Guys, I posted this on another thread because I see a disturbing number of members have been sucked into the hype around the 5.7mm FN handgun cartridge. This cartridge is being pushed very heavily by European governments and manufacturers for political and economic reasons, and has been shown time and again over the past 15 years to be an answer in search of a question that doesn't need to be asked. It is NOT a viable cartridge from a ballistics or tactical viewpoint.

If you like this cartridge in your gun, more power to you. I am not saying it's a bad cartridge intrinsically, and any caliber that gets anyone shooting more is a good thing in my book.

But let's not go so far as to think this cartridge should be what we are arming our warriors with when they're on the sharp end of the spear.

Copied from a post by Dr. Roberts:
10/13/11

"Several papers have described the incredibly poor terminal performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm projectiles fired by the FN P90:

--Dahlstrom D, Powley K, and Gordon C: �Wound Profile of the FN Cartridge (SS 190) Fired from the FN P90 Submachine Gun". Wound Ballistic Review. 4(3):21-26; Spring 2000.
--Fackler M: "Errors & Omissions", Wound Ballistic Review. 1(1):46; Winter 1991.
--Fackler M: "More on the Bizarre Fabrique National P-90", Wound Ballistic Review. 3(1):44-45; 1997.
--FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit. FBI Handgun Ammunition Tests 1989-1995. Quantico, U.S. Department of Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation.
--Hayes C: �Personal Defense Weapons�Answer in Search of a Question�, Wound Ballistic Review. 5(1):30-36; Spring 2001.
--Roberts G: �Preliminary Evaluation of the Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 23 Grain FMJ Bullet Fired by the New FN P-90 , Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant�, AFTE Journal. 30(2):326-329, Spring 1998.

"The current 31 gr SS-190 FMJ bullet has nearly adequate penetration, but the wound resulting from this projectile has a relatively small permanent crush cavity, as well as an insignificant temporary stretch cavity. Although the 5.7 x 28 mm penetrates soft body armor, wounding potential is at best like a .22 LR or .22 Magnum. Even 9mm NATO FMJ makes a larger wound--and we are all aware of the awe inspiring incapacitation potential of M882 ball from the M9......

"A few large U.S. LE agencies adopted 5.7 mm weapons--after being involved in several OIS incidents with P90's, 5.7 mm usage in these agencies plummeted as a result of the poor terminal performance.

"It is all basic physics and physiology. Look at the surface areas in contact with tissue for 9 mm FMJ and JHP compared to 5.7 mm. When both are point forward, the 9 mm FMJ crushes more tissue than the 5.7 mm; for the short time that the 5.7 mm is at FULL yaw, it crushes a bit more tissue than the 9 mm FMJ. At no time does the 5.7 mm crush more tissue than the expanded 9 mm JHP--even when the 5.7 mm FMJ is at full yaw, an expanded 9 mm JHP crushes more tissue. The relatively small temporary cavities produced by both the 9 mm and 5.7 mm projectiles are not likely to cause significant injury to the majority of elastic structures of the body.

"The P90 can definitely penetrate soft body armor, but then so can 9 mm AP rounds. The greater momentum of 9 mm bullets allow them to defeat vehicles and other intermediate barriers better than the 5.7 mm bullets. Standard 9 mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP JHP loads crush more tissue, offer ideal penetration, and are equally likely to not exit the opponent as the 5.7 mm. 5.56 mm and 6.8 mm weapons offer significantly superior terminal effects compared to 5.7 mm. Bottom line�what does the P90 offer that is not already available?"

I had a big response typed up, but I don't really want to kick this hornets nest, so I'll sum it up quickly.

I've had a 5.7 handgun and I'll own one again. I own a PS90 now. My neighbor is in the secret service and carries a P90.

I've shot the round a lot, and I love it. Matter of fact, I bought 1000 more rounds yesterday.

What does it offer that's not available already? The ability to make multiple, fast shots, on target.

You've clearly taken the "5.7 is worthless" side of the debate, but as a frequent visitor to the various 5.7 forums, I can tell you there's just as much data out there supporting the cartridge- i just don't have the energy to dig it up.

There are various bullets and loadings available for the 5.7. If you want to expend energy quickly, you can do that. If you want it to penetrate body armor, it can do that.

The police department in my home town carries 5.7s, and they love them too. There's something to be said for 3 20 round mags on your person.

I have a hunch that in coming years, if FNH ever decides to let other manufacturers make their ammo too, you'll continue to see the popularity of the 5.7 rise, including with PDs and swat teams. I'll bet you a milk shake that in 10 years the 5.7 will be even more popular than it is now. When I bought my 5.7, nobody had really heard of it. Now, they're in every gun shop.

No, it's not for war. Home defense, swat, PD, plinking, varmints, and having fun? Absolutely.

I know I want one.

Is reloading for them a big deal?


Travis

I'll take you up on that milkshake bet! Whoever's right, we'll at least be able to sit down together and have a good shake and talk guns & hunting. Sounds like a win-win to me!

And yes, it's always a good idea to avoid kicking over a hornets' nest...



Like I said, I have no problems with the round for general pistoleer work. But I'm more than a little hesitant to endorse it for general LE use, and less so for military use. I'm called upon to review actual shootings and make ammunition recommendations on a fairly frequent basis and while I've seen ammunition "failures" ascribed to everything from the 5.7mm thru 45 ACP and .223 Rem, in most cases the ammunition is not the problem. Unfortunately, the 5.7mm has had some pretty bad documented failures that in my opinion and that of others far more expert than I would likely not have happened if the round in question had been a 9mm 124 gr JHP or 40 S&W 185 gr JHP, or equivalent in other generally accepted service calibers. I know there are agencies that endorse and even issue the 5.7mm, but these aren't agencies that get into a lot of gunfights. The agencies that DO shoot a lot of bad guys don't endorse the 5.7mm. Is it prejudice? Bad first impressions leading to a general negative view by the industry? I can't say about that.

But as Dr. Roberts points out, in addition to its marginal performance in gelatin tests, the 5.7 has not had a great record in actual gunfights/OIS with agencies that have used it. Yes, the 5.7 lets folks make fast and accurate shots, but with training and experience you can do that with a 45 ACP 1911 or a 9mm, too, and have a much higher probability of a good terminal ballistics/effects outcome.

I wouldn't worry too much about people niavely purchasing 5.7 guns/ammo. The expense alone may deter many. It's not that big a deal or mistake if someone gets "sucked into" getting one. The 5.7 stuff will always re-sale to someone else.

I know a devestating case can be made on 'one-side' against the 5.7 round in comparison to 'other' calibers ... but that is the nature-of-the-beast regarding Caliber Wars. Many in the U.S. do not like its lack of terminal performance at conversational distances. The Europeans however designed it for effective military defense at longer ranges. It is what it is ...

There was a young southern gal who posted 'here' some years ago.
She bought a new FN Herstal Five-seveN pistol as (maybe) her 1st pistol purchase. I don't know how that one turned out for her ... She may not have been 'savy' but she WAS 'gutsy', for sure.

A lot of shooters really like the 5.7 shooting experience.
Fun, protection, high velocity, long range, accuracy, a different experience ... and they know what/why they are doing.

I don't worry at all about what people buy with their firearms budgets. But if people buy a 5.7 for personal protection I do think they deserve to be informed that this round has not stood up to scrutiny by serious end-users. See following post.



Sorry, you'll find that the ballistics and tactical community both in the USA and internationally is remarkably united in what works and what doesn't work in the "Caliber Wars". You'll always find lay-people who will loudly proclaim that one standard service caliber or another doesn't work, but among the professionals you'll find that no one has much preference for 9mm/357 SIG/40S&W/45ACP in handgun calibers, or 5.56mm NATO/7.62 NATO for carbines or rifles.



I confess I don't know which European agencies/powers issue the 5.7mm to their cops/soldiers. Do you? Are these agencies/countries currently involved in active shooting wars? I'd be interested in knowing who they are. Our military people have uniformly been very displeased with the round. (See following post)




I can heartily concur with the editorial change suggested.

Guys, I am not willing to "go along to get along" here. The 5.7 has a VERY BAD reputation among people who shoot bad guys for a living. Again, quoting from Dr. Roberts:
Small caliber PDW's like the MP7 and P90 are niche weapons that have very narrow and specific roles to play.

Below are comments specifically on the MP7 by a combat experienced senior SOF NCO currently serving in the U.S. military:


Quote:
�When employing the MP7 up close, you literally use it like a fire hose and sprinkle 4.6 all over the torso of the guy you want to reduce (usually on Auto, which is a CQB no-go anyway), and you have to keep hosing him down with bullets until his brain figures out that you are filling him in. Usually this takes longer than shooting a NSR with a rifle, so by the time that your brain figures out that the guy has quit and is crumpling, you are almost out of bullets and any other threats in the room have most likely started to engage you. IF your team is on their **** and everyone grasps the true importance of primary/secondary sectors of fire, then perhaps you can get in there and all of your guys can sprinkle 4.6 liberally on all of the bad guys in an efficient manner, but if you fail to do that, then bad things will happen quickly.�

Pat Rogers, a former NYPD officer and combat veteran Marine, is a highly respected firearms trainer who has also commented on the use of small caliber PDW�s like 4.6 and 5.7 mm:


Quote:
�Multiple rounds are required to incapacitate. This means significantly more training, which translates into significantly more ammunition expended, at a higher cost per round and with limited sources available. To ensure immediate incapacitation, brain shots will need to be emphasized. Which requires more training, and also more insertion of luck into the equation- especially dealing with multiple opponents. Limited capability within the system means engagement at anything outside of CQB distances may be problematic. This means movement to objective, egress etc will present a whole new range of difficulties. The gun is easy to shoot and fun as well. This does not always translate well to real world applications. If there is a single reason why these platforms are in any way superior to the M4 FOW, it is not apparent to me.��

A decorated, experienced SWAT officer at a U.S. LE agency that has had multiple OIS incidents with 5.7 mm FN P90's has written the following--note that his comments equally apply to the 4.6 mm MP7:


Quote:
�The 5.7 pistol as a carry gun is a mistake. There are far more effective weapons and ammunition combinations out there. The only factor that comes close to equalizing the P90 (not the 5.7 pistol) is it's full auto capability: 900 rpm of very controllable fire. Even this advantage is limited to close-in, CQB type engagements. I can put more rounds on target faster with the P90 than with my M4 in close contact engagements. Unfortunately you may HAVE to put more rounds in the threat due to the lack of damage the projectile causes. The 5.56 is far more effective at getting the attention of men than 5.7 mm. This is not speculation. We have been using 30 P90's for five years now. There have been multiple BG's shot with them. We will not be buying more 5.7 mm or other small caliber PDW systems��

As a result of poor terminal performance, a large Federal agency is also no longer running P90�s like they used to. Likewise, some military units that tried small caliber PDW's in combat are procuring other options, like 9" .300 Blackout uppers to run on M4 lowers.

When a civilian LE agency chooses a full-auto system, significantly more time is needed for training. This increases costs, both in the amount of ammunition necessary to purchase, as well as the need to pay officers for increased time in training, rather than being in the field. Instead of a 1-5 shot NSR with an AR15 based system, with an MP7 each officer is now going to be routinely shooting 15-20+ rounds into each target both in training and in actual OIS incidents, thus the amount of ammo expended is going to be 4 times what would be used with an AR15 based system shooting any common CQB caliber like 5.56 mm, .300 Blackout, 6.8mm, or even 7.62x51mm. How is an LE agency going to afford four times more training ammo for a weapon system like the MP7 that needs to be always shot full auto and whose ammo is more expensive than other common calibers?

In the civilian realm, how is an LE agency going to explain to their Admin and media why they are now needing to shoot every suspect 15-20+ times? In addition, when you are having to shoot 15-20 rounds full-auto at every target, there is a higher likelihood that some of those rounds may miss the target; how is an LE agency going to handle the liability from the potential increased number of missed shots that can occur with a system that needs to be used full-auto like a "fire hose" in order to offer adequate incapacitation of threats?

With the data now available, a U.S. LE agency would have to be woefully ignorant or colossally stupid to purchase the MP7 (or P90) for SWAT use given the numerous weapon systems available for LE SWAT/CQB use that are both better and more cost effective than small caliber PDW's.

I can't shoot so I would have no right having a point of view


Besides Elmer Keith is my mentor...

If Keith's your mentor, what the heck are you building a 6.5mm for? Shouldn't you be building a .333 OKH or a .35 Whelen Improved for your new varmint rifle?

I'll stick with a 1911 and M-1 carbine.

First i believe the pistol is way over priced and second it wouldn't be my first or second choice for a self defense carry weapon. I wouldn't minded owning one for groundhogs and squirrel hunting.

First of all, this is the handgun forum, not the "machine gun" forum.
Second, the 5.7 round was designed to shoot through body armor from a handgun. To my knowledge, no 9mm round does that from a handgun.
3rd, try shooting the so called 5.7 FMJ, non expanding, underloaded, practice round into a simple 2.5 gallon jug of water. Then try it with any 115-124 gr. FMJ 9mm round. The results aren't even remotely close. So believe whatever you want. E

I think I'll go with an M.D. with real world experience rather than anecdotal water jug observations.

That's your call. But, just for the record, I've seen more than just a few gun shot wounds and deaths as well.
I used the water jug example as something that is readily availiable and realistic in performance.
Congresswoman Giffords was shot throught the forehead with a 9mm FMJ and is alive and well today. That's not unusual I understand. So much for the killing power of the 9mm FMJ from a handgun. E

If was going to carry any FMJ round it would be the 45 ACP and nothing smaller.

Don't own one, so I have no dog in the hunt. I can certainly see why it's not useful for our guys in uniform, when they can choose between M4 in .223 or 6.8 SPC.

But I'm reading notes about FMJ bullets in the 5.7, and there will obviously be a huge difference in wounds between expanding and non-expanding bullets. Seems like LEO's and the rest of us can use expanding bullets, and I would think a perp would indeed notice when hit by a varmint bullet at 2300 fps.

I knew a guy 30 years ago who hunted fur avidly in the Texas panhandle. He had a .17 Remington, but quickly sold it after he had to shoot a bobcat 4 times, longest shot 100 yards. Small non-expanding bullets are not particularly effective, even at ~3800 fps

I guess I'll edit to add that the PS90 is certainly an ingenious design, the way it feeds out of a 50 rd magazine; and I can appreciate that as a collector and engineer. The PS90 rifle is too spendy to buy for grins, but I have thought about a AR57 upper for my Armalite. In the end, though, the house long gun is a 9mm carbine, with laser sight. It's loaded with +P JHP's and it should work fine

If the guy you refer to needs to shoot a Bobcat 4 times he needs to use a different bullet in his 17 Rem or learn how to shoot.

I've been around GSWs and fatalities, too, but none with the 5.7. I know I wouldn't carry it as a primary handgun.

That was 30 years ago - and bullet selection in .17 was limited in those days. I don't recall if he was using handloads or Rem factory loads, but I recall reading other reports of erratic bullet performance. I've lost track of him since then, but he was an avid shooter & hunter.

Warning:

)))))))))))) DON"T DRINK THE DOCROCKET KOOLAID! ((((((((((((

I'm not.

Hey Doc, I refuse to accept the 5.7mm has a future because it would prove Hardin/Gun Kid right. Everything would change...even the certainties of death and taxes.

Already have the heavy end covered



You obviously don't know what Doc does or what his credentials are do you........

No. I do not know the good Doc's credentials. I also admit to knowing almost NOTHING about the 5.7 subject - and I do realize that DocRocket KNOWS what he is talking about.

But I still feel that it is NOT that big of a deal.

I don't think there is that much danger of many people getting "sucked in" and being mis-lead by choosing and acquiring 5.7 ammunition & firearms un-aware of 'whatever' potential/inherent shortcomings they may possess. They could do worse.

I think most people that choose that particular format know pretty much what they are doing.

Just my opinion ...

I wouldn't even consider the 5.7x28 as a defensive round, not even for a secondary gun. It'd be a fun little plinker to play with, no doubt, but I'm not going to trust my life to something punching that size of a hole.
Personally, I'm still a fan of the 10mm, works for bears, mountain lions and two legged critters. It has great penetration capability with the right bullets and I'm a big believer in penetration, I want an exit wound. There's no point in having a bullet stop half way through its target. If the bullet goes in throught the sternum and exits taking pieces of vertebrae with it, so much the better.
That's my biggest complaint about the 45 ACP, I like a bit more penetration. A 460 Rowland might be about perfect.

The 5.7x28mm round has found wide acceptance both within NATO and elsewhere. A quick run down (but by no means complete) for those interested:

Belgium- Air Force, Army, Special Forces, National Police SWAT, and Li�ge Municipal Police
Canada- Montreal SWAT
Cyprus- National Guard Special Forces
France- DSGE Intelligence Agency (same function as US CIA)
Greece- EKAM Unit of the National Police
Guatamala- DIGICI Intelligence Agency
India- Special Protection Group (similar to US Secret Service)
Indonesia- Special Diver Group of Indonesian Navy; Special Forces of Indonesian Army
Italy- 9th Parachute Assault Regiment
Libya- the Libyan Armed Forces
Mexico- Mexican Army; Presidential Guard; Special Forces of the Mexican Navy
Nepal- all armed forces
Peru- GRUFE (special forces) of the Armed Forces of Peru
Poland- GROM (Polish Special Forces)
Saudi Arabia- all armed forces
Singapore- Singapore Armed Forces Commando Unit
Spain- Spanish Armed Forces; Madrid Municipal Police
Surinam- Security Forces
Thailand- Royal Thai Army
United States- Secret Service

I would suggest that more than a few of the above countries (Mexico, for instance) are engaged in "active shooting wars" be it against local Communist insurgents, drug cartels, or serving alongside our troops as allies in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Hardly. As with any proposed change in the military there will be supporters and detractors on both sides; the overall findings of the US military have been in support of NATO adopting the 5.7x28mm round, despite the disgruntled opinions of a very few (such as you have published above). The reality is that the Ordnance Officers (and NCOs) involved in the testing/endorsing of the 5.7x28mm round for adoption by NATO were uniformly pleased with it's performance, as anyone reading their reports may ascertain for themselves.

For what it's worth, my only interest in this discussion has to do with the selection of a single cartridge for multiple platforms as applied to use in the military. I personally think this is a good thing, and (apparently) the military thinks that the 5.7x28mm round fills the bill.

There is a rumor going around that Glock will possibly unveil a pistol chambered for the 5.7x28mm round at the next SHOT Show. As I understand it (rumors are sketchy at best when it comes to details) the conversion to 5.7x28mm is about as simple as swapping the barrel and magazine. If this is the case, expect to see more countries adopt the 5.7x28mm round for their police and armed forces.

Actually, despite being the guy who kicked over this hornet's nest to begin with, I don't think it's that big a deal, either. In this we are pretty much muy sympatico. With one small exception.

Unfortunately, in the past month or so I've stumbled across four people (3 in Wisconsin, where CCW is the new and raging fad among gun folks, one in TX) who have little or no experience in shooting and none whatsoever in defensive shooting, military service, or LE training, all of whom were extolling the virtues of their new 5.7mm pistols, which they were "sold" by a gunshop guru or internet ninja buddy.

What is the likelihood that one of these newbies is going to use his/her 5.7 in a defensive shooting? Infinitesimal. As such, it's not that big a deal.

But the facts about this round's poor bench testing performance and real-world shooting performance over the past 10+ years are not happy or good, as I have accounted above. I don't think I am being biased here, I'm simply passing on the results of a lot of very serious people who live at the sharp end of the spear. And as such I feel some obligation to point out that that record.

Old_Writer... thanks for that list. I've not followed closely recent developments in adoption of the 5.7mm cartridge but will do so. I will be happy to learn it if they've found a new bullet(s) that have overcome the glaring deficiencies of the round in previous testing and experience.

Of the agencies you've listed, it will be interesting to see which ones have adopted the 5.7 as a submachinegun round and which as a pistol round. For instance, I am aware that the U.S. Secret Service has had 5.7mm SMG's for a number of years, but the standard round for pistols is NOT 5.7 as of my last contact. I'll be looking into this further. Thanks for the list.

Your comment about ordnance people here in the US being pleased with the 5.7 intrigues me. I've got some calls out and will be looking into this as well.

Could you do me the favor of citing a source for these favorable reports by ordnance people? I'd like to read them. These were NATO ordnance boards, not US military boards, I presume?

Finally, I'm intrigued by your reference to a common round for pistol and rifle. This concept has always puzzled me, as the experience of our military, and that of a number of other countries around the world, has been that a common pistol-rifle round is a compromise that satisfies the requirements of neither, but I'm open to the discussion.

Doc,

Just like anything, we look for data that supports our own beliefs. As I've said before, I frequent several 5.7 message boards, and the more time goes by, the more people rave about this thing. I've seen countless tests and first hand accounts of what this thing will do. It appears this doc roberts guy doesn't like the 5.7, and that's fine. There are a whole bunch of people who like it...and the number is growing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Five-seven

And this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_5.7%C3%9728mm#History

Excerpts of note:

The 5.7�28mm cartridge was designed in response to NATO requests for a replacement for the 9�19mm Parabellum cartridge.[9][11] According to the NATO requirement, the new cartridge was to have greater range, accuracy, and terminal performance than the 9�19mm cartridge.[21] Additionally, it was to be capable of penetrating body armor.[21] FN Herstal responded to the NATO requirement by developing the 5.7�28mm cartridge and two associated weapons: the FN P90 personal defense weapon (PDW) and FN Five-seven pistol.[9]

and

In 2002 and 2003, NATO conducted a series of tests with the intention of standardizing a PDW cartridge as a replacement for the 9�19mm Parabellum cartridge.[11] The tests compared the relative merits of the 5.7�28mm cartridge and the HK 4.6�30mm cartridge, which was created by German small arms manufacturer Heckler & Koch as a competitor to the 5.7�28mm.[11] The results of the NATO tests were analyzed by a group formed of experts from Canada, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and the group's conclusion was that the 5.7�28mm was "undoubtedly" the more efficient cartridge.[11]


So, "a group of experts from canada, france, the UK, and the US" think that the 5.7 is superior in performance to the 9mm and the 4.6. But, doc Roberts disagrees. Ok.

I don't carry a 5.7 simply because of it's size, but I would love to. I wouldn't feel handicapped or undergunned in the least carrying it. Matter of fact, I'd choose it if I could. We all know shot placement is king; I could probably put 3 shots of 5.7 into a small target in the same time it took me to fire 1 or 2 .40 shots.

I know we'll keep butting heads on this one, so we'll have to agree to disagree. I think as more time goes by, we'll see who wins. My money is on the 5.7.

I don't think we're butting heads in any negative way, and I'm open to arguments in favor of the 5.7mm because I would quite honestly like to have somebody convince me that the 5.7 is in fact a viable service cartridge, if this is indeed true.

I need to read/hear more from the ordnance/ballistics experts in Canada, the U.K., and France. I know nothing of the testing done in the latter two countries, but I personally know experts from Western Canada who have tested and rejected the 5.7mm repeatedly for their agencies. The RCMP have rejected it at least twice.

Like I said, I've got messages out to a number of people in the industry on this question, as it seems that the assertions I've read on this thread indicate I've got a blind spot here. I'm going to correct that blind spot, and if my current and previous position needs to change based on real evidence, I'm going to change it.

Does that reference say they tested it against the 9mm? Because what you pasted doesn't explicitly state that.

You're right, rufus. I couldn't quite tell, to be honest. The reason for the tests, however, was to find a replacement for the 9mm, and the 5.7 and 4.6 were candidates. After the testing, the 5.7 won - and since they decided to go with it, I'd assume that means it was better in their testing than the 9mm. I'd like to know more and see how those tests went down.

People thought the 223 was under powered and now people are touting what is basically a 22Mag? Sorry but for defeating body armor I can see it having a purpose but for defense no way, unless I typically have to go up against armored criminals. And even then one or two 45 slugs to the armor is generally enough to make him slow down enough to tap him in the head with the third round.

dfe... you and me both!!!

I just got an email back from a contact in the USSS. He states that the P90 PDW in 5.7mm was purchased by Secret Service based on "outside testing" for T&E and limited deployment, and that the P90 did not measure up to its advertised capabilities against armored and unarmored targets. As such, the USSS is phasing this weapon out.

Another source, a US military ordnance guy who trains and advises foreign govt's on weapons and ammo as part of his regular mission, replied to me by email and said that every Asian agency he is aware of who has used the P90/5.7mm as a primary wepaon during combat (his emphasis, not mine) has dropped it in favor of larger caliber weapons.

I'll post more feedback as it comes in.

I have not heard anything yet about use of 5.7mm in standard-issue sidearms yet.

Searched the Wikipedia footnotes, authors' names, and so forth. The cited articles are gun magazine pieces, not primary or even secondary sources, and the authors did not cite their sources for the opinions expressed and quoted.

I'm still looking for the reports mentioned.

Is that anything like drinking the water in Mexico...'cause right now I could use some intestinal movement Oh, that was probably an over-share

TMI, dood!!! TMI!!!

Just for the record, the 5.7FN in the FNH pistol is not my "go to" choice for a CCW or night stand gun. That choice goes to a 1911 pistol in .45 ACP w/ HP ammo. You might say that I don't consider it "awesome" or possessing some mystical killing power.
But I do consider it and the .22 RF Magnum when fired from a 5-6 inch barrel handgun far superior to the 9mm FMJ round for such work.
That comes from seeing them work on both the street and in the field, over and over. The 9mm, from a handgun, with FMJ ammo has never performed nearly as well.
And I do believe the FNH pistol has some very good points. It is the gun I've found in that weight class that I can shoot well. It's a very light gun for those who refuse to carry a heavy handgun. It has lots of protection from corrosion, and it's very easy to maintain, etc. E

Good points, Eremicus.

FWIW, the guys I've talked to who have enjoyed success with 9mm NATO FMJ ammo in the Sandbox have been employing double-taps to the noggin. Just sayin'.

it would be a good fiddler crab gun with the proper optics.

This sounds oh so familiar....

I will take the opinion of Dr. Roberts at face value. There is no one in the industry more respected than he. The 5.7 is a niche weapon, designed to punch through body armor, nothing more. it is absolutely not a replacement for any of the commonly carried service rounds.

A 5.7 would be a smokin' IDPA gun, if only it were legal. Ah well...

Anybody wanna take a sternum hit with a vest on (no plates) from a 460 Rowland?

I never had the slightest urge to buy one of the 5.7X28 handguns or carbines.
I don't care how fast that 31 grains is going, it is not going to be as effective as a heavier, larger caliber bullet.
If getting multiple hits is all that important, buy a freaking air soft gun. A fellow should be working on putting one, maybe two effective bullets on target, instead of spray and pray.

I'm afraid that DocRocket has it correct in reguards to the 5.7

So how does the 5.7 do with expanding bullets ??

Probably limits penetration quite a bit.

i double posted this on this thread and the other one:
to borrow from an article by david fortier on military small arms magazine referenced in the wikipedia article:

5.7x28mm
In the 1980s, lightweight personal body armor was becoming more prevalent among Soviet units. While these flak jackets were easily penetrated by rifle fire, they were able to defeat 9x19mm ball rounds. So there was growing concern over NATO�s 9x19mm weapons being rendered obsolete. Fabrique Nationale recognized this threat and began working on a solution in the 1980s, an effort that picked up steam when NATO established the CRISAT target--a 1.6mm titanium plate and 20 Kevlar folds--as a penetration standard. FN responded with a small-caliber, high-velocity cartridge called the 5.7x28mm.




A small bottlenecked cartridge with a 28mm-long case, it�s topped with a .224-inch-diameter projectile. The standard military SS190 ball loading features a 31-grain armor-piercing FMJ-BT projectile, and there are tracer, subsonic and practice rounds, too--as well as commercial 40-grain sporting ammunition (SS196 and SS197). (Editor�s note: FN and ATK, parent of Federal Cartridge, recently signed a distribution agreement under which ATK would become the exclusive distributor of commercial sporting ammo in the U.S.; the restricted law enforcement and military ammunition remains an FNH USA product.)




The cartridge�s overall length is 40.5mm, and it weighs half what a 9x19mm cartridge does. To cut through soft body armor, the .224-diameter SS190 projectile incorporates a cone-shaped steel penetrator sitting atop an aluminum core surrounded by a steel jacket.




Velocity of the 5.7x28mm SS190 ball load from a P90 PDW�s 10.2-inch barrel is 2,346 fps. Fired from an FN Five-seveN service pistol it still clocks a respectable 2,133 fps. Despite the high muzzle velocity, recoil is approximately 30 percent less than a 9x19mm. The 5.7x28mm is capable of defeating the CRISAT target at 200 meters

this intrigues me on several counts. One, talking to a special forces type a couple of years ago he confirmed the effectiveness of a Vmax hornady bullet in the 5.56 that i had got a glimpse of one soldier loading into a rifle via the t.v.
I had experimented with these and they are nasty bullets.
two: The velocity of the pistol is similar to that of one of the so called AR15 pistols, but in a smaller package.
Then i remember something from a number of years ago where somebody was fulling with as i remember either a CZ or a 1911 platform with a necked down to .224 40s&w casing. Similar velocities, and you could put a A.P. bullet in it. Sound Familiar?
I will have to rethink this caliber, because with the RIGHT bullets i think it would be flat destructive, particularly with the flat ballistics easy shooting and large mags.

I might add try some vmax loaded in .223 and shoot some steel plates. Goes right through


Edited by RoninPhx (2 minutes 15 seconds ago)

So, following this logic, I should be hunting elk with a .45 handgun, right? Since a 165 grain .30 bullet will never be as effective as a 230 grain, .45 caliber bullet?

Ever seen a rabbit or other varmint get hit with a 50 grain bulle t going about 4,000 fps? Hint: there's not much left over.

The 5.7 doesn't go 4000 FPS. Also we are not talking elk hunting here, stay on track

No, it doesn't. And no, we're not.

The principle of the 5.7 is the same, however. It's foolish to say that speed is not important and doesn't make a difference. The 5.7 bullet is typically traveling more than 2X's as fast as the typical handgun calibers.

That can mean different things depending on the bullet. If you want fast, violent expansion, you can get it. If you want penetration, you can get it. No, you're not going to have tissue "crushed" by the diameter of the bullet, but there are other benefits speed gives you that a slower bullet cannot.

A 220 Swift makes a wonderful elk rifle - as long as you're confident of a head shot.

So does anybody here reload for one?


Travis

Here's a QL calc, with the 40gr VMax and Power Pistol. 2000 fps looks possible from a 5" bbl.

Doc:

Just got this from a SEAL of my acquaintance (blood kin) re the 5.7x28.



I have no idea what was sanitized out of that.

apples and oranges....you wanna take a hit from my 416 Rem or a 5.7 even with body armor you ain't going to survive a 416 Rem hit

Just a slower 5.56 with a lighter bullet, not am improvement at all IMHO

It's not supposed to be a 5.56 and it's not supposed to be an improvement on the 5.56, so I agree.

His full title is Dr. Gary K. Roberts, DDS (note that he is a dentist, not a trauma surgeon). I am not aware of any credible independent source online that clearly acknowledges DocGKR as an authority on the subject of wound ballistics, let alone gunshot wounds in actual human bodies.

He spends a lot of time posting on the internet, and he definitely has a cult-like following on a few internet forums, but that doesn't count for anything. He has certainly done extensive testing with bullets in ballistic gelatin, and some LE/military organizations have consulted him over the years, but that hardly puts him head-and-shoulders above the other individuals that are typically mentioned in these sorts of discussions. For example, the 28-year veteran of Houston, PD SWAT that I mentioned earlier, who has actually shot people with guns (including the P90), and served three terms as president of the TTPOA (Texas Tactical Police Officers Association).

Furthermore, the individual in question (DocGKR) 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 to a discussion on current 5.7x28mm loads.

Not to mention, two days after the Fort Hood shooting occurred, this same individual was already touting the early media reports that said the killer was stopped by a female police officer who had been shot with 5.7x28mm rounds.

Of course, we now know that the early news reports were inaccurate and that is not what actually happened; despite her bravery, the female police officer in question was incapacitated (and nearly died) from a hit to the leg, and the killer was actually stopped by a second (male) police officer while she was lying on the ground severely wounded.

All of this despite the fact that DocGKR had never even tested either of the ammunition types used by the Fort Hood shooter (SS192, SS197SR); not to mention the misinformation campaign (with regards to this caliber) that he has been pushing for years on forums all over the internet.

More recently, he tried to discount one of EA's 5.7x28mm loads (which he has never even tested) by simply scrutinizing a blurry photo of it that he found on the internet. The man is clearly not impartial; he made up his mind on this caliber about 15 years ago when he shot gelatin with the SS90 prototype cartridge.

Basically, what you are trying to do is use a completely erroneous appeal to authority (http://grammar.about.com/od/ab/g/appealauthterm.htm); in other words, a fallacy in which a rhetor seeks to persuade an audience not by giving evidence but by appealing to the respect people have for the famous. What's humorous is that the individual you are trying to use in such a manner does not even meet the notability criteria for his own Wikipedia article, and I explained above why that is the case.

Nevertheless, let's assume for a moment that DocGKR is definitely a highly respected authority on wound ballistics (i.e. shooting gelatin), and he dislikes SS190 based on his experience shooting gelatin with it. In that case, your argument would still be completely devoid of actual evidence (forum stories don't count and DocGKR has posted no actual evidence of any sort), and your "authority" on the subject is still basing his opinion on ancient testing done with a simulant (gelatin) and outdated ammunition (SS90 and SS190).

Anyway, you likely haven't even read any of those (ancient) papers. Half of them discuss a 23-grain plastic-core prototype cartridge (SS90) that was discontinued 20 years ago.

The two or three other papers on that list (discussing SS190) are irrelevant from the get-go, in light of the massive amount of verifiable information available on the caliber's performance in actual human bodies (as opposed to a simulant).

Papers aside, nothing else in that post was substantiated in any way. Even the picture in the post is extremely outdated (the projectile pictured is the SS90 prototype).




Prove it. Don't cite internet forum posts, either, because that isn't proof of anything.




Completely false. The first two U.S. agencies to issue the P90, for example, were the Houston Police Department and Richland County Sheriff's Department. See also:

http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/articlearchive/details.aspx?ID=309

I concede that the P90 is not all things to all people. However, for what I do, as a SWAT officer in a major city, it�s a great weapon.

<snip>

The 5.7mm ball produces a wound cavity about the size and shape of the best 9mm 115 grain JHP +P+, except the peak occurs at a deeper penetration. In the one shooting we had with the P90, the bullet performed well. In fact, the bullet performed exactly as it was designed. The autopsy provided detailed information about the wound cavity and travel of the bullets.

<snip>

If you operate in an environment like the one I operate in, you can�t go wrong with a P90 slung at the low-ready.

-- Sandy Wall of HPD (see below)



http://warriorsos.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-to-win-gunfight-by-sandy-wall.html

Sandy Wall retired from Houston Police Department after 28-years. He served for 22 years on SWAT, and was a three-term president with the Texas Tactical Police Officer Association (TTPOA). He is currently the Training Director for Safariland Training Group. Sandy is the founder of the Less Lethal Solutions, Inc. and the inventor of "The Wall Banger."




Again, prove it. DocGKR was just recycling hearsay in the same manner you are.




The only actual credible accounts of shootings with the 5.7x28mm would be:

- The Fort Hood shooting, which is very well-documented now (see some of the first-hand accounts, such as the one I posted below).

- A handful of U.S. SWAT shootings like the one that was described in the Houston SWAT writeup on the P90 (by a 28-year veteran of HPD).

- Dozens upon dozens of news reports on shootings (mostly fatal, and mostly done with the Five-seveN pistol, aka "matapolicias") from the Mexican Drug War, and nearby countries like Colombia and the Dominican Republic. The news accounts from Mexico are supported by crime scene photos showing 5.7x28mm casings and/or the deceased victims themselves (many of those are graphic so I won't post them here).

All of the shootings listed above clearly indicate that the 5.7x28mm is at least as effective as the common pistol calibers. The hearsay on this caliber that appears on internet forums is always completely unsubstantiated and unverifiable; people have been recycling these stories for years now, and you still can't trace them to anything more credible than vague posts on an internet forum.

As for the Fort Hood shooting, being armed does not make an individual impervious or magically resistant to bullets; the wounds (and their effects) are not different. As for "fleeing," the soldiers at Fort Hood were highly motivated during that attack, one way or the other; all of them were very intent on surviving and helping others survive. Many of the victims described feeling the effects of adrenalin during the shooting. Two of the victims even charged the shooter with chairs (according to the trial testimony, both were killed with shots to the chest before they could reach him).

The female police officer that responded to the shooting was also intent on stopping the shooter but by all reports, was incapacitated (and nearly died) by her leg wounds. The bullet shattered her femur into "hundreds of bone fragments" according to her personal comments on her blog, as well as other news sources. According to her blog, she subsequently underwent a complete knee replacement operation and she won't be able to do patrol work anymore.

All of this information is corroborated by a number of witnesses including Munley herself, on both her blog and in her trial testimony. See:

http://sgtmunley.blogspot.com/

I was given a second chance at life. I was also fortunate to not lose my leg. The awesome surgeons were able to do an arterial graph and repair my femoral artery. But for a couple of days, there were unsure about the outcome and if I was going to be able to keep my leg at all.

I stay in a lot of pain because the bottom of my femor is blown into hundreds of bone fragments that are pushed into my muscle tissue and until the surgery, they will not be removed.


http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20091202/articles/912029944

Sgt. Kim Munley, who helped stop the shooter Nov. 5 at Fort Hood, Texas, will have to get an artificial knee, which means she will not be able to return to street patrol duty.


http://www.kasa.com/dpps/military/army/Fort-Hood-hero-faces-more-surgery-_3228588

Munley underwent total knee replacement surgery in January and still walks with a cane. She said the most difficult part of her recovery has been learning to rely on others.




Wrong.

1. The P90 was extensively tested by the U.S. Secret Service prior to adoption.

2. The P90 was never in "limited" deployment. It has been the primary weapon of the ERT for over 10 years.

3. There is no credible evidence that the Secret Service has stopped using the P90 altogether. Some have said that the P90s are moving from the ERT to other branches of the Secret Service, but there is no credible evidence for even that claim.




Actually, you got that claim from DocGKR on the M4carbine.net forums, and it was (as always) ambiguous and completely unsubstantiated.




Jane's Information Group is a far cry from "gun magazine pieces."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane's_Information_Group

However, even a gun magazine would be more credible than the internet hearsay you've been citing all throughout this thread.




No, it doesn't. There are numerous expanding 5.7x28mm loads available now that penetrate 12+ inches in ballistic gelatin. For example:

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




www.eliteammunition.net

Let's see, a .416 Rem or a 5.7X28 to hunt elephant in Africa? Decisions, decisions.

point well made DD

BT927 brings the hammer.

I know a secret service agent. He's my friend and neighbor. He carries a P90 and loves it.

...and lolol @ the expert dentist. That's classic. Maybe we can now find the effects of the 5.7 on a bicuspid or incisor?

Thanks, BT927.

I was frankly amazed at your post. Your dismissal of Dr. Roberts' work and reputation tells me two things: first, that you have no idea what Dr. Roberts does or has done in the very real world, and second, based on your snide comments on his work and reputation, that you and I are not likely to see eye to eye on anything, at any time. You see, Dr. Roberts is a real person, as am I, and he and I are colleagues and friends, and we have worked with and continue to work with a lot of other real people who do real things in the real world, much of which can't be specifically talked about on an internet forum. Sorry about that.

I have been advised by wiser heads here on the 'Fire to not try to foist my opinions, and those of my ballistician colleagues, upon this forum. I have ignored them at my peril, it seems, and in this case stepped into a hornet's nest I was unprepared for. I didn't have all my facts and citations ready, and I'm not likely to have unless and until I spend a significant amount of time gathering them, time which I don't have at present.

So for now I must concede that I can't refute your "hammer", as dryflyelk refers to your post.

As such I am humbly withdrawing any assertions I have made about the wonderful 5.7mm round heretofore in this thread or on any other, and you and others who stand to profit monetarily from the success of that round are more than welcome to do so as far as I'm concerned. It won't harm me or mine a whit.

Thank you sir.

This thing can't be any more quirky than a Hornet or a .17? Does anybody agree? I want one.


Travis

I have enuf problems...I have a Hornet and a K-Hornet......

Post deleted in interest of civility.

That's it! My new grizzly gun will be a 5.7!!

If there's access to the internet in the here-after, I'm guessing that Jack O'Connor and Elmer Keith are having a good laugh about now.

Speed does kill, but it also has to have mass to do so. You take a large cal heavy bullet and push it at the same speed as smaller cal lighter bullet and the heavier bullet will win every time. You just can beat the law of physics. The 5.7 has its place, but I'm just not sold on it being a better defense weapon than the 357 magnum or 45 ACP. Would you rather take a hit from the 5.7 or a round from Ma Deuce

Oh, c'mon doc. Don't back down that easy. No need to back away. Sometimes it's fun to banter just for the heck of it. I do it all the time. It's like a debate class back in high school. Point, counter point, all in fun.

For most of us this stuff is just theory anyway. Hopefully, I'll never have to find out which round has the best stopping power, and I hope you don't have to, either.

dfe... no thanks. I didn't have my ducks in a row when I started this thread, and that's not how I do things. I can probably counter most of Newbie's points pretty substantially, but I have a day job and a night job right now.

As you say, it's mostly just theory. But a good part of what I do/teach/advise isn't theory at all, but involves real blood and guts and stuff. So I have to take it seriously.

Like I said, I'm happy to find out any round works better than advertised. I started this thread using old data and I'm not gonna continue debating until I've got my facts up to date. Don't care if I was right or wrong before, but I for damn sure want to be right now.

Well, good on ya. If I really had to advise others or teach those in the line of fire what to use, it could my opinions would be completely different. For me, it is theory. For many, it's not- it's serious stuff and could mean life or death.

If you do find any more information, I'd love to hear it. It sounds like you've got some good sources.

Deflave, I suggest you go to either the Ramshot Load Guide on their website or the similar site for Accurate Arms powders.
Both sites carry some specific warnings about reloading the 5.7X28 round. It is described as extremely critical or very touchy to load. I.e., it goes critical fast. It is recommended that one increase the load only .1 of a grain at a time and pay strict attention to the overal cartriage lenth with each of the bullets tested. I am planning to do some loading for it next spring, BTW.
A couple of things more. First, the brass is ejected forward about 30 degrees from dead ahead. It's thrown about 15 ft. or more. But once you find where it lands, it all lands very close together.
The other thing is that the 27 gr. load, which clocks about 2036 fps, hits about 6-7 inches higher at 25 yds. than does the 40 gr. V-Max load which clocks about 1740 fps. The gun has adjustable sights.
All that said, you can get a 40 gr. SRA Hornet SP to run as much as 1900 fps. plus according to the data.
In testing both ammo types on 2.5 gallon sealed, water jugs, both loads, even the non expanding HP 27 gr. load, affect the jug the same. Completely blows apart the front half of the jug and hits, on course, the back of the jug, some 12 inches of penetration. It doesn't exit.
In contrast, a soft lead, SWC, .357 load which clocks 940 fps., blows out the back half of the jug, not the front, and does exit. But just barely. The bullet can be found about 10 ft. away on the ground. E

Thanks E.

I really am curious if reloading for them is as big of a PITA as they say. I know when I first got into .17's, you'd have thought I was playing with enriched uranium they way some old timers spoke.


Travis

Very informative thread (as well as the "other" 5.7 thread). What I've learned is (according to the "experts here) is that my C96 Mauser (7.63x25mm) is the "perfect" deer handgun.

While I have actually killed a deer (and a couple of hogs) with the C96.....I never knew just how "deadly" it was. Always though, in my ignorance, that my .44 Magnum was more effective, but after this thread I have seen the light.

In fact, since the 5.7x28 is such a "deadly" deer/hog/human killer.....my 7.63x25 (which is a much heavier caliber) is probably overkill and should be reserved for game like big bears or moose!

while i know the above was somewhat in jest, I think, needed to add this. I have a number of 7.62x25's running from the c96 to other pistols. I used that round to penetrate, yugo, ammo, the steel top of a 50gallon drum which then, the bullet, went through the air tank of a compressor, and bulged the other side. I was quite impressed. Now a number of years ago we went over, sammie, that is, a bunch of glock 19's for the iraqi police. They promptly sold them in the black market. Going back to the 7.62x25 round because it would penetrate car bodies better than the 9mm. So the old tokarov is still widely respected in various circles.

Yeah.....screwing young boys and blowing up your neigbors (and yourself) is held in high regard in "some" circles, but that doesn't make it right.

The fact that fast bullets penetrate armor better than slow bullets has been axiomatic since the 1920's, if not earlier. The Tok and the 5.7mmFN are predictably good armor-piercers. In the late days of the Cold War, both Soviet and NATO ordnance people were looking at their primary opponents being heavy infantry wearing ballistic armor, so armor-piercing bullets were the rage.

But piercing armor is not the end-all and be-all of combat bullet effectiveness. Bear in mind that when our forces invaded Iraq, our primary battle bullet was the 5.56 62gr greentip armor piercing bullet. Our troops found out quickly that against unarmored personnel, these bullets were not ideally effective, basically just pencilling through the target's body and causing much less damage than the old 55 gr bullets we'd been using since Viet Nam. Sure, the haji's died from these wounds, but not quickly, and as such were able to continue to return fire on our guys. We have since transitioned to different bullet types that, while not as effective against armor, perform better on soft targets.

I can actually think of one good thing about the FN 57 pistol. Now, when a Glock guy claims the 1911 is obsolete, us 1911 guys can tell him some folks want to replace Glocks with FN's, and we can watch his head spin

And those 62 gr bullets were going a lot faster out of m16's, than any 5.7-launched bullets...

But I do wish folks would quit saying the 5.7 is a challenge to reload, 'cause they're getting me intrigued, and I had really planned to go buy other stuff If I did buy one, though it would probably be an AR57 upper for an AR15

You have an evil and twisted mind! I love it!

Now that I have to agree with ! E

They were also being used at much longer distances, so no, they weren't going a lot faster.

Furthermore, they were purportedly failing to tumble/fragment, whereas 5.7x28mm bullets do not fail to expand/tumble/fragment (per any gelatin test or any shooting). In short, that comparison is useless.

One thing that has always been consistent about light, fast bullets is the inconsistency of the wounding effect. Once upon a time, the 220 Swift was idolized by gun writers as producing spectacular kills on game up to deer size. Time and experience proved them wrong.
The 5.7 would be a wonderful plinker but as time goes on the results in defensive situations will likely be similar to those of the 220 Swift on big game, very inconsistent.

I'm not selling my 357. I ready have several 22's

I don't agree. While back in the day, the .220 Swift was erratic, it isn't today because we now have much better bullets.
That and you can't get something for nothing. The 5.7 FN kicks 30-40% less than a 9mm which, in turn kicks alot less than a .357 Magnum. The FNH pistol holds 20 rounds and weighs 19 ozs. empty.
I suspect with a decent soft point bullet, that will both expand and hold together, like the .22 rimfire magnum from a handgun, it will do alot jobs. E

Sorry, wrong answer.

Average engagement range in the urban warfare engagements in Mogadishu and in Iraq were significantly shorter than anticipated previously. Engagements in urban environments are typically under 100 meters with a large percentage of engagements occuring at ranges under 20 meters. At those ranges the 62 gr green tip is travelling at close to 3000 fps. Infantry (Army and USMC) units retooled their tactics rapidly to deal with these much-shorter engagement distances and as soon as possible ammunition better suited to unarmored CQB targets was substituted.



Where do you get this stuff? Anybody who claims any bullet/ammo type never fails is dissimulating, or has no real world ballistics experience. ALL ammo fails at one time or another. One of the objectives of terminal ballistics testing is to find the line where failures occur. The results tabulated by the FBI and other ballistics testers are based on multiple shots into gelatin for EVERY round they test, because they expect a certain amount of failure as a matter of course. Failure may consist of failure to expand, failure to yaw (FMJ or monolithic bullets), precipitous/premature expansion/fragmentation, failure to penetrate 10-12" of gelatin, etc. All bullets fail at some time or another. The proportion of bullets that perform as desired to bullets that fail is what matters.

If you are actually claiming that 5.7mm FN bullets do not as in NEVER fail in gelatin testing, then you are either lying or your sources are lying, or you're ignorant of the full scope of the tests. And if bullets can fail in gelatin, they can and do for damn sure fail in the real world. It's a matter of when and how they fail that's important.

So clear up your language and your claims, newbie. You're either lying or careless with your claims here.

I've had a couple of interesting callbacks from people who are puzzled by some of your Houston PD claims, BTW. Ballistics data will be forthcoming as well. I'll post more info as it comes to me.

Oh, and I've been asked, how much of your annual income did you say is based on sales of 5.7x28 ammunition and/or firearms, again? Inquiring minds want to know.

Good points, E. Still, for general woods & field deer hunting, would you use a 220 Swift as your first choice?

Most of us wouldn't (and don't), preferring a more traditional deer caliber like the .243 Win, .30-30 Win, 260 Rem, 7mm Rem Mag, or one of the venerable .30's (.30-30, .308, .30-06, .300 Mag). Why do you suppose that is? I think the answer to that question might shed some light on the reasons the 5.7mm hasn't overtaken the anti-personnel world already, as its proponents claim it will and should.

Don't worry Doc, I'm not drinking any of that retched "kool aid"

I beg to differ. The performance of the 220 Swift on big game is still erratic as ever despite certain improvements in bullet design. The performance of handgun bullets is still erratic despite much research into making them perform uniformly. Hollow points clog up with material and fail to perform as expected. Sometimes they strike bone other times only soft tissue, there are so many variables.
Big bullets punch big holes and have sufficient mass to continue on the intended trajectory. Punching big holes increases the chances of severing large vessels and nerves. Punching bullets clear through the target increases damage to the target. Small, fast bullets are not good at penetration.
I'll not take a 220 Swift out bear hunting, there's a reason bear hunters prefer large, heavy calibers, particularly in CQ.

Even your almighty dentist has stated that 5.56mm failures were associated with reduced velocities and variations in bullet construction:

http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_m855yaw.html

These failures appear to be associated with the bullets exiting the body of the enemy soldier without yawing or fragmenting. This failure to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short barrel weapons or when the range increases.

<snip>

In addition, bullets of the SS109/M855 type are manufactured by many countries in numerous production plants. Although all SS109/M855 types must be 62 gr. FMJ bullets constructed with a steel penetrator in the nose, the composition, thickness, and relative weights of the jackets, penetrators, and cores are quite variable, as are the types and position of the cannelures. Because of the significant differences in construction between bullets within the SS109/M855 category, terminal performance is quite variable�with differences noted in yaw, fragmentation, and penetration depths.

All of the aforementioned factors, again, are completely irrelevant outside of a discussion on 5.56x45mm bullets.




There are numerous 5.7x28mm gelatin tests online, but not a single one where the bullet didn't expand, tumble, or fragment (one of the three); the 5.7x28mm (FMJ) bullets that tumble do so consistently, and do so within about two inches of penetration.

Feel free to prove me wrong by posting a gelatin test wherein a 5.7x28mm bullet passed through a gelatin block without enlarging the permanent wound cavity in some way. I'm waiting.




Speaking of which, you have yet to back up the mountain of misinformation you spouted in this thread; apparently you ran out of time as soon as you got called out on your falsehoods. In that case, why are you still spouting off?

You have proven beyond a doubt you have no clue what you're talking about in this thread; get a clue or stop talking.




Zero. I'm correcting your misinformation because it's misinformation.

I'm finding these vids interesting:

5.7:



9mm FMJ:



and .45 ACP:

oh and coincidentally, I was shooting next to a guy at the range today, with a FN 57. He liked the lack of recoil, but admitted it had a loud bark.

His groups were about twice the size of mine, when I shooting my P238 Sig. The two 1911's, and the 1950's .357 S&W, were much better.

It still might be fun to load in a carbine, or a good SS rifle.

I have shot a lot of 1 pound 6 month old roosters with a 40 gr 1200 fps bullet.

Body shots do not even create a limp.

When Reagan was shot with a 22, he did not know he was shot.

This is some really poor stopping power.

What makes the 223 rifle work, is the bullet is so fast the shock wave of liquid flesh getting out of the way, does the damage to other flesh.

Lower velocity 22 bullets just make a tiny hole, that will not stop a 1 pound bird.

Reagan didn't know he was shot per se, but he felt extreme pain and told U.S. Secret Service agent Parr he thought he had cracked one of his ribs by jumping onto him inside the President's limousine. In other words, Reagan was aware of his injury; he simply didn't know it was caused by a bullet.

Anyway, getting shot and not knowing it is actually a fairly common phenomenon, regardless of caliber.




The .22 LR has killed countless humans. However, we're not discussing the .22 LR; read the thread title. We're discussing the 5.7x28mm, which pushes heavier expanding bullets at much, much higher velocities than the .22 LR; the comparison you're attempting to make is completely invalid.

"completely"?

Terminal ballistics bring out the worst in posters, in 18 years I have been around gun forums.
Terminal ballistics is what I am least certain about how to improve my game.
Lots of out of control variables, and not enough data.

I have killed ~~ 5,000 rodents with a .223, but I did not learn much about terminal ballistics from it.



I do know that there is a vintage of Quikshok from about 12 years ago, made outside the US, that is so powerful that the big rock chucks I shot never made it to their holes.
With a 6" single shot Stevens target pistol, it does 1240, 1286 fps with 32 gr. That will never meet SAAMI.

The 5.7 does not look very impressive in the ballistics gelatin test that you posted. The 45 ACP with the 230 hydro shock did more damage in those tests

That's FN SS195LF, which performs like the SS190 (minus the steel penetrator). The SS195LF is anemic compared to any of the current 5.7x28mm loads by EA, which Brassfetcher has also tested:

http://www.eliteammunition.net/f/5.7x28mm_Elite_Ammunition_S4M.wmv

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

Put that in quotes, and could be a subheadng for the Handguns Forum.

"in some way" is a pretty low standard.

I did indeed pick out one of the more poor tests of the round, but you previously posted that it always did well in Gelatin testing. Even the 9mm FMJ ammo, not a revered "stopper" in the 2nd video, did much better.

Here's a vid of a lowly .22 LR:

No doubt about it, in ballistic gelatin the .45 Auto has the edge, followed by the 9mm FMJ, with the 5.7mm bring up a distant third. What they do in humans especially after going through bullet resistant material is any body's guess.

No, I said 5.7x28mm bullets do not fail to expand/tumble/fragment in gelatin testing; I was directly responding to another poster who tried to reference the purported 5.56x45mm failures, which were actually attributed to 5.56mm bullets failing to tumble/fragment.




That poster cherry-picked loads to make it appear that way (and admitted it). The 9mm FMJ test he posted was also done by a different tester in uncalibrated gelatin. We can make his comparison valid by using high quality 5.7x28mm ammunition alongside a comparable caliber (9x19mm):

9x19mm Golden Saber

5.7x28mm EA Pro II

The tests aren't quite to scale (the 9mm video is zoomed in much closer), but the tests were conducted in the same media by the same independent source (Brassfetcher).

Looks like either one ought to do the job. Isn't the purpose of the 5.7 to penetrate soft body armour?

Seeing as how I'm not trying to penetrate soft body armour but only killing paper targets and maybe metal plates I guess I'll stick with the .45 Auto.

The 5.7 would be my go to round for elephants though.

I can tell from the tone of the title of this thread that the OP has never owned and probably never fired (or even caressed) a Five-seveN. Him offering advice on this firearm is about as relevant as the Pope giving stage direction to Ron Jeremy for his next pr0n flick.

It pisses off Dianne Feinstein that I own one. That's all the reason I'll ever need. So go pee in someone else's post toasties, I don't give a big green weenie.

Here's a quote from your first post on this thread:



The vid tests I posted are data, hardly unsubstantiated, and definitely not hearsay. Your first posts on this thread puffed up the cartridge as being "...at least as effective as the common pistol calibers." - when in fact the video tests I posted above showed that it was comparable to a .22 LR with its worst loads, and maybe about like a 9mm FMJ with its best loads. When you take the common calibers with their best, premium loads, the difference is visible in favor of the bigger calibers, as others have already observed.

I own 3 AR's, including a .300 Blackout upper, so I am certainly not automatically opposed to new weapons or calibers, but I am also unlikely to face terrorists in body armor, and don't see the point of the FN pistol for me. Now as a carbine, it might well be a neat replacement to the old .22 Hornet in suitible applications, or just a fun project, but I have no illusions that it is the wave of the future.

tex_n_cal, you spot on and did indeed prove your point

Your reading comprehension is failing you again. Read the entire statement you quoted. When I referred to unsubstantiated hearsay I was commenting on the internet stories about shootings with the 5.7x28mm, and I said the verifiable shootings with 5.7x28mm that I listed clearly indicate that the 5.7x28mm is at least as effective as the common pistol calibers.

I never said you can't cherry pick gelatin tests with bad ammo to make the caliber seem worse than it is; I'm sure you can, but your cherry picking proves nothing. In the same testing media, high quality 5.7x28mm EA loads are indistinguishable from their 9x19mm JHP counterparts:

9x19mm Golden Saber

5.7x28mm EA Pro II

I like new technology, too, but I let others do the beta testing on the really important stuff.

There's only a handful of gelatin tests of the 5.7 online at Youtube - objective data that everybody can access and examine. I found two of them that aren't very complimentary to the cartridge, one that I posted. You found some that make it look better - which is fine. How many of the "good" tests were in fact cherry picked out of several tests by the folks who posted them - especially the people who sell the ammunition in the video? Beats me, I don't spend my time worrying about this stuff, normally.

The OP cited his references to back up his opinion, and you've attacked those references, which is fine. Do you have any references of your own, of sources equal or better in credentials to Roberts, who can show objective data which supports your claim:



And it's time for me to do chores, and other productive things

Owned, no. Fired, yes, quite a bit. Roughly 500 rounds, full auto and semiauto. Caressed? Ummmm, no... I don't know Ron Jeremy and I don't know the Pope. You'll have to work on that simile on your own.

And I'm glad you're pissing off Diane Feinstein.

I started this thread out of a misguided sense that people who might buy a 5.7mm might be doing so based on some whiz-bang sense that it was/is the wunderkind of new LE/military/defense pistol calibers. Unfortunately, I didn't have my ducks in a row, and I'm putting together some more definitive results from bench testing and real-world applications to speak to the question.

The results ain't all in yet and I'm man enough to say I've overstepped and will post whatever information I gather when it's all in, positive or negative to my initial premise. I'm more interested in the truth than an agenda.

Your pee, your Post Toasties, I have no interest in. Fair enough?

None, and the tests were done independently by Brassfetcher, which is a neutral testing source.




Yes, it is fine that I attacked his references; they're obsolete, for reasons I detailed.




Read my post on page 6. I already gave examples of verifiable shootings with the 5.7x28mm, supported by reliable articles and news reports with first-hand accounts.

BT927,
If you're going to be in the Kansas City area to do some holiday shopping this weekend, on Saturday we're having an indoor IDPA shoot at the Bullet Hole (Hodgdon's old indoor range) which isn't that far for you. We start at 10----will be done in time to go shopping. I bet we'll be able to talk them into letting you shoot your 5.7x28--would love to meet you and see you shoot it---won't argue ballistics, I promise!! :-)

BTW, Happy Thanksgiving to everyone at the fire. That we live somewhere where we can argue stuff like this is something to be thankful for.

I don't know if I'll be in the area, but I'll keep that in mind. I appreciate the offer.

Our Page View settings must be different, as there's no page 6 for me, but I assume you mean your first lengthy post to this thread. You post two links pertaining to officer Sandy Wall, who is a retired SWAT officer with considerable experience, and an author. The second link has nothing to do with the 5.7.

In the first link, Wall praises the PS90, and relates of the only OIS shooting involving the PS90 & 5.7, of which he had firsthand knowledge:

"...The shooting itself was a violent confrontation with many rounds exchanged between the suspect and the react team. The suspect was hit multiple times with both 5.56mm and 5.7mm rounds... "

Wall was clearly a sharp and brave man who served the public well, and his opinion merits respect, but if the said suspect was shot with both 5.56 and 5.7, how do you conclude the 5.7 was solely responsible for the good outcome? If you have some objective evidence that explains this contradiction, please share.



You post no other links, or any other references to the "handful of U.S. SWAT shootings" involving the 5.7, which might suggest it was equal or superior to other cartridges.

Sgt. Munley's bravery is inspiring, but again, I don't see how it provides any useful objective data on the 5.7. A 9mm FMJ would probably have also ruined her knee.

Ft. Hood was a horrible tragedy. Distasteful as it was, I looked for basic info. The terrorist fired about 200 shots, injured 31 and killed 13, including one unborn child. Again, I don't see any meaningful conclusions one can draw from that result.

Links, or detailed references, please, to back up your opinion that the 5.7 is at least as good or better than other popular defensive pistol rounds.

Again, read the quotes I already posted on that subject. Specifically:

The 5.7mm ball produces a wound cavity about the size and shape of the best 9mm 115 grain JHP +P+, except the peak occurs at a deeper penetration. In the one shooting we had with the P90, the bullet performed well. In fact, the bullet performed exactly as it was designed. The autopsy provided detailed information about the wound cavity and travel of the bullets.




Two more examples:

http://web.archive.org/web/20020903...esday/gwinnett_d3c6768a824c529800ad.html (Summary: Duluth, GA police with FN Five-seveN pistols shot and killed a man holed up in his garage shooting at them with a .357 Magnum revolver)

http://www.dui1.com/DuiCaseLawDetail829.htm (Summary: Sioux Falls, SD police officer with a P90 shot a man in the arm through a bedroom door and he dropped his weapon and surrendered)

The best known case involving U.S. police would still be the aforementioned shooting in Houston, TX, which is supported by the article from Sandy Wall, who noted that the SS190 bullet performed well (as confirmed by autopsy) and compared its performance to a 9x19mm 115-grain JHP +P+.

In the other two cases listed above, the victims immediately ceased their actions and/or died. Would the outcome have changed in any of these three shootings if the police officers involved had been using 9x19mm weapons? Absolutely not.




So would a 9x19mm JHP, or a .40 S&W JHP -- which only supports my assertion that the caliber has been at least as effective as the common pistol calibers. No one ever said the 5.7x28mm is especially lethal or especially destructive; but neither is a 9x19mm JHP or .40 S&W JHP.

Even so, the 5.7x28mm bullet that hit Sgt. Munley's femur destroyed it and incapacitated her. It was effective; it was every bit as effective as a common pistol caliber would have been in its stead.




The attacker fired 147 rounds indoors; the rest were fired outdoors in his exchange of gunfire with responding police. He killed 13 (excluding the child) and wounded 29. In other words, about 30% of the people he shot died of their wounds (incidentally, about 30% of gunshot wounds are fatal in general); as for the survivors at Fort Hood, most were shot in limbs and other non-vital areas, and many still suffered serious injuries.

For the duration of the shooting, every soldier/civilian/police officer that tried to stop the attacker was killed or incapacitated immediately. Many of the victims described feeling the effects of adrenalin during the shooting, and two of the victims even charged the shooter with chairs (according to pre-trial testimony, both were killed with shots to the chest before they could reach him).

In conclusion, yes, there is absolutely a meaningful conclusion one can draw from the incident -- the caliber kills every bit as consistently as the common pistol calibers. Those shot in vital areas generally died, and those shot in non-vital areas generally survived. However, even those who survived (such as Sgt. Munley) still suffered serious injuries, and with the same shot placement another pistol caliber would have produced the exact same results.

As stated earlier, this is also corroborated by dozens upon dozens of news reports on shootings (mostly fatal, and mostly with the Five-seveN pistol, aka "matapolicias") from the Mexican Drug War, and nearby countries like Colombia and the Dominican Republic. The news accounts from Mexico are supported by crime scene photos showing 5.7x28mm casings and/or the deceased victims themselves.

OK....it took a while but now I understand. Any incident where the 5.7 actually "works" is due to the vastly superior balisticas and ability of the round. Any time it doesn't work....it must be due to faulty ammo or some other reason than an ineffective cartrdge.

Now I see the light.

Im still trying to see the niche of where it fits in. I dont recall the specific lot or brand of ammo but I vividly recall seeing ballistic testing about 2003-2004 in calibrated gelatin and was completely underwhelmed. As unimpressive as it was, after pentrating a IIa vest is was even less impressive, an ice pick style wound regardless of FMJ or expanding ammo. I agree I would rather have any wound in the body over a bullet stopped on a vest but are there available stats on what percentage of shootings involve body armor in a civilian environment? If I was facing a known armored threat I would be reaching for more than a 5.7 or changing my aiming point to begin with. If the BG is aware/prepared enough to be wearing armor I would hedge my bets by selecting something heavy enough to punch a plate rather than hoping the BG is wearing soft body armor without an additional insert.

I recall the Sacramento Good Guy shooting and soft body armor was an issue. The entry team was already in place inside the building and the hostage negotiators provided the hostage takers with ballistic vest (which the BG tested by shooting with a 9mm). The team was advised of the issue and aiming points were adjusted. Aside from the timing of the sniper initiated assault the entry team did just fine with MP5's shooting 147 hydrashok.

If someone wanted to exam the Hollywood bank robbery you could make an arguement that a 5.7 might have penetrated enough to make a difference (mix of soft armor and plates) but the more appropriate solution for an average officer is still a full size 5.56.

I'm still trying to see why one hideous plastic gun costs twice as much as the other hideous plastic guns.

Any of the small caliber weapons are unimpressive to me in general when compared to a normal caliber weapon when AL factors are considered

If the officers involved in the bank robbery that you referred to would have had about any simple deer rifle with any ammo then the vest would have been penetrated. Also a heavy projectile such as the 255 grain hard cast load from Buffalo Bore at 925 FPS would have put a lot of hurt on the intended target even if no penetration of the body armor was achieved. Blunt force trauma is great with the additional mass of the heavy projectile

You have it!

No, that was your fabrication.

tex n cal...

The problem we're dealing with here is not that the 5.7mm doesn't perform as well as some other pistol calibers, it's that the fans of the round will not be convinced of its underwhelming performance by whatever evidence that's been put up here and elsewhere.

Our resident 5.7mm fan has given us 3 examples of the round being used in gunfights. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to find another three, or maybe a half dozen.

The problem is that pointing to this or that shooting, or even a handful of shootings, as "proof" that a round is adequate for serious social purposes is completely lacking in any meaningful validity, statistical or otherwise. I could post specific examples of the 5.7mm failing to perform as intended from OIS's I've analyzed (if authorized to do so by the principals, permission for which was denied), but that would be no more valid than the positive examples. For that matter, I could give you several dozen examples of failure of 9mm, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP bullets. None of these examples prove anything.

Proof is a lot harder to get your hands on. People like Marshall & Sanow tried, with all good intentions as far as I am concerned, to prove which ammo works well in gunfights with their One-Shot Stop data. They've been vilified in the press, on the internet, and in real life for being "unscientific". I'm not convinced their results are all that bad, as time goes by, because their results generally trend well with proven ballistic performance in gelatin (with some glaring and obvious exceptions) and with accumulated data from OIS's in other databases.

The reason I and others are so confident of the value of the best ammunition in the standard service calibers (9mm, 357 SIG, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP, and to a lesser extent 38 Special and 357 Magnum, 41 Magnum, and 44 Special/Magnum) is that they all meet the FBI gelatin testing requirements, but also that real-world OIS results tend to prove that these bullets perform as expected in real shootings, and bullets that fail to meet the FBI standards tend to perform less effectively in real shootings.

You can't "prove" these data. You can only look at trends over time. And most of the real world data is virtually impossible for a non-professional with a LOT of goodwill in the industry to even get a look at, let alone spend time analyzing. There are a lot of good and bad reasons for that. For example, I am told that there is a database somewhere in California with more than 14,000 shootings detailed in it. I've talked to 2 industry professionals who have seen it and used it. But the chances I will ever see it or use it, even with my credentials, is infinitesimal. The FBI has tens of thousands of gelatin tests on file, and while you might get your hands on some of it that's leaked out here and there, it's all summary information and not raw data.

This is why I've had to back off from my original post's assertions. A lot of people are willing to talk to me in general terms, but that's about it. Getting access to bench data is relatively easy, and I've got some data coming from contacts in two ammunition companies; getting people who do ammunition evaluations for a living and advise the Pentagon and other major players to talk about the 5.7mm FN is harder, and I've got a couple of them to at least comment in a general sense, but none of them are willing to go on record and none of them will share with me any specific details of any shootings. Yet. I'm still working on that. The third level of research, i.e., interviewing SWAT and SF people who've used the FN round in multiple engagements, I'm working on, and while I've been given hints that solid information may be forthcoming, nothing has come out yet, and again, nobody wants to speak on the record.

Let's just say this: the discussion that has blossomed out of my original post, which I typed out off the cuff in a moment of pique, has really impressed me. I'm genuinely interested in learning whether the 5.7mm round is the tactical weiner-dog many people say it is, or whether it's a much better round than its reputation to date. Either way, it's a worthy investigation.

I've recently started writing again, and I've contacted a couple of editors I know about this topic and one or two others. If I get the green light from one of them, I expect this will make a whale of a magazine article. We shall see.

Thanks for providing an articulate and fresh perspective I'll be very curious to see such an article

I deal with enough statistics to know that in complex processes, variations occur, and absolutes are rare. The .357 magnum almost always stops fights, but once in a while, it doesn't. 9mm +P, good .40, and good .45 ACP loads do most of the time - but occasionally they don't. Marshall and Sanow tried to come up with some clean percentages to rate ammo, and their results are controversial, but as you say, the trends are useful.

That "evidence" consists of internet hearsay and obsolete papers written about outdated ammunition. You haven't even made a case against the SS190 (which dates back to the last century), let alone EA's current 5.7x28mm loads.




Indeed, and the trend is that the 5.7x28mm is generally effective; that trend was established by dozens upon dozens of verifiable shootings with it (the U.S. police shootings make up a small portion of the total number, as I've made clear from the beginning).

No one has been trying to establish a "one shot stop percentage" or "effectiveness rating" for the caliber, ala Marshall & Sanow. The simple fact is that the caliber has been generally effective, just like the common pistol calibers.




On the contrary, you've been actively fishing for "ammo" that supports your original assertion in the OP:

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=92823

Quote: "These guys have drunk deeply of the 5.7mm kool-aid, and nothing short of nuclear warhead class information is going to shut them up." (11/19/11)

No, I'm not an internet "ninja" as you call me. I'm just a guy. I've got a PS90 and I like it. I love it, actually. And guess what? Believe it or not, my neighbor really is SS. He's not "ex", he's active. And he carries the P90 on occasions, depending on the assignment. I know he really likes it, and I've only heard him speak good things about it. I guess he's also had a drink of the "kool-aid?"

If you ask guys on an M4carbine forum about the 5.7, what kind of information do you think you'll get back?

Likewise, if you ask guys on a 5.7 forum about the cartridge, what do you think they'll tell you?

Also, I found your website through a little digging. I have no doubt that you have forgotten more about ballistics than I'll ever learn in my lifetime. If you do find good information, I really would like to hear it.

It just seems like you're pulling from the "it worthless!" side and BT927 is championing the "it's the best!" side. BT927 may have a vested interest (elite ammo guy?) and it seems you have a preconceived bias. I'm sure the truth lies in the middle.

Actually, I've read a bunch of stuff on a bunch of sites about the 5.7mm since this thread started, and like I said earlier I'm intrigued. Am I biased? Probably, but who isn't? Am I open to having my mind changed? Absolutely.

Yes, I've asked for input at sites like M4carbine.net where anybody can log in(no answers of any value yet, as it happens) but also a few other sites where it's not possible to log on unless you've BTDT. I'll get some good information in time, and I'll do the best I can to be as unbiased as possible as it comes in.

I have seen a number of references in this thread to the military using this itty bitty caliber. From my perspective small diameter ammo requires high performance bullets.
Military is limited, at least in the non specialty branches to ball ammo. Thus it reminds me of a .22
Hard for me to think it would ever be wide spread in the military

Here is my take on caliber choice, any caliber choice.

If you have a firearm that you are confident in and can put shots on target accurately while under stress, then that is the firearm you should use. All the ballistic gelatin in the world shouldn't sway your opinion. I'd rather be armed with a 22lr that I can trust than some super boomer that makes me flinch at the mere thought of pulling the trigger. Go with what works for you. In the end, isn't that the most important factor - confidence and accuracy - that will tip the scales in your favor?

That is not true today, the Marine Corp purchased 2 million rounds of open tip ammo to issue to their troops a year or so ago

Quite so. And that's the big reason why I consider the 5.7 a choice for some people under some circumstances.
It's a very light gun for people who refuse to carry heavier ones. More important, I can shoot it alot better than I can anything else even remotely close to that weight.
It's 20 rd. magazine is worth having as well. E

Boy you guys are going at it,,, I'm not a ballistics expert, and I have not shot anybody with a handgun,, but I have shot alot of people sized animals with handguns, from large dogs, deer and wild hogs up to medium bears. 22lr, 22wmr, .40sw, .45auto, 357mag and 10mm, were all the cals used and actually preferred in that order. For killing the 10mm glock will be my choice from now till something better comes along,, the 5.7 seems like a great round where you need alot of rounds down range well controlled and a on target, perhaps where a single or multiple wound is enough to stop an attacker, or you want to zip a small hole through body armor, people after all are easier to drop than any of the above animals,

As far as the 20 round mags of the 5.7, I really don't see that as an advantage unless you are in an extended firefight with limited mags,and the people that are heading into those fights usually have plenty of mags on hand, and the Glock 20 and 29 both take a 15 round mag in 10mm,,,, sure the larger round is heavier and kicks harder,,, on both ends as well. If Glock would just make a 10mm carbine that used the same mags as my mod 20 and 29 I could die gun happy,,,,

OK you guys get back at it,,,,,,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sh2gPz-KdQ



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXmQbX4VJYo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4w8PFFP67U

Just a little interesting fun video.

^^ I assume you're demonstrating standard handgun calibers (9mm, .45ACP) do not penetrate the CRISAT armor as evident in the videos. There is a fair amount of blunt force trauma.


DocRocket, if you are who you seem to be (by linking these posts over here to those over at m4carbine), you and Doctor Roberts certainly don't sound like friends and or Colleagues for that matter, unless on the assertion that you both belong to the same gun forum, and have exchanged PMs with each other.

Regardless of that fact, what intrigues me about this entire debate is, all you find against the 5.7x28mm caliber use refers to the P90, and snippets of articles written xx years ago. Yet Doc Roberts, will certainly post gel tests of common calibers and other testings on the internet. Why doesn't he post testings of the 5.7x28mm failures? Even if some of the testing were classified, a man of such stature, could easily do open testing on this caliber as he has done so on other calibers.

People who I know that carry the FSN, certaily don't carry ball (ss190) ammunition. It is what it is, ball ammunition. Designed for penetration, and mimimal deformation.

I found one youtube collection of calibrated gel tests with the 5.7x28mm when used in both an AR57, and a FiveSeveN Pistol. His tests include SS190. He seems to have no issues reaching minimum penetration depths from the handgun. Remember penetration is above expansion, and shot placement above those two.

The limit of pressure with most rimless cartridges is loose primer pockets. The 6mmBR class has primer piercing as a limit, as do many rimmed cases.

The weakest cartridge case head hall of shame:
1) 10mm has .334" extractor groove -.132" pocket/2 = .101" wall
2) 5.7mm has .254" extractor groove - .123" pocket/2 = .0655" wall
3) 30 carbine has .304" extractor groove - .123" pocket/2 = .0905" wall
3) 25acp has .247" extractor groove - .123" pocket /2 = .062" wall

The reason the shame is not in order of wall thickness is because the shame is proportional to case cross section area divided by wall area.

Caliber wars are a waste of time. So is all the misinformation in this thread. What is most important is YOUR ability with YOUR handgun. Can't hit a broad side of a barn with a .45 - then it's not the gun for you. Same with the 9mm, .357, .40 Cal, 357 Sig, .......

Fact of the matter is that the FiveseveN can and does the job necessary if used properly. Same for the .45 Cal.

Use what works for you and leave it at that. A good shot with a puny .22 Short is better than a missed shot with a .50 BMG.

FOR THE RECORD: I own lots of handguns and yes the FiveseveN is one of them. I load for lots of handguns/rifles and yes the FiveseveN, PS90 SBR, and PS90 are three of them. You can't compare dumbed down 5.7 ammo (as required by the ATF because of it's penetration potential - if you don't believe me just compare SS195LF white box to the current blue box stuff) to optimum loaded .45 Cal ammo vs. Elite stuff. Apples and oranges and bananas. Both of these guns have their uses and both have good and bad points. Bottom line: Use what works for you because one good shot placed is better than 5 missed shots anyday, anytime, in any occurance.

whitepaper: first off, thanks for posting the youtube link.

Second thing: I see this is your first post, which suggests that you've come here to make your case after hearing about it from a friend. Welcome to the 'Fire; but please don't presume you know me, or the people I know, by your reading of posts here or elsewhere. Draw whatever conclusions you care to but don't expect me to respond to your speculation.

If you have been reading this thread carefully, you will have read my post several weeks ago in which I expressed my sincere regret for having started this thread without sufficient evidence in hand to prove a point, one way or another. You will have further read that I am in the process of an in-depth research project which will prove to me (if no one else) whether the 5.7x28 cartridge is a suitable one for self-defense and LE/military use.

As for the video link posted: thanks, again. But I will reiterate comments I made about these "balllistic research" videos on a different thread. The videos are interesting, and they are to some degree entertaining, but they should not be taken as "proof" of anything. The gelatin blocks were shot at too high a temperature, the placement of denim was not according to protocol, and so forth.

This is not to say there isn't useful information in the videos. Since you didn't take the time to summarize the results (which would save a lot of time on the part of readers of this forum, next time you want to post video as "proof", do us a kindness and summarize the data so those who don't have the time or inclination to sit through 25 minutes of video can review the information).

So, summarizing the video results:

1. All rounds were chronographed 5 times.
2. All rounds were tested in gelatin only 3 times (7 less than the minimum number required for validity in most test protocols).
3. Protector bullets all fragmented dramatically. Fragments penetrated 11" to 14".
4. SS190 bullets all penetrated 14" to 15+", and did not fragment.
5. SS197 bullets exhibited dramatic fragmentation again, with fragments penetrating 14-18".
6. S5 bullets did not fragment, and penetrated 16-18".
7. S4M bullets (3 of 4 test shots were shot through denim, unlike the other tests, so comparison to the other tests is really not possible) penetrated 11-15", without fragmentation.

IF, and it is a big IF, the 3-shot tests truly represented the manner in which the ammunition will and should perform in real shootings, IMHO none of these rounds would be acceptable for LE/military use.

Two of the five rounds tested demonstrated fragmentation into many small pieces, very much like a varmint bullet. Real world use has shown that varmint bullets work well on varmints, but work poorly on armed felons, which is why all LE ammunition for the past 25 years has been designed to hold together so that the greatest proportion of the bullet's mass penetrates the most deeply. A bullet that penetrates through armor and then dissipates its force in 100+ pieces thereafter isn't going to get the job done.

Three of the five rounds presented did not fragment, but they did not expand, either, nor did they fragment into 2 or 3 large pieces. I have done analysis on several LE shootings where failure of bullets (5.56 caliber) to expand/fragment has been a major contributing factor to the failure of said rounds to stop the violent actions of the felon receiving those bullets.

In sum, these videos show me bullets/ammo that I would not care to take into combat myself.

But I am continuing my research and will report findings when they are ready. In the meantime, as I stated before, I have withdrawn any general criticisms I may have made against the 5.7mm round. Specifics will tell the tale soon enough.

Thanks for posting that, I agree completely. My only caveat would be that if you're using YOUR handgun in a defensive/offensive scenario, YOUR handgun should be chambered in one of the standard service calibers and loaded with proven effective ammunition.



Better than 100 missed shots. Or 1000 missed shots. You can't miss fast enough to win in a gunfight.

You can deduce that the temperature of those blocks were too high, just from looking at them? protocol calls that they be stored at 39.x *F, and shot within 20 minutes of removing. BB calibration was to spec.




Sorry, I left the video as a tool in aiding further education. If you're too lazy to watch all of the videos to further your education/knowledge (as you were the one who originally claim this round is a complete failure), that's your own boat to float. Last I checked, when handed a text book, you don't get a summarized paper with it.

You seem to be quite the picker and chooser of information. FBI mandated protocol calls for anywhere from 12-15" as more than enough penetration, and I do believe even your "friend" Doc Roberts, says 18" is the maximum amount of desired penetration. Although FBI protocol, does not define maximum. You're summary of the S4 is incorrect, as they took shots sans denim.

So you have rounds tested that all meet recommended penetration depths, but you think they lack merit for acceptable LE use? I'm sure the maker of that video would gladly test all rounds again with all protocols (Steel, Glass, the "proper" denim cover), but individuals taking the time to perform this tests, pay for this out of pocket..





Wait you just said fragmentation from above was bad, but now it's okay. Remember the 5.7x28mm is not a typical pistol round that relies on large expansion. Typically mimics rifle rounds, in terms of yawing, fragmentation and expansion. 5.56x45mm, 75gr BTHP/WC T2 which is a highly regarded SD round in the AR platform exhbits extreme amounts of fragmentation. Must be a varmit bullet..


The way I see it, is there seems to be quite a few examples of this cartridge being proven in the pistol plaform. Someone can easily pull up the 5+ pages of all the drug cartels using it. What have we seen over the past 5yrs or so from the camp that opposes it? Not a single shred of any analysis done on the round. It's the same copy/paste articles, that put tidbits of information together. Like the referenced 9mm HP vs the discontinued SS90 round. Where are the gel tests of this plaftform showing it's failures. Never seen any. Then again I'm not LE, so apparently we're not allowed to see just these results from just this caliber, but every other caliber is free for us to see the analysis..

I don't think talk about the 5.7 is going to go away, I saw cops on TV complaining about how it was meant to go through body armor.

I would put it in the same category as "Black Talon".

It has permanently broken into the lexicon of trivial pursuit for guns.

Martin Fackler has stated that 12" penetration is minimum, not more than enough

The 5.7x28mm operates at 50xxx psi. What does the Tok operate at? Why is there a need for this comparison in case strength between two completely different rounds? 5.7x28mm has no issues shooting max pressures in regards to primers. People who do stupid things when reloading, usually get stupid results..

Also note that FBI protocols also state that just because it reaches under that 12" minimum (high 11.x") doesn't mean the round is in adequate.

Also note that I have read Fackler and he stated that 12" is by no means a maximum and is in fact a minimum. There are certainly times when more penetration is advisable especially shooting through barriers in order to take out hostiles

It is clear that you have an agenda to promote the .7 but IMHO a 22 ain't where it's at when my life is on the line.


I have MacPherson's book




I also have this one



Penetration is by far the most important atribute of a sefensive cartridge IMHO and in my experience in the game fields

The 5.7 is an interesting concept, but certainly not my cup of tea for a defensive handgun

I'm a .45 ACP w/ 230 gr. HP ammo sort of guy myself. However, the 5.7 I have is very light, easy to hide and, above all is something I can shoot well. If I decide I want to carry something light, I'd far rather have a 5.7 FN than any 2 inch class gun.
I see the 5.7 FN as one of the choices for those that choose to carry something minimally effective ballistically, but alot easier to carry comfortably than a full size 9mm - .45 ACP. E

Did I state 12" was maximum anywhere? If so that was by mistake, as we both are clearly referecing the fact that 12" is min and of adequate penetration depths. As you reference, penetration comes above expansion. Not the other way around.

I never said this was the latest and greatest, but people seem to discount its a viable self defense rounds, merely based on information we never get to see. We all know rifles are prefered over handguns, and handguns time and time again (in all major calibers) have shown failures.

Agreed. IMHO and experience ammo choice is paramount for any caliber to be at its top level effectiveness

Well, whitepaper, as I stated to begin with, it looked to me like you came to this forum spoiling for a fight, and against my better judgment (having chosen to NOT carry on any further indictments of the 5.7x28mm round already)I replied to your post as clearly and non-judgmentally as I could.

You appear to be set on having a fight, though, and I'm afraid I will not oblige you. I will respond to a couple of your points as they do make some sense.



<sigh>

You're right, I cannot say one way or another what the temperature of the blocks might have been.

But the video producer posts the ambient temperature as being 94 degrees, and he's shooting at an outdoor range, and you can clearly see he's shooting in the sun. He doesn't provide video evidence of the blocks' temperatures. He doesn't explain how he safeguarded the blocks' temperatures during the tests. All that that tells me is that we have no idea whether the blocks were stored and shot at 4C or not, due to the video producer's failure to provide that information.

BB calibration was "to spec", you say, and I might concur. But when was the gelatin calibrated? How long before shooting the first bullet into the gelatin? Was he monitoring the temperature? No? Yes? We can't tell. He doesn't provide that information.

As I said, this video "proof" is only a demonstration, and while entertaining, it really doesn't prove anything one way or another.





Don't be petty. I was not "too lazy" to watch all the videos, inane as they were. I watched all 25+ minutes of them. But I have to say that watching 40 seconds of slow-motion low-resolution footage of a gelatin block being shot (half a dozen times over) did not provide any "education", for me. Nor did watching a guy shooting his pistol over a chronograph and reading the numbers out loud provide me with any "education".

You didn't hand me a text book, and you didn't provide a summary, which would have been a courtesy to the people who frequent this forum.

All I'm saying is that if you come here to pick a fight, at least have the courtesy to summarize your "proof". I did it for you. How does that offend you?



I have no idea what the producer of those videos would "gladly test", nor, do I expect, do you.

I have shot more ammunition into blocks of gelatin than you can even imagine. And yes, a large part of that testing was paid for out of my own funds. I have watched hours and hours of film and video of gelatin blocks being shot. I have reviewed reams of data of gelatin blocks being shot.

The person who produced this video may have paid for it out of his own pocket, I have no idea. Nor do you (unless you're the guy who did it? Is THAT why you're so upset that I would point out the methodological flaws of these "tests"?). Regardless, I don't care who paid for it, or why. The video was clearly done by amateurs and include amateur mistakes.



This is a complicated question, and the answer is even more complicated. But I'll give you a short version.

Bullets that fragment explosively, like varmint rounds such as the V-Max, do not penetrate very deeply. Tissue damage in human-size thoraces is typically shallow and non-lethal, or at least not quickly lethal. Bullets that penetrate more deeply into tissue before fragmenting, and particularly bullets that break up into a small number of larger fragments (as opposed to bullets that break up into a large number of small fragments) have proven over the years to be more effective in terms of terminal effectiveness. In order to assess the effectiveness of fragmenting bullets, you need to demonstrate the depth at which the bullet begins to break up, the number of fragments typically produced, and the depth to which these fragments penetrate.

As an example: the old 5.56 55 gr FMJ round carried by our troops in Viet Nam and for a long time afterwards was a proven "man-stopper" that typically yawed in flesh/gelatin and broke into 2 major fragments, which as it turns out did a lot of damage. This is a totally different type of fragmentation than that demonstrated by varmint bullets. Apparently the guys who make ammo for the 5.7 FN tried to do the same thing with their S5 or S4M ammunition, i.e., to make it break up into 3 pieces.

BTW, your boy's video shows the bullets that were supposed to break into 3 pieces didn't.

The video footage provided does not give us clear enough photographic evidence of the fragmentation pattern. The testers do not provide weights of the fragments.

Again, I reiterate: the "tests" in these videos don't prove much of anything, one way or another. Let's just leave it at that, shall we?



Well, the fact is that there is a LOT of stuff you're not allowed to see, and all I can say to that is "too bad". Learn to deal with it.

I don't do ballistics testing for a living, nor do I have control over what gets tested, or by whom. My line of the terminal effects business is the messier side. What you think of that makes no difference to me.

But I've done enough gelatin testing, and I've done enough critiques of research in fields a LOT more complicated than the Jello-o shooting area to know that junk science is junk science, and the videos you put up barely qualify as junk science. It's entertainment, it's food for thought, but it's not science, and it's decidedly not "proof" of anything.

I am putting that as kindly as I can.

Now, I am DONE with this discussion. As stated previously, I have some serious research on this 5.7mm thing in the works and I will not waste any more time on this discussion.

Lots of information though, and some emotion thrown in.

And I think it's interesting how new 24Hr Campfire members sweep in to passionately defend their pet cartridge. I guess they just happened to be lurking. Or else they Google 5.7 discussions every day and swoop in when they see something contrary to the storyline.

I will be most interested to see Doc's project. Based on his experience and body of posts on the fire, I have no doubt it will be through and well reasoned.

tex n cal... thanks, amigo. I appreciate the vote of confidence.

As I previously stated and reiterate here: I wish I had not started this thread. I did so in a fit of pique over a stupid comment by a Neanderthal whose opposable thumbs apparently gave him access to an Apple computer, and in doing so I precipitated this whole unravelling mess.

I promise a complete and thorough investigation, without prejudice. I have no interest in or against this cartridge or the arms it is chambered for.

Now I ask that the internet ninjas give me some time to work on this. I have a real job, and a real life. I do this research in my "spare" time.

What i see is an established member of this site who put some unverified internet rumors to paper as if they were fact, and who was later made to look VERY uniformed.

The fact is, that in the Fort Hood incident, the Five SeveN armed terrorist stopped 4 attackers at close range- instantly.

2 soldiers who attacked him with chairs/table, an orderly that tried to rush him, and officer Munley, whose femur was utterly shattered from a single hit to the knee- which knocked her out of the fight immediately. So when put to the test, the FsN went 4 for 4 on "instant stops" in a real world terrorist incident.

I have personally shot "anemic" SS192 FN ammo (the fort hood attackers round of choice) through 48 layers of Kevlar. Elite S4M takes the same round, and cranks the velocity up another 400+ fps.

The Elite S4M has been independently chronoe'd at over 2500fps from the FsN PISTOL, and has been independently tested by Brassfetcher labs.

In their summary, Brassfetcher stated OUTRIGHT that Elite S4M is slightly more capable than .45 ACP Hydroshok JHP ammunition.

Brassfetcher are true industry experts...and they have spoken.

Get with the times people.

Perhaps one of the Five SeveN's critics can post an actual verified story of any incident where the 5.7mm round actually failed.

You know, not a campside story...an actual verifiable incident.

I don't know about you lads...but i for one do not wish to take a 2500fps tumbling and fragmenting S4M to my center mas...not even if i'm wearing level IIIA armor, which S4M will EASILY defeat (front and back).

I was at the range and there was a grouchy bald guy, about 70, that had expensive rifles, but said he did not hunt anymore, he went to the range and posted on the internet. He said he was having to get new IP addresses to get back in. I asked what gun forums he was getting banned from and getting back in with the new IP addresses. The only name I recognized was 24 hour camp fire.

What does it all mean?
He could be a very well established poster.

Seems like there is some kind of 5.7 anti-defamation league monitoring the internet and then ganging up on anyone that posts anything bad about it. Three separate posters on this one thread all with between 2 and <20 posts pimping for the 5.7. If they also have a death squad ol' DocRocket better sleep with one eye open.

This thread has been noticed, and a link has been posted on several FN and Five SeveN forums. Little goes un-noticed in today's day and age.

It's not one old, banned poster coming here to make sure the 5.7 gets an even review, it's actual Five SeveN owners and users...like me.

People have successfully downed big pigs, deer, coyotes, and all kinds of other man sized game animals cleanly with a single well placed 5.7mm round. And in actual gunfights it has proven to be fully capable of stopping a determined attacker. Not always, perhaps...but what round does always work?

Answer: None- take note that in the Fort Hood attack, Officer Todd had to shoot the terrorist FIVE TIMES with a 9mm to put him down, whereas the terrorist put down Officer Munley with just a single "low powered" FN factory 40gr V-Max SS197SR hit to the knee, taking her completely out of the fight.

On top of that, the 5.7mm has 30% less recoil than standard pressure 9mm, the ammo is extremely light and compact (1200rds will fit in a single .30 cal ammo can), and the FsN pistol itself is extremely lightweight, accurate, and easy to shoot. Oh yeah...and it renders Level IIIA soft body armor completely useless and obsolete. (which i have verified in my own tests when i shot factory SS192 ammo at 2100fps from an FsN Pistol through 48 layers of kevlar)

Really, the Five SeveNs ability to be precisely rapid fired is far in excess of what i can do with either my Sig P228, my HK P7, or pretty much any other duty caliber sidearm i've ever shot. (I have been shooting for over 35 years, and am a former US Army infantryman, so i have a pretty big base of experience to compare the FsN against).

Is the 5.7mm and FsN pistol a miracle package?

No.

But it is a clear next step in handgun evolution. My prediction- in 20 years most major military forces will be using a PDW chambered side arm. (The Chinese Army already does)

So can you confirm or deny the death squad thing? Doc wanted me to ask.

BTW, i had arranged to have some 5.7mm Elite ammo tested by Doctor Gary Roberts, at my own expense, however the owner of Elite ammo told me personally he did not think Roberts was capable of a fair review based on his own previous correspondence with the man. In my own dealings with him on other forums, i have found Doc Roberts, DDS, to be very dismissive and close-minded.

This is afterall a man that told me point blank that the legendary 125gr SJHP .357 magnum loading was a bad choice for self defense. (There are literally thousands of dead criminals that would no doubt strongly disagree with that contention).

I respect roberts opinions, but he has freely admitted to never having tested SS192, SS195, SS197SR, or any Elite load offered in 5.7mm, ever, not a single time. Even to this day.

Elite paid out of it's own pocket to have an independent and highly respected ballistics laboratory test two of their rounds (they've also tested SS192 and SS195LF), and those results have been posted online for anyone who is interested to see.

In those tests, Elite S4M ammunition exhibited 12-14" of penetration, ALL S4, SS192 and SS195 rounds tested exhibited destructive tumbling effects (which is clearly seen in the videos posted in this thread) and FBI required 12+" of penetration.

In it's summary, Brassfetcher stated, and i quote:

"As tested, both Elite cartridges (S4M and Protector II) offer lethality that is on par with, or slightly greater than, a 230gr .45 ACP JHP."

http://www.eliteammunition.net/f/Eli...Performance_Su mmary.pdf

I can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any 5.7mm-centric hit squads.

Or one guy posing as several different people, but with similar writing styles

Nope merely trying to get some solid answers as you are.





You're right. I'll send him a youtube message and ask for verification. At that point, it would be taking his word for it. I don't have any detail tech information available, as most of the listed FBI protocols say that it has to be shot within 20 minutes of being removed from stored temperature. It doesn't state whether at XX outside temp if it's only good for XX minutes..




I'd have to agree. It proves nothing, but it seems some people have it stuck in there head, that they equate this round to be the most ballistically inefficient round ever created, however even these basic gel tests prove this round is capable of meeting min penetration values. This isn't some .380 ACP round that needs FMJ's to reach 12"..





Again that's based on higher velocities achieved in these rounds, when shot from a AR15. I've seen the 40gr Vmax style bullets in gel from a 5.56 round, and you're right, they clearly only penetrate 6-8" in bare gel. However at lower velocities this round doesn't seem to have issues penetrating to min depths as shown in the video.





I would agree. I would have liked to see them melt the gel down and collect and weight fragments. Perhaps they didn't think testing needed to carried to that point of degree.



I would certainly agree to that, if you would agree the snippets of information provided on the 5.7x28mm on sites like M4, don't really proove much of anything either




I certainly have learned to deal with it. It's one of the reasons I seek out as much data as possible. I was able to make my conclusion on what carry rounds I carry in my major calibers (9mm, .40S&W, and .45ACP) because of such data.





And again if I haven't already mentioned it, I will greatly welcome any further data and testing on this round, as long as it isnt' 20yrs old, and about a discontinued bullet

I agree with Doctor Roberts, I will not use the 125 gain JHP in a 357 the 158 is a much better choice for any and all situation that may be encountered

Uh, yeah...that's it.

I live in Pa, ask the mod to run our IP's.

I'm glad you agree with the friendly dentist that a slightly heavier bullet at a slightly slower velocity is "a much better choice" (Much better- really? The differences between the two are miniscule, when comparing weight and velocity alone), but anyone with a half a brain knows that the 125 gr SJHP is most decidedly NOT a bad choice for personal self defense.

The bullet did not become a legendary police "manstopper" because it doesn't work.

With regard to .357 magnum weights and anti-human self defense needs, i would select the Barnes 125gr solid copper hollowpoint over any lead 158hp made anywhere- ever. Much like Roberts, i like this Barnes bullet in pretty much every caliber offered, and use it in my .380s and 9mm's.

In 5.7mm, i use Elite S4M out of my FsN pistol. This round shows real world independent velocities in the 2550 fps range with a stock threaded barrel (and just about 2500 fps flat in a standard barrel). This round penetrates over 12" in all the gel tests ive seen. Both from Brassfetcher and in various user posted videos. Due to the nature of spitzer bullets, it is going to yaw and tumble in flesh. It's simple physics, and all the videos bear this out. Given that the bullet is almost an inch long, we are talking about a pretty significant wound channel, even if the jacket doesn't fragment at all.

Oh yeah...and it'll defeat the best soft body armor on the market like it's not even there. (Elite advertises 30 layers of kevlar penetration from the FsN pistol. I have personally shot much less powerful SS192 which uses the same bullet as the S4M but at 2100fps through 48 layers of kevlar)

Anyone can go on ebay and buy police trade in concealment armor for peanuts. Sometimes under $100. So the possibility is very real that a home invader might use it.

I'd rather be secure in knowing that my home defense weapon of choice will blow through his surplus armor like a knife through hot butter, thank you very much.

Just to give a comparison, I've fired the following rounds in recent tests against a 20+ year old Level IIA vest panel composed of just 12 layers of kevlar:

Guns used were HK P7 in 9mm, Glock 20 in 10mm, Colt 1991A1 in .45acp, FN Five SeveN in 5.7mm:

10mm Nosler 180gr JHP: No penetration
.45 ACP 230gr Winchester Ranger T JHP: No penetration
9mm Corbon 115gr+P: No penetration
9mm Buffalo Bore 115gr+P+ (Montana gold HP): Clean penetration
FN 5.7mm 40gr Vmax (SS197SR): Partial penetration
FN "blue box" SS195 28gr OTM (1900fps): Clean penetration

After this test, i folded the panel over on itself (24 layers- most Level IIIA vests are about 20-25 layers), and re-shot it.

9mm Buffalo Bore 115gr+P+: No penetration
FN "blue box" SS195 28gr OTM (1900fps): No penetration

So out comes the powerful 5.7mm rounds....

FN SS192 28gr OTM (2100fps): Clean Penetration

So i folded it over on itself again....48 total layers:

FN SS192 28gr OTM (2100fps): Clean penetration

Elite S4M uses the same bullet at 2500fps.

Thanks for your reply.

I am busy and unable to reply to all your points, but in sum it would appear that we are in agreement on more of these discussion points than we disagree on.

I will also greatly welcome any further data and testing, and as stated previously, am in full agreement that it needs to be current and follows standard protocols. Data from real shootings is a lot harder to get at, but I'm working on it.

By the way, the HK MP7 which uses the 4.6x30mm PDW round is in use with SOCOM and the USN SEALs.

The FN P90 is (or was) in use by the US Secret Service uniformed white house security force as their primary weapon. For about a decade now.

If it's good enough to protect the President, it's good enough to protect me too...

What was behind the Kevlar vest in your penetration tests? What about trauma plates?


I like the Barnes 185 XPB in the 45 ACP at 1100 PS, I don't like the 110 Barnes in the 38 Splc. Not really a fan of the 180 in the 41 mag, at least not at the velocity that Federal loads them, faster would make them better IMHO. I have some 140's in 357 but have not tested them as yet. I have not tested the 125's from Barnes in the 357 as yet.

But I have tested a lot of ammo and bullets and shot a lot of game and my statements stand on the 125 JHP VS a 158 I'll take the 158 every time. These are lead core bullets that I am talking about

Well, that's a pretty important question, but I think we can cut to the chase and predict that 1) the zippy 5.7 rounds would penetrate not only Level II kevlar, but Level IIIA kevlar no matter what you put behind them, and 2) some trauma plates will defeat the 5.7mm rounds, but not all.

It's virtually axiomatic that light, fast bullets penetrate armor very well. What they do past the armor is what you really need to test.



I've "tested" 357 Mag Barnes 125 gr ammo on Level IIIA armor and in gelatin. (I use the word loosely; I didn't follow full protocol, so it hardly counts as a "test". It was more of a matter of satisfying my curiosity and I wouldn't say it has any validity worthy of publication.) It doesn't penetrate the armor. But it does perform very well indeed in 10% gelatin.

The old 125 gr SJHP load that "made" the 357 Mag's reputation as a manstopper was not a particularly good round, by current testing standards. It was a LOT better than the lead roundnose and SWC bullets previously in favor with law enforcement prior to the 125 SJHP's introduction and widespread use, though.

@jwp475:

I used a 5 gallon water jug behind the armor panel so it would have something to hold it in place, but something that would give a little too, like a torso would.

I have since obtained several flat UL rated ballistic fiberglass hard plates in UL stand alone level I, II and III.

In conversations with the owner of the armor company, he said that to stop 5.56mm fire you need to use 3 sheets of the level III (9/16" thick) to defeat M855 green tip. So i expect that probably 2 plates will defeat a hot 5.7mm round, but i've not yet tested it. I did test the Level I (5/16") plate against a 115gr 9mm FMJ round, and the Level I plate stopped it dead cold, without any spalling or back face deformation.

I've not shot anything living with it yet, in the way of game animals, but others have posted numerous videos or photos/accounts of 5.7mm used in this role, and none have reported that it failed to do the job, even against big feral pigs and white tail deer.

I started out a skeptic when it comes to the 5.7mm, but as the data (as opposed to internet rumor and lore) started to come in, it became very clear that the 5.7mm is far, far more than just "a souped up .22 magnum", as many derisively claim.