So is this a validation of the 5.7 round as a contender for personal defense? It is a rather obscure weapon and far less common so it makes sense that there isn't a lot of experience from personal use against bad guys. However this weapon was in the hands of a trained military soldier so if there were any person to use it to it's potential, it would be that kind of person unfortunately.

 

Trained Soldier LMAO,he was a Shrink,probably qualified with an M4/16 and an M9 9mm,once a year.

 

Lots of things can be lethal and not good self defense choices (like a rattlesnake). The object in using a weapon for SD isn't necessarily to kill, but to stop the attack as quickly as possible. I wouldn't be overly confident that a 5.7 round would do that, but I'd rather have it than nothing.

The deadly results achieved at Ft. Hood still don't make the 5.7 a good SD choice, just like the Sirhan Sirhan example doesn't make the .22 a good SD choice, IMO.

 

Lots of things can be lethal and not good self defense choices (like a rattlesnake). The object in using a weapon for SD isn't necessarily to kill, but to stop the attack as quickly as possible. I wouldn't be overly confident that a 5.7 round would do that, but I'd rather have it than nothing. The deadly results achieved at Ft. Hood still don't make the 5.7 a good SD choice, just like the Sirhan Sirhan example doesn't make the .22 a good SD choice, IMO.

Dude did you not read the part where it BROKE BONES?! dude I believe that’s far enough power for personal defense. Sounds like you just don’t want to give this round it’s props

 

I expect it's easier to get lethal hits against unarmed victims. The results may not be the same on a two way shooting gallery. That said, I would think the 5.7 round is nothing I'd want to get hit with!

 

Interesting first post, Professor. What prompted it?

 

You joined in 5/11 and waited almost 3 years for you first post?
Odd.

My thoughts as well.

 

Nothing I've ever read, heard or seen disputes the 5.7x28 as being a good choice as a self defense round. It's penetration qualities make it an excellent home defense round. Having said that; none of the current pistols chambered in the round are all that suited for concealed carry. I like the round but I need a smaller gun for practical concealment.

 

I own a 57 and leaving aside very good capacity (20+1), and lethality (obviously the replies vary), the firearm is full size but it is light (mostly polymer)--main reasons for my choosing same is that it has a high exit velocity and a straight line discharge to target (accuracy) with an "easy" recoil that is slightly more than a 22 and certainly less that a 9mm. Not dealing with recoil not only makes the weapon a fun gun to target shoot with, it provides me with a very valuable variable; if I should be in some kind of "what if", recoil is minimal thus adding to better accuracy. The idea that many in law enforcement and security opt or use this caliber that is basically a pistol NATO round 5.56 designed for the security type small compact rifles (FN PS90) and that it has its notoriety with Ft Hood and even drug cartel BGs, tells me that this is no ordinary firearm that is just another oddity not worth looking at

 

If the ammo shelves were overflowing with 5.7 rounds, and gun manufacturers were making more variants of the pistol, I could see its adoption as a defensive carry platform.

However, I believe we're better off carrying what we practice with, and in order to practice, we need affordable availability. I really do like the idea of light, high-speed rounds such as the 5.7 and .22 TCM. However, by trading mass for speed, one can still get bone-crushing results. Hence bigger, slower bullets are still comparable and very relevant arguments for self defensive carry.

 

A gun is a gun is a gun and it is better than a rock. They all will work and all have their "personalities". 57, I believe,,was originally developed more for NATO. The round is very light (you can carry twice as much ammo as a 9, which has always been a consideration for military, and at velocities approaching 2500FPS and used with a restricted bullet design, if can be armor piercing (maybe that is why cartel types like it). Not available in shelves for you and I but could be or is available to secret service etal. Cost is high these days (like many calibers)but my original purchases ($18 for 50 of FN logo) before having the dope in the whitehouse were really about the same as any other high caliber. Currently AE makes a 57 cartridge that I can use for target shooting--runs $19 for 50. At height of hysteria, my $19 was selling for as high as $70 and my pistol that I purchased for $870 ( yes a bit much IMO) was selling for almost $2000 and now is around $1000. Bottom line--they all work one way or another, especially for the kind of defense we talk about on the forum. Cartridge design is unique and very military looking, very light, very fast and very accurate--as I said in last reply--I equated lo recoil with my ability to control firearm under stress and I equate that with accuracy--If I do not hit what I am aiming at, no caliber makes a difference. No matter what, situational awareness is still No 1 in my arsenal and it has served me well for 72 years and I do not see that changing very much regardless of my pistol and its caliber.

 

I had a FNH FN FiveseveN and an AR-57 and I sold both plus a case of ammo a year ago January for an enormous amount of money. They are light recoiling, flat shooting, and accurate. They have almost as much energy as a .38 special. If I could have legally got the LE only hotter rounds, I might have kept them. As it was, the ammo was very hard to find, expensive, and on the light side of energy for me. They were fun niche guns for the range. I prefer my 10mm and .45 ACP semi-autos and .357 magnum revolvers for self-defense.

 

Welcome from Virginia.

 

Ok.

The FN 5.7 pistol is constantly maligned or underestimated in many gun forums and articles, often by people who have never experienced shooting the pistol. Subjective comparisons with the .22 magnum or categorization as a sub-par .223 round create confusion about the effectiveness of the FN 5.7.

Enough time has passed after the terrorist attack at Ft. Hood. The shooter, Nidal Malik Hassan, has been arrested, tried and sentenced. The media has moved on. Now we can begin to analyze the impact of the FN 5.7 and address the question of lethality.

Using SS192 and SS197SR ammunition (common commercial 5.7x28 ammo), several 20-30 round magazines and an FN 5.7 (shooter also had a .357 revolver but did not use it), Hassan killed 13 and wounded 32 people.

Many armchair ballistics expert criticized this result as proof that the FN 5.7 platform is not lethal enough because of the proportion of the fatalities to the wounded. Others have proposed that had Hassan use another type of pistol, 9mm or .45, there would have been more fatalities.

If you look at this Wikipedia link and look at the list of casualties, one can come to a very eye-opening conclusion.
Fort Hood shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1. 11 people were shot center-of-mass (COM), one was shot in the stomach and one was shot in the head. All 13 died. All 11 victims who were shot COM did not survive.
2. 3 of the 13 people who died, tried to charge Hassan, but he stopped them with COM shots.
3. The 32 people who were wounded were hit in the arms, legs, hips and shoulders. None of the wounded survivors were shot COM.

The following conclusions can be drawn:
1. The FN 5.7 is a very lethal round CQB because all 11 victims who were shot COM died. No survivors for those hit COM.
2. The FN 5.7 is a real stopper, because 3 tried to charge Hassan at close range and were stopped by COM shots.
3. One of the fatalities was shot in the stomach, and died. The fragmentation of the SS197R round can create a hail of metal shards that can cause serious internal organ damage and bleeding in the stomach.
4. None of the 32 people who were hit in the extremities, hips and shoulders were able to muster a counter-attack because the FN 5.7 must have shattered or broken bones. The high rate of wounded vicitms to fatalities was the direct result of the shooting ability of Hassan (or lack thereof), and not because the 5.7x28 round is not lethal.
5. Sgt. Kimberly Munley (base civilian police), one of the first responders, was immediately disabled with 5.7x28 bullet shrapnels to her wrist and a second 5.7x28 bullet broke her femur. The light 5.7x28 commercial ammo showed that it can shatter large bones due to its velocity
6. According to medical personnel, there was so much blood in the room that it was difficult to get to the victims because the floor became very slippery. One can conclude that the commercial 5.7x28 rounds can fragment or tumble, causing immense blood loss.
7. It took five bullets (which I assume was a 9 mm) from Sgt Mark Todd to stop Hasan. And he survived his wounds (no available info on where he was hit, except that one of the bullets paralyzed Hasan).

In conclusion:
1. The FN 5.7 is definitely a very lethal round. 100% fatality for COM shots.
2. The FN 5.7 is a man-stopper. Three military men tried to charge Hasan, and all three were stopped.
2. The FN 5.7 is a very incapacitating round, if extremities are hit, because it is powerful enough to break the femur (which is the largest bone in the body)
3. The fragmentation or tumbling effect of commercial ammo can cause a lot of blood loss.

The FN 5.7 is a very effective weapon. It is as effective as, or arguably more effective, than any military or civilian pistols in the market.

It is unfortunate that the jihadist Hassan used this weapon against U.S. soldiers.

2ndAmVA

DEFENSOR GUNLEATHER
website: DEFENSOR GUNLEATHER - specializes in high quality concealed carry leather holsters
email: dennis@defensorgunleather.com

 

Interesting first post. It's unfortunate that such a horrible incident is one of the few sources of data available for such an evaluation, but it's valuable information.

My thoughts had been that 5.7 was certainly lethal, but unlikely to be effective in stopping power. If three were stopped in the process of attacking, perhaps I was wrong.

But, as others have said, it's really not a practical choice for most.

 

I've kinda been toying with the idea of getting a Five seveN, but after having read this I'm not too sure. Having access to a good supply of ammunition is going to be the deciding factor for me I guess. I'd rather have a 9mm with a full mag than an empty five seven, lol.

Maybe one day down the road a ways....

 

You joined in 5/11 and waited almost 3 years for you first post?
Odd.

 

You joined in 5/11 and waited almost 4 years for you first post?
Odd.

I was a long post...

 

Unfortunately nobody makes compact handguns for this round. Such pistol can be double stack, yet still be very light and thin because the light-recoiling round can be handled by less beefy metal parts.

Somebody needs to call George Kellgren to make one

 

The currently available SS195LF (lead free) ammo is a 28 grain @ 2350 fps and 343 ft./lbs. of muzzle energy from the 16” P90 or AR-57. It is approximately 300 fps slower out of the 4.8” handgun with less energy.

The currently available SS197SR (sporting round) ammo is a 40 grain @ 1800 fps and 340 ft./lbs. of muzzle energy from the 16” P90 or AR-57. It is approximately 200 fps slower out of the 4.8” handgun with less energy.

 

hijacking a tad:

what options are out there for handloads? can you even buy loose bullets for this? anything you can buy loose that you can't buy ready to fire?

 

Many poo-poo any caliber not of their choice, but nearly all haven't been shot with one.

 

- Major Hassan was an Army officer, but he was a doctor. Many servicemen wear the uniform but are not trained beyond basic marksmanship. The hallmark of the Five-seveN is its ease of operation and accuracy.

- the 5.7x28mm round is not a magic bullet, nor is it comparable with rifle rounds like the 5.56. What it does do is comparable to a 9mm but with different ballistic characteristics - less risk of overpenetration, flatter bullet trajectory, and less recoil. Since the 5.7 is less likely to overpenetrate, it's an excellent round for home defense where you want something easier to wield than a 12 gauge shotgun and not hitting family members in the next room is a concern. All else being equal, it's easier to put more rounds in a given time span on target with the 5.7 than with a 9mm and certainly a 45ACP.

- I like the 5.7 a LOT. But I'll never argue that it is, or ought to be, a mainstream round. Only two firearms are chambered for it and neither one is cheap. My Five-seveN MkII cost $1200 - I don't call that affordable.

- Regarding stopping power, there's physical and psychological stopping power. The 5.7x28mm in a pistol is very loud and the muzzle flash is substantial; there's a huge bark going along with its bite. If you're in an extended gunfight behind cover, you might want the penetration power of a 45ACP. But how often does this happen to a civilian in a self-defense scenario? When I was an infantry officer I would have never wanted the 5.7. But as a civilian I prefer it over all over handgun rounds. Different mission, different requirements. Oh, and there was a fourth person in the Ft. Hood shooting that charged the shooter who survived, but did not continue his attempt to stop the shooter after he was shot.

- I do wish there was a smaller version for CC; while it is one of the lightest handguns on the market, it is also 1911 sized.

- In the end, the best caliber is the one you love shooting the most and feel most confident with.

 

OP, I enjoyed your post.
Knowing what light fast bullets do to varmints and the reasoning behind many members choosing an M4 over a pistol for a home defense weapon I found the article informative.
I almost bought one last year, but it felt too fat for me. Too fat for my wallet, too.

 

I've considered one for several years now.

 

Love my 5.7 and had this very same argument on this forum before on the capabilities of the 5.7. Glad other people are starting to appreciate it more. It's a great round and amazing pistol.

 

Just a last point on this 57 pistol. There are two forums--an FN forum that will get you to the 57 and a fiveseven forum, that is independent of the FN name but has its supporters. My impression has always been that many who populate these forums and particularly the FN forum, are former, current military, LEOs or some offshoot of security-related business. I find their discussions to literally be above my head with various "pistol furniture" to enhance their fireams and technical discussions on ballistics, cartridges, lethality, armor piercing etal. There is even a company that seems to specialize in providing services and boutique ammunition to the FN57 community. All in all, I find this info intriguing and, in a way, supporting evidence that this is not a niche/special strange caliber firearm, but a serious change in pistol design and caliber. As I said before and others have said, we all tend to defend our choices and they all are good choices--obviously, I am doing the same. No matter what, though---"SA all the way" is number 1 in my book.

 

I hope so. IMHO the 5.7x28mm is particularly well suited for home defense. If Germany ever pulls its head out of H&K's ass (they were pushing the 4.6x30mm), the way can be cleared to NATO standardize the 5.7 round to replace the 9mm.

 

I think, that within the limitations of the mission it was intended for, the 5.7 is a perfectly adequate round.

• Yes, it has less power and less lethality than a typical 9mm, but in return it is easier for less well trained individuals to use and has a longer effective range (especially when comparing a typical 9mm subgun and a 5.7 PDW which is it's reason for being.)
• As a Small Caliber High Velocity round, it has a better chance of penetrating bullet resistant vests ('sporting rounds' excepted) than typical 9mm bullet designs.
• As a SCHV round, it is less likely to over-penetrate interior or exterior walls should the bullet miss its intended target. 9mm rounds have been shown to penetrate many more drywall sections than more lightly constructed rounds, even those from rifles.

Do I think it's the be and end all of bullets? By no means, but it does have a place, just as the .380, .38SPL and .32MAG have their place. I like it enough that my bedside gun is a PS90 (2nd generation). I've found that even when shouldered it sticks out less than my outstretched arms would holding a pistol, and that's with the full-sized barrel still on it.

 

I wonder what the response time was for medical treatment for those with the most traumatic injuries, being those injuries occurred during an active shooter scenario? It seems that could be one factor overlooked in this very good discussion. If those shot COM, (God bless them), lingered while events unfolded, waiting with no medical care, it seems their chance of bleeding out/going into shock/expiring would increase greatly. The round couldn't be given credit for that under those circumstances.

The only real negative about the 5.7 and the guns chambered for it, in my opinion, is the inability for civilians to get the very ammunition that was meant to make the round and weapon successful, that which penetrates armor.

 

The only real negative about the 5.7 and the guns chambered for it, in my opinion, is the inability for civilians to get the very ammunition that was meant to make the round and weapon successful, that which penetrates armor.

Very true. Elite Ammo, who cater to 57 fans and also make different kinds of boutique ammo for the pistol, got in a bit of hot water with ATF/feds over ammo piercing at one time. If I am home or at and about in my way of life, ammo piercing means as much to me as having a 50 caliber gun strapped to my waist. Lightweight, lo recoil, capacity, accuracy (from cartridge and lo recoil) met my requirements. As said
by others, everyone has their favorite and can give you all the reasons for their choice and it can vary from a simple derringer to a 50 cal. Price fluctuates and you keep supplies up when you have an opportunity. Heck--the toughest cartridges to find at a reasonable price are 22LRs--the low man on the caliber totem pole.

 

I'll agree with the OP. I find these arguments no different at all than those made when the military switched to the 5.56. Haters gona hate.

 

Claiming 100% of COM shots are lethal with the round is a big stretch and colors the argument - whether it happened in one case or not.

ICE dropped it like a hot potato. While the specified rounds will go thru a vest, they don't perform worth crap on the other side - got that directly from an ICE firearm training officer.

Put it through the torture tests that every other defensive round goes through, then come tell us all about it.

IMHO, there's no reason for the ammo to be so expensive - except the patent holder wants to make a quick buck. AA tried this with the 6.5 Grendel and while it could've been extremely popular; AA's attempt to keep anyone else from copying it just prompted the shooting community to move on to other things - and it got copied anyway. I'm not saying either round isn't a good/great round, but I think the originators have shot themselves in the foot.

I can buy 2-3x the number of guns and ammo or a gun and a class. It may be a neat cartridge, but not that neat.

 

Well, if the BG is wearing a vest, a bullet with crappy performance after penetrating the vest still beats a bullet that doesn't penetrate the vest. It certainly has its place as a military round, but I doubt it will ever see enough widespread use in civilian life to convince the masses. Heck, 9mm Luger has been in use for, what, 100 years, EXTREMELY widespread use for at least 30 in the States, and yet there are still folks who think it's barely better than throwing rocks.