Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: FNH Five Seven

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Valdosta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    347

    Post imported post

    I know I'll get some laughs from this but has anyone given thought to carrying this pistol as primary? For those not familiar with it, it fires a 5.7 x 28mm round. These rounds are normally fired via machine gun and this is the only pistol made to fire these rounds.

    I own one and I'm impressed at how light the pistol is with a full magazine of 20 rounds. It comes with three magazines so you have 61 rounds available without purchasing more magazines or the +10 round extenders.

    There are rounds that can penetrate 58 layers of Kevlar but there are some rounds only available to the miltary and LE. The rounds don't expand but are designed to tumble, providing significant damage without over-penetration. I've yet to take mine to the range but a friend shared his experience and said he shot a thick piece of steel and it punched a perfect hole in it, then shot a watermelon (with the sametype round)and it literally exploded. Yes, I know that a human body isn't equivalent with a watermelon, but still...

    Does anyone know of tests in ballistic gellatin with the available rounds? There is a lot to be said for having 21 in the pipe in such a light pistol.

    open4years

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    I carry this as my primary. Its not a "proven" round and definitely goes against the fat and heavy round mentality, but there have been a few instances that I've read about the round working as planned. Here's my thinking: when a bullet exits a body through over penetration, it is taking along with it unused kinetic energy. If a bullet stops in the body, then all the energy has been transfered to the individual.

    Its easy to shoot and get (a) precision followup shot(s) because of its low recoil. Plus it looks nice!

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    nowhere, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    252

    Post imported post


  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Valdosta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    347

    Post imported post

    Thanks to both of you. I received my copy of Concealed Carry magazine today and there was a review of the Five Seven. The author apparantly thought that the rounds available to the public were capable of penetrated ballistic vests. He carried out a test using a level 3 vest and, of course, it didn't penetrate. It wasn't designed too as those rounds are only available to the miliary and LE.

    I've read that SWAT teams are using this pistol as it seems the bad guys are beggining to wear body armour. They also conducted a study comparing penetration through interior walls. They compared the 5.7x28mm to .45 and the .45 penetrated through more walls than the Five Seven did.

    So, we have a tumbling round that penetrates deep enough into a body but doesn't exit. Sounds good to me.

    This is off subject but this issue of Concealed Carry had an article about Open Carry which was favorable. The article mentioned this forum.

    open4years

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    429

    Post imported post

    I have carried my 5.7 for a year now. I use a cross breed IWB very comfortable.
    When I open carry it I use a level 2 Sherpa it gets some looks. I like the big grip for my large hands and the low recoil. It is a deadly gun. It is the only pistol with riffle ballistics. The 190 ammo from FNH is in a red box for military leo only. There is a blue plastic tip round that frags easy thus crating a large would channel. Good to hunt wild pigs. At close to 3,000 fps it hits hard and then yaws. Like 223 ammo out of an M16
    Most self defense gun fight happens at 30 feet or so. The 5.7 pistol goes a tad bit further
    (quigley down under)


  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Valdosta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    347

    Post imported post

    Wow, did everyone look at the ballistic tests? It seemed to made much more of a devastating "wound" than a .45 JHP. Did I read the results correct? I'm now convinced, thanks for the input guys and for the great gel tests link.

    open4years

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    269

    Post imported post

    Is the ammo capable of defeating soft armor restricted as AP? Or just the ones with steel penetrators designed to defeat modern infantry armor? I heard that there was civilian legal ammo that could go through soft armor (like most rifle rounds, simply b/c of its high speed), but most manufactures only sold it directly to LEO/Military.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Valdosta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    347

    Post imported post

    The recent issue of Concealed Carry Magazine puts that rumour to the test. My understanding has always been that the ammunition that can penetrate body armour is limited to LE and Military. The experiment, in this magazine, test all ammunition availabe to the public and none of them will penetrate a ballistic vest.

    I do not wish to shoot LE but it bothers me that SWAT teams are using the Five Seven, with the ballistic penetrating round, as its becoming more common for bad guys to wear ballistic vests. I would like to be able to protect myself against a bad guy wearing a vest, but I understand that if the ammunition is released to the public, it will get in the wrong hands.

    So, I guess I'll have to go for a head shot after he is still shooting at me after a taking a few hits....assuming I'm still alive.

    open4years

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    Indeed. Work on that Mozambique Drill. Here's a good clip on how it can be used. Its a movie clip with Tom Cruise, so take it with a grain of salt, and also, some adult language used, but the 2nd guy he "defends" himself from gets the 1-2 in the center and a 3rd fairly well aimed shot in the head. Ignore the last shot, though, because thats not defensive.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmKR6evZRQQ

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    269

    Post imported post

    My understanding has always been that the ammunition that can penetrate body armour is limited to LE and Military.

    Not by law, AP ammo is designated by law by certain materials in its construction that are used in AP bullets (usually a steel core), the actual legal defintion has nothing to do with the round's actual ability to penetrate armor.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,156

    Post imported post

    open4years wrote:
    I would like to be able to protect myself against a bad guy wearing a vest, but I understand that if the ammunition is released to the public, it will get in the wrong hands.

    Yep, because bad guys can't get full-auto either. Bans sure do work! Hell for that matter, thank God bad guys aren't allowed to have guns period!

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Valdosta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    347

    Post imported post

    nova wrote:
    open4years wrote:
    I would like to be able to protect myself against a bad guy wearing a vest, but I understand that if the ammunition is released to the public, it will get in the wrong hands.

    Yep, because bad guys can't get full-auto either. Bans sure do work! Hell for that matter, thank God bad guys aren't allowed to have guns period!
    You are absolutely correct. There is a point to be made that if the police feel the need to protect themselves with ballistic vest penetrating rounds, that maybe we should to. Aren't we then being denied the same level of self-defense as LEO's have?

    Criminals will always find a way to get what they want while the good guys (us) abide by the laws. Heck, even if I go through with getting a ballistic vest, the bad guy may have some of those "illegal" bullets.

    Now I am paranoid.

    open4years

  13. #13
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    My first introduction to the FN was by a friend of mine a while back (about a year ago?) who had just gotten one (plus the extended clip). We were out on a ranch just killing a day when he handed it to me saying 'here is the latest and greatest bla bla...' "Run the Clip". (Let me qualify slightly by saying that I have known this individual for years, he is responsible for much of my shooting and firearms experience and I trust him completely) so I took the gun, picked a target and started firing. I 'count' my rounds as I go and am used to no more than 11 rds (1911 with extended mag). Since I was under instruction to "run the clip" I continued firing, losing count, and wondering if the thing was ever going to run out of bullets!!! 30 rds is a BUNCH!!!
    At the time I really didn't think much about the gun. It was a 'neat toy' if you will, but didn't go on my 'list'. Recently, since the 'need (want) a new gun' bug hit me, I have determined to look at all options. This one came back to light. My biggest issue with this gun now is that there seems to be only ONE gun chambered for this round!? And it is not a small gun! If OC was legal here (Texas) then I might consider it, but in the OC scenario, I still think I would prefer a nice 1911! However, I do feel that if this round had a smaller gun to go through that it would quickly become a popular choice, I would at least give it some serious consideration! And the argument of 'fewer rounds' due to a 'smaller' gun I think would be moot with this one as well... I see absolutely no reason to feel that I need to carry 40-90 rounds (standard clip 20 rds, +1 backup = 40rds; extended clip 30 rds + option to carry 2 bkps = 90 rds)

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    FN makes an expensive line of carbines that take the same round as well. I carry an FNP-9 as a primary carry piece. Nice stuff. They had the good sense to back John Browning back in the day, so they must know something.

    -ljp

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Virginia USA, ,
    Posts
    1,688

    Post imported post

    i love my PS90, it is a fun gun to shoot

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,156

    Post imported post

    Legba wrote:
    FN makes an expensive line of carbines that take the same round as well. I carry an FNP-9 as a primary carry piece. Nice stuff. They had the good sense to back John Browning back in the day, so they must know something.

    -ljp
    Whether or not people like the caliber (5.7) FN does make some fine guns. I've wanted an FNP-40 for a long time but never got around to it.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    797

    Post imported post

    You can get 5.7mm ammo that penetrates soft armor. 'Armor Piercing' ammo is ammo made with specific materials, not just fmj.

    I like the 5.7 but I prefer Glocks/Sigs. If the Hughes Ammendment is ever done away with I'm definitely picking up a P90 though!

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Valdosta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    347

    Post imported post

    Gator5713 wrote:
    My first introduction to the FN was by a friend of mine a while back (about a year ago?) who had just gotten one (plus the extended clip). We were out on a ranch just killing a day when he handed it to me saying 'here is the latest and greatest bla bla...' "Run the Clip". (Let me qualify slightly by saying that I have known this individual for years, he is responsible for much of my shooting and firearms experience and I trust him completely) so I took the gun, picked a target and started firing. I 'count' my rounds as I go and am used to no more than 11 rds (1911 with extended mag). Since I was under instruction to "run the clip" I continued firing, losing count, and wondering if the thing was ever going to run out of bullets!!! 30 rds is a BUNCH!!!
    At the time I really didn't think much about the gun. It was a 'neat toy' if you will, but didn't go on my 'list'. Recently, since the 'need (want) a new gun' bug hit me, I have determined to look at all options. This one came back to light. My biggest issue with this gun now is that there seems to be only ONE gun chambered for this round!? And it is not a small gun! If OC was legal here (Texas) then I might consider it, but in the OC scenario, I still think I would prefer a nice 1911! However, I do feel that if this round had a smaller gun to go through that it would quickly become a popular choice, I would at least give it some serious consideration! And the argument of 'fewer rounds' due to a 'smaller' gun I think would be moot with this one as well... I see absolutely no reason to feel that I need to carry 40-90 rounds (standard clip 20 rds, +1 backup = 40rds; extended clip 30 rds + option to carry 2 bkps = 90 rds)
    I believe that FNH will introduce a smaller version of the Five Seven. How much this reduces the velocity and the effectiveness of the round will be discovered then. But it would probably still appeal to me.

    open4years

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Valdosta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    347

    Post imported post

    They recently came out with a .45 with 14 rounds in the magazine, plus two more magazines come with it as is there standard. I own a Para-Ordinance (spelling?) P14-45 that also has 14 rounds in the magazine. I carried it openly for several years but it was HEAVY!

    I'm pretty convinced that the Five-Seven will be my primary from now on, but I would like to at least hold their .45. If you look at the catalog, you will notice that the desert tan color makes the gun weigh a bit less than the other colors! This is true in the Five-Seven.

    I have a black Five-Seven as it was all they made when I bought it. Now they make it in different colors, including tan, with night sights but the night sights have to be ordered with the gun, you can not buy night sights from them. I e-mailed and asked if I could send my gun back for night sights to be added, but no reply.

    I can't justify buying a new Five-Seven unless the gun shop will take this one back as I haven't fired it yet. (I know, I'm commiting a major violation by carrying a gun that I haven't fired yet. But I have a back-up that I have fired.)

    open4years



  20. #20
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    AnaxImperator wrote: There's a great deal of reliance on temporary wound channels to get the job done, if you judge it by those tests.

    Even more importantly...

    If you have to shoot to defend your life, what's easier to explain in court: the run of the mill .45 ACP firing 3 rounds, killing the bad guy or the "cop-killer FiveseveN using military style armor piercing ammunition" where you fired 22 rounds into the guy?

    Just look at how many gun enthusiasts were mistaken in this thread alone about 5.7 ammunition. Heck, the CC magazine was even testing the rumor. What do you think an ignorant "jury of your peers" is going to think about the 5.7?

    Legal liability aside, you risk your life carrying something like a FiveseveN as your primary defense weapon. Just look at the gelatin tests on that website:

    If you examine the permanent wound channel, you have essentially a 0.376" diameter 9.6" deep channel. This is indeed adequate penetration, but the diameter of the permanent wound channel leaves a great deal to be desired. Even with the best gelatin results indicating a 0.376" dia. x 9.6" deep wound channel, that's only11.34 square inches of surface area he's bleeding from and that's in a best case scenario too.


    The same site lists some tests done with the .45 ACP. Even using the least desirable gelatin results from that site, you get 0.659" dia. and 10.9" penetration. (from a Glock 30 with a 3.8" barrel fired into bare gelatin). That results in 22.56 square inches of surface area he's bleeding from. Again, this is worst-case scenario.Other ammunition tested showed much better penetration andexpansion. (16" penetration at 0.75" diameter, for example).

    I'd feel much safer carrying a .45 ACP that will double the surface area of the wound channel (and more than double the volume). Granted, without proper shot placement you're still relying on the bad guy to bleed out, but that happens quite a bit faster when he's got a bigger hole to bleed from.

    The goal of defensive shooting is to positively end the threat to your life. Waiting for the bad guy to bleed to death out of a 0.376" diameter hole isn't exactly good for your health. You can not safely rely on tumbling to accomplish the wound channel damage you need. Only two of the four shotsfrom the FiveseveN indicated tumbling occurred.Tumbling is a random event that you can't depend on when your life is at risk. Who cares if you can carry 25+ rounds of ammunition. If you have to use all of it to stop someone, "self-defense" might behard to justify.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Valdosta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    347

    Post imported post

    shad0wfax wrote:
    AnaxImperator wrote: There's a great deal of reliance on temporary wound channels to get the job done, if you judge it by those tests.

    Even more importantly...

    If you have to shoot to defend your life, what's easier to explain in court: the run of the mill .45 ACP firing 3 rounds, killing the bad guy or the "cop-killer FiveseveN using military style armor piercing ammunition" where you fired 22 rounds into the guy?

    Just look at how many gun enthusiasts were mistaken in this thread alone about 5.7 ammunition. Heck, the CC magazine was even testing the rumor. What do you think an ignorant "jury of your peers" is going to think about the 5.7?

    Legal liability aside, you risk your life carrying something like a FiveseveN as your primary defense weapon. Just look at the gelatin tests on that website:

    If you examine the permanent wound channel, you have essentially a 0.376" diameter 9.6" deep channel. This is indeed adequate penetration, but the diameter of the permanent wound channel leaves a great deal to be desired. Even with the best gelatin results indicating a 0.376" dia. x 9.6" deep wound channel, that's only11.34 square inches of surface area he's bleeding from and that's in a best case scenario too.


    The same site lists some tests done with the .45 ACP. Even using the least desirable gelatin results from that site, you get 0.659" dia. and 10.9" penetration. (from a Glock 30 with a 3.8" barrel fired into bare gelatin). That results in 22.56 square inches of surface area he's bleeding from. Again, this is worst-case scenario.Other ammunition tested showed much better penetration andexpansion. (16" penetration at 0.75" diameter, for example).

    I'd feel much safer carrying a .45 ACP that will double the surface area of the wound channel (and more than double the volume). Granted, without proper shot placement you're still relying on the bad guy to bleed out, but that happens quite a bit faster when he's got a bigger hole to bleed from.

    The goal of defensive shooting is to positively end the threat to your life. Waiting for the bad guy to bleed to death out of a 0.376" diameter hole isn't exactly good for your health. You can not safely rely on tumbling to accomplish the wound channel damage you need. Only two of the four shotsfrom the FiveseveN indicated tumbling occurred.Tumbling is a random event that you can't depend on when your life is at risk. Who cares if you can carry 25+ rounds of ammunition. If you have to use all of it to stop someone, "self-defense" might behard to justify.
    Strange. I looked at the same photos and the Five Seven caused more wound channels than the .45. I agree with the court room aspect. I bought the gun because I feel that it will be banned soon, so that is a good point.

    As for how many rounds it would take with a .45 versus the Five Seven, is there real world data on the Five Seven? I know the round is considered effective, by the military, when fired from long guns and I've read positive reports, from the military, about the Five Seven. Does the round lose so much FPS to become ineffective when fired from this pistol? I doubt it.

    I've always been a believer in the .45 or 10mm, but this gun and round, has merit for me and it ultimately comes down to a personal choice for the gun one chooses to carry.

    If I'm asked in court why I chose this gun, I will say that number 1, it is lightweight and easy for my old bones to carry and number 2, I read that it was an effective defensive round. I will be carrying rounds available for the public.

    open4years

  22. #22
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    open4years wrote:
    [snip]

    As for how many rounds it would take with a .45 versus the Five Seven, is there real world data on the Five Seven? I know the round is considered effective, by the military, when fired from long guns and I've read positive reports, from the military, about the Five Seven. Does the round lose so much FPS to become ineffective when fired from this pistol? I doubt it.

    [snip]
    open4years
    I haven't seen any information on the terminal performance of civilian 5.7 ammunition on human equivalent targets. It's still a relatively new cartridge, in terms of morgue reports. The military loves it because it is great for penetrating body armor at close to medium range from short-barrelled SMGs like the P90. I'm sure it would perform great from the Five seveN pistol too.Thecartridgewas purpose-built for use in SMG's by soldiers facing armored targets.

    I hope I didn't sound overly harsh on your choice to purchase or carry the Five seveN. FN makes great products and I can definitely understand wanting to purchase a Five seveN. Personally, I would be hesitant to carry a 5.7 as my defense weapon. I'd carry a .357 Magnum or a .45 ACP as my primary carry weapon, because both are proven performers against human threats and there is no question of their ability to end a threat.

    You mentioned that you thought the 5.7 caused more damage than the .45 in the gelatin tests. The gelatin in the link below (from the original url linked earlier) has a redoutline around the temporary wound channel. The permanent wound channel is the diagonal line streaking from lower-left towards upper-right. The bullet yaws, creating a larger temporary channel a few inches in, and then it rights itself and continues on in a straight line to the right.The red linethey highlighted that photo with is only a temporary wound channel.http://www.brassfetcher.com/images/5...im%20block.JPG

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    44

    Post imported post

    Had the chance to actually shoot one of these a few months back. Definitely interesting and the owner let me put a full 20+ rounds through it. It was weird, fun, and really cool to put an assault rifle cartridge through a pistol so light you're left wondering where the metal is.

    In real-world defensive shooting, it's more of a solution looking for a problem. Specifically designed to defeat body armor in civilian tactical and military applications, the chances of having to solve for a mugger in body armor at 50 yards is questionable, at best. So is getting that sweet AP ammunition it was initially designed for. It's one hell of a fun pistol to shoot and it's not likely you're going to get too many chances to handle one very often.

    Personally, I'd prefer to trust my more compact 9mm and .45 pistols to stop someone with evil intentions. However, FNH stands behind it as an effective defensive pistol. The Internet was custom-built for bickering, but I've heard good arguments on both sides. Again, it's a solution looking for a very specific problem. Instead of using a heavy pistol round in a submachine gun they went the other direction -- pack a light sub-gun round into a pistol. It may work well for military / SWAT engagements but I'll take my Kimber or my Glock over the FN if the fit ever hits the shan.

    Great article on it here:
    http://www.shootingtimes.com/handgun...207/index.html

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kingston, Washington, USA
    Posts
    343

    Post imported post

    Speaking to the 5.7mm round, I have never been impressed with the round. A micro rifle round in a pistol (?), when our guys in Iraq are already pissed about the .223 and it's lack of stopping power.

    So I began to research the thing. I quote from the Box O' Truth website:

    "Also useful is that while doing the Buick of Truth shoot I was talking to some members of a very large and very well respected SWAT team who has had more operational use of the weapons than any other group in the United States, and they were absolutely sour on the weapon.

    One of them told me about a particular incident where two SWAT officers, one armed with a shotgun and the other armed with a P90, engaged a bad guy. The P90 armed officer was the first to engage the bad guy....which caused the bad guy to start hollering "Stop shooting me with that thing!!" after sustaining multiple hits with the weapon.

    The officer with the 12 gauge used his weapon and the bad guy was dropped instantly and apparently no longer had the ability to complain about what he was being shot with.

    Another member of that same team recently posted on another forum that his team was in a firefight where the P90 was used again. The officer armed with the P90 fired on a bad guy...but the round was stopped by the bad guy's rib.

    Scientific gel testing has shown the 5.7 to offer pretty poor ballistic performance when compared to the 5.56 or even to more common handgun/subgun rounds like the 9mm and the .45 ACP.

    The benefit of the 5.7 round is that it reputedly penetrates body armor...but only with rounds available to LE/military that ordinary civilians cannot get. Even then, there are AP rounds for more common handgun/subgun calibers (9mm, .45 ACP) that will also penetrate body armor and give superior terminal ballistic performance.

    When you combine the results of scientific testing with the observed results of real life firefights the worries about it being a weak penetrator and a bad choice for stopping the hostile actions of a bad guy seem to be solidly founded. "


    The round, though new, just does not seem to be passing the smell test. If it were, you would have guys crowing about how the round just puts 'em down. Instead, you have this impression that they are really cool in full auto (P90) but the round they fire sucks.



  25. #25
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    The 5.7 I would think would be much more desirable if civilians could own the good ammo since sometimes thugs wear armor. The 20 round capacity is nice though.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •