Consider a philosophical reversal?
This is a discussion on Consider a philosophical reversal? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Just for the record...I have been a die hard "big and many" school for thirty plus years. Meaning, .45 acp with several magazines ready, all ...
October 6th, 2008 02:26 AM
Consider a philosophical reversal?
Just for the record...I have been a die hard "big and many" school for thirty plus years. Meaning, .45 acp with several magazines ready, all day, every day. Perhaps a 10mm, anything else is a BUG.
That said, I purchased an FN Five-seveN single action-low recoil pistol.
This is a 5.7mm necked case round traveling at around 1800 to 2100 fps with TWENTY rounds per magazine.
I am soliciting knowledgable opinions and comments that are well reasoned and thought out.
I'd prefer to avoid obvious cliches, i.e. ".45 ACP RULES MAN, anything less is a" ...whatever.
I am reconsidering my big bullet theory for the fast any many school of thought due to the extraordinary results that several military spec-ops throughout the world have reported with this weapon configuration.
"If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men." Romans 12:18
...if not...be prepared to meet Mr.10mm, .45, .40 or any one of their little brothers.
October 6th, 2008 02:36 AM
Do some research! In fact, do some of your own.
Consider testing your .45 ACP and your new FiveseveN against some ballistic gel, or wetpack, or roadkill deer (for the true rednecks).
Compare them side-by-side. Do it a few times in a few different materials.
Try covering the material with a few layers of denim first.
Try a few different brands of ammo in each gun.
Then, with some real data to work with, make an informed decision.
Me? I carry a .45 ACP with +P hollowpoints of modern design and don't have any "second thoughts" about it.
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
- Margaret Mead
"Booger Hook Off the Bang Switch" - unknown
October 6th, 2008 02:47 AM
My personal criteria for a carry caliber/weapon is the ability to stop an unavoidable threat via a hit to the central nervous system. To do that, a given caliber must be capable of penetrating enough soft tissue and bone to reach it, and still be able to inflict damage on it.
I don't hold that much stock in the size of the wound channel; by the time that matters I believe it is too late to make a difference. The transfer of energy from a round to its target, or the amount of fluid shock a given round has may play a large role in incapacitating an attacker, but it is far from a sure thing.
It seems the Five-seveN has fluid shock in spades, due to the high velocity of the bullet and the fact that most ammunition available is either frangible or ballistic tipped. There is also no doubt in my mind that the pistol/caliber combination is deadly. My concern is whether the 5.7x28 rounds available for civilian purchase have enough penetration to immediately stop a threat via a CNS hit.
Any thoughts on this matter from the OP or anyone else?
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Where self preservation is concerned, if you're not cheating, your not trying...
October 6th, 2008 02:48 AM
Well, I am a .45 guy but, whatever improves your personal shot placement is OK with me. That is what it's really all about.
If you can put them where they need to go to stop a threat then you should be well served. Try to work on your head shots.
October 6th, 2008 09:13 AM
I think that with the military & LEO rounds, the 5.7 would be an adequate self-defense pistol.
However...the only rounds that I've seen commonly for sale are the light (36 or 40 grain?) V-max style rounds. I have my severe doubts if these would penetrate deeply enough to be effective.
It wouldn't be my choice...I'll take my 9mm or .45.
There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH
...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper
There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm
October 6th, 2008 09:18 AM
October 6th, 2008 10:16 AM
Set aside ballistics, and think logistics. Stick with a common and proven performer on the street.
"Just blame Sixto"
I reserve the right to make fun, point and laugh etc.
October 6th, 2008 10:56 AM
I had considered a 5.7 because of the velocity and believe that the necked down cartridge is a good design, although I still haven't bought the .357 Sig conversion barrel for my 239/40. My only reason for putting the 5.7 on the back burner is availability of ammo. I have weeded down my collection to include those weapons with high popularity and large production of ammunition here in the US. I also feel as comfortable on most of those days that I have to carry a small P3AT due to clothing for the day, or the type of activity I'm involved in, as I do on days I carry a .38, .40 or .45.
What little experience with the 5.7 round I've had at the range, I was greatly impressed.
Also, I would bet there is a higher percentage of the "nothing but 4's" crowd (in handguns) that believe the 5.56/223 platform is far superior to .30-06....for whatever reason.
October 6th, 2008 10:56 AM
This is just one of those hand guns designed to defeat (penetrate) body armor. The balistics are impressive, and from what I know at this point it should be enough to do a job on any BG. My first concern though, would be penetration, it's there in spades! But would this bullet shot through the BG? If so, then an inocent by stander might be in real trouble. However, one individual has stated that this round is comparable to the .22 mag. I wonder if that is enough to do the job right?
Y'all be safe now, ya hear!
October 6th, 2008 12:29 PM
October 6th, 2008 01:13 PM
Hydrostatic shock is a neat buzzword but the reality is this...
I need as much permanent "displacement" of target material as I can get. More frontal area of the projectile equals greater displacement of damaged media. In layman's terms, the .45acp damages more stuff. The little needle of a 5.7 doesn't, as it relies on the temporary disruption from the shock factor and "maybe" the tumble effect.
Again, .45acp is a sure thing.
October 6th, 2008 02:03 PM
I would chose the .45 ACP over a .22 Magnum rifle ballistics for personal self defense.
October 6th, 2008 02:20 PM
Yeah, but most of you guys would choose a .45 over an frickin' phaser....
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
October 6th, 2008 02:23 PM
Another factor to consider is the availability of ammunition. I know I can buy 9mm and 45acp at "most" walmart or meijer's. Not my first choice of course but it is available. Not sure about the other.
For freedom is never free someone else just picks up tab.
Kimber Custom II
Kimber Eclips Pro II
Marlin Camp Rifle .45acp
A 9mm may expand but a .45acp won't shrink
Remember there are only two types of Ships in the Navy, SUBMARINES and Targets!
October 6th, 2008 04:33 PM
IMHO a sure thing in a pistol round doesn't exist. Terminal ballistics aside it all comes down to shot placement. I'm comfortable and confident with my 9mms therefore I tend to carry a 9mm on a daily basis. Not that I don't enjoy shooting my .45ACP pistols. They just aren't my go to gun for CCW. As for the 5.7x28 I'm not a big fan of the little round. It's not easy to find locally and the bullet is a tad small for my taste. Not saying you couldn't bring someone down with it. Just not my cup of tea and I wouldn't want to depend on it for personal defense.
By BenGoodLuck in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: August 20th, 2009, 05:32 PM
By jofrdo in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: December 4th, 2007, 01:58 AM
Search tags for this page
what is a philosophical reversal
Click on a term to search for related topics.