Is the 5.7 FN a good defensive round and pistol?

Discussion in 'General Handgun Discussion' started by redbrittany, Oct 16, 2008.

  1. redbrittany

    redbrittany New Member

    1
    0
    0
    Does anyone know whether this is a good round to consider for defensive purposes? A friend in New Hamshire called me to ask about it and I am not familiar with this round or gun. Anyone out there give me some insights?
     
  2. matt g

    matt g New Member Supporter

    3,865
    0
    0
    Please post this in the correct forum.
     

  3. Mark F

    Mark F New Member Supporter

    2,918
    0
    0
    Not really. It's a high velocity, small diameter bullet.
     
  4. h2oking

    h2oking New Member

    56
    0
    0
    I think the folks at FN would argue with Mark's statement considering it shoots the same diameter bullet as the M 16 and works on the same principal of a light bullet doing serious damage due to its high velocity. If Mark is implying that it is an over kill and has too much penetration for street use making it more dangerous to bystanders then in that sense I would agree. I have one and it shoots great but I carry a 38 in the summer and 45 auto when ever it is cool enough to wear a jacket. The penetration of the FN is unbelievable being able to shoot through common body armor like it wasn't even there. I think it might have a place perhaps with law enforcement who patrol in remote places and do not want to carry a rifle. Also it is a fairly large gun though light in weight even when fully loaded with 21 rounds. It has very little recoil when shooting 27 grain aluminum bullets but is very noisy with a lot of muzzle flash.
     
  5. Mark F

    Mark F New Member Supporter

    2,918
    0
    0
    Yes sir, that was precisely my point. I have some "limited" experience with the FN FIVE SEVEN. I love shooting it, but I wouldn't use it for personal protection.
     
  6. matt g

    matt g New Member Supporter

    3,865
    0
    0
    IIRC, the FN 5.7 was designed as an armor defeating pistol round for the Brit equivalent of the Secret Service. Because of this, it won't drop energy very well. It should drill neat, clean holes through soft tissue.
     
  7. Mark F

    Mark F New Member Supporter

    2,918
    0
    0
    Yep, that's exactly why it's not good for SD. You don't want nice clean holes through tissue. What you want is massive meat oblitteration, and total vitals destruction.
     
  8. matt g

    matt g New Member Supporter

    3,865
    0
    0
    Exactly. You are better off slinging hollow points against a vest than you are slinging AP against a soft target.
     
  9. gorknoids

    gorknoids New Member

    2,396
    0
    0
    Speaking of vests, I happen to know the man who wrote this: http://www.justnet.org/Lists/JUSTNET Resources/Attachments/758/0101.04RevA.pdf
    He conducted all of the testing, and has been consulted on all revisions of the original document, which bears his name.
    He also tested Dragonskin, and despite what some people say, it IS a worthless product. The only reason that it meets current specs is that the specs were changed. Bullets still go through it like a hot bullet through a butter vest. If you know someone who is wearing it, please tell them that the real authority on body armor advises them to upgrade immediately.
     
  10. robocop10mm

    robocop10mm Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    11,380
    1
    0
    AP 5.7 ammo is restricted to LE/Military. You would be hard pressed to find a non-expanding bullet on the open market. Most of the ammo that is civi legal is HP or Ballistic tip type.
    Over penetration? Doubtful. Extreme velocity with expanding bullets leads to fragmentation. Under penetration is more likely.

    The 5.7 pistol takes the light bullet/high velocity argument to the nth degree. It is the polar opposite to the .45 ACP. Is it a viable SD round/gun? IMHO probably. Do I own one? NO.

    I have heard of 5.7 KB's. Is there a problem with the gun? I don't know, but I won't be buying one any time soon.
     
  11. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0

    I am officially calling BS on that statement. There has been SO MUCH underhanded dealing with this issue, not to mention massive pay offs, tests being halted for "circumspec" reasons, test dates being moved, test requirements being stretched, or shortened, to keep one product in a massively profitable military contract and to keep another one out.

    I have an extensive file at home on the personal PC about some of the tests, the people involved and who they were at the time of making "the statement".

    There is a SEVERE gray, bordering on charcoal, area surrounding the trials for body armor that no one can say, with certainty, that any product has been tested to the lone criteria and not a modified one.

    JD
     
  12. Mark F

    Mark F New Member Supporter

    2,918
    0
    0
    I saw tests using Dragonskin on WEAPONOLOGY, and from what I saw Dragonskin is exceptional in absorbing high-energy projectiles. It also withstood a direct impact on top a grenade. I think there's some hanky panky going on....
     
  13. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    Mark - I, literally, stumbled onto DragonSkin about a year or so before it made it big with Weaponology and a couple of other shows. There has been so much underhanded stuff I could write three pages of stuff, just on what I have been able to "dig up".

    How about a few highlights?

    The Director of Engineering for the current issued Body Armor, Interceptor, happens to be one of the three LEAD techs in charge of the evaluation for DragonSkin under submittal to the military trials? His name was Dr. Karl Masters and at the time of the tests for DragonSkin to replace the Interceptor Armor, his day job was "Acting Product Manager for Interceptor"

    Now, call me paranoid, but when the Acting Product Manager for the product you are trying to surpass is the one of the people conducting the "closed" tests of your product, and you are not allowed to be there, or evaluate the data of the "failed" tests - I call that hokey....

    Now, for the sake of ease on you, my fair reader, I am going to link to Pinnacle's facts page, but all the facts can be verified by an independent search using Google and it can also be found in several volumes of lawsuits filed by Pinnacle.

    Source

    I wish I could say that was ALL that was underhanded about this cover up. Here is Main & Central which is a pro military, expose what is not getting to our troops sort of website. Read the damning condemnation of Retired Army Colonel John D. Norwood.

    This guy was HEAD of Armor Procurement for the Army. In his capacity, he was the guy making the decisions what our guys were to wear into harms way. Upon retirement, guess where he took an Executive Level job. Armor Holdings Inc; one of the two primary providers of.... wait for it..... Interceptor Body Armor to the Army.... He was then the subject of an Article 32 investigation by the Army... Does anyone know what an Article 32 means to a retired officer?!?! :eek:

    Yeah, read a little further about how four West Point Grads were involved not only in the cover up of the tests, but also with keeping the current status quo Interceptor Armor with our troops...

    There is so much to this story that would enrage the parents of our troops if the whole story would ever be printed. The thing is, for me, it basically boils down to two issues.

    1) A Better overall product ( DragonSkin ), that could save American lives, has been kept from our troops and my tax dollars have been spent on an inferior product.

    2) My tax dollars, that were spent on the inferior product, were then redirected as a form of Gold & Platinum Umbrellas, not to mention flat kickbacks, to members of the Military that are SUPPOSED to be looking out for the best interest of our troops...

    Take a look into some of the details behind the story and see what you think.

    Personally, I have worn the Interceptor stuff in the field, and I have tried on the DragonSkin and worn it, though not in the field. Thankfully I have never taken any rounds in either product, but I can tell you if I had to, I would much rather have the DragonSkin on than that ceramic plate crap with all the nice ballistic nylon just waiting to let bullets through....:eek:
     
  14. BigO01

    BigO01 New Member

    578
    0
    0

    There was a time regardless of what one might find on your links JD just the above would invalidate any and all testing done on Dragonskin based the good old standard of

    CONFLICT OF INTEREST !

    Said tests would have to be redone after a group of honestly impartial people were doing them .

    Money funneled into the right pockets can make a world of difference can't it ?

    I don't have a dog in this fight but I know for a fact I watched a video of Dragonskins performance against not just one or two rounds but dozens of rounds of 9mm , 7.62x39 and shrapnel dispensing explosives all to the same vest and NOTHING penetrated it . I found that pretty damn impressive considering I have read that most body armor makers suggest it be replaced after a single hit from a small arm .

    And I watched this Years ago when the subject was brought up on another Gun forum I use to go to .
     
  15. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    I don't have a dog in this fight either BigO - but if there is a better product available for the troops, by God I want my tax dollars providing it.

    I saw all the same tests, and I was impressed, but I have also worn the stuff and it flows with the body much more than ceramic plates do. Those Dragon Skin Ceramic Disks are a better overall product than one big plate covering your chest.

    There is so much behind the scenes stuff, underhanded stuff going on, it would just make you puke if you read the whole timeline of the trials...

    I just want the best overall products for our troops, whether it be body armor, helmet, boots, water purification or your firearm.

    JD
     
  16. matt g

    matt g New Member Supporter

    3,865
    0
    0
    Our troops should be outfitted with the best that money can buy, but unfortunately, this never happens. Ask anyone that served, they tell you that the best thing that the military issued them was their poncho liner. It's a bad scene when every ground soldier feels that their best piece of equipment is their woobie.
     
  17. Mark F

    Mark F New Member Supporter

    2,918
    0
    0
    Haven't you HEARD? Low bid wins...
     
  18. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    Not really - but I see what you are getting at Mark.

    When the cost of a screwdriver is $1100 - I would rather have the best possible screwdriver for our good folks in the military who were selfless enough to put themselves in harms way.

    After all, it's OUR collective $1100, we should be able to have some say on which product they buy with it....
     
  19. h2oking

    h2oking New Member

    56
    0
    0
    You are right about what you saying about damaged caused by high velocity but that drops off when you go to any other commercial bullet because of the added weight of the bullet. The non expanding AP bullet that I think you are referencing is the 27 grain copper jacketed aluminum bullet which really cooks. I don't know if they are still available but when I bought my gun that was all that was available. When you step up to even a 35 grain bullet you are adding 23% to the weight of the bullet and at 40 grains another 42% which really slows the bullet down and it will no longer perform the magic of high velocity that the round was originally intended.
     
  20. Recon 173

    Recon 173 New Member

    191
    0
    0
    The Chinese are using the 5.7 and 5.8 cartridges in their new pistols and some of their new carbines. It looks like the Chinese want their troops to be able to carry a lot of small bore, high velocity firearms and ammunition. What makes ANY cartridge work are the tactics behind it. Would I use an FN 5.7 for anything? Nope. Not at all. That's the sort of bullet that people kid would "put out an eye and make somebody mad if you shot them with it."

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDb2Q-8QJ44[/ame]