12Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksThere is definitly no denying that. Strange, that the SS197 goes right through solid or semi solid objects but water stops it in its tracks.
This is a discussion on Explain the FN FiveSeven to me within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; There is definitly no denying that. Strange, that the SS197 goes right through solid or semi solid objects but water stops it in its tracks....
Array
There is definitly no denying that. Strange, that the SS197 goes right through solid or semi solid objects but water stops it in its tracks.
I carry a .357mag because no one bickers about the .357mag being "enough".
Array
Isnt the 5.7 designed to deposit energy quickly? I watched "surviving D-Day" on history and they showed the the bullits fired from german machine guns at omaha beach stopping in less than 3 ft of water. Weird.
I carry a .357mag because no one bickers about the .357mag being "enough".
Array
Keep in mind penetration is more important than "designed frangibility". If you don't dig in deep enough to hit a vital organ your shot won't be as effective.Originally Posted by kelcarry
Do you remember Glaser Safety Slugs? In the 1980's they were all the rage for about 5 months until they started being used in actual shootings. People being hit with them weren't going down because the bullet fragmented so completely and so quickly that vital organs weren't hit. The Glaser Safety Slug was basically a copper jacket housing filled with #12 bird shot. It would penetrate perhaps 6-8" in flesh and it threw tiny pellets of shot everywhere in those 6-8". They were determined to be mostly useless as defensive rounds and people stopped using them.
The FBI commissioned a study after the Dade Country shoot-out and concluded that for a handgun round to be effective it must penetrate a minimum of 12" reliably. Anything short of that and you run the risk of rounds not hitting vital organs. While ballistic media is consistent, it's unrealistic because there's one thing you can be sure of when shooting at people - and that's inconsistency of the impact area hit by the bullet. Thick clothing, excessive fat, excessive muscle, bone density that varies, etc. all play a factor in an actual shooting and they all vary from person to person. As such, you want a round that can penetrate reliably to punch threw those things and poke a hole in something important like a heart, lung, brain, etc.
There are people out there committing violent crimes that have 8+" of fat and muscle around their midsection.
Please visit my YouTube channel: The Military Arms Channel
Array
Most rifle rounds won't penetrate very far in water. I think the Myth Busters did a test with a .50 BMG in a swimming pool in one of their episodes.
It's interesting to note our bodies are comprised mostly of water, about 60% of our body weight.
Please visit my YouTube channel: The Military Arms Channel
Array
As will the 7.62x25.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Array
Im a reloader and while i havent loaded the 5.7, its a .224 bullet which is the same as used in the typical ar15. So i guess it would not penetrate water very well.
I carry a .357mag because no one bickers about the .357mag being "enough".
Array
If you had strain gauge to check the pressure inside the jug of water that would give you the real story I bet the "energy dump" would be significant with the 5.7. A human body is around 8" thick the vitals are within 3 inches of ether side of the entrance in a human body so the idea you need to penetrate three milk jugs seems like over penetration to me. Again to each there own on choice. But the disruption even in your video seems to be enough to cause serious damage to the central nervous system or vitals in a human body. The 45 seems to go right through the first jug about the width of human torso without much hydrostatic disruption. I lien the 5.7 to shooting deer with a .223 and a Barnes X they drop instantly and without hardly even a kick. Small caliber high velocity and good bullet construction the damage inside is devastating. 5.7 for self defense good round for Rhino or Buffalo probably not.
One other thing water can be very much like a solid it is not very compressible. Hydraulics in heavy equipment works on this principle.
Array
What about the SS197 penetrating water soaked phonebooks like 6ft (sarcasm) ? Would that be kinda like people? We are water soaked media. :)
I carry a .357mag because no one bickers about the .357mag being "enough".
Array
The FBI and most ballistic experts would disagree with your conclusions about penetration. Your assumption about penetration assumes you're shooting an averaged sized naked person standing square to you. If you shoot a bigger man in winter clothing and it's a cross body shot (perhaps including the arm) you're going to need more than 3" of penetration. The FBI Agents found this out the hard way in the Dade Country shoot-out. This is why the FBI has the 12" minimum penetration requirement.
You also must consider that you might find yourself in a fight with a person shooting back at you and doing so from cover. Shooting through glass, plywood, drywall, etc. and hitting the bad guy might also be required.
But you are correct, carry what you're comfortable with. If you're happy with the 5.7, who am I to dissuade you from carrying it? I don't have to live with your decisions, you do. I've evaluated the 5.7 cartridge and drawn my own conclusions about it and thus decided 9mm and .45 ACP better suit my own personal needs. I encourage each person to do the same.
Please visit my YouTube channel: The Military Arms Channel
Array
I really like the P90- think it's an awesome rifle (especially since I'm a lefty). The way I see it, the 5.7X28 is a pretty great round- it's 'compact', relatively light, and now you can have your rifle and sidearm in the same caliber.
So, instead of carrying maybe 200rnds of each rifle/sidearm, you carry 400rnds that can be used interchangeably. So you never really have to worry about 'running out of rifle ammo' or the other way around- as long as you have ammo, you're set whichever way you need to go.
"Rock and load, lock and roll... what's it matter? FIRE!!"
"Gun control means hitting your target every time."
Please take everything I say with at least one grain of salt- I am a very sarcastic person with a very dry sense of humor.
Array
I agree, the concept is cool (being able to carry the same round in both your rifle and handgun). The cowboys used to do this back in the old west days... logistically it made sense.
I bought the FiveseveN and PS90 partially for that reason. But once I found I was less than thrilled with the performance of the 5.7 with commercially available rounds, I sold the FiveseveN for another handgun. I did keep the PS90 because I had SBR'ed it, and I like the gun. It's fun to shoot. But if I needed a rifle, I would take a rifle and not the PS90.
Please visit my YouTube channel: The Military Arms Channel
Array
Wouldnt it be fair to say you (MAC) dont like the SS197 round as opposed to the pistol itself? Elite Ammunition offers a 55gr FMJ round that moves @ 1800fps from a FiveseveN. It looks like the typical 5.7x28mm round is designed to fragment which is proven in your test. If its penetration you want, use a different bullet. Brassfetcher tested a 5.7 round that was a Barns 40gr TSX bullet that penetrated 14-15" and retained most of its weight, from a FiveseveN. Is that satisfactory for you?
I have no problem shooting SS197 but I dont load that round for HD use, I keep something from EA.
This has been a great thread and again I've learned a few things from MAC so for that I thank you, however I'm still convinced that the platform is great and to pick the ammo for the intended job, as it should be.
Thanks
Steve
I carry a .357mag because no one bickers about the .357mag being "enough".
Array
It's a "cop-killer" pistol, and you don't want one. Rockstars are history. Besides.........hard to find expensive ammo.
Array
Leaving aside the ridiculous "cop killer" comment (any firearm can be a "cop killer"), the very fact that you can say that is indicative of its ability to be a competent self/home defense firearm. The so-called armor piercing ammunition that I assume you are really referring to is limited if not wholly unavailable to your "cop killers". I have been in court on several occasions where the 57 was found in drug cases and the ammunition found was the standard readily available ammuntion that anyone can purchase and, like any firearm, as I said before, can kill anyone, including an LEO.
Array
No problem....I'm outta here since you're an attorney. Last thing I need is trouble with the law. Sometimes I can be ridiculous.....that way I know I'm still human. Never "assume" anything. ;)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
