9mm or .22 Mag? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : 9mm or .22 Mag?


fgutie35
06-09-2010, 10:58
I'm debating on two pistols for self defense. I'm currently carrying a G19 with a M-Tac IWB holster. I'm pretty happy with it, but for summers and the quick trip to the store, I would like something light and slim that I can just put in my pocket or clip to my pants. I was looking at the Kel-Tec PF-9 and I was pretty convinced that is what I wanted, but now I see on CDNN catalog the PMR-30 which is suppose to be the poor man's FiveSeven. I called CDNN, but they don't have them in stock right now, but will be according to them. Their price will be $299.00. Now I'm tempted and willing to give up the PF-9 for the fire power 30rds of .22 Mag. So my question is. How does the two calibers compare when used as Defensive pistols? (I know there is a .22mag round that can be used for SD):dunno:

sdrnavy
06-09-2010, 11:02
I have a PF-9 , It has never failed. I carry Federal 115 +P HST: I do want a PMR-30 though ! The Bass Pro Shop had a wide selection of .22 mag last time that I was there, About $11.00 a box of 50 on average.

fredj338
06-09-2010, 11:44
Wow, I know, I know, shot placement is king, but seriously. The 22mag is a nice rodent basher, not a serious SD caliber. Better than no gun, just barely. There are far too many subcompact 9mm, even 380, not to mention the J-frame snubs in 38sp, to choose a 22mag as a SD weapon. As always, JMO. About $11.00 a box of 50 on average. The ammo isn't even cheap enough to consider that as a reason.

fgutie35
06-09-2010, 11:54
Wow, I know, I know, shot placement is king, but seriously. The 22mag is a nice rodent basher, not a serious SD caliber. Better than no gun, just barely. There are far too many subcompact 9mm, even 380, not to mention the J-frame snubs in 38sp, to choose a 22mag as a SD weapon. As always, JMO. The ammo isn't even cheap enough to consider that as a reason.

Well, I was considering it after I saw a video on YouTube that compares both .22Mag and 5.7x28 rounds and both have the same expansion and similar damage up to 12" of wet phone books. After that, is the 5.7x28 alone.

gunreviewonmyspace
06-09-2010, 12:08
Get the one you will shoot more. That will be the one you will be better with. That is what matters.

voyager4520
06-09-2010, 12:10
Out of the two I'd say PF-9. But make sure you get one with the metal mag release and don't ever dry-fire it without a snap cap.

Mountain10mm
06-09-2010, 12:16
9mm.


A .22mag really isn't regarded as defensive caliber. The 5.7 has similar ballistics to a .22mag - out of a RIFLE. The 5.7 also has a better self defense bullet selection, even so the effectiveness of the 5.7 as a defensive caliber, with civilian available bullets, is highly debatable. Truly a gun is better than no gun, given strict size and weight requirements, I think there are better alternatives to any .22 such as the new Ruger LCP/LCR, Kel-tec, Kahr, or the venerable air-weight J-frames, all of which (except for maybe the Kahr) fully-loaded should weigh less than a pound.

Keep in mind that you won't be shooting, or even drawing, your gun unless your life or limb is in mortal danger - with such high stakes, do you want to literally put your life on the line with a .22mag?

fredj338
06-09-2010, 13:40
9mm.


A .22mag really isn't regarded as defensive caliber. The 5.7 has similar ballistics to a .22mag - out of a RIFLE. The 5.7 also has a better self defense bullet selection, even so the effectiveness of the 5.7 as a defensive caliber, with civilian available bullets, is highly debatable. Truly a gun is better than no gun, given strict size and weight requirements, I think there are better alternatives to any .22 such as the new Ruger LCP/LCR, Kel-tec, Kahr, or the venerable air-weight J-frames, all of which (except for maybe the Kahr) fully-loaded should weigh less than a pound.

Keep in mind that you won't be shooting, or even drawing, your gun unless your life or limb is in mortal danger - with such high stakes, do you want to literally put your life on the line with a .22mag?Well said.:wavey:

HAMMERHEAD
06-09-2010, 18:00
Well, I was considering it after I saw a video on YouTube that compares both .22Mag and 5.7x28 rounds and both have the same expansion and similar damage up to 12" of wet phone books. After that, is the 5.7x28 alone.
__________________
Was the .22 mag fired from a rifle or short barreled pistol?

I like the .22 mag, my CZ Lux is my favorite long gun, but would never stake my life to it out of a pistol when a 9mm or .38 spl was available.

HAMMERHEAD
06-09-2010, 18:07
Never mind, found it, 24" rifle for the .22 mag.
Can't assume performance from a 4" pistol will be anything like it is from a 24" rifle.

AK_Stick
06-09-2010, 18:24
Well, I was considering it after I saw a video on YouTube that compares both .22Mag and 5.7x28 rounds and both have the same expansion and similar damage up to 12" of wet phone books. After that, is the 5.7x28 alone.


I'd look hard at the terminal performance of the 5.7 at Ft Hood, and in the few LEO shoots its had, then ask yourself if you felt that was good enough to trust your life to.


Killed 13, wounded 30..... Almost all at close range, and defenseless.....

Fairly piss poor performance if you ask me.

PATRICE
06-09-2010, 19:56
.....

den888
06-09-2010, 20:30
I would say that a .22 mag is not a serious SD/HD round.

ROG
06-09-2010, 21:21
I'd look hard at the terminal performance of the 5.7 at Ft Hood, and in the few LEO shoots its had, then ask yourself if you felt that was good enough to trust your life to.


Killed 13, wounded 30..... Almost all at close range, and defenseless.....

Fairly piss poor performance if you ask me.According to news reports most of the wounded survivors at Fort Hood were shot in extremities. But regardless, it is also true that the vast majority of victims (680+) in the Oklahoma City bombing survived. That does not mean a bomb is an ineffective means of killing someone.

But if you like, we can compare Fort Hood to incidents where other bullets were used. The Columbine massacre involved roughly twice as many rounds fired (mostly 9mm), and resulted in an almost identical number of dead. The Virginia Tech massacre (also 9mm) resulted in about twice as many dead, but the victims were shot roughly twice as many times as the Fort Hood victims. The North Hollywood bank robbery (mostly 7.62x39mm) resulted in a large number of wounded and no fatalities at all.

srt-4_jon
06-09-2010, 21:32
According to news reports most of the wounded survivors at Fort Hood were shot in extremities. But regardless, it is also true that the vast majority of victims (680+) in the Oklahoma City bombing survived. That does not mean a bomb is an ineffective means of killing someone.

But if you like, we can compare Fort Hood to incidents where other bullets were used. The Columbine massacre involved roughly twice as many rounds fired (mostly 9mm), and resulted in an almost identical number of dead. The Virginia Tech massacre (also 9mm) resulted in about twice as many dead, but the victims were shot roughly twice as many times as the Fort Hood victims. The North Hollywood bank robbery (mostly 7.62x39mm) resulted in a large number of wounded and no fatalities at all.

Well said. The other reason against a .22 mag SD gun is the rimfire bullets themselves.

AK_Stick
06-09-2010, 23:38
According to news reports most of the wounded survivors at Fort Hood were shot in extremities. But regardless, it is also true that the vast majority of victims (680+) in the Oklahoma City bombing survived. That does not mean a bomb is an ineffective means of killing someone.

But if you like, we can compare Fort Hood to incidents where other bullets were used. The Columbine massacre involved roughly twice as many rounds fired (mostly 9mm), and resulted in an almost identical number of dead. The Virginia Tech massacre (also 9mm) resulted in about twice as many dead, but the victims were shot roughly twice as many times as the Fort Hood victims. The North Hollywood bank robbery (mostly 7.62x39mm) resulted in a large number of wounded and no fatalities at all.


Many of the victims were hit multiple times, and alot of them had wounds in both extremities and the torso. Only 8 of the wounded soldiers have been able to go on the deployment they were spooling up for. Alot of the shots were also taken at extremely close range in comparison to VT and Columbine. I don't know where you get that the people at VT were shot "twice as many times"

They only give an approximate round count for VT, and Ft Hood, and they don't give names of wounded, or locations of hits, I'd be very interested in how you came about those stats. What I know of people who were shot, comes from medics stationed on Hood, who were either on station, or at the hospital some of the wounded came to.


However, almost every shooting involving the 5.7 seems to end with poor evaluation of the 5.7. Versus the other calibers where poor performance is the exception and not the rule.

ROG
06-10-2010, 00:42
Many of the victims were hit multiple times, and alot of them had wounds in both extremities and the torso.Many of the victims had wounds to extremities only. Many of the others hit in the torso were specifically hit in the lower torso or simply grazed. Some were hit by ricochet fragments or only scraped while escaping.



I don't know where you get that the people at VT were shot "twice as many times"News reports state that roughly 100 rounds were fired in the Fort Hood shooting, versus 170 rounds in the VT shooting. The Fort Hood count includes at least 10 rounds of 9mm fired by police officers at the shooter, so roughly half as many rounds were fired at Fort Hood as were fired in the VT shooting. Given the very close range both shootings occurred at, we can conclude that the VT shooting victims were shot more times than the Fort Hood victims.



They only give an approximate round count for VT, and Ft Hood, and they don't give names of wounded, or locations of hits, I'd be very interested in how you came about those stats.A thread posted here awhile back listed most of the wounded and hit locations:

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1160561

A brief Google search of any of the names in the list will yield local or national news reports with details that match up with the list. Most of the information in the list is verifiably accurate, although some of the details (on specifically which organs or bones were destroyed by the bullets, for example) are understandably not included in news reports in many cases.



However, almost every shooting involving the 5.7 seems to end with poor evaluation of the 5.7.I doubt you can produce a verifiable source on said shootings.

fgutie35
06-10-2010, 01:17
All right guys, thanks for all the replies. I guess I will have to get the PF-9, then whenever they work out all the bugs of the PMR-30 (which they usually have to do with every new innovative design), then I will save money again to get it.:supergrin:

AK_Stick
06-10-2010, 01:43
News reports state that roughly 100 rounds were fired in the Fort Hood shooting, versus 170 rounds in the VT shooting. The Fort Hood count includes at least 10 rounds of 9mm fired by police officers at the shooter, so roughly half as many rounds were fired at Fort Hood as were fired in the VT shooting. Given the very close range both shootings occurred at, we can conclude that the VT shooting victims were shot more times than the Fort Hood victims.


Most accounts I've seen say he fired "more than 100 rounds" and aren't including rounds fired by the police, but even without that,

Do you actually believe what you just wrote?

You have to be kidding, because twice as many rounds were fired, we should conclude they were shot twice as many times?

:rofl:

Thats quite possibly the dumbest thing I've seen posted in here since the latest Dr Courtney troll showed up.

There are plenty of first hand accounts of use of the 5.7 available if you know where to look. I would suggest you do some reading/searching, you might be amazed. Fact is, its a terrible round for un-armored personnel from the handgun. Backed up by the 13 people who took shots to the torso mostly at point blank, and lived.

The 5.7, makes about as much power as a 22 magnum out of a rifle, which isn't a caliber noted for its impressive terminal performance, power or penetration. But you pop it into a handgun, make it look cool and suddenly people think its high speed.

kendric98
06-10-2010, 02:30
Haha a post asking what is better 9mm or .22 mag, that has never happened to the .45. Looks like the war is over .45 wins!:rofl:

ROG
06-10-2010, 02:35
You have to be kidding, because twice as many rounds were fired, we should conclude they were shot twice as many times?Both shootings took place at very close range making it nearly impossible for either shooter to miss a human sized target. Both shooters shot roughly the same number of victims (~45-50), except one shooter fired nearly twice as many rounds as the other.

The Fort Hood shooter killed 13 with the roughly 100 rounds he fired. At that rate if he had fired an additional ~70 rounds (as did the VT shooter, for a total of ~170) the number of dead would have been much larger and actually very similar to the number of dead in the VT shooting.



There are plenty of first hand accounts of use of the 5.7 available if you know where to look. I would suggest you do some reading/searching, you might be amazed.Link a verifiable source.



Fact is, its a terrible round for un-armored personnel from the handgun. Backed up by the 13 people who took shots to the torso mostly at point blank, and lived.According to that source only 10 victims took a bullet to the torso, and of those, 6 were hit in the lower torso. Any common pistol bullet such as 9mm impacting in that same area would have produced the same outcome.



The 5.7, makes about as much power as a 22 magnum out of a rifle, which isn't a caliber noted for its impressive terminal performance, power or penetration.Link a news report (even one) covering a shooting where a victim was shot with .22 WMR fired from a rifle, and the bullet performed poorly.

FlyBoy007
06-10-2010, 06:37
While comparing the FH and the VT shootings no one is asking the question, How long did it take for the victims to die. They were laying there bleeding for quite a while.

If I shoot someone I really don't want to wait for them to die if they have the capacity to kill me (the only reason I would shoot some one in the first place).

I want the most incapacitating round not one that will eventually kill.

srt-4_jon
06-10-2010, 09:38
The 5.7, makes about as much power as a 22 magnum out of a rifle, which isn't a caliber noted for its impressive terminal performance, power or penetration. But you pop it into a handgun, make it look cool and suddenly people think its high speed.

Look at elite ammunition's 5.7 offerings and try to back that statement up. Just like the 10mm, 5.7 is loaded pretty wimpy off the shelf.

Glock1911
06-10-2010, 10:56
I would never consider a .22 caliber gun for SD, unless it's the only thing I had besides a rock.

After reading this write up, no one should consider the .22 a viable SD weapon.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/PDF%20Files/A%20brief%20Test%20and%20Evaluation%20of%20the%20Kel-Tec%20PMR-30%20handgun.pdf

English
06-10-2010, 16:55
All right guys, thanks for all the replies. I guess I will have to get the PF-9, then whenever they work out all the bugs of the PMR-30 (which they usually have to do with every new innovative design), then I will save money again to get it.:supergrin:

In a way the most important thing about those two pistols is that the PF-9 is light, small and slim and the PMR-30 is big and relatively heavy though light for its size. Think of the PMR-30 as a service size pistol. So regardless of the effectiveness of the two rounds it just does not fit your summer carry requirement. I am not knocking the PMR - I would like one - but it serves a different purpose.

English

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 18:27
Well, I was considering it after I saw a video on YouTube that compares both .22Mag and 5.7x28 rounds and both have the same expansion and similar damage up to 12" of wet phone books. After that, is the 5.7x28 alone.

All that shows is the 5.7 sucks as well. Stick with the 9mm.
Pat

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 18:30
Look at elite ammunition's 5.7 offerings and try to back that statement up. Just like the 10mm, 5.7 is loaded pretty wimpy off the shelf.

Wow look at some wonder bullet company with a lot of unverified claims. In the end its still a little bullet not going fast enough. The 5.7 is ran out of blow back firearms you can't load it up that hot. Its a wimpy round that seems to have a devout following of mall ninjas.
Pat

ROG
06-10-2010, 18:48
Wow look at some wonder bullet company with a lot of unverified claims. In the end its still a little bullet not going fast enough. The 5.7 is ran out of blow back firearms you can't load it up that hot. Its a wimpy round that seems to have a devout following of mall ninjas.
PatEA's numbers have been independently chronographed and verified by several sources. They shouldn't be surprising to you because even the .22 WMR is capable of expanding to .48" and penetrating 9.1 inches:

http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page2548.htm

That is an average diameter only 0.064" (less than 1/10th inch) smaller than 9mm Remington 147gr Golden Saber JHP, which expands to an average diameter of 0.541". The only significant difference is that the .22 WMR is a couple inches short of the 12" minimum. With a heavier bullet at a higher velocity (EA 5.7x28mm), that gap is closed.

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 20:25
EA's numbers have been independently chronographed and verified by several sources. They shouldn't be surprising to you because even the .22 WMR is capable of expanding to .48" and penetrating 9.1 inches:

http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page2548.htm

That is an average diameter only 0.064" (less than 1/10th inch) smaller than 9mm Remington 147gr Golden Saber JHP, which expands to an average diameter of 0.541". The only significant difference is that the .22 WMR is a couple inches short of the 12" minimum. With a heavier bullet at a higher velocity (EA 5.7x28mm), that gap is closed.

Poor performance. I won't depend on a load that does not penetrate 12 inches. Also Federals 9mm 147 grain HST expands to .75 caliber. Another factor you are failing to consider is momentium. (mass times velocity the amount of force required to bring a moving object to rest). The power factor on the 5.7 is pathetic. Its not likely to break bones inside the target. Its more likely to deflect. Hell once nurse was shot at Ft. Hood and did not even know it. Its a pathetic round hated by people who have actually had to use it in real life outside of a video game.
Pat

vafish
06-10-2010, 20:43
In a way the most important thing about those two pistols is that the PF-9 is light, small and slim and the PMR-30 is big and relatively heavy though light for its size. Think of the PMR-30 as a service size pistol. So regardless of the effectiveness of the two rounds it just does not fit your summer carry requirement. I am not knocking the PMR - I would like one - but it serves a different purpose.

English

That was going to be my comment. The PMR 30 is a large handgun. It is not comparable to a PF9 for concealed carry in the summer time.

Ballistics argument aside, if you don't want to carry a G19 because it is too big, you damn sure don't want to carry a PMR30.

Also Kel-Tec has a history of having to redesign their guns 2-3 times before they get the flaws out of them. I would not buy a brand new design from kel-Tec and trust my life to it. I would wait until it had been out on the market for a while and got the bugs worked out of it.

ROG
06-10-2010, 21:21
Poor performance. I won't depend on a load that does not penetrate 12 inches.Numerous EA 5.7x28mm loads offered to civilians will penetrate 12+ inches in ballistic gelatin.



Also Federals 9mm 147 grain HST expands to .75 caliber.Fired from a Glock 17, Federal 9mm 147 grain HST actually expands to 0.64" in bare ballistic gelatin. It also penetrates slightly less than 12 inches. Fired into clothed gelatin, it manages to penetrate 12+ inches of gelatin but expands to a reduced diameter of only 0.54". Again, less than 1/10th of an inch larger than the .22 WMR I linked.

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm

Quote: 9mm Fed 147 gr JHP HST (P9HST2) from G17:

------------- Velocity - Penetration - Recovered Diameter - Recovered Weight
Bare Gelatin - 1037fps --- 11.9" ----------- 0.64" ------------- 147.8gr
4-layer denim - 1049fps --- 14.7" ----------- 0.54" ------------- 147.5gr
Auto windshield - 1042fps --- 13.4" ----------- 0.53" ------------- 140.4gr



Its not likely to break bones inside the target. Its more likely to deflect.A number of the victims at Fort Hood suffered broken bones (of all types) despite the fact that the ammo type used by the shooter has significantly less momentum than EA 5.7x28mm ammo. Your speculation does not match up with reality. Here are just a few examples:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2009-11-06-hood-victims_N.htm
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2009/11/post_184.html
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6716290.html

Quote: "The bullet tore through her left forearm and broke two bones. A soldier for seven years who was a medic before becoming an occupational therapist, his daughter reacted instinctively, Nelson says. She was about to deploy to Afghanistan."

...

Quote: "One of those wounded during Thursday's shooting incident is a 135th officer, Maj. Randy Royer of Dothan. Royer, who was shot twice and has a broken bone in a leg that was hit by one of the bullets, is still hospitalized."

...

Quote: "Ferguson's mother, Leva, said the 21-year-old graduate of Clear Lake High School, who was shot three times, had improved in recent days. In an interview with KHOU, Ferguson said she was hit in the arm, shoulder and leg. She suffered a broken bone in her arm, a collapsed lung and other internal injuries."



Hell once nurse was shot at Ft. Hood and did not even know it.A victim's reaction to being shot has very little to do with the bullet's performance. Here is another example where a man was shot and killed with a .45-caliber handgun, and prior to dying never even knew he was shot, simply complaining of chest pains:

http://www.wbiw.com/local/archives/2009/03/police_investigating_shooting.php

Quote: “Morgan County police are trying to figure out who fired a bullet that killed a Monrovia man. The 35-year-old was not aware he had been shot. He complained of chest pains and his wife called 911. The victim has since been identified as 35-year-old Jason Breisch, and that the incident may have been an accident from a neighbor doing some target shooting with a .45 caliber handgun.”

By your flawed logic, we can conclude that a .45-caliber handgun is similarly a poor performer because the victim in the story never knew he was shot, and simply complained of chest pains.

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 21:59
Numerous EA 5.7x28mm loads offered to civilians will penetrate 12+ inches in ballistic gelatin.



Fired from a Glock 17, Federal 9mm 147 grain HST actually expands to 0.64" in bare ballistic gelatin. It also penetrates slightly less than 12 inches. Fired into clothed gelatin, it manages to penetrate 12+ inches of gelatin but expands to a reduced diameter of only 0.54". Again, less than 1/10th of an inch larger than the .22 WMR I linked.
.

Umm wrong. I fired these myself into bare gelatine two years ago at a law enforcement training in Fairbanks Alaska. The demonstration was put on by Federal. I was the lucky volunteer who got to shoot the guns. Penetration was 12.5 inches with the 147 grain standard pressure HST. Here is a picture of the bullet.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/bullets/9mmbullets.jpg Its the second bullet from the right. In clothed gelatine expansion was still over .65.

Same bullet (9mm)
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/bullets/9mm4045HST.jpg

Now for a 5.7 vs 9mm. Not even the best 9mm
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/bullets/9mm_vs_57mm.jpg

The 5.7 bullets that can go over 12 don't expand. The ones that do can't go over 12. Just like most other mouse gun calibers.

As for the fellow shot with a 45 round. It was most likely ball which is what most people use when they are target shooting. Ball in 45 does suck. Just not as bad as the 5.7. At least the victim felt chest pain. The nurse shot with the 5.7 was not even aware she was hurt.

The biggest damning evidence against the 5.7 is those who have been forced to use who have since stopped. Several agencies have reported less than stellar performance from this mouse round.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=278930

For anyone wanting an expert opinion on the 5.7 follow this thread. Its unbiased and has good information.
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19913

ROG
06-10-2010, 22:11
Umm wrong. I fired these myself into bare gelatine two years ago at a law enforcement training in Fairbanks Alaska.Your gelatin was most likely calibrated wrong. The source I posted contradicts you. Post a photograph of the calibration BB you fired (if you even did) into the gelatin.



Now for a 5.7 vs 9mm. Not even the best 9mmYour example picture shows a 5.7x28mm type that was discontinued over 15 years ago, so your example is irrelevant.



The 5.7 bullets that can go over 12 don't expand. The ones that do can't go over 12.You have it backwards. The bullets that do not penetrate 12+ inches are lighter and tumble instead of expanding, and most of those bullets are not even produced anymore. The bullets that penetrate 12+ inches do expand and do not tumble.



At least the victim felt chest pain. The nurse shot with the 5.7 was not even aware she was hurt.The victim shot with 5.7x28mm was trying to rescue one of the wounded when she was shot. The bullet grazed her and missed organs. The victim shot with .45 ACP was mortally wounded and simply complained of chest pain. He was not trying to rescue a wounded soldier in the middle of commotion and gunfire, like the Fort Hood victim was.



The biggest damning evidence against the 5.7 is those who have been forced to use who have since stopped. Several agencies have reported less than stellar performance from this mouse round.The "biggest damning evidence" against the 5.7x28mm is random unverifiable posts on internet forums.

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 22:16
[QUOTE=ROG;15451992]Your gelatin was most likely calibrated wrong. The source I posted contradicts you. Post a photograph of the calibration BB you fired (if you even did) into the gelatin.
L
QUOTE]

Listen kid I was there. I am a cop and a firearms instructor. I will not have my integrity challenged by some snot nosed kid. I am not some guy hiding on the internet like yourself. Yes the gelatine was calibrated by Federal. No I did not take a picture of it. You have done nothing yourself and you have no life experience as evidenced by your posts.

It is not un common for different batches of bullets to have slightly different performance. If you have ever done any testing for yourself you would know that. The author of the article you posted is someone I know and have talked to . Dr. Roberts. He is not a fan of the 5.7 cartridge.

FN 5.7 x 28 mm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Several papers have described the incredibly poor terminal performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm projectiles fired by the FN P90:

--Dahlstrom D, Powley K, and Gordon C: “Wound Profile of the FN Cartridge (SS 190) Fired from the FN P90 Submachine Gun". Wound Ballistic Review. 4(3):21-26; Spring 2000.
--Fackler M: "Errors & Omissions", Wound Ballistic Review. 1(1):46; Winter 1991.
--Fackler M: "More on the Bizarre Fabrique National P-90", Wound Ballistic Review. 3(1):44-45; 1997.
--FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit. FBI Handgun Ammunition Tests 1989-1995. Quantico, U.S. Department of Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation.
--Hayes C: “Personal Defense Weapons—Answer in Search of a Question”, Wound Ballistic Review. 5(1):30-36; Spring 2001.
--Roberts G: “Preliminary Evaluation of the Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 23 Grain FMJ Bullet Fired by the New FN P-90 , Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant”, AFTE Journal. 30(2):326-329, Spring 1998.

The current 31 gr SS-190 FMJ bullet has nearly adequate penetration, but the wound resulting from this projectile has a relatively small permanent crush cavity, as well as an insignificant temporary stretch cavity. Although the 5.7 x 28 mm penetrates soft body armor, wounding potential is at best like a .22 LR or .22 Magnum. Even 9mm NATO FMJ makes a larger wound--and we are all aware of the awe inspiring incapacitation potential of M882 ball from the M9......

A few large U.S. LE agencies adopted 5.7 mm weapons--after being involved in several OIS incidents with P90's, 5.7 mm usage in these agencies plummeted as a result of the poor terminal performance.

It is all basic physics and physiology. Look at the surface areas in contact with tissue for 9 mm FMJ and JHP compared to 5.7 mm. When both are point forward, the 9 mm FMJ crushes more tissue than the 5.7 mm; for the short time that the 5.7 mm is at FULL yaw, it crushes a bit more tissue than the 9 mm FMJ. At no time does the 5.7 mm crush more tissue than the expanded 9 mm JHP--even when the 5.7 mm FMJ is at full yaw, an expanded 9 mm JHP crushes more tissue. The relatively small temporary cavities produced by both the 9 mm and 5.7 mm projectiles are not likely to cause significant injury to the majority of elastic structures of the body. As with any penetrating projectile, if either a 9 mm or 5.7 mm bullet is ideally placed to cause significant damage to the CNS or major cardiovascular organs, a fatal result is likely.



The P90 can definitely penetrate soft body armor, but then so can 9 mm AP rounds. The greater momentum of 9 mm bullets allow them to defeat vehicles and other intermediate barriers better than the 5.7 mm bullets. Standard 9 mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP JHP loads crush more tissue, offer ideal penetration, and are equally likely to not exit the opponent as the 5.7 mm. 5.56 mm and 6.8 mm weapons offer significantly superior terminal effects compared to 5.7 mm. Bottom line—what does the P90 offer that is not already available?

ROG
06-10-2010, 22:23
Listen kid I was there. I am a cop and a firearms instructor. I am not some guy hiding on the internet like yourself. Yes the gelatine was calibrated by Federal. No I did not take a picture of it. You have done nothing yourself and you have no life experience.Post a picture of the calibration BB's penetration depth so we know if Federal correctly conducted the test according to standard gelatin testing protocol. Until you do that, the test is absolutely irrelevant.



FN 5.7 x 28 mm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Several papers have described the incredibly poor terminal performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm projectiles fired by the FN P90:

--Dahlstrom D, Powley K, and Gordon C: “Wound Profile of the FN Cartridge (SS 190) Fired from the FN P90 Submachine Gun". Wound Ballistic Review. 4(3):21-26; Spring 2000.
--Fackler M: "Errors & Omissions", Wound Ballistic Review. 1(1):46; Winter 1991.
--Fackler M: "More on the Bizarre Fabrique National P-90", Wound Ballistic Review. 3(1):44-45; 1997.
--FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit. FBI Handgun Ammunition Tests 1989-1995. Quantico, U.S. Department of Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation.
--Hayes C: “Personal Defense Weapons—Answer in Search of a Question”, Wound Ballistic Review. 5(1):30-36; Spring 2001.
--Roberts G: “Preliminary Evaluation of the Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 23 Grain FMJ Bullet Fired by the New FN P-90 , Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant”, AFTE Journal. 30(2):326-329, Spring 1998.

The current 31 gr SS-190 FMJ bullet has nearly adequate penetration, but the wound resulting from this projectile has a relatively small permanent crush cavity, as well as an insignificant temporary stretch cavity. Although the 5.7 x 28 mm penetrates soft body armor, wounding potential is at best like a .22 LR or .22 Magnum. Even 9mm NATO FMJ makes a larger wound--and we are all aware of the awe inspiring incapacitation potential of M882 ball from the M9......

A few large U.S. LE agencies adopted 5.7 mm weapons--after being involved in several OIS incidents with P90's, 5.7 mm usage in these agencies plummeted as a result of the poor terminal performance.

It is all basic physics and physiology. Look at the surface areas in contact with tissue for 9 mm FMJ and JHP compared to 5.7 mm. When both are point forward, the 9 mm FMJ crushes more tissue than the 5.7 mm; for the short time that the 5.7 mm is at FULL yaw, it crushes a bit more tissue than the 9 mm FMJ. At no time does the 5.7 mm crush more tissue than the expanded 9 mm JHP--even when the 5.7 mm FMJ is at full yaw, an expanded 9 mm JHP crushes more tissue. The relatively small temporary cavities produced by both the 9 mm and 5.7 mm projectiles are not likely to cause significant injury to the majority of elastic structures of the body. As with any penetrating projectile, if either a 9 mm or 5.7 mm bullet is ideally placed to cause significant damage to the CNS or major cardiovascular organs, a fatal result is likely.

The P90 can definitely penetrate soft body armor, but then so can 9 mm AP rounds. The greater momentum of 9 mm bullets allow them to defeat vehicles and other intermediate barriers better than the 5.7 mm bullets. Standard 9 mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP JHP loads crush more tissue, offer ideal penetration, and are equally likely to not exit the opponent as the 5.7 mm. 5.56 mm and 6.8 mm weapons offer significantly superior terminal effects compared to 5.7 mm. Bottom line—what does the P90 offer that is not already available?The author of that post (DocGKR) is also the author of the 9mm ballistic gelatin testing that contradicts yours. :rofl:

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 22:29
Post a picture of the calibration BB's penetration depth so we know if Federal correctly conducted the test according to standard gelatin testing protocol. Until you do that, the test is absolutely irrelevant.



The author of that post (DocGKR) is also the author of the 9mm ballistic gelatin testing that contradicts yours. :rofl:

Because you say something is irrelevant does not make it so. Most 5.7 fan boys like yourself call all the damning evidence against the 5.7 irrelevant. And I am sure it is on the video games you kids play. But in real life it is very relevant.

No Dr. Roberts tests do not contradict mine. His results were slightly different. .10 in expansion and .01 of an inch in penetration is hardly cantradicting.

It is obvious that you lack any real world experience as I have said before. Post less and read more.
Pat:wavey:

ROG
06-10-2010, 22:37
Because you say something is irrelevant does not make it so. Most 5.7 fan boys like yourself call all the damning evidence against the 5.7 irrelevant. And I am sure it is on the video games you kids play. But in real life it is very relevant.Unless you can prove it was conducted according to standard testing protocol by providing the BB calibration depth, it is not relevant to anyone that has any knowledge about ballistic gelatin testing.



No Dr. Roberts tests do not contradict mine. His results were slightly different. .10 in expansion and .01 of an inch in penetration is hardly cantradicting.Fired from a Glock 17, Federal 9mm 147 grain HST expands to 0.64" in bare ballistic gelatin. It also penetrates slightly less than 12 inches so it does not reliably meet the FBI minimum. Fired into clothed gelatin, it manages to penetrate 12+ inches of gelatin, but then expands to a reduced diameter of only 0.54". Again, less than 1/10th of an inch larger than the .22 WMR I linked.

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm

Quote: 9mm Fed 147 gr JHP HST (P9HST2) from G17:

------------- Velocity - Penetration - Recovered Diameter - Recovered Weight
Bare Gelatin - 1037fps --- 11.9" ----------- 0.64" ------------- 147.8gr
4-layer denim - 1049fps --- 14.7" ----------- 0.54" ------------- 147.5gr
Auto windshield - 1042fps --- 13.4" ----------- 0.53" ------------- 140.4gr

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 22:44
Unless you can prove it was conducted according to standard testing protocol, it is not relevant to anyone that has any knowledge about ballistic gelatin testing.

Which we know you don't have

[/B]

I am done with you kid. Grow up and get back to me when you have your own experience in the real world.


Main point from Dr. Roberts.

A few large U.S. LE agencies adopted 5.7 mm weapons--after being involved in several OIS incidents with P90's, 5.7 mm usage in these agencies plummeted as a result of the poor terminal performance.

ROG
06-10-2010, 22:53
Which we know you don't haveAnyone with any knowledge of ballistic gelatin testing knows that the gelatin must be correctly calibrated and the BB must not penetrate too deeply, otherwise the testing is flawed. You cannot provide the BB calibration depth from your test, so your test was not necessarily conducted properly. Since we can't be sure it was conducted properly, the test is not relevant to this discussion at all.



Main point from Dr. Roberts.

A few large U.S. LE agencies adopted 5.7 mm weapons--after being involved in several OIS incidents with P90's, 5.7 mm usage in these agencies plummeted as a result of the poor terminal performance.Don't forget that DocGKR also says Federal 9mm 147 grain HST expands to a diameter less than 1/10th of an inch larger than the .22 WMR I linked, and also says that it fails to reliably meet the FBI minimum penetration.

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 22:59
Anyone with any knowledge of ballistic gelatin testing knows that the gelatin must be correctly calibrated and the BB must not penetrate too deeply, otherwise the testing is flawed. You cannot provide the BB calibration depth from your test, so your test was not necessarily conducted properly. Since we can't be sure it was conducted properly, the test is not relevant to this discussion at all.



Don't forget that DocGKR also says Federal 9mm 147 grain HST expands to a diameter less than 1/10th of an inch larger than the .22 WMR I linked, and also says that it fails to reliably meet the FBI minimum penetration.

Again its common for 5.7 fan boys to face the facts of their pet rounds failures. The test conducted by Federal were valid. The 9mm is a far better choice than the 5.7 ever thought about being. What is also very relevant to this discussion is the fact you don't have any personal experience to back up your claims. When you are challenged you call those who oppose you liars. I have no time for kids like you. Welcome to the ignore list.
Pat

ROG
06-10-2010, 23:08
Again its common for 5.7 fan boys to face the facts of their pet rounds failures. The test conducted by Federal were valid. The 9mm is a far better choice than the 5.7 every thought about being. What is also very relevant to this discussion is the fact you don't have any personal experience to back up your claims. When you are challenged you call those who oppose you liars. I have no time for kids like you. Welcome to the ignore list.
PatYou are a hypocrite. You have no gelatin testing experience with 5.7x28mm cartridges of any type. Your gelatin testing experience with Federal 9mm 147 grain HST is a simple manufacturer's test that you cannot substantiate in any manner.

Alaskapopo
06-10-2010, 23:22
ROG
This message is hidden because ROG is on your ignore list.

:cool:

AK_Stick
06-10-2010, 23:46
Look at elite ammunition's 5.7 offerings and try to back that statement up. Just like the 10mm, 5.7 is loaded pretty wimpy off the shelf.



Still nothing more than a 22 wmr

ROG
06-10-2010, 23:49
Still nothing more than a 22 wmrLink a news report (even one) covering a shooting where a victim was shot with .22 WMR fired from a rifle, and the bullet performed poorly.

AK_Stick
06-10-2010, 23:58
I don't know of any shootings involving a 22 wmr.

But I know of several with the 5.7 where it performed poorly.

ROG
06-11-2010, 00:05
I don't know of any shootings involving a 22 wmr.Then your statement that 5.7x28mm is "nothing more than a 22 wmr" is absurd because you don't even know of a single shooting involving .22 WMR fired from a rifle.



But I know of several with the 5.7 where it performed poorly.Link a verifiable source, even a news article.

AK_Stick
06-11-2010, 00:22
Then your statement that 5.7x28mm is "nothing more than a 22 wmr" is absurd because you don't even know of a single shooting involving .22 WMR fired from a rifle.



Its still the truth, no matter how you try to spin it.

Do your homework, you'll be surprised what you can uncover with a little snooping.

ROG
06-11-2010, 00:42
Its still the truth, no matter how you try to spin it.Even if it was true that 5.7x28mm from a pistol is similar to .22 WMR from a rifle, it's irrelevant. You are not even aware of a single shooting involving .22 WMR fired from a rifle.



Do your homework, you'll be surprised what you can uncover with a little snooping.A large number of unsubstantiated internet forum posts. Try to back up your argument instead of asking me to back it up for you. Link a verifiable source, even a news article, on said shootings.

Foxtrotx1
06-11-2010, 00:50
Most accounts I've seen say he fired "more than 100 rounds" and aren't including rounds fired by the police, but even without that,

Do you actually believe what you just wrote?

You have to be kidding, because twice as many rounds were fired, we should conclude they were shot twice as many times?

:rofl:

Thats quite possibly the dumbest thing I've seen posted in here since the latest Dr Courtney troll showed up.

There are plenty of first hand accounts of use of the 5.7 available if you know where to look. I would suggest you do some reading/searching, you might be amazed. Fact is, its a terrible round for un-armored personnel from the handgun. Backed up by the 13 people who took shots to the torso mostly at point blank, and lived.

The 5.7, makes about as much power as a 22 magnum out of a rifle, which isn't a caliber noted for its impressive terminal performance, power or penetration. But you pop it into a handgun, make it look cool and suddenly people think its high speed.

then show us. :faint:

Foxtrotx1
06-11-2010, 00:59
Poor performance. I won't depend on a load that does not penetrate 12 inches. Also Federals 9mm 147 grain HST expands to .75 caliber. Another factor you are failing to consider is momentium. (mass times velocity the amount of force required to bring a moving object to rest). The power factor on the 5.7 is pathetic. Its not likely to break bones inside the target. Its more likely to deflect. Hell once nurse was shot at Ft. Hood and did not even know it. Its a pathetic round hated by people who have actually had to use it in real life outside of a video game.
Pat

12 inches this, 12 inches that. Everybody talks about 12 inches. What made the FBI god of balistics? one shooting and some tests afterword? come on, guys stop eating the food your being served. We so easily forget that ballistics jell doesn't replicate the varying density and BONE that people consist of. Pistols are not fight winners. It dosn't even matter. the 5.7, 9mm, 40, .45 are all in the same energy ball park. Heck, the bigger 3 are all about the same size! You know what stops fights? rifles. if you wan't to bet your life on something bet it on a rifle. Without a rifle, as long as your flinging hot lead and lots of it and making contact, YOU SHOULD BE HAPPY. :faint::dunno:

Fights are not won on the chalkboard, you can talk about momentum and ill be out practicing failure to stop drills!

Alaskapopo
06-11-2010, 01:39
12 inches this, 12 inches that. Everybody talks about 12 inches. What made the FBI god of balistics? one shooting and some tests afterword? come on, guys stop eating the food your being served. We so easily forget that ballistics jell doesn't replicate the varying density and BONE that people consist of. Pistols are not fight winners. It dosn't even matter. the 5.7, 9mm, 40, .45 are all in the same energy ball park. Heck, the bigger 3 are all about the same size! You know what stops fights? rifles. if you wan't to bet your life on something bet it on a rifle. Without a rifle, as long as your flinging hot lead and lots of it and making contact, YOU SHOULD BE HAPPY. :faint::dunno:

Fights are not won on the chalkboard, you can talk about momentum and ill be out practicing failure to stop drills!
Energy means exactly nothing at handgun levels. What matters is bullet penetration and expansion. Momentum is more important than energy at handgun levels. (mass times velocity) a 9mm rounds, 40 round and a 45 round all have a lot more momentum, expansion and penetration than the best of the best 5.7 loads. Handguns are not fight stoppers and frankly no small arm including rifles and shotguns are death rays. But some rounds are better than others. The 5.7 is puny and not worthy of respect. That is why its getting dropped by the major agencies that have tried it. I like rifles but I can't carry my patrol rifle with me all of the time. Handguns are there when we are not expecting trouble. When I get caught in that situation I want my rounds to do as much tissue damage to the target as possible. Also the 12 inch minimum came from Dr. Martin Fackler, the worlds leading expert on wound ballistics. So its more than just the FBI doing some tests after a shooting.
What stops fights is skill with a firearm under stress. That and a lot of luck.
Its a good thing you practice failure drills. If you carry a 5.7 that will be the norm not the exception. Its a good thing the 5.7 holds so many of those tiny bullets because you will probably need all of them. I practice all kinds of skills when I am at the range not just failure drills.
Pat

ROG
06-11-2010, 01:49
Momentum is more important than energy at handgun levels.Momentum is only revelant when bones are struck, and a number of the victims at Fort Hood suffered broken bones (of all types) despite the fact that the ammo type used by the shooter has significantly less momentum than EA 5.7x28mm ammo offered to civilians.



a 9mm rounds, 40 round and a 45 round all have a lot more momentum, expansion and penetration than the best of the best 5.7 loads. They do not exhibit 'a lot' more expansion or penetration than even .22 WMR, as shown in Brassfetcher's testing. 9mm bullets expand to less than 1/10th of an inch larger than .22 WMR fired from a rifle.

srt-4_jon
06-11-2010, 13:12
Still nothing more than a 22 wmr
Same can be said about a .223 from a pistol. Doesnt mean I would want to be shot by it.

Alaskapopo
06-11-2010, 14:41
Same can be said about a .223 from a pistol. Doesnt mean I would want to be shot by it.

Most sane people don't want to be shot with even a bb gun. That does not change the fact a 5.7 is a poor choice as a defensive cartridge.
Pat

srt-4_jon
06-11-2010, 17:03
Except for the fact it is 20 rounds of +2000fps/380ft/lb rounds coming out of a 4.8" barrel with almost NO recoil. Follow up shots are so easy. Have you actually had any firing time with the Five-seveN? I ask because it seems you don't have any first hand knowledge with the caliber you are so passionately against. I would let you shoot mine if you didnt live so far away. Hell, you might actually like it. :rofl:

There is more to a SD handgun than just terminal performance. If that weren't the case, I can argue that 9mm/.40/.45 is a "Its a wimpy round that seems to have a devout following of mall ninjas" when I compare it to a 44 mag.

You bring up a decent argument except all the data you present is well outdated. The most recent paper you quote was published in 2001. I can find you a paper from 2001 that says Pluto is still a planet. That doesn't mean that it is today. See what I mean? Alot of things have happened in 9 years. Most of the rounds they tested arent even made anymore not to mention another company making ammunition for it.

In the end, we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I am not going to change your mind and you are not going to change my mind.

So back to the 22wmr self defense gun. I personally wouldnt use one because the fact it's rimfire.

Alaskapopo
06-11-2010, 17:11
Except for the fact it is 20 rounds of +2000fps/380ft/lb rounds coming out of a 4.8" barrel with almost NO recoil. Follow up shots are so easy. Have you actually had any firing time with the Five-seveN? I ask because it seems you don't have any first hand knowledge with the caliber you are so passionately against. I would let you shoot mine if you didnt live so far away. Hell, you might actually like it. :rofl:

There is more to a SD handgun than just terminal performance. If that weren't the case, I can argue that 9mm/.40/.45 is a "Its a wimpy round that seems to have a devout following of mall ninjas" when I compare it to a 44 mag.

You bring up a decent argument except all the data you present is well outdated. The most recent paper you quote was published in 2001. I can find you a paper from 2001 that says Pluto is still a planet. That doesn't mean that it is today. See what I mean? Alot of things have happened in 9 years. Most of the rounds they tested arent even made anymore not to mention another company making ammunition for it.

In the end, we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I am not going to change your mind and you are not going to change my mind.

So back to the 22wmr self defense gun. I personally wouldnt use one because the fact it's rimfire.
I have fired a 5.7 and PS90. I never said the guns were bad but rather the cartridge. Firing a pellet gun is enjoyable as well but its not a good choice for self defense. Same thing for the 5.7. No not much has changed with the 5.7. Its still a wimpy round with low energy and momentum with a dismal stopping rate in the real world. There is a lot of things to a personal defense handgun and they all need to be there. 1. Reliability, 2. terminal performance, 3. ergonomics, 4. accuracy. If any one factor is missing the gun and caliber is not acceptable for defensive use.
Pat

ROG
06-11-2010, 17:49
No not much has changed with the 5.7. Its still a wimpy round with low energy and momentumOn this same page you said "energy means exactly nothing at handgun levels". Make up your mind. Either way, current 5.7x28mm cartridges produce muzzle energy roughly equivalent to the common pistol calibers such as 9mm.



with a dismal stopping rate in the real world.You are absolutely not aware of any shootings with EA's 5.7x28mm cartridges, and you have shown you can't substantiate any "dismal" shooting with even the original SS190.



There is a lot of things to a personal defense handgun and they all need to be there. 1. Reliability, 2. terminal performance, 3. ergonomics, 4. accuracy. If any one factor is missing the gun and caliber is not acceptable for defensive use.In reality, any of the common pistol calibers such as 9mm are lacking in terminal performance.