FN 5.7 Pistol
- Thread starter daddyflea
- Start date
Linefinder
New member
The round was designed for LE use to penetrate body armor and light plate armor on vehicles. Reports I've read is that it performs very well in this niche. It certainly serves a purpose.
OTOH, the very reason for its existence would make it a poor choice for home defense or CCW usage.
I've heard that components for reloading are difficult to come by and that it's a fickle little thing to handload.
All the above info is second (or third) hand. I've never even seen one. But, the above comments pretty much reflect the general opinions I've read about the cartridge.
Mike
OTOH, the very reason for its existence would make it a poor choice for home defense or CCW usage.
I've heard that components for reloading are difficult to come by and that it's a fickle little thing to handload.
All the above info is second (or third) hand. I've never even seen one. But, the above comments pretty much reflect the general opinions I've read about the cartridge.
Mike
Quote:
Plus side....Very fast and effective round.... Lot's of fun to shoot....Kind of like a hand held AR on steroids...
Down side.... Ammunition is very expensive and tedious to reload...Components for reloading limited in source....as well as factory loadings..
5.7x28 sells for around $22/50 where I live. There are numerous loadings (jhp, when usually tumbles/does not expand terminally, and a 40gr VMAX, which will penetrate 9-12" with 30-60% fragmentation and good expansion.)
If none of these suit you, Ryan at www.eliteammo.com will be more than happy to roll something that will.
Plus side....Very fast and effective round.... Lot's of fun to shoot....Kind of like a hand held AR on steroids...
Down side.... Ammunition is very expensive and tedious to reload...Components for reloading limited in source....as well as factory loadings..
5.7x28 sells for around $22/50 where I live. There are numerous loadings (jhp, when usually tumbles/does not expand terminally, and a 40gr VMAX, which will penetrate 9-12" with 30-60% fragmentation and good expansion.)
If none of these suit you, Ryan at www.eliteammo.com will be more than happy to roll something that will.
Had one for awhile. Pretty much performs like a .22 mag out of a rifle. Not much stopping power, very accurate, no recoil and 100 yard hits are made very easily. You can easily modify it to shoot without the mag inserted, if desired. Traded it off awhile back, a P90 might be a keeper though.
blinddog
New member
I should think that with the extreme penitration from these the possible adverse liability would preclude LE use, except in very special conditions. I know some do not think liabilaty is a consideration in a S/D firearm. But it very much is esspecially for a LEO.
It is an intersting consept if coupled with the P 90 carbine sort of an old idea that is new again. (44-40 Colt SA and Winchester 1873)Just incase you did not get the referance. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowingsmilie.gif
It is an intersting consept if coupled with the P 90 carbine sort of an old idea that is new again. (44-40 Colt SA and Winchester 1873)Just incase you did not get the referance. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowingsmilie.gif
I'll have to disagree that liablility is a concern for a LEO, but not a private citizen. Citizens are afforded the same rights as LEO's when it comes to deadly force and protecting themselves. They may not have the same training as a LEO, but when it comes to a deadly force situation, they are held to the same standard.
The use of force is applied to the "reasonable person" standard and if a reasonable person does not believe that it's justified, it may not be.
If a LEO discharges his weapon and the weapon overpenetrates, or he misses, and kills someone else or damages property, he's responsible for the action. The private citizen will be too.
The use of force is applied to the "reasonable person" standard and if a reasonable person does not believe that it's justified, it may not be.
If a LEO discharges his weapon and the weapon overpenetrates, or he misses, and kills someone else or damages property, he's responsible for the action. The private citizen will be too.
blinddog
New member
Exactily that is my point, the 5.7 was developed to penitrate body armor and vehicles, in a military setting. Not a police ot non LEO SD situation. BTW COPs are taught to not shoot at vehicles except in very extreme conditions because you cannot kill a car with a handgun, and a dead driver equals a 3000 pound unguided missle.
I have to stand by my first post the 5.7 FN is not really sutible for a LEO or a Non LEO CCW, the penitration is just to much liability. Even in a justified shooting the bullet on an unarmored person is likely to drill through and could consevably hurt or kill someone else who was not involved.
Trust me I have been involved in a coroners inquest related to a justified shooting, I had a prosecutor whom I thought was a personal friend grill me for close to half an hour because I chose to carry a 45 ACP for a duty pistol when almost all the rest of my dept 70% had chosen the 40 S&W, I was useing Dept authorised Remington 185 grn Golden Sabers though, he tried to make an issue of that but the when I told him I would prefer the 230 grn and the dept armorer testified as to why the Dept had only authorised the 185 grn he shut up on that point. It was found to be justified though and I was cleared of any wrong doing, and the civil suit that followed was thrown out. The perp was a white guy with a very long history, even of violence against his own family. But my point is if you are ever in a shooting you will be examined to the point of wondering about your own judgment. Why complicate somthing that will be complicated from the get go with a chambering that was developed for over penitration?
I have to stand by my first post the 5.7 FN is not really sutible for a LEO or a Non LEO CCW, the penitration is just to much liability. Even in a justified shooting the bullet on an unarmored person is likely to drill through and could consevably hurt or kill someone else who was not involved.
Trust me I have been involved in a coroners inquest related to a justified shooting, I had a prosecutor whom I thought was a personal friend grill me for close to half an hour because I chose to carry a 45 ACP for a duty pistol when almost all the rest of my dept 70% had chosen the 40 S&W, I was useing Dept authorised Remington 185 grn Golden Sabers though, he tried to make an issue of that but the when I told him I would prefer the 230 grn and the dept armorer testified as to why the Dept had only authorised the 185 grn he shut up on that point. It was found to be justified though and I was cleared of any wrong doing, and the civil suit that followed was thrown out. The perp was a white guy with a very long history, even of violence against his own family. But my point is if you are ever in a shooting you will be examined to the point of wondering about your own judgment. Why complicate somthing that will be complicated from the get go with a chambering that was developed for over penitration?
Karl in Phoenix
New member
++++ blinddog: you have it right on--for non-military, the liability factor is way high.
It is not very funny when the people you thought were your friends, are suddenly your persecuters when you are the surviving party in a justifiable shooting.
For self-defense carry, it is important to carry only high-performance factory ammo (no FMJ's ever).
It is just not worth it (saving money by using reloads for self-defense carry) to survive a justifiable self-defense shooting, only to be prosecuted for carrying ammunition that is "specifically manufactured at home to be extra deadly" to show a "predisposition to murder another human".
Extreme bullet penetration has it's place for hunting large animals and in the military, but not for self-defence against humans.
Respectfully, that is my opinion.
Karl in Phoenix
It is not very funny when the people you thought were your friends, are suddenly your persecuters when you are the surviving party in a justifiable shooting.
For self-defense carry, it is important to carry only high-performance factory ammo (no FMJ's ever).
It is just not worth it (saving money by using reloads for self-defense carry) to survive a justifiable self-defense shooting, only to be prosecuted for carrying ammunition that is "specifically manufactured at home to be extra deadly" to show a "predisposition to murder another human".
Extreme bullet penetration has it's place for hunting large animals and in the military, but not for self-defence against humans.
Respectfully, that is my opinion.
Karl in Phoenix
The 5.7x28mm round from the FN 5.7 has been proven (albeit in limited cases) to do VERY well in LE/Civilian shootings. The lack penetration is a problem in some people's minds, yes, but there are loads for the 5.7 that will give you better penetration. Elite Ammo loads some GOOD stuff that outpenetrates the factory stuff by a small margin. The average 5.7 round will go through 9-11" of gelatin. Not enough in the opinions of many, but in the real world it seems to get the job done.
The main advantage of the 5.7 is the fast follow-up shot and the 20 round magazine.
The 40gr VMAX rounds perform about identical to a .223 VMAX round impacting 350 yards downrange. Expect about 11" of penetration with a lot of fragmentation.
When using SS195 rounds (Hollowpoint LF rounds) the projectile behaves like an FMJ .223, yawing very early in the wound track and tumbling, usually stopping 9-11" in.
The 5.7 has also tested to do well against windshields. INferior to bonded handgun rounds like the 357SIG ect. in my opinion, but it HAS proven that it will achieve penetration and decent penetration into objects behind the windshield.
All of this hype over "armor piercing" is just that. Hype. It is no more prone to go through vests than any other low-powered varmint type round. The .223/5.56 will VASTLY outperform it on a vest.
As to using handloads for self-defence. I have NEVER seen a SINGLE case where that made a difference. If anyone knows of said landmark case, post up a reference. I simply wouldn't use handloads because lets face it, Ranger Talon's and whatnot are hand inspected and have a LOT of money/time going through QC to make sure they go "bang" when you pull the trigger. That makes me feel warm and fuzzy.
-NOW-
The 5.7/PS90 is NOT! a replacement for the .223. It is meant to replace the 9mm SMG type weapon, and that it does well imho. As far as the 5.7 pistol, the "slow and heavy" fans will always be arguing against it, and the "light and fast" fans love it. In the real world, contrary to much rumor, it has performed well.
The main advantage of the 5.7 is the fast follow-up shot and the 20 round magazine.
The 40gr VMAX rounds perform about identical to a .223 VMAX round impacting 350 yards downrange. Expect about 11" of penetration with a lot of fragmentation.
When using SS195 rounds (Hollowpoint LF rounds) the projectile behaves like an FMJ .223, yawing very early in the wound track and tumbling, usually stopping 9-11" in.
The 5.7 has also tested to do well against windshields. INferior to bonded handgun rounds like the 357SIG ect. in my opinion, but it HAS proven that it will achieve penetration and decent penetration into objects behind the windshield.
All of this hype over "armor piercing" is just that. Hype. It is no more prone to go through vests than any other low-powered varmint type round. The .223/5.56 will VASTLY outperform it on a vest.
As to using handloads for self-defence. I have NEVER seen a SINGLE case where that made a difference. If anyone knows of said landmark case, post up a reference. I simply wouldn't use handloads because lets face it, Ranger Talon's and whatnot are hand inspected and have a LOT of money/time going through QC to make sure they go "bang" when you pull the trigger. That makes me feel warm and fuzzy.
-NOW-
The 5.7/PS90 is NOT! a replacement for the .223. It is meant to replace the 9mm SMG type weapon, and that it does well imho. As far as the 5.7 pistol, the "slow and heavy" fans will always be arguing against it, and the "light and fast" fans love it. In the real world, contrary to much rumor, it has performed well.
Last edited: