Why not more 5.7x28?

Not open for further replies.


Jan 28, 2014
I could be wrong but why is the FN 57 the only handgun chambered in this round? It seems there would be a pretty decent market for a handgun in this caliber in the 5-600$ range that nobody has taken advantage of. I'm I the only one thinking this? What gives? Ammo seems to be pretty assessable for a decent price.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good question.
I wonder if the very high operating pressure of the 5.7 has something to do with the lack of other guns.
There has been only spotty success with chambering semi-autos for high pressure rounds. The .30 Carbine operates at 40Kpsi and pistols for it were of limited success. The 5.7 operates at 50Kpsi ....so I wonder if that is not a factor.
Quick google search reveals

Master Piece Arms Defender = 550ish
Excel BAS 9R = 450-500ish

there are also a couple upper receivers for AR's.

That Excel pistol is interesting. The Masterpiece reminds me of the Mac 9.
Both are larger in scale than the FiveSeven...... but at less than half the price worth a look. Any reviews?
Sometimes it's a bit of a chicken and egg deal with firearms and ammo. A maker doesn't want to do R&D if there isn't a supply of ammo, and this round would take a lot of R&D due to the pressure already mentioned. Ammo makers only want to make what they can sell, so the circle continues.

Also, the 5.7 hasn't interested a wide group of shooters (in my opinion). Meant to defeat body armor (can't buy that ammo though) which isn't high on people's list. Then the chicken/egg thing, if you don't like the FN pistol and it's price you're out of options. Also, with the price of ammo it's not a plinking toy for a day on the range.

Don't get me wrong, it has it's merits but for most they are limited and not worth the $$$ to commit to it.
As far as niche cartridges go, 5.7 is pretty cheap and easy to find locally here.

Heck of alot cheaper than some "standard" rifle cartridges and "common" handgun rounds.

308 and 44 mag are both commonly shot and both typically cost more as well.

I've just been waiting for something in the caliber that I like.
Rumor used to be that the owners/developers wanted too much in royalties or just flatly refused to allow the round to be chambered in other manufacturers guns, and that consequently led to the 22 tcm. With the TCM you have options (albeit few) of a new upper for several popular guns like glock 17, then factory built 1911 and CZ style pistols, all from Rock Island Armory, and also a bolt action rifle in the same chambering. The big difference is that RIA is not overcharging for the guns or uppers and other folks are making the ammo so competition keeps the cost down. 22tcm or FN5.7...pretty similar and I think the tcm edges it out, and if others agree then your looking at a dying round in the 5.7x28
I think if another major manufacturer started making a 5.7x28mm pistol, there might be a domino effect. If someone like HK, Sig, Beretta, Glock, S&W, etc. came out with one, it might do quite well, and it might see more people making it.

Personally I think the 5-7 itself is a little weird (very unique safety switch), which is probably part of why it's off-putting for some.
I agree that the 22 TCM is probably going to take over especially with the 9M loading.

Since it can fit in 9mm magazines and brass can be made from 223 instead of needing special brass.

I've been leaning that way myself lately. I like the idea of a longslide in 22 TCM, although that Excell BAS 9R looks real intresting.
West Kentucky, same situation you described happened with 300BLK as well.

The 300whisper came first but was tightly controlled and heavily liscensed, then 300BLK came out, with very little difference other than being more friendly towards other manufacturers.

Now the 300whisper isn't much more than a footnote and I can buy numerous variations of 300BLK at my local brick and mortars.
After looking at some balistic gelatin videos comparing the 5.7X28 to the 22WMR from the Keltec PMR30 I think the 22WMR holds it's own with the 5.7X28 from the FN pistol unless your interested in defeating body armor.
Barnbwt, the TCM is also much newer, and is much more friendly towards being compatible with existing designs.

A Sig 226 could be converted to TCM if one was so inclined.

So can a Glock, I belive they're already shipping glock uppers so chambered.

There's already a 1911 variant readily available.

An XD would be another simple conversion, provided someone makes a barrel for it.

Any of them would be much more practical than any current 5.7 pistol save the real deal FN.

Federal is the only source for 5.7 ammo I know of. They make the FN branded stuff to my understanding. But it is used by some governments, so the cartridge is gonna be in production for a long while one can assume.

Armscorp is the only TCM ammo manufacturer as far as I'm aware, and seem to be doing a decent job of getting ammo onto shelves here, but it is a purely Comercial design and may fade into oblivion. I reload and brass is easy to make, so it's less of a concern. 5.7 brass can be harder to find/pricy.
The round is kinda long and the gun gets a weird grip.

The 5.7 pistol would never have existed if the P90 wasn't around. It was just a case of making a pistol that was ammo similar, and had the same defensive needs.

.22TCM has promise, just need to try one in a Glock.
One of the benefits of the 57 is that you can stack a lot more rounds in a mag. Why would I want a .22 TCM if it only holds the same as a +P 9mm? Or, am I wrong?
I was really impressed with the FN 57 I shot. I loved the light weight! Around here ammo is still pretty expensive and the gun is also expensive. The reports of ruining the brass for reloading by tumbling it is also a turn off.

I love bottle-necked pistol cases. I love my 7.65x25 Tokarev and my .30 Mauser. Small fast bullets with low recoil are just a lot of fun to shoot! If I ever happened across a FN 57 for a reasonable price I would probably pick one up. I think the 5.7 would loose a lot of its "charm" in a heavier gun.

Yes, I consider the case capacity one of the selling points. A PMR-30 would be fun too as it seems to be a poor mans FN-57.
Part of the reason may be that it people cant figure out what it does especially better than other more common loads and guns. Id be one of them.

Those that have mentioned using them (not in the recreational sense) haven't been all that impressed with its performance overall.
The round is kinda long and the gun gets a weird grip.
Sadly, this. Though it's more a symptom of ANY high velocity/High BC pistol cartridge and not the FNH in particular. Tis no free lunch, no there is not.

But, some of us have long proximal phalanges (first finger bones) and actually prefer a longer, narrow grip. Oddly enough, a P35 Hi Power feels stumpy and broom-handle-like to me, but a five-seven and even CZ52 feel 'right.' The Steyr-Hahn in Largo feels exceptionally good, as does the SACM in 32 'longue' (though I really need the 11:10 scale version of that pistol called the SIG P210)

I think the 5.7 and 4.6 PDW rounds were doomed from the start as pistol cartridges for the NATO contract for this reason; they're simply poor rounds to base a 'universal' issue handgun around since people span the range from Wilt Chamberlain to Donald Trump as far as hand geometry, and the lowest common denominator sets the bar. Not to mention the short barrel needlessly cuts the round off at the knees to a certain extent (not to the point it becomes 'worthless' as claimed by many, but to the point it no longer does anything noticeably different from weakish 9mm that would justify using it in lieu of parabellum)

Part of the reason may be that it people cant figure out what it does especially better than other more common loads and guns. Id be one of them.

Those that have mentioned using them (not in the recreational sense) haven't been all that impressed with its performance overall.

It's an insanely light weapon, especially loaded, especially when you are carrying multiple magazines. Feels like a damn toy; even airsoft is generally heavier due to the pump mechanism. The loaded gun is lighter than an empty G17.

Recoil is about 1/3-2/3 that of 9mm. The gun also has a large grip and aggressive checkering; makes rapid fire highly controllable.

The round is also fast enough and of a high enough BC (ballistic constant) to be noticeably flatter shooting out to 100 yards.

The real problem with the operators out there who have been dissatisfied with both five-sevens (who actually adopted it?) and P90s is one of expectations and intended use. Remember, this gun was to be a PDW for rear-echelon NON-COMBAT guys, as was the pistol (which is used almost exclusively for mundane activities like guarding, if I am told correctly). It was never intended to be the tip of the spear for guys knowingly going into combat --they were supposed to be using the approximately 3X more powerful and 2X bulkier 5.56 weapons for those jobs, at a minimum.

So what is the first thing hot-shot cops, operators, and other fools who fell for a slick marketing campaign do? Press the ultra-light carbine and pistol into aggressive/offensive roles where their performance and power are far more critical factors than their light load out weight, simplicity, cleanliness, or capacity --then declare them abject failures. I have to wonder if the strengths of the platforms might have been appreciated more by a group that has to actually carry and live with the things day-in-day-out, vs. operators who get to ride a transport all the way from the armory to the objective for a short/fast mission. Law enforcement especially.

You know, the AR15 makes for a lousy concealed carry pistol; must mean the round is far too powerful and the gun far too heavy/bulky/dirty for anything, and therefore an answer to a question nobody asked. What's that? Pistols make more sense than rifles for daily carry because they're smaller, lighter, and weak enough to be fired without shoulder support effectively? But if you're going into a fight you want the most effective weapon, right, so why drop to a weeny 9mm over 5.56?

Same reason the P90 was developed to replace the (then) M16A3(?) and the five-seven to replace the M9; when the soldier's job isn't to close with and defeat the enemy (which it usually isn't without a fair bit of warning and preparation, given modern tactics) there's a huge advantage in getting their weapon lighter, smaller, and a smaller hindrance to their actual jobs (while still being present to heed the call in an emergency). The M4 more or less splits the difference as far as the rifle/PDW was concerned, and more importantly allowed Uncle Sam to avoid having to make an actual decision since it was basically the same rifle they started out with ;)

A PMR-30 would be fun too as it seems to be a poor mans FN-57.

I have both the 5.7 and PMR-30. Both are just about the most fun you can have with a hand gun. While these two have similarities, they are by no means equals. Ammo is easy to find for the 5.7. Ammo for the .22 is scarce. For serious use, I'd grab the 5.7. No question.
IMO, the 5.7x28 round is silly(at its current price point). If the ammo would drop to a sane level of price, that would be different.
Ive got about 5000 rounds of 5.7 American Eagle that I paid $13 a box for. The FN stuff I have about 1000 rounds of the 40 grain stuff. Paid $15 a box for it.

Palmetto State . Best pricing anywhere.
Not open for further replies.