FN 57 for self defense?
- Thread starter Deja vu
- Start date
I really would be concerned about the noise level. When you are in a self defense situation you don't want certain psychological factors to hinder your decision making. For example people who are scared of the recoil from their 357 snubby (many women feel this way) may hesitate to pull the trigger and thereby lose a tactical advantage.
If the first shot from your 5-7 blows your eardrums it may be hard to get in some follow up shots because you are disoriented or you may not hear the shouts of loved ones near you warning of other dangers.
Really cool gun and cartridge though.
If the first shot from your 5-7 blows your eardrums it may be hard to get in some follow up shots because you are disoriented or you may not hear the shouts of loved ones near you warning of other dangers.
Really cool gun and cartridge though.
People's reaction to and perception of sound levels varies wildly in life and death situations. Some people don't even register the sound of a gun, but to others it might sound like naval artillery! (Time and spatial perception distortions are common, as well.) I recommend reading "On Killing" and "On Combat" by Grossman.
As for the 5.7, the poster who commented about it taking the "small and fast" theory to extremes is right. It is a light, small round that depends on velocity. In its original form, it was designed to penetrate body armor very well. Those rounds are generally restricted now, in the US, if I recall correctly.
This test demonstrated FBI acceptable penetration, and permanent cavities decent for such a small projectile (until the last few inches of penetration).
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...ebull410-tests-fn-five-seven-fn-ss197sr-ammo/
The reviewer is disappointed, and rightfully so, with non-expanding HP ammo.
That said, it's certainly better than a .22LR, and I don't know many people volunteering to get shot by those either!
As for the 5.7, the poster who commented about it taking the "small and fast" theory to extremes is right. It is a light, small round that depends on velocity. In its original form, it was designed to penetrate body armor very well. Those rounds are generally restricted now, in the US, if I recall correctly.
This test demonstrated FBI acceptable penetration, and permanent cavities decent for such a small projectile (until the last few inches of penetration).
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...ebull410-tests-fn-five-seven-fn-ss197sr-ammo/
The reviewer is disappointed, and rightfully so, with non-expanding HP ammo.
That said, it's certainly better than a .22LR, and I don't know many people volunteering to get shot by those either!
If anyone wonders how destructive the FN-57 is, just look up the Ft. Hood shooting. The firearm used for all the carnage was a Five-Seven.
I wasn't aware that the 57 was used...But for actual street type cred. or in HD/CC scenarios, it's not been around long enough for any body of data.
I'm a big caliber bullet at standard velocity guy, especially so if truly recent technological advances cited for 9mm bullets, are applied as well to the .45 ACP...just makes the old war horse that much better...if you can control the gun in defensive fire...comes down to a matter of recoil, and the OP's point was his female companion liked it and was able to handle it, the 57 that is. And in his/her case, a series of multiple hits with a 57 always trumps a cpl misses with a .45.
I wasn't aware that the 57 was used...But for actual street type cred. or in HD/CC scenarios, it's not been around long enough for any body of data.
I'm a big caliber bullet at standard velocity guy, especially so if truly recent technological advances cited for 9mm bullets, are applied as well to the .45 ACP...just makes the old war horse that much better...if you can control the gun in defensive fire...comes down to a matter of recoil, and the OP's point was his female companion liked it and was able to handle it, the 57 that is. And in his/her case, a series of multiple hits with a 57 always trumps a cpl misses with a .45.
Last edited:
Mrgunsngear
New member
I tested the SS198 round a while ago from the 5.7 pistol in this video.
The 5.7 is a very easy gun to shoot well due to the trigger and low recoil (helps new/timid shooters not flinch) but the grip is tough for a lot of smaller statured shooters.
The 5.7 is a very easy gun to shoot well due to the trigger and low recoil (helps new/timid shooters not flinch) but the grip is tough for a lot of smaller statured shooters.
Walt Sherrill
New member
Evil Monkey said:
In a self-defense situation, you don't want to incapacitate your opponent, you want to STOP him -- before he can stop you.
Except for shots to the heart, most of the shots to the major blood vessels won't RAPIDLY incapacitate the person shot. Even a direct shot to the heart isn't necessarily a fast stop -- it can take up to minute in some cases for him to drop -- and that gives the other guy time to KILL you before he drops.
A shot to the head, or a shot to the spine, high or low, can stop things almost instantly. All of the above is even better. And doing it with a low-recoil, high capacity weapon may make it easier.
If you read about the infamous FBI shootout in Miami back in the 80's, the two bad guys were hit by a a number incapacitating shots, and those shots would have caused them to eventually bleed out -- but they killed two FBI agents and wound several others before that happened. They were finally stopped by several CNS shots from one agent.
Temporary or permanent wound cavities might be debilitating, but they won't always debilitate quickly if at all -- particularly if the target is experienced, determined to get his opponent, or drugged up. There are too many well-documented stories of people being hit is seemingly critical spots with multiple .45 or .357 Magnum rounds who continue the fight. As best I can tell from various documents about wounds damage and related ballistics, truly damaging temporary or permanent would cavities occur most often with rifle rounds, or very high velocity handgun rounds -- and the 5.7 seems to fall into that category.
Last edited:
The only way to incapacitate someone with a pistol round is hitting his cns, anyway shots hitting major blood vessels or heart take down your target in a few seconds.(most of the time the target stop shooting or fall down just because he know he has been hit). i think the 5 7 is a very good option for self defence, the only things i'd consider before buying is the price of ammunitions (the less you train with your weapons,the less lethal it will be).
Another excellent video Mrgunsngear !! I was a little surprised by the penetration, I was expecting a bit deeper.
I really like this gun and if it were $600 or so I would already have one. I would not feel under gunned with the 5.7x28 as a self defense round but the gun itself is just a bit bigger than I would care to carry.
Based on the test in the video, lack of over penetration, lack of recoil, high capacity I wouldn't discount it as a decent nightstand gun for those bump in the night scenarios. Yes, I get that there is quite a bit of muzzle flash and its loud, but then again my 12 gauges are'nt exactly dim and they certainly don't whisper when I fire them....
.
I really like this gun and if it were $600 or so I would already have one. I would not feel under gunned with the 5.7x28 as a self defense round but the gun itself is just a bit bigger than I would care to carry.
Based on the test in the video, lack of over penetration, lack of recoil, high capacity I wouldn't discount it as a decent nightstand gun for those bump in the night scenarios. Yes, I get that there is quite a bit of muzzle flash and its loud, but then again my 12 gauges are'nt exactly dim and they certainly don't whisper when I fire them....
.
Last edited:
5.7
$ for ammo: for the 5.7X28, costs are in the .38 to .54/round area.
For the .45 ACP....costs are in the .34 to $1.25+/round area.
Energy levels are NOT similar. 5.7 typically runs with ME in the mid 200's (ft.lbs).
Military ball .45 ACP runs in the mid to upper 300 ft.lbs.
I like the FiveSeven, own one and shoot it frequently. I reload.
The rescue was in Peru...The Japanese embassy in late 1996. No terrorists survived. (There is continuing controversy about the manner of some of their deaths.)
$ for ammo: for the 5.7X28, costs are in the .38 to .54/round area.
For the .45 ACP....costs are in the .34 to $1.25+/round area.
Energy levels are NOT similar. 5.7 typically runs with ME in the mid 200's (ft.lbs).
Military ball .45 ACP runs in the mid to upper 300 ft.lbs.
I like the FiveSeven, own one and shoot it frequently. I reload.
Last edited:
Stopped by my LCS / Police equipment shop yesterday for a chat with the owner an old friend. There were 6 LEO's there at the time, including the former firearms instructor for Louisville Metro. On the counter was an open box of 5.7mm ammunition so I asked the obvious question...what they thought about it for defense.
A lot of laughter...they were all carrying .40's for duty and an even mix of .40's and 9's for off-duty. All were unimpressed, made comments about puny calibers, and the wisdom of "experimenting" in a SD or LEO type shooting. Not a good word for any of the 'marginal' calibers and that included .380 and low powered 9mm.
They all said it looked like toy ammunition, maybe fun for blowing up wood chucks in a suitable gun or full beer cans, but not for carry where your wife and kids depended on you coming home off shift.
Rod
A lot of laughter...they were all carrying .40's for duty and an even mix of .40's and 9's for off-duty. All were unimpressed, made comments about puny calibers, and the wisdom of "experimenting" in a SD or LEO type shooting. Not a good word for any of the 'marginal' calibers and that included .380 and low powered 9mm.
They all said it looked like toy ammunition, maybe fun for blowing up wood chucks in a suitable gun or full beer cans, but not for carry where your wife and kids depended on you coming home off shift.
Rod
Odd, police officers who saw my five-seven at a range nearly pooped themselves, thinking I had cop-killing intentions, or some such idiocy. Gave me a strong impression that the gun was a potentially bad idea for self-defense (i.e. ignorant cops would seek to railroad you for daring to carry one)
Also, what cop doesn't have a healthy fear of 25acp pocket guns?
Sorry for the wide photo;
Posting before some fool claims 5.7 only has 9" of penetration, or something
TCB
Walt Sherrill
New member
Gun shops are seldom the place to go for good information about guns. They're in business to sell, and generally like to sell what they have in stock.
The same might be said of MOST LEOs... In my experience, a relatively small % of any agency or department sworn officers are gun savvy; Those who are tend will be very knowledgeable and possibly experts; some will shoot competitively, and will know whereof they speak. But must of them shoot their weapons weapons only when they are forced to qualify, and have little interest in their weapons the rest of the time.
Sounds like the guy talking in a gun shop with LEOs about the 5.7 got the worst of both cases.
With regard to .22 WMR:
That round, if the ammo has powder designed for pistol barrels, and the barrels are 3"=5" long, the .22 WMR can perform a lot like a .380 round, and you can get off a lot of shots pretty quickly. I have a PMR-30. It's been reliable, loud, and shots like a damned LASER!! If push came to shove, I'd wouldn't feel bad about using it for self-defense. It wouldn't be my first choice, but...
The same might be said of MOST LEOs... In my experience, a relatively small % of any agency or department sworn officers are gun savvy; Those who are tend will be very knowledgeable and possibly experts; some will shoot competitively, and will know whereof they speak. But must of them shoot their weapons weapons only when they are forced to qualify, and have little interest in their weapons the rest of the time.
Sounds like the guy talking in a gun shop with LEOs about the 5.7 got the worst of both cases.
With regard to .22 WMR:
That round, if the ammo has powder designed for pistol barrels, and the barrels are 3"=5" long, the .22 WMR can perform a lot like a .380 round, and you can get off a lot of shots pretty quickly. I have a PMR-30. It's been reliable, loud, and shots like a damned LASER!! If push came to shove, I'd wouldn't feel bad about using it for self-defense. It wouldn't be my first choice, but...
I don't understand the whole physiology of what it takes incapacitate someone.
I've seen so many people incapacitated with a punch or kick that doesn't even penetrate the body why does a projectile need to hit a major blood vessel to stop a fight?
I'm not denying what you say, mine is a legitimate question. I should say that I have absolutely zero medical training so the answer may be simple biology but I honestly have no idea.
About an hour before you posted that, I had written the exact same thing haha (then closed page to do something else). Gun shops bring some of the worst opinions out for whatever reason, and each and every person giving advice is an expert. Stopping power, double taps, .40+ or nothing, etc. In reality I think the majority of perpetrators would have second thoughts with an incapacitated limb, or a rapid loss of blood. Not that I am advocating the shoot to injure mindset in the least, but people tend to behave differently in real life than in the movies. With all of the options out there and third hand information, I think we tend to overthink things at times.
I could understand laughter if you'd asked about carrying a pellet gun, but I would never feel undergunned with a Five Seven. CA limited magazine capacities remove much of the benefit for me, but I will probably get one when I leave the state in a few years. And while it may be a bit large for female CC, at least it is something she likes to shoot and is comfortable with.
Each to his own...figured I'd get flamed by guys who support the 5.7 but I'll stay with a bigger, albeit, slower cartridge...as will the LEO's I spoke with, both on and off duty. Their opinions, like mine, come from a bit of study on useful carry options that span the last century. Their duty weapon is decided by dept. policy, as well as their off duty choice...mine is not.
But to the point, is anyone aware of a body of data on the new cartridge's effectiveness on the street; any other instances where it was used at all?
Best Regards Rod
But to the point, is anyone aware of a body of data on the new cartridge's effectiveness on the street; any other instances where it was used at all?
Best Regards Rod
Theohazard
New member
In my experience, law enforcement officers are some of the most ignorant people you'll ever find when it comes to the subject of firearms. The average person doesn't know much about guns, but they know they don't know very much and they don't try to convince you otherwise. However, many LEOs seem to think that because they are issued and carry a gun they are somehow more knowledgeable about guns in general because of this. And the problem is made way worse by the people who specifically look to LEOs for advice on firearms; they treat LEOs as some "expert" source of firearms knowledge and contribute to the problem.rodfac said:
I work at a gun shop/range/training facility, and some of worst gun information I've heard has been from LEOs or from customers referencing LEOs. And the problem isn't unique to LEOs; military members and veterans have the same problem: It's called the Dunning-Kruger effect and it refers to someone who has an inflated view of their own expertise on a subject. Remember, just because someone carries a gun in their line of work doesn't mean they know anything about guns in general.
Here's a thread I started a while back about this subject:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=508860
Last edited: