FN 5.7mm vs. .22 Hornet

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nightcrawler

New member
I'v been thinking about the FN P90 submachine gun and the cartridge it fires, 5.7x28mm SS190. The round will penetrate a Level IIIA vest at 100 yards, something even .44 Magnum won't do, but it's pretty anemic energy-wise. The load data for the SS190 round is a 31 grain .22 caliber bullet at 2,346 feet per second, which creates about 379 foot-pounds of energy at the muzzle.

I was wondering how .22 hornet would do for armor penetration, if applied in full metal jacket form. As near as I can tell, .22 Hornet offers better ballistics than 5.7mm (admittedly from a longer barrel), and could, I suspect, penetrate soft armor just as well.

Typical .22 Hornet loads (from Winchester Ammunition):

-34gr @ 3050fps / 700 ft-lbs
-45gr @ 2690fps / 723 ft-lbs
-46gr @ 2690fps / 739 ft-lbs

As you can see, these loads offer higher velocities AND heavier bullet weights than the 5.7mm round. This would mean that the bullets would have better momentum, and (being the same small caliber as 5.7mm) would penetrate soft armor BETTER.

What do you think? Am I wrong about any of this?
 
Wish everyone would get real! The PDW concept is not going to hit the consumer market any time soon and there is nothing in the current market that even comes close to the current concepts being used now.

Our only hope is that someone make a sabot that would allow a .224 bullet to be seated in either a .40 case (40 S&W or 10mm) or .355 case ( 38 Super, 9x23, .357 Sig) and use existing weaponry. Keep the sale of these sabots low key so that the "officials" don't have a sh!t fit.
 
What are you talking about? I was comparing ballistics between the two cartridges. How "real" can I get? I have no desire for a supposed armor-piercing pop gun. If I want to pierce armor, my FAL will get the job done every time.

If you want an AP pistol, get one of those Olympic or Professional Ordnance AR-15 dealies with the 6" barrels.
 
It's all about velocity and bullet design.


I'm sure if somebody were to use a 357Magnum in a lever action carbine it would get enough of a kick in it's seat so that it could become a decent threat to Level III soft body armour.



Heck, I'm left wondering about some of the older serious 357Magnum loads, like the 110grain bullets that can pull over 1700fps from a revolver. Smaller diameter than the 44Magnum may play a benefit to it's ability to punch holes in kevlar.



As for the 22Hornet, I doubt it even needs to be a FMJ bullet. It's likely that velocity is fast enough and the meplat of the bullet is pointy enough that exposed lead spire points could still punch a hole through it. Impact velocity needs to be fast enough so that it slices through layers before they can react to "catch" the round.


22Hornet ammo can still manage like 2100fps from a Taurus Raging Hornet revolver if I'm not mistaken, that should be close enough to the right velocity to make a keen soft body armour punch for up to Level IIA and possibly Level III.
 
Hmmm, the Taurus Raging Hornet is built on a frame that is the equivalent to the S&W N-frame if I'm not mistaken. Heck, it's even the same frame that Taurus uses for their 454Casull possibly, maybe without the heat treat.



The Taurus Raging Hornet is likely the closest thing out there on the civilian market to the 224Boz or the 5.7x28mm rounds that are restricted Military/LEO creations.


Handloaders might be able to tweek the performance of the Hornet a little more for use in a revolver rather than a revolver, but I can't say for sure. Faster powder might be slightly more optimized for a short handgun barrel? Handloading would certainly allow use of some different bullet types than typically found in factory offerings, if the 22Hornet is a true .224 diameter bullet. The 22Jet was a .223 cal bullet I believe.
 
.22 Hornet

Just to add a little fuel to the fire, when the military was using the Hornet as a survival rifle caliber, they were issuing FMJ cartridges for them. This was for the survival rifle that the USAF was using on it's aircraft in the early fifties.
 
The P90 uses a steel core bullet. Unless you have the same bullet for the Hornet, your results won't be the same.

It is a very controllable little gun, by the way.
 
This one deals with the half of the crooks who wear uniforms...

One to the chest, to slow them up a bit, then two to the head, to finish the job.

You might pierce the armor, but he'll still be able to shoot back, which isn't a good option to allow him.
 
Along this same line; the 7.62 x 25 will penetrate leval II and maybe III body armour. The Czechs had a load for their sub guns (M48 I beleive) that was good for 1800 fps from a CZ 52.
What if you had a 30-40 gr spire point in a sabot loaded in the M48?

By the way I have heard that the M48 is fine in a CZ 52, but don't use it in a Tokerov. It is said that the Czechs planned it that way out of spite for the Soviets when they were forced to redesign the CZ 52 to be complatable with Solviet wepons.
 
While the 7.62x25 round will penetrate up to NIJ Threat level II, levels IIIA and above will stop it. It's a big deal in Russia and the Baltic States, since that round is so common there (it's like their equivalent of .45ACP here). They make their body armor a little differently, since if it can't stop a 7.62 tokarev, then there just wouldn't be much point in wearing it there.

The .22 Hornet seems like a dandy round for piercing soft body armor, at least up to class II (maybe IIIA if it was steelcore and a hot load), but terminal ballistics are likely to be pretty poor.

I wonder if you can cyanide coat the round in such a way as to allow the poison to survive the initial firing...? I think the KGB did something like that with Ricin, but IIRC that was in an airgun...

Ziggy
 
Luke Skywalker said:
Nightcrawler created a good thread. What are the comparable strengths and weaknesses between the .22 Hornet and the 5.7×28mm?
Click to expand...
To be more specific, Nightcrawler created a good thread that died over a decade ago.

Welcome to TFL, Luke. I hope you enjoy your stay here. But it seems you've joined the ranks of an alarmingly large number of members whose first post is one responding to a thread that's been dead for years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top