So what's the general consensus on the FN Five-seveN?

[Strykervet]

Secret service uses it. So? They used Uzi's back in the 80's. They need something that they can fire in a crowd AND is capable of penetrating armor. It also can use the same ammo as the P90. It is a specialty weapon, nothing more, nothing less. I think it is perfect for SS use.

Problem is, especially for civilians, the ammo and the P90 are both neutered versions of the originals. And yes, FN has poor civilian service. They make their big bucks with the military. If you want "better" ammo, you have to pay a LOT for it, and some company that makes it recently got told by ATF they were selling AP pistol rounds and they wanted their customer list --along with any unfired rounds. Trying to use 5.56 bullets usuallyd doesn't work out too well either --they either don't penetrate enough, and the heavy ones that will go too slow and won't stabilize.

I was excited when it came out, but after I learned about the ballistics of the round, I was disappointed. It is nothing much more than a centerfire .22mag. I even heard of someone testing it against the Grendel P30 and they both were about the same.

I know a lot of people still like it, but come on, stop trying to make it into something it isn't. Unless you need the special characteristics of the weapon, it really is nothing more than a tacticool pistol.

I'd rather just have a 2nd. gen. Glock 17 myself. And the P90? Rather have an M4.

I do wish that someone could come up with rifle performance in a high cap. pistol, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. These days if it isn't a Glock or AR copy, it isn't "new". Pretty sad when Kel Tec is the leader of innovation in new firearms designs in the US. FN tried, but they can't seem to make anything not neutered, same as HK.

 

[m2steven]

As I've said, I own the pistol along with 9mms 40 and 45 cal autos, 380s, 357 magnum revolvers, etc etc etc. I like the 5.7 as a defensive weapon because at 100 or 120 yards, I'll shoot your bowling ball in the head over and over again in fairly rapid succession while you adjust your 45 for windage and elevation.

I have faith in what I can do to a bad guy with this pistol. The only other pistol I have that comes close is my Glock 32 (357 Sig - another GREAT round for hitting YOUR bowling ball in the head over and over at 100 yards).

I shoot and carry 9mm because it's cheap and effective. 357 Sig is not as cheap but it's much more effective. 5.7x28 is not as effective I suppose given identical shot placement, but I'd rather place my shots with the 5.7 than a 45 or 40 or 9mm. Delivering the package to the correct mailbox is 9/10 of the game to me.

 

[Maple_City_Woodsman]

The 9mm bad reputation comes from the 115gr silvertips that used to be standard issue, the silvertip had a major weakness, it was lightly constructed and came apart early and only penatrated about 9" funny now we have another bullet designed to come apart in the first few inches and it is the new magic manstopper.

Why cant you see past your own nose? That is EXACTLY what YOU are doing in your comparisons of 5.7 with 9mm and 40 - you are ignoring the 5.7 ammunition which uses the proper kind of bullets, and only comparing the weak-sauce ss197 rounds to high end personal protection rounds in 9mm and 40.

Only a minority claimed the 9mm was a "magic manstopper" back then, and only a small minority of 5.7 fans are claiming that now. NOBODY in this thread is claiming that, but yet that is the facetious argument that YOU keep coming back to. Please stop trying to derail the conversation with your red herring.

There is nothing magic about the 5.7 nor any other projectile. Terminal ballistics are a function of bullet design and impact energy/speed/momentum, no youtube video will persuade me that they can somehow bend the laws of physics.

In these two sentences alone, you have:
1) completely ignored shot placements effect on terminal ballistics
2) contradicted your previous statements about 9mm and 40 superiority
3) admitted you are not open minded about this debate.
4) misrepresented the pro 5.7 position yet again with a straw man argument.

I for one would like to have a real debate, a real dialog, with someone who is actually open to such and can put up a rational argument which does not violate basic logic and reasoning. If that could be done, it would be the FIRST 5.7 thread in history. We may set some kind of world record. Perhaps we should all take a minute to brush up on what actually makes sound arguments:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

I am willing to admit that the 5.7 has some flaws. I am willing to explain, logically, why I believe the 5.7 has merit. I am willing to concede that other pistol cartridges have certain advantages over the 5.7... Is anyone else in this thread where I am, or am I totally along in this?

 

[Zerodefect]

Secret service uses it. So? They used Uzi's back in the 80's. They need something that they can fire in a crowd AND is capable of penetrating armor. It also can use the same ammo as the P90. It is a specialty weapon, nothing more, nothing less. I think it is perfect for SS use.

Problem is, especially for civilians, the ammo and the P90 are both neutered versions of the originals. And yes, FN has poor civilian service. They make their big bucks with the military. If you want "better" ammo, you have to pay a LOT for it, and some company that makes it recently got told by ATF they were selling AP pistol rounds and they wanted their customer list --along with any unfired rounds. Trying to use 5.56 bullets usuallyd doesn't work out too well either --they either don't penetrate enough, and the heavy ones that will go too slow and won't stabilize.

I was excited when it came out, but after I learned about the ballistics of the round, I was disappointed. It is nothing much more than a centerfire .22mag. I even heard of someone testing it against the Grendel P30 and they both were about the same.

I know a lot of people still like it, but come on, stop trying to make it into something it isn't. Unless you need the special characteristics of the weapon, it really is nothing more than a tacticool pistol.

I'd rather just have a 2nd. gen. Glock 17 myself. And the P90? Rather have an M4.

I do wish that someone could come up with rifle performance in a high cap. pistol, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. These days if it isn't a Glock or AR copy, it isn't "new". Pretty sad when Kel Tec is the leader of innovation in new firearms designs in the US. FN tried, but they can't seem to make anything not neutered, same as HK.

Exactly. It makes it a good PDW round for the SS. A narrow niche for sure, but if you're in a heavy populated area, it's perfect for CQB where a carbine, shotgun, or even a .45 1911 may be too much.

My M4rgery is a bit overkill at my current location. Rifle perfomance in a pistol ain't going to happen. Ow, my hand. Maybe a Sig P556 or AK pistol would do, but those aren't real pistols, and are big time permanent ear damage.

How are the PS90 and FS2000 nuetered? Anyone can reload better ammo for the PS90. FN has some good stuff. I can't wait for Keltecs KSG, but it'll probally be another year or more before they come out. Keltec sucks at actually getting thier product onto the market.

I'd have no problem grabbing a PS90 and Glock 17 to bug out.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

for civilians, a pointless and expensive plinker. for LE, for whom it was designed, an effective caliber for defeating armor in AP form.

 

[amd6547]

Again...I think the 5.7 with proper ammo would be a great HD round, particularly in the PS90...But $1400 is just too much for a weapon which is designed for cheap mass production. If it were under $1000, FNH would sell all they could make, including to me.
I will be sticking with my $350 Saiga 5.45.

 

[Zerodefect]

I wish it was cheaper as well. But that isn't to say that the PS90 still walks all over a 14.5" AR15 in CQB. Fast and light. It probally is under $1000......In Belgium. I try not to let $ limit my serious gear. I cancelled my cable for extra ammo $.

Makes it hard to decide who comes out of the safe at night sometimes.

 

[elSquid]

Some need to read the following Brassfetcher report very carefully if they want to see the FiveseveN outperform the 230gr 45ACP...

http://www.brassfetcher.com/Elite%20Ammunition%20S4M%20Kinetic%20Energy%20Performance%20Summary%2016APR11.pdf

Ok, I skimmed through it.

First off, the report takes great pains to state that the test medium used was 20% gelatin. Why would this be used when 10% is the established standard? 10% corresponds to swine tissue. 20% corresponds to... what exactly? Does 20% increase or accentuate yawing?

Next, the report only compares maximum temporary cavities and suggests effectiveness is solely a function of said. However, many tissues and such are essentially elastic...which is why the permanent crush cavity is an important metric. This report ignores it. Why?

The FBI specifies that a defensive pistol round should have 12 to 18 inches of penetration. This report arbitrarily cuts off all discussion at 8 inches. Why?

Honestly, to me it looks like the report is structured to present this particular 5.7 loading in the best possible light.

YMMV,

-- Michael

 

[Kachok]

Why cant you see past your own nose? That is EXACTLY what YOU are doing in your comparisons of 5.7 with 9mm and 40 - you are ignoring the 5.7 ammunition which uses the proper kind of bullets, and only comparing the weak-sauce ss197 rounds to high end personal protection rounds in 9mm and 40.

Only a minority claimed the 9mm was a "magic manstopper" back then, and only a small minority of 5.7 fans are claiming that now. NOBODY in this thread is claiming that, but yet that is the facetious argument that YOU keep coming back to. Please stop trying to derail the conversation with your red herring.



In these two sentences alone, you have:
1) completely ignored shot placements effect on terminal ballistics
2) contradicted your previous statements about 9mm and 40 superiority
3) admitted you are not open minded about this debate.
4) misrepresented the pro 5.7 position yet again with a straw man argument.

I for one would like to have a real debate, a real dialog, with someone who is actually open to such and can put up a rational argument which does not violate basic logic and reasoning. If that could be done, it would be the FIRST 5.7 thread in history. We may set some kind of world record. Perhaps we should all take a minute to brush up on what actually makes sound arguments:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

I am willing to admit that the 5.7 has some flaws. I am willing to explain, logically, why I believe the 5.7 has merit. I am willing to concede that other pistol cartridges have certain advantages over the 5.7... Is anyone else in this thread where I am, or am I totally along in this?

Sir, I cannot imagine how the heck you came to those stupid conclusions, how on earth did I contradict myself, there is not even a hint of logic in that stupidity. By every messure of ballistic performance a full power .40 S&W is superior PERIOD there is NOTHING in that statment that goes aginst that. I detailed the advantages the 5.7 has in great detail if you actualy read what I wrote. Don't just read what I said, try and understand it, or spread your bitter vile elsewhere! That kind of responce is not remotly logical and completly uncalled for. Now if all you want to do is flame, don't respond to my posts, I for one take offence to your inslulting language. I am no rookie to ballistics, internal, external, and terminal, I have studied all three in great detail, so if you are trying to intimidate me with your crued wording or red letters you are trying that on the wrong person. I know my stuff and won't back down because you sent me red letters.
BTW shot placement is a given, I can shoot a .40cal XD as well as any sissy kicking pistol.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

And the P90? Rather have an M4.

M4 is an assualt rifle meant for combat, the P90 is a defensive submachine gun. I would rather have a M4 in most situations aswell.

 

[Slvrwrx]

From what I've seen, I have no reason not to think the 5.7 round isn't a good pistol round. I make no claims that it's better than other calibers, and certainly no claims it's equal to rifle calibers..

Here's .45 HST vs a pork shoulder from youtube. Very nice expansion, and penetetration to 9"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyfQ6fz-N0Q


Here's a ProII from EA fired into a pork shoulder from the FSN:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbdhKoyi2W4

The 5.7 round looks to have penetrated the entire length of the pork shoulder and into the water jug behind it...

Of course it's no rifle. Here's the 75gr TAP 5.56 that took multiple water jugs and the pork shoulder to stop it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htc7djfeNhw

I think the youtuber has an older pork test with the S4, but he hit the bone dead on, and it didn't create much of a wound channel.

 

[G|0cKbYtE]

The Brassfetcher review seems like a Shill review. They show respectable results but....

It looks like the .45 out performed the 5.7 by a wide margin in those gell blocks.

It is extremely complimentary and should be eye-opening to those that continue to poo poo the FiveseveN. But to those of us that have seen numerous gel tests, pork shoulder tests, clay tests, actual street shootings, etc., it's more of what we already know. The FiveseveN does what FNH designed it to do and it does it well...

The still photos of ballistic gel disruption in the report seem complimentary to the .45 because of the scale of the photos. For some reason the photo of the .45 gel test is zoomed in much closer. Perhaps that was done during formatting of the report. Regardless, when you view them in similar scale the picture becomes more clear. Also, there is more to the story than just what you see as evidenced by the detailed analysis of the inch x inch energy release from each respective round. Where, when, and how much energy is released into the target is the genius and therefore lethality of the 5.7x28mm round.

Federal 230gr Hydra-Shok -Notice how the .45 round wastes a lot of energy at impact and also fails to fill the gel block with disruption in the vital areas like the 5.7 rounds.




EA S4M - The S4M almost tears the block open at the top directly in the "kill zone". Notice how it loses almost zero energy upon impact. That was discussed in the report.




EA Pro II - Another great round, but Brassfetcher criticized it a bit for losing a lot of energy upon impact (like the .45). Even it is visually more impressive than the .45 in the gel when compared at similar scale. I have this report if anyone wants it.




EA T6 - This round will penetrate level IIIa (both front and back and does so after passing through a cylindrical gel block that was positioned in the middle of the vest). It has also been recently confiscated by the ATF and it's confiscation is currently being challenged in court. Luckily I bought some of these rounds before they were taken off the shelves. Hopefully they will be back for sale soon.





Implying that Brassfetcher is a shill is a pretty sharp statement about a published company that has been doing testing for the government, private industry, and public for a long time now.

 

[G|0cKbYtE]

The problem is Yugo or Romanian TT can be had for <$300 and high quality 'Kool-Aid' gun like H&K long slide expert .45 for $900 plus shipping. Despite its aging design the TT with hotter ammo is equal shot for shot to the PPSH impressive performance indeed. That spells bad news for FN 5.7. No hard feeling but when it comes to pistols I will take H&K over FN anytime.

The Tokarev is a great penetrator but unfortunately is an over-penetrator and merely pokes holes in its target. It is a "dumb" round compared to the sophisticated behavior of the 5.7x28mm on human targets.

I own a Yugo M57 and enjoy shooting it but wouldn't want to have to try and incapacitate a would-be attacker with holes barely wider than the bullet. Also, I don't want to have to go to trial for all the collateral damage as the bullet passes through the intended target like a warm knife through butter.

I would rather carry a 9mm instead of the Tokarev.

 

[G|0cKbYtE]

Ok, I skimmed through it.

First off, the report takes great pains to state that the test medium used was 20% gelatin. Why would this be used when 10% is the established standard? 10% corresponds to swine tissue. 20% corresponds to... what exactly? Does 20% increase or accentuate yawing?

Next, the report only compares maximum temporary cavities and suggests effectiveness is solely a function of said. However, many tissues and such are essentially elastic...which is why the permanent crush cavity is an important metric. This report ignores it. Why?

The FBI specifies that a defensive pistol round should have 12 to 18 inches of penetration. This report arbitrarily cuts off all discussion at 8 inches. Why?

Honestly, to me it looks like the report is structured to present this particular 5.7 loading in the best possible light.

YMMV,

-- Michael

They use both 10% and 20%. 10% is for the publicity gel vids and 20% for full analysis. Brassfetcher uses 16-inch gelatin blocks. The S4M penetrated surprisingly deep, given the way it behaves in gel. The Pro II expanded significantly even though it penetrated deeply enough to exit the block. T6 dumped all of its energy in the block and just plopped out of the end like it should in an ideal situation. Genius.

They cut off at 8 inches because that is the end of the "kill zone" when discussing force against non-armored targets. Designing a bullet that does lots of damage before or beyond the 2-8in range is not advantageous when discussing a SD or Leo round.

 

[G|0cKbYtE]

M4 is an assualt rifle meant for combat, the P90 is a defensive submachine gun. I would rather have a M4 in most situations aswell.

All SD situations a civilian would find themselves in would be defined as close quarters combat. In those situations you want weapons designed for that application. If I am in a war and fighting at 300yards, I want an M4 or more. If I am moving around a house or my car, I want something with a small profile yet lots of punch - PS90 works for me and the Secret Service.

 

[G|0cKbYtE]

Anyone care to explain to me why the 5.7's 40 gr bullet is superior to the 22 mag at near identical speeds? This should be funny

As has been said a million times, one is a pistol, one is a rifle, one pokes tiny holes, one causes substantial tissue damage through bullet behavior.

After all the ballistics discussion concerning the FiveseveN thus far, the above comment still being made by the self-proclaimed ballistics expert clearly betrays his "hidden" agenda to troll and inflame.

I would advise those that want legitimate, mostly-objective discussion regarding the FiveseveN to resist communicating with this person. People like him are why FiveseveN threads get locked.

 

[Rail Driver]

Anyone care to explain to me why the 5.7's 40 gr bullet is superior to the 22 mag at near identical speeds? This should be funny

Reliability. The .22WMR is rimfire. It's less reliable inherently than ANY centerfire cartridge, both in feeding and ignition. That's the biggest point of separation, in my opinion. Then we can move on to bullet composition. Most .22WMR is soft lead with a copper wash. FN 5.7 projectiles are fully or partially jacketed using a proper jacket which aids in the performance of the bullet.

 

[Kush]

EDIT: For all those who read this posts I was apparently looking at the wrong picture.

 

[elSquid]

They use both 10% and 20%. 10% is for the publicity gel vids and 20% for full analysis. Brassfetcher uses 16-inch gelatin blocks.

That didn't answer the question - 10% is the standard, because it replicates swine leg muscle tissue. Why use 20%? What is this supposed to replicate? Doesn't it make test comparisons with other folks' work difficult, since the industry uses 10%?

They cut off at 8 inches because that is the end of the "kill zone" when discussing force against non-armored targets.

Based on what? The FBI specifies 12-18 because...

www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

The bullet must penetrate sufficiently to pass through vital organs and be able to do so from less than optimal angles. For example, a shot from the side through an arm must penetrate at least 10-12 inches to pass through the heart. A bullet fired from the front through the abdomen must penetrate about 7 inches in a slender adult just to reach the major blood vessels in the back of the abdominal cavity. Penetration must be sufficiently deep to reach and pass through vital organs, and the permanent cavity must be large enough to maximize tissue destruction and consequent hemorrhaging.​

An 8 inch maximum penetration means that the round may be quite ineffective in a real world scenario.

They cut off at 8 inches because that is the end of the "kill zone" when discussing force against non-armored targets. Designing a bullet that does lots of damage before or beyond the 2-8in range is not advantageous when discussing a SD or Leo round.

We've been down the "light weight-high velocity path" before; this isn't a new concept.

This also brings up another interesting point. The 45ACP load used was a Hydra-Shok...a ~20 year old design. Why didn't the author use a modern load such as an HST instead? Of course, the HST was designed with the FBI guidelines in mind: 12-18 inches of penetration.

A 230 gr 45ACP is the standard load. What happens if a lightweight-hivel 45ACP load is chosen: one that also trades off for penetration. Say, like a Glaser?

I did a quick google search for "45acp glaser gelatin" and I didn't find a suitable result...but I did immediately see a link to this youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAgC6B5yiyQ

Turns out that the vid was done by brassfetcher, using 20% gelatin, and it shows a 40S&W Glaser. Stop the video at 20 seconds and compare that temporary cavity with that of the S4M. Here we have an apples to apples comparison. Does this mean that the 40S&W is a better stopper than the FN?

Nothing is really new here: lighter weight pistol projectile, higher velocity, trades off penetration for temporary cavity.

What I would like to see is the permanent cavities from brassfetcher's report. I wonder if they would show the S4M load in a less than favorable light?

-- Michael

 

[Kachok]

As has been said a million times, one is a pistol, one is a rifle, one pokes tiny holes, one causes substantial tissue damage through bullet behavior.

After all the ballistics discussion concerning the FiveseveN thus far, the above comment still being made by the self-proclaimed ballistics expert clearly betrays his "hidden" agenda to troll and inflame.

I would advise those that want legitimate, mostly-objective discussion regarding the FiveseveN to resist communicating with this person. People like him are why FiveseveN threads get locked.

I would advise that if you don't want to be throughly trashed by those horrid facts that you hate so much, to quit spouting your nonsence. You nor anyone else has given me a scientific explanation as to why an identical projectile launched at near identical speed would be so many times more deadly coming out of a 5.7 vs a 22 mag. The only tangiable anything you could even point out as an advantage of the 5.7 is that the factory fodder 5.7 is usualy loaded with projectiles intended for human sized targets, while the lightly constructed .22 mag HP are intended for varmint, but in terms of potential wounding there is no difference. Now next time you decide to run your mouth get your facts streight first. On to my next point that again nobody can give me any kind of remotly scientific anwser to, how on earth does the 5.7x28 or any any projectile for that matter have a greater wounding potnetial then a larger caliber with more energy/mass/momentum heck every messure there is for ballistic performance. Sounds to me like G|0cKbYtE is the one with the rabbid bias not me.

 

[G|0cKbYtE]

That didn't answer the question - 10% is the standard, because it replicates swine leg muscle tissue. Why use 20%? What is this supposed to replicate? Doesn't it make test comparisons with other folks' work difficult, since the industry uses 10%?

I don't pretend to know the extent of all the testing methodologies that a reputable ballistics company like Brassfetcher would employ; What I do know is that all rounds tested were exposed to the same variables so any concern about standards outside of the test is moot. Most people are familiar with a 230gr .45 caliber bullet travelling around 850fps and know them to be a suitable round for self-defense. The FiveseveN rounds were measured against this historical round. Feel free to email them and ask them what benefit 20% offers in portions of their test. Perhaps penetration?

I apologize if I don't answer all your questions. I'm not paid to argue in favor of the FiveseveN. I only do this for fun.

Based on what? The FBI specifies 12-18 because...

www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

The bullet must penetrate sufficiently to pass through vital organs and be able to do so from less than optimal angles. For example, a shot from the side through an arm must penetrate at least 10-12 inches to pass through the heart. A bullet fired from the front through the abdomen must penetrate about 7 inches in a slender adult just to reach the major blood vessels in the back of the abdominal cavity. Penetration must be sufficiently deep to reach and pass through vital organs, and the permanent cavity must be large enough to maximize tissue destruction and consequent hemorrhaging.​

An 8 inch maximum penetration means that the round may be quite ineffective in a real world scenario.

Two of the three 5.7 rounds penetrated the entire 16 inch, 20% block. The third turned sharply upward so it didn't reach the end yet was still well beyond 8 inches. I would estimate it at around 12 inches just using the blocks below the gel as a rough ruler.

This also brings up another interesting point. The 45ACP load used was a Hydra-Shok...a ~20 year old design. Why didn't the author use a modern load such as an HST instead? Of course, the HST was designed with the FBI guidelines in mind: 12-18 inches of penetration.

Probably because the Hydra-Shok is still a VERY popular brand name and many, many people are familiar with it. A big advantage of the HST over the Hydra-Shok is reliable expansion in real-world applications. In this test, the Hydra-Shok expanded as advertised. Recovered weight was 224grs

I won't argue that in ballistic gelatin an HST or Talon round might have performed slightly better. How much better if any I don't know. What I do know is the 5.7x28mm isn't the greatest bullet in the history of the Internets and I am not trying to portray it as such. It does have tremendous advantages (weight, recoil, capacity, accuracy) in areas that other rounds sometimes fall short.

There are plenty of rounds (like that which flies out of my 10mm) that will look MUCH more impressive in a ballistic gel vid, but how many shots of 10mm am I realistically going to be able to put in the middle of the bad guy when the $h!7 hits the fan? I am fairly confident that I can put a very quick triple-tap in the center of a bad guy from 21 feet darn near every time with my FiveseveN and inflict an impressive amount of damage when I do.

I did a quick google search for "45acp glaser gelatin" and I didn't find a suitable result...but I did immediately see a link to this youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAgC6B5yiyQ

Turns out that the vid was done by brassfetcher, using 20% gelatin, and it shows a 40S&W Glaser. Stop the video at 20 seconds and compare that temporary cavity with that of the S4M. Here we have an apples to apples comparison. Does this mean that the 40S&W is a better stopper than the FN?

Nothing is really new here: lighter weight pistol projectile, higher velocity, trades off penetration for temporary cavity.

What I would like to see is the permanent cavities from brassfetcher's report. I wonder if they would show the S4M load in a less than favorable light?

-- Michael

Again, I'm sure you can find a lot of pictures and videos of many, many things. However, what you aren't getting out of your informal searches is the inch by inch breakdown of the rounds energy release as Brassfetcher provided in their experiments. The S4M beat the .45 Hydra-Shok soundly in that test, and was convincing enough for BF to state that we could replace the .45 230gr with the S4M (or the SS195 - which still baffles me) as a suitable self-defensive ammunition choice.

As mentioned above, penetration wasn't an issue in 20% gel as 2 of 3 rounds went completely through and the third went about 75% of the way. I didn't click on your link, but Glaser rounds are usually poor penetrators. The 5.7x28mm has never been considered a poor penetrator. It is usually considered an "ideal" penetrator, dumping all of its energy in the target.

What I would like to see is the permanent cavities from brassfetcher's report. I wonder if they would show the S4M load in a less than favorable light?
-- Michael

I posted a link earlier in the thread that contained a plethora of permanent cavity comparisons. There was even direct comparisons against .45 caliber. Some were in meat, some were in gel, some were in clay.

One comparison video I saw had both the .45 and S4M creating a 4inch permanent cavity in modeling clay. It was pretty interesting. How does modeling clay compare to tissue and muscle? I have no idea, but it was a direct comparison.


The weird thing about the Brassfetchers test is that the rounds they fired showed significantly lower fps than what many of us have seen when testing them personally. I think they had the S4M going 2300fps? It was weird.

How much more impressive would the S4M have tested if it would have been closer to the 2600fps that has been achieved out of other guns?

 

[elSquid]

As mentioned above, penetration wasn't an issue in 20% gel as 2 of 3 rounds went completely through and the third went about 75% of the way. I didn't click on your link, but Glaser rounds are usually poor penetrators.

Yup, but the temporary cavity is very impressive looking. Which is not a particularly useful metric for a defensive handgun load, but for some reason the brassfetcher report highlighted that and ignored the permanent crush cavity when proclaiming the superiority of the S4M load over the 230gr 45 ACP JHP. Throw that 40S&W Glaser into this report, use the same evaluation criteria, and *it* would have to be crowned king. Which would be nonsense, because, as you have said, Glasers are poor penetrators.

The graphs? Kinetic energy transfer would seem to be less important, than say, actually physically damaging tissue... but the report doesn't seem to care about that. What is the energy doing? Temporarily moving tissue is temporarily moving tissue. Heating tissue, as far as I know, isn't a major factor in bullet effectiveness.

The report doesn't appear to conform to industry standards - 10%, show the gel block after the round has stopped - presents pretty, but not-particularly-useful energy dump graphs, states that shallow penetration is all one needs in a fight, and reaches a global conclusion based on a sample size of one, using an essentially obsolete 45 ACP loading as a contrast.

It doesn't strike me as a particularly useful report. :shrug:

-- Michael

 

[Kachok]

A large temporary cavity is a sign of a high pressure wave, but reliable lethality is determined by the permanate cavity which is what causes rapid loss of blood presure. Shock kills are simply not reliable. The FBI tested the fragmanting ammo and other types of shock kill loads and came to the conclustion that bullets that penatrate the majority of the chest cavity are more effective, far be it from me to argue with their conclusions. Not that this is apples to apples with handguns, but the bullets that I handload for my 6.5x55, 308, 270 and my magnum rifles are all designed for high levels of penatration (Accubonds mostly), I don't use "soft" high fragmentation bullets and I have had spectacular results on game, 23 years of hunting and I have yet to have a deer or hog make it out of sight. So needless to say I am not a big fan of the "energy dump" theory since it relies on the initial shock to buckle them, and no bullet shy of a .50BMG can do that 100% of the time. A 1/2" permanate wound canal all the way through the boiler room is a very very fast kill even if it does not have the drama of a fragmenting bullet.

 

[DmL5]

You've proven nothing, lack the "gravitas" to refute the source(s) cited

Actually, I thoroughly refuted the unsubstantiated internet forum post you cited.

Again, the individual in question has not even tested any 5.7x28mm load introduced in the last 15-20 years. What he thinks about an ammo type not offered to civilians (SS190) or an ammo type discontinued 20 years ago (SS90) is utterly irrelevant. Everything written in the internet forum post you linked is completely unsubstantiated by the author.

(there are several authoritative research papers in that link that describe the relevant concerns plaguing the 5.7 and its lackluster performance)

All of the cited reports are ancient and describe ammunition that is either not offered to civilians (SS190) or was discontinued about 20 years ago (SS90). The reports are completely obsolete and irrelevant.

and resorting to namecalling (calling Dr. Roberts' position "idiotic")

Calling an individual's position idiotic does not in any way constitute "resorting to namecalling." Actually, his position is provably idiotic, and I clearly demonstrated that in my last post. The statement that the 5.7x28mm performs "at best" like a .22 LR or .22 WMR is provably wrong; Brassfetcher has independently tested a number of EA's loads in calibrated ballistic gelatin. One example:

http://www.eliteammunition.net/f/5.7x28mm_Elite_Ammunition_ProtecTOR_II.wmv

EA's Pro II load, fired from the Five-seveN pistol, perforated a 16-inch block of calibrated ballistic gelatin, and the bullet is visibly expanded on exit. Even the .22 WMR from a rifle (http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page2548.htm) is not capable of doing that unless a non-expanding projectile is used.

The phenomena is typically manifested in the form of someone making several consecutive posts bearing numerous anecdotal claims (news reports, for example) and advertisements and attempting to pass them off as having more weight than actual documented research.

The poster in question cited actual ballistic gelatin testing that was conducted according to standard protocol, as well as dozens upon dozens of verifiable, substantiated accounts of shootings with the 5.7x28mm, all of which were accompanied by photos and videos of the crime scenes and victims.

You've cited nothing but internet forum posts and ancient "research" that you have never even read, and which was conducted using ammo that has been discontinued or unavailable for 15 to 20 years.

Problem is, especially for civilians, the ammo and the P90 are both neutered versions of the originals.

You're recycling and perpetuating misinformation.

It is nothing much more than a centerfire .22mag.

In a pistol-to-pistol comparison, with 40-grain bullets, the 5.7x28mm EA loads achieve a muzzle velocity roughly 700 ft/s faster than the .22 Magnum.

When 30-grain bullets are compared pistol-to-pistol, the 5.7x28mm EA loads achieve a muzzle velocity roughly 1000 ft/s faster than the .22 Magnum.

http://www.gunblast.com/KelTec-PMR30-2.htm
http://www.gunblast.com/FN-FiveseveN.htm

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

All SD situations a civilian would find themselves in would be defined as close quarters combat. In those situations you want weapons designed for that application. If I am in a war and fighting at 300yards, I want an M4 or more. If I am moving around a house or my car, I want something with a small profile yet lots of punch - PS90 works for me and the Secret Service.

I said that because someone else choose the M4 out of the two when they are both different weapons for different situations.