been killed by .22 rimfires than all other calibers combined
-Agent Urey Patrick of the FBI from "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness"

the .58 killed more people in one day in one battle than all other calibers combined