Ske1etor
Member
The firearm and round was designed and intended to be used as an armor piercing round. I was speaking on the AP rounds.
Semi-Auto Shooting @ 2000+FPS
- Thread starter ldasr
- Start date
- Status
Why are you speaking about rounds unavailable to civilians?
And the 5.7 was designed as a sidearm to compliment the P90. The fact they use the same cartridge has more to do with logistics than with developing an AP-capable pistol.
And the 5.7 was designed as a sidearm to compliment the P90. The fact they use the same cartridge has more to do with logistics than with developing an AP-capable pistol.
Ske1etor
Member
I was speaking about the rounds the firearm was designed to fire. Using this ammo, the firearm can achieve its intended use. Defeating light body armor.
The P-90 was designed as a high cap bull pup rifle capable of defeating light body armor and some low level trauma plates. The 5.7 pistol was designed to compliment this weapon by giving the user the ability to back up his main weapon with an armor piercing sidearm. It was never intended to be used with non armor piercing ammo. The round is much too small to inflict a large permanent wound cavity. When a person is wearing body armor, a bullet that will cause a large permanent wound cavity will not pass through body armor or will require a firearm that is way too large to use in a close quarters combat situation or way too powerful to be controllable (IE; .50BMG. or .50AE)
The P-90 was designed as a high cap bull pup rifle capable of defeating light body armor and some low level trauma plates. The 5.7 pistol was designed to compliment this weapon by giving the user the ability to back up his main weapon with an armor piercing sidearm. It was never intended to be used with non armor piercing ammo. The round is much too small to inflict a large permanent wound cavity. When a person is wearing body armor, a bullet that will cause a large permanent wound cavity will not pass through body armor or will require a firearm that is way too large to use in a close quarters combat situation or way too powerful to be controllable (IE; .50BMG. or .50AE)
bdg146
Member
So I hear all the time about how even the most effective handgun for self-defense is incomparable to a rifle or shotgun. I agree. Handguns are underpowered.
One thing I don't understand though, is why are people so eager to jump on and trash a light, fast round out of a handgun. If you can push a 32 grain bullet at over 2,300 fps, then isn't that ballistically more similar to a rifle than a 230 grain bullet at 800 fps? So how can anyone be so sure this round is worthless? If light and fast is proven to be better (rifle vs pistol), then why is the 5.7x28 automatically junk?
One thing I don't understand though, is why are people so eager to jump on and trash a light, fast round out of a handgun. If you can push a 32 grain bullet at over 2,300 fps, then isn't that ballistically more similar to a rifle than a 230 grain bullet at 800 fps? So how can anyone be so sure this round is worthless? If light and fast is proven to be better (rifle vs pistol), then why is the 5.7x28 automatically junk?
Ske1etor
Member
Its simply too small to ensure a large permanent wound cavity. If you can hit a vital organ with it then you are fine. But if you don't, the person receiving the rounds is going to sit there and bleed until the cops get there. The purpose of a self defense handgun is to stop the threat as fast as possible. Cause as much damage on the BG's body as quickly as possible. A larger wound cavity causes massive bleeding and shock faster. It also gives you a smaller target. The larger the diameter of the bullet the larger the permanent wound cavity so there is a bigger chance that you will hit something important.
I know at least one person is reading this and saying "Well, if you practice you can hit a vital organ" Every situation is different and a dynamic shooting situation is hard to train for.
You can carry that tiny little round on your hip all you want. I have no faith in the fact that it can positively stop a BG in a couple of shots so I choose not too. I will stick with the proven .45ACP.
Phil DeGraves
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,531
I don't know; something about a gun that costs $900 and feels like it was made by Mattel....
Ske1etor
Member
I wouldn't call it worthless but if someone tossed a rifle chambered in 30-06 infront of you and then tossed the same rifle chambered in .223 which one would you chose to do battle with? Im thinking the 30-06. Secondly, a handgun is a last resort weapon. They are designed to be used within 50 yards. Anything other than that and you are just hoping for a hit. With a rifle you have a maximum range of about 200 yards for a moving target and not much more for a stationary target. More distance equals more time to put solid hits on a moving target.
The 5.56 is a NATO round for a reason. The same reason that it is illegal for a soldier to shoot an enemy with a .50BMG. NATO ammo is chosen on its ability to cause a clean wound "AKA easily repairable", Its availability and the number of NATO soldiers carrying weapons chambered in the same caliber. Now I ask you, do you really care if the guy you are shooting has a nice clean wound or do you want him to stop.
You can toss all of the underhanded put downs aside and just come out and say what you want to say. Don't pull punches because I wont.
The facts are there. There is a reason that military snipers are changing to the .300 Win Mag. There is a reason Marines wish they were issued .45ACP and there is a reason the Barret .50 cal is the most feared weapon on the battlefield and that reason is not "Oooooh.... its fast!"
The 5.56 is a NATO round for a reason. The same reason that it is illegal for a soldier to shoot an enemy with a .50BMG. NATO ammo is chosen on its ability to cause a clean wound "AKA easily repairable", Its availability and the number of NATO soldiers carrying weapons chambered in the same caliber. Now I ask you, do you really care if the guy you are shooting has a nice clean wound or do you want him to stop.
You can toss all of the underhanded put downs aside and just come out and say what you want to say. Don't pull punches because I wont.
The facts are there. There is a reason that military snipers are changing to the .300 Win Mag. There is a reason Marines wish they were issued .45ACP and there is a reason the Barret .50 cal is the most feared weapon on the battlefield and that reason is not "Oooooh.... its fast!"
Last edited:
HA! That is EXACTLY what I thought the first time I looked at one. It just looks like a cheap toy. There is nothing wrong that but the 5.7 just doesn't seem like it has a place with its high ammo costs. It is fun to shoot and pretty accurate as even at 100 yds it is fairly easy to hit an 8" steel plate regularly but just isn't on my list of guns to buy.
ldasr
Member
Thread Originator
As I started this thread, I never realized how much interest and information I would be getting. I must commend all of you. This is one of the most informative sites I have ever visited. Thanks
As I started this thread, I never realized how much interest and information I would be getting. I must commend all of you. This is one of the most informative sites I have ever visited. Thanks
I never said it wasn't. However, in my state, I can not carry a concealed rifle. Laws in your jurisdiction may vary.
"Not much more" for a stationary target? Many rifles rounds are plenty effective at double and triple the 200 yards you quoted. I'd also rather not be on the opposite end of a .308 at 1000 yards either.
Apparently you are unaware of the fragmenting capabilities of 5.56NATO ammunition in the field. 5.56 wounds through fragmentation. With common military ball (55gr and 62gr), velocity is necessary for effective fragmentation to occur.
http://www.razoreye.net/mirror/ammo-oracle/AR15_com_Ammo_Oracle_Mirror.htm#m193orm855
http://www.razoreye.net/mirror/ammo-oracle/AR15_com_Ammo_Oracle_Mirror.htm#velocity
Perhaps some combat medics can e-mail you pictures. A wound from military 5.56 is not "clean".
Why aren't they using .458 Winchester? Or .450 Bushmaster? Or .416 Rigby? Bigger is apparently better, according to you.
Where? Please show me facts, not your opinion that the 5.7 is junk and the .45 ACP is a gift from Heaven.
Big Boomer
Member
Energy vs momentum, caliber wars continue...
Then there is the fashion of the day, seems the old 45 that's been around for 100+ years is out of style, the new thing is light and fast. Amazingly enough it's been here before, and will be gone yet again given time.
I bet we can all name at least 15 calibers that have come and gone, some great, some not.
I would like to see a return of the 357 maximum though.
All the arguing I see above seems to be about what bullet kills best. Some will chime in with only shot placement matters so it really doesn't matter what you hit them with, then someone will chime in about big and slow and gotta have enough penetration to do the job, then the light and fast crowd screams about overpenetration and lawsuits, then say that you can't hit anything with a large caliber because it darn near tears your arm off and follow up shots are impossible because your arms is laying on the ground and you are bleeding out now from the recoil. Someone will chime in about a superfast round that somehow will penetrate through an engine block with a 50gr hollowpoint round, but magically not overpenetrate in human flesh.
Seems that something that is both big and fast is not a good round and only people that want to be like dirty harry would ever consider anything of the such.
People are stubborn most have heard their decision making information from the local gun counter jockey. So be it, I really don't care, just don't tell the gangbangers out there that their 25auto will not blow softball size holes out the back of a person or take their head clear off, and in the event needed could stop a tank. If you do they might actually get something worthwhile so shhhhh!
So what is worthwhile? Depends on the person, kinda like what football team you like and how they will play next year. It's all speculation until it comes to the moment of truth.
Tell you what, I'll keep mine, you keep yours. If you try to take mine you'll get more than you bargained for.
You like yours, I like mine, don't try to tell me what I like. If you like chocolate cake great! Just don't try to explain to the world how it's so much better than lemon.
I think I'll go get some cake now...
Then there is the fashion of the day, seems the old 45 that's been around for 100+ years is out of style, the new thing is light and fast. Amazingly enough it's been here before, and will be gone yet again given time.
I bet we can all name at least 15 calibers that have come and gone, some great, some not.
I would like to see a return of the 357 maximum though.
All the arguing I see above seems to be about what bullet kills best. Some will chime in with only shot placement matters so it really doesn't matter what you hit them with, then someone will chime in about big and slow and gotta have enough penetration to do the job, then the light and fast crowd screams about overpenetration and lawsuits, then say that you can't hit anything with a large caliber because it darn near tears your arm off and follow up shots are impossible because your arms is laying on the ground and you are bleeding out now from the recoil. Someone will chime in about a superfast round that somehow will penetrate through an engine block with a 50gr hollowpoint round, but magically not overpenetrate in human flesh.
Seems that something that is both big and fast is not a good round and only people that want to be like dirty harry would ever consider anything of the such.
People are stubborn most have heard their decision making information from the local gun counter jockey. So be it, I really don't care, just don't tell the gangbangers out there that their 25auto will not blow softball size holes out the back of a person or take their head clear off, and in the event needed could stop a tank. If you do they might actually get something worthwhile so shhhhh!
So what is worthwhile? Depends on the person, kinda like what football team you like and how they will play next year. It's all speculation until it comes to the moment of truth.
Tell you what, I'll keep mine, you keep yours. If you try to take mine you'll get more than you bargained for.
You like yours, I like mine, don't try to tell me what I like. If you like chocolate cake great! Just don't try to explain to the world how it's so much better than lemon.
I think I'll go get some cake now...
Not Enough Is Known
In my opinion, the 5.7 FN round has not seen enough use for anyone to determine if it will work well in a NON-BODY ARMOR situation.
The ability to penetrate breaks down to how much recoil and bullet effectiveness. If your handgun has a heavy bullet like a .45ACP, you either need to use HARDENED bullets like the old KTW rounds or you need to up the velocity to the point that the bullett can penetrate.
If you use a smaller caliber, you can get that penetration by high velocity, but then risk not having enough bullet to damage the target.
I have shot .41 and .44 magnum handguns that can be made to penetrate deeply using non expanding ammo. The problem is that the recovery time between shots is much longer, for me at least than using smaller rounds.
I would prefer something bigger than the 5.7 FN in a gunfight, but if it penetrated and larger rounds did not, I would take it and shoot accordingly to the Center of Mass and if that failed, then the head.
As for the .30-06 vs .223 argument, does that apply to a pistol caliber debate?
Jim
In my opinion, the 5.7 FN round has not seen enough use for anyone to determine if it will work well in a NON-BODY ARMOR situation.
The ability to penetrate breaks down to how much recoil and bullet effectiveness. If your handgun has a heavy bullet like a .45ACP, you either need to use HARDENED bullets like the old KTW rounds or you need to up the velocity to the point that the bullett can penetrate.
If you use a smaller caliber, you can get that penetration by high velocity, but then risk not having enough bullet to damage the target.
I have shot .41 and .44 magnum handguns that can be made to penetrate deeply using non expanding ammo. The problem is that the recovery time between shots is much longer, for me at least than using smaller rounds.
I would prefer something bigger than the 5.7 FN in a gunfight, but if it penetrated and larger rounds did not, I would take it and shoot accordingly to the Center of Mass and if that failed, then the head.
As for the .30-06 vs .223 argument, does that apply to a pistol caliber debate?
Jim
Ske1etor
Member
You brought up rifles, not me.
Yes, Many are. The 5.56 is not. We are talking about the 5.56.
Sure, you can say that you wouldn't want to be on the other end of a .308 at 1k. That is not what we are talking about. We are talking about employing the most effective weapon for the job.
I was speaking on plain old military ball. Of course if you are using ballistic tips then you are going to up the damage caused by the weapon.
According to me? You assume that I say that bigger is better. I never said anything of the sort. The .300 Win Mag is better than the .308 as far as a sharpshooter is concerned due to its flatter trajectory. Higher speed, higher ballistic coefficient, flatter trajectory, better accuracy, higher speed and energy at impact. Plus, you know that they say when you assume right.
I didn't say the round itself was junk. I said against a soft target. Use all of the post not just the parts you feel like arguing against.
Hey, more power to you if you feel safe carrying a glorified .22lr. I pray that nobody in here ever has to find out if their carry firearm is effective in stopping a threat but I will stick with the proven round and you go ahead and ride on the speed bandwagon as long as you like.
Never said the .45ACP is a gift from heaven. The 5.7 round was not designed to be fired at soft targets. Its main design was body armor. I just don't understand that.
I guess I just can't wrap my mind around the idea that someone would want to carry an unproven firearm loaded with an unproven round with less than stellar performance.
Likewise. It is designed for hard targets, I agree that it does a great job at getting through body armor. I have no problem with people stating that it is good against body armor. But don't sit here and attempt to say that it is a great soft target round because that isn't what its designed for. Sure, it will make a hole and any bullet can kill but why take a chance with such a small round.
ForneyRider
Member
.41 mag can shoot 1900 fps in 170gr., properly loaded.
.357 mag can get 1700+ in 125gr.
.357 mag can get 1700+ in 125gr.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Actually, SS196 (civilian 5.7x28mm) will not even penetrate Level II under standard testing procedures. It will presumably penetrate IIa, but so will a .357 and many other common handguns, which is why IIa has long been considered obsolete.
Basically, a FiveSeven with unrestricted ammunition won't penetrate any armor that is rated to stop .357.
According to the BATFE:
(FTB is the BATFE Firearms Technology Branch.)
32 grains at 2300+ fps is the velocity out of the P90 carbine (10.35" barrel). The velocity out of the FiveSeven's 4.8" barrel will be less. Someone above cites figures of 28gr at 2050ft/sec or 40gr at 1700ft/sec.
The thing is, "light and fast" bullets lean very heavily on kinetic energy/cavitation/tissue displacement effects. I am a "light and fast" proponent (my chosen carry load in 9mm is 115gr +P, and I used to keep my mini-14 loaded with 55gr JHP's), but the 5.7x28mm is too light and not fast enough. 28 grains at 2050 ft/sec is only 261 ft-lb; 40 grains at 1700 ft/sec is only 256 ft-lb. That quite anemic compared to even a 115gr 9mm at 1300 ft/sec (431 ft-lb), never mind a .223 (55gr at 3000 ft/sec, 1099 ft-lb). Ballistically, the 5.7x28mm is much closer to a .22LR rifle than it is to a .223; according to CCI, a .22LR Stinger is 32gr@1640ft/sec (191 ft-lb), and a CCI Velocitor is 40gr@1435ft/sec (183 ft-lb), out of a rifle. Another way to look at it is that the FiveSeven gives you .22 rimfire magnum performance out of a pistol.
That's not to say the FiveSeven is a bad gun--it's well made, reportedly very accurate, and I'd love to have one--but its terminal ballistics, even on paper, are significantly outclassed even by 9mm, and without restricted AP ammunition, it is outclassed as a defensive caliber.
I owned a FiveseveN pistol and actually shot animals with it. I would not class it as a self defense round unless you are worried about being attacked by gophers. Several hits on a coyote in the chest did not even slow the animal down. A 223 provided the coup de grace.
I also used the 5.7 on rabbits and various small rodents, and it performs well in this role, although on large rabbit managed to absorb a few hits and still escape.
I subsequently sold said 5.7. The 22 hornet is much more effective.
I also used the 5.7 on rabbits and various small rodents, and it performs well in this role, although on large rabbit managed to absorb a few hits and still escape.
I subsequently sold said 5.7. The 22 hornet is much more effective.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Yes, that's the way I see it. The FiveSeven basically duplicates .22 rimfire magnum rifle ballistics out of a full sized pistol.
M2 Carbine
member
I look at the probable effectiveness of a round from a personal level.
I know I'm not as tough as some but I ask myself, Would I probably have any fight left after having a couple of the SS-195 bullets entering my chest at 2,000 FPS and tumbling through my body?
No, I don't think so.
Until I hear of someone taking a couple COM or head hits from the FN 5.7 and continuing to fight, I'll keep the FN 5.7 handy, along with a few other guns.
I know I'm not as tough as some but I ask myself, Would I probably have any fight left after having a couple of the SS-195 bullets entering my chest at 2,000 FPS and tumbling through my body?
No, I don't think so.
Until I hear of someone taking a couple COM or head hits from the FN 5.7 and continuing to fight, I'll keep the FN 5.7 handy, along with a few other guns.
Read the above post again. He said a 5.7 pistol duplicates a 22 magnum rifle.
My experience using the 5.7 on animals pretty much supports this. The 5.7 is less effective than a 22 Hornet. Do you consider 22 Hornet to be a combat worthy round?
My experience using the 5.7 on animals pretty much supports this. The 5.7 is less effective than a 22 Hornet. Do you consider 22 Hornet to be a combat worthy round?
M2 Carbine
member
I wouldn't want to take it to Iraq but do you know anyone that survived a COM hit with a Hornet?
I wonder what the MV would be with Hornets, loaded for short barrels, out of about a six inch barrel?
I have a TC. A Hornet barrel might be an interesting addition.
- Status
Similar threads
