FN 5.7mm P-90 Ballistics?
- Thread starter DmL5
- Start date
IZinterrogator
New member
futureforcewarrior22 used one in the sandbox that he picked up somewhere. He gives a description of his experience with it in this thread.
Even ballistically the two aren't similar.
Out of a 4-inch barrel, a 40-grain .22 Magnum gets 1450 fps. Out of the Five-seveN's 4.75-inch barrel, the 31-grain 5.7x28mm gets 2150 fps.
I know of several shootings with the 5.7 where it gave good performance, but I wanted to know if any here have heard of some shootings that I haven't. Thanks IZ for the interesting link.
-DmL
You phrased the question as "P90", not "FiveseveN". P90 ballistics are 31grn@2329 (9.5" barrel) for 370 ft/lbs. .22 Mag: 40grn@2020 (18" barrel) for 360 ft/lbs. Sure it has an edge because it reaches a higher velocity in a shorter barrel. But when used in firearms designed for that particular round, no real difference. .22 mag wouldn't be my first (or top 10) round for defense/offense. Neither would the 5.7. It is not likely I'll own one.
And I've read that Hornady's "civilian load" for the 5.7x28 only clocks at 1400fps. A centerfire Stinger.
But its not fair to compare it to .22 Magnum fired out of a barrel of twice the length. Given a long enough barrel, 22 Mag could be made ballistically equal to almost any pistol caliber.
A fair comparison is the two rounds fired out of equal (or nearly equal) barrel lengths. When this is done (as posted earlier), the .22 Magnum isn't even close to the 5.7mm.
Regarding the new 40 gr. civilian round, it isn't known yet what the velocity will be. There have been figures of 1300 fps, 1650 fps, and 2000 fps. FN doesn't even know what it will be. The round will be arriving soon in the US and FN expect it to be just under 2000 fps. Regardless of whether the new round is 2000 fps or 1300 fps, there are plans by at least one major reloading company to produce a 30-grain round that will be similar ballistically to the old SS192.
But in spite of all this, I wasn't talking about the new V-max SS-196 round, or the old SS-192 JHP, or even the LE/Military FMJ SS-190. This topic pertains to the 5.7mm SS-190 round's performance in shootings.
-DmL
Not true. Drag would eventually cause diminishing returns. 5.7 wasn't a "pistol cartridge" anyway. A PDW/SMG round. Fact is, whether you get shot with an 18" .22 mag or a 9.5" 5.7, it'll sting the same. I understand that the recoil impulse is low enough that you can place a whole mag on target with one long burst. Thanks goodness!
Sorry, I just can't get excited about a centerfire round with rimfire ballistics.
I had been told that Hornady was producing this round and the figures were already known.
Since I helped this thread go astray, I'm out.
#1. A 18" .22 Magnum rifle is by no means what is being discussed anyway. When one mentions that the .22 Magnum has been a poor performer in shootings, he is referring to a .22 Mag pistol, which has a drastic reduction in velocity from the rifle.
#2. We weren't talking terminal ballistics anyway. I have a lot more info in favor of the 5.7 if we want to talk terminal ballistics. But so far we're talking just ballistics, as in velocity and projectile weight. Terminal ballistics would favor the 5.7 because as you said, the two rounds fire very different projectiles. The 5.7 round is .850-inch long and it tumbles.
Anyway, your original statement was false. The 5.7 and .22Mag cartridges are by no means similar ballistically unless the latter is fired from a barrel of twice the length of the former. Even then, the 5.7 surprisingly has a slight edge in energy, giving 20 more ft. lbs (it actually generates 379 flb at muzzle).
Out of the same barrel length, the .22 Magnum is a long drop from the 5.7mm. I have heard the 5.7 compared many times to the .22 Magnum, but its not a legitimate comparison even if one does not take bullet design into account. Also its performance in shootings. But I will not get into that as my intention was to get new details, preferably from new shootings, not provide them.
-DmL
Thats another argument brought against the 5.7, but it isn't legitimate either.
#1. You said "in the sandbox". Does the same marginal performance apply to the 5.56 round when used in a close quarters role? Close quarters is the intended use of the 5.7 weapons. The 5.56 performance issues you present are at extended range.
#2. Here is where we stop talking bullet weight and velocity. What ultimately matters is the wound, not the bullet characteristics. The 5.7 creates a larger permanent cavity than the 5.56 because the projectile has a longer length, leading to a larger wound during tumble. The 5.7 also tumbles earlier and stays in tumble longer than the 5.56mm. Take note I am NOT saying the 5.7 is superior or equal to 5.56mm. The 5.56 has the benefit of a much larger temporary cavity, whereas the TC of the 5.7 isn't large enough to aid its TE.
#3. A round only need penetrate a depth equal to the thickness of the target. The average thickness of a human torso is 9.4 inches. The penetration given by the 5.7 in the Five-seveN is 8-10 inches and 11 to 13 inches in the P-90. This is the most penetration you can get without overpenetration, and its also the most you will need in most scenarios. Therefore, the superior flesh penetration of the 5.56 doesn't help it in 90% of its applications and overpenetration is a concern. Reduced overpenetration was one of the design points of the 5.7 and one of the reasons why it is finding favor with so many protection units like the US Secret Service.
#4. That argument against the 5.7 is further disproved by its more-than-marginal performance in about fifteen shootings. No-one has survived a shot to the chest with a 5.7, whether wearing heavy winter clothing or high protection (IIIA) soft armor. 90% of the shootings involved one round and the others involved a couple rounds. You can argue against a round all you want, but I'm not believing you when the round is out there performing again and again.
#5. On top of this, the 5.7 weapons have been adopted by dozens of SF/CT units (including the French GIGN) after going through extensive ballistic testing. These units would not adopt a weapon for general use whose wound channel resembled a .22 Magnum. Most of these units are using the weapons for general use and many of them replaced their previously-used M4's and MP5's.
#6. The 5.7 round also has very low recoil and thus very high hit probability. Better shot placement means better wounding ability.
#7. The 5.7 weapons aren't restricted to a single shot anyway. The Five-seveN holds twenty rounds and the P-90 holds fifty.
A quote: "As one who has actually used the P90 for tactical operations I can say that it is a devastating round despite its small size. From our initial training, I recall the fact that no one has survived being shot by the P90."
My opinion on the wounding ability of the 5.7 is that it is on par with other pistol calibers. However, the weapons themselves offer many advantages: lightweight, low recoil, almost no overpenetration, high capacity, and still have reasonable ergonomics.
-DmL
I hope y'all will forgive me, I'm late to this 5.7 hoopla party.
So why is the 5.7 supposed to be superior to, say, the 7.62x25 Tokarev?
7.62x25 Tokarev: 85gr@1647 for 511 ft/lbs. (Seller & Belloit)
A round that penetrates level IIIA soft armor (without the hard plates I assume) will no doubt delight the black hearts of lawyers the first time an innocent is hit with one of these, either through a miss or overpenetration. But I digress.
Maybe I'm missing something here. The Brits developed the .224 BOZ to do about the same thing as the 5.7 and designed it as a one-shot concept. Here we have the 5.7 with people appearing to claim 100% one-shot lethality from thoractic hits but saying it works best when firing bursts.
I'm just trying to get a grip on what the role of this gun should be and why its supposed to be superior to similar calibers.
So why is the 5.7 supposed to be superior to, say, the 7.62x25 Tokarev?
7.62x25 Tokarev: 85gr@1647 for 511 ft/lbs. (Seller & Belloit)
Indeed. From reading the threads it seems that the significant advantage for the 5.7 is that you can fire a "burst" into your enemy and down him. Perhaps what we need then is modernized shotgun with highspeed projectiles to do the same thing.
These 15 shootings are out of how many incidents? Not the total killed, but the total number of people hit with the 5.7? Very few people survive being hit in the chest by a 5.56 unless there is immediate triage & medical attention so I'm not swayed much yet.
A round that penetrates level IIIA soft armor (without the hard plates I assume) will no doubt delight the black hearts of lawyers the first time an innocent is hit with one of these, either through a miss or overpenetration. But I digress.
Maybe I'm missing something here. The Brits developed the .224 BOZ to do about the same thing as the 5.7 and designed it as a one-shot concept. Here we have the 5.7 with people appearing to claim 100% one-shot lethality from thoractic hits but saying it works best when firing bursts.
I'm just trying to get a grip on what the role of this gun should be and why its supposed to be superior to similar calibers.
^^^
So it's highly effective, AND allows for sustained fire?
Also, the disadvantage of a shotgun is that if you twitch and miss, it amounts to using a heavy-recoil, small-magazine, semiautomatic rifle.
P90, you can quite literally hose your targets down. And if you have good aim, you can put enough bullets (I would have said lead, except that they have enviro-friendly ammo...wtf, right?) into them to compensate for relatively light bullets.
And Lawyers would like to get rid of any and all firearms...it doesn't really matter what round is used, although the SS19x family does seem to be a pet peeve of clueless anti-gun people.
So it's highly effective, AND allows for sustained fire?
Also, the disadvantage of a shotgun is that if you twitch and miss, it amounts to using a heavy-recoil, small-magazine, semiautomatic rifle.
P90, you can quite literally hose your targets down. And if you have good aim, you can put enough bullets (I would have said lead, except that they have enviro-friendly ammo...wtf, right?) into them to compensate for relatively light bullets.
And Lawyers would like to get rid of any and all firearms...it doesn't really matter what round is used, although the SS19x family does seem to be a pet peeve of clueless anti-gun people.
CZ-52? Ballistically, the 5.7 SS-190 pierces vests much better and the SS-192 pierces a little better, and yes, I'm talking about from a 5.7 pistol, not P90. Terminal ballistically, I'm not sure which of the two would be more effective. I do know that the 5.7 would create a larger permanent cavity due to the behavior mentioned earlier.
The CZ-52 also only has 40% of the Five-seveN's capacity (8 rds vs. 20 rds.) and its also heavier.
90% of the shootings involved one round and the others involved a couple rounds. So yes, bursts are possible, but not required to kill with it.
The total number hit.
You're comparing a rifle round fired from a rifle to a sub-rifle round fired from a pistol. The terminal ballistics of the 5.7 were never meant (or said) to be better from a pistol than a rifle round from a rifle.
Yes. 100% lethality according to a tactical operator. Those against the round say that bursts are the only way to achieve effectiveness with the 5.7mm. Real-life shootings so far have said otherwise. Those are the two sides you're hearing.
Posted earlier: My opinion on the wounding ability of the 5.7 is that it is on par with other pistol calibers. However, the weapons themselves offer many advantages: lightweight, low recoil, almost no overpenetration, high capacity, and still have reasonable ergonomics.
-DmL
Think of it this way:
A requirement was posted for a very compact SMG for use by non-infantry personnel in combat zones (like tank crews).
They wanted armor penetration, high ROF, low recoil, and a nice flat trajectory.
FN designed the weapon first, then the round for the weapon, as opposed to designing a weapon to go with an existing round.
Stiletto is correct
The P90 is a very ergonomic weapon by all accounts
The caliber/round is totally secondary (good thing)
It will never be the equal of the 5.56 at any range
It was meant to replace a handgun, or pistol caliber subgun...not a rifle/carbine...it is small and relatively light.
It relies on it's ability to easily put multiple rounds on target...quickly and accurately...and defeat body armor.
Head to head, the 5.7 x 28 round is slightly less impressive than the better 9mm loadings with regard to terminal ballistics.
It does not generally achieve adequate penetration.
Rounds that penetrate less than 13" have been shown to be less than satisfactory in the real world.
There is too much chance of having to shoot through an arm into the chest, or through the width of the chest.....the bad guys do not always stand still and face you head on in the real world.
Now...a burst of 5.7 x 28 is going to do much more damage than a single 9mm round...absolutely...very little doubt!
But the evidence of the 5.7 rounds "street effectiveness" is pretty thin...so far.
The P90 is a very ergonomic weapon by all accounts
The caliber/round is totally secondary (good thing)
It will never be the equal of the 5.56 at any range
It was meant to replace a handgun, or pistol caliber subgun...not a rifle/carbine...it is small and relatively light.
It relies on it's ability to easily put multiple rounds on target...quickly and accurately...and defeat body armor.
Head to head, the 5.7 x 28 round is slightly less impressive than the better 9mm loadings with regard to terminal ballistics.
It does not generally achieve adequate penetration.
Rounds that penetrate less than 13" have been shown to be less than satisfactory in the real world.
There is too much chance of having to shoot through an arm into the chest, or through the width of the chest.....the bad guys do not always stand still and face you head on in the real world.
Now...a burst of 5.7 x 28 is going to do much more damage than a single 9mm round...absolutely...very little doubt!
But the evidence of the 5.7 rounds "street effectiveness" is pretty thin...so far.
FirstFreedom
Moderator
Said it before.....the P90 is essentially worthless for civis, and purt near worthless even on full auto, *relative to* other carbine choices. It's fun. It's cute. It's got 50 rounds if you're LEO. But...It's a .22 magnum. If you need a carbine, grab an M4.
The FiveseveN, on the other hand, fills a limited niche, I believe, by giving a *concealable*, SBA-piercing round (even the non-penetrator rounds will penetrate far better than any other handgun alternative).
The FiveseveN, on the other hand, fills a limited niche, I believe, by giving a *concealable*, SBA-piercing round (even the non-penetrator rounds will penetrate far better than any other handgun alternative).