Maverick223
Member
Anyone have a reasonable comparison of effectiveness with regards to ME/100yds Energy compared to similar "manstoppers"
...such as .22WM and .22 Hornet. Also thinking of a PS90 but do not like the ballistics. Thanks, Mav.
the 5.7x28 nato - my theory
- Thread starter Das Nemesis
- Start date
- Status
...such as .22WM and .22 Hornet. Also thinking of a PS90 but do not like the ballistics. Thanks, Mav.robsc
Member
Here`s mine. Yes, the cartridge is underrated and slammed by those who think it`s a joke. The OP refers to it as 5.7x28NATO . I didn`t know that NATO has adopted this gun and cartridge, or no? This gun is #1 on the gun banners list.
Last edited:
Coal Dragger
member
Maverick223 the .22WM with a 40gr bullet at 1950fps is about 100fps slower than a 5.7X28mm with a 40gr bullet. The .22 Hornet is running around 2800fps with a 40gr bullet is considerably faster and more powerful than the puny 5.7X28.
So for some perspective we don't see many individuals that go into harms way clamoring for either a .22WM or a .22 Hornet now do we? So why bother using a round considerably less powerful than the Hornet, and only marginally more powerful than the .22WM?
So for some perspective we don't see many individuals that go into harms way clamoring for either a .22WM or a .22 Hornet now do we? So why bother using a round considerably less powerful than the Hornet, and only marginally more powerful than the .22WM?
30mag
Member
A rifle round (such as .223?) would be better at being a rifle round, and a pistol round (.357 sig) would be a better pistol round.
It is noted that military snipers don't use varmint guns.. probably for a reason.
It is noted that military snipers don't use varmint guns.. probably for a reason.
SaMx
Member
sort of. The data I've seen shows the 40 grain bullet doing around 1950 FPS out of a 5 inch pistol barrel, and .22 magnum doing around 1500 FPS. I expect that if you used a longer barrel, and powders designed for a longer barrel, it would be in about the same velocity range as the hornet. So it's a little more powerful than people give it credit for.
That said I still don't believe it's a good choice for a defensive round.
SaMx
Member
BTW, TC makes rifle and pistol barrels for the encore and contender in 5.7x28
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
If that's true (I don't know), then it's really funny. Poses a dilemma to us, however - do we (a) point out to them how stupid they are since it's one of THE least powerful rifles going, or (b) mock them by producing some really similar-looking bullpup guns in .17 mach 2, .14 caliber, or smaller, just in order to sit back and laugh while watching them focus on banning prairie dog shooters? Tough call.
They don't?
http://www.biggerhammer.net/sigamt/550/sniper.html
servantofinari
Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 93
If NATO was smart they would use the 6.5 Grendel and the .50 Beowulf, the problem with the PDW P90, is there is the Magpul PDR-C/D
Maverick223
Member
Thanks for the reply, very interesting, still considering a PS90 as my first medium caliber carbine. .22s are fun to shoot though, but man that is an expensive .22 cartridge.
Would rather go with a MP5 (or reliable clone) but it doesn't seem to be available in my cost range (sub $2k). Gotta save money for the big boy gun savings fund.
MachIVshooter
Member
Hague convention is the one that covers use of expanding projectiles. Geneva convention is about the treatment of POW's.
MatthewVanitas
Member
The MagPul PDR doesn't exist other than as a plastic mock-up. Last I heard, MagPul had it on the back burner because there are no government orders for it. It vaguely resembles the Bushmaster Arm Pistol, which never went anywhere either. Don't get me wrong, I think it's awesome, but it's currently on hiatus.
.50 Beowulf? Is there a single Law Enforcement agency or organised fighting unit anywhere using the .50 Beowulf? It doesn't have anywhere near the range of other cartridges (and terrible BC for long-range), and has greatly reduced capacity. Why on earth would the military use a very niche hunting cartridge?
So far as 6.5: the military has already chosen to back the 6.8 SPC in that fight, and even the SPC is still not taking off. The 6.5 is pretty much a null issue in military terms, unless someone has citations to update.
Pulse
Member
the problem with all those Calibers and the 6.8SPC is that a company owns them and said companys have no intention what so ever to give up the Patends for them.
in order for it to become a NATO round, Remington and Alexancer Arms (holds both, 6.5 and .50beo) would have to allow everyone that wants to to roll there own ammo without any additional charge, neither company wants that and that alone is reason enough to none of those rounds will ever become officialy a NATO wide used caliber. (among other reasons.)
Zak Smith
Member
You know that Hornady and Silver State both manufacture 6.8 SPC ammo, right?
Pulse
Member
i guess with Licence fees?
because if it would be free and everyone could do it, European companys would do it.
you can buy Rifles in 6.8SPC in Europe, trying to find ammo for it is next to impossible and because of ITAR it is a serious PITA to get ammo out of the USA directly.
S&B, RUAG, Dynamite Nobel and many other would be all over it, because the demand is there. (or it would come, once the ammo is here, the Rifles in 6.8SPC would actualy be sold. )
Zak Smith
Member
It would be more helpful if you would post facts not speculation.
Pulse
Member
fact is, outside of the USA, it is almost impossible to get 6.8SPC Ammo, but Rifles are possible to buy at very reasonable Prices.
fact is no European company makes 6.8SPC, but demand exists and could easy greatly increase if ammo/components would be available
Fact is, it is not even possible to buy reloading components for the 6.8SPC without jumping a dozend and then some legal hoops because of ITAR.
fact is that the few 6.8SPC shooters in europe would buy components made in europe, even if they are of worse quality or mutch higher priced, simply so they dont have to beg the US goverment for a export licence and find a gunshop that is willing to export simple bullets and Brass. but no european company can/will supply them.
considering these facts, what is your guess why it is like that?
Zak Smith
Member
I hesitate to speculate. One could imagine a variety of reasons. However, it if is the case that license fees are the reason, that should be relatively easy to determine.
I spent part of my afternoon at Kaw Valley Gun club indoor range today. I just had to try out my new redhawk. There was a big sign on the 2nd door leading to the firing line. That banned that round from use on this range. It explained that it had the potential to penetrate the backstop. I guess i didn't realize they had that much zip.
. I guess i didn't realize they had that much zip.
nwilliams
Member
Yeah it's banned at the only indoor range here in Santa Fe also. They have a big sign on the range door that says "NO 5.7x28!" Another indoor range I go to every once in a while (out of town) allows .223 rifles but doesn't allow 5.7 handguns or rifles
I think they are afraid of someone using SS190 AP ammo in the range. Why someone would shoot that is beyond me as they're going for about $800/50rd box.
The commercial SS197 or 195 wouldn't hurt it a bit. I shoot mine all the time in the local indoor range. They don't allow .223 or bigger.
The commercial SS197 or 195 wouldn't hurt it a bit. I shoot mine all the time in the local indoor range. They don't allow .223 or bigger.
servantofinari
Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 93
It’s a niche round I’ll admit, but it would fill that niche perfectly
servantofinari
Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 93
What? If you can stop a 5.56 NATO you can stop a 5.7. Who is spreading this “Cop killing supper bullet” stuff? Its as good as a .22 WMR no better no worse.
servantofinari
Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 93
yes, i am talking about how it harms the target, rim fires are not as good as center fire.
- Status
