Rethinking the FN Five-Seven

>>34749461
It's a handgun that does almost nothing a handgun is designed to do.

It is a m1 carbine in a handgun package. How about that.

File: LeFN.jpg (2MB, 4103x2360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4103x2360px

>>34749461
>That's a little better than a .22 magnum which will typically drive a 40 grain bullet at 1900 fps or a 30 grain bullet at 2300 fps out of a 24 inch barrel.
Thats fucking irrelevant since a 22 mag is a rimfire straight walled cartridge with a soft lead projectile
>Has anyone developed any hotter than factory reloads for the Five-Seven that haven't blown the gun up? How much more performance can handloading squeeze out of this round and pistol?
Look up elite ammunition and R&R weapons systems. T6B and S4M are some nasty stuff.

>>34749497

a handgun is designed to be a gun that can be easily used with one hand and is generally easy to carry on you person, the 57 more or less does this.

>>34749624
It's called a sidearm because it's role is to neutralize a target when you get caught with your pants down reloading your primary or when it jams. When it becomes another primary is when things get distorted.

>>34749585
32gr/2200fps and 28gr/2600fps out of the pistol for the S4M and T6B, respectively. I'd like to know if it's possible to get to 40gr/2500fps in the pistol without overpressuring it.

>>34749671
>what is ccw

File: 57tree.jpg (2MB, 4160x3120px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4160x3120px

>>34749694
Probably not, anything decently dense and over 2kfps will shit on soft armor anyway.

Another overlooked point is how nice the trigger is for a hammer fired polymer pistol. Sort of a long reset but its a nice trigger.

>>34749734
I'm thinking more like rifle-style wound channels in soft tissue if you can get the velocity up high enough.

File: WoundProfile.jpg (30KB, 639x472px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 639x472px

>>34749839
1/2

File: WoundProfile2.jpg (31KB, 640x468px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 640x468px

>>34749839
2/2

File: WoundProfilesAfterWallBarrier.jpg (101KB, 800x530px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 800x530px

>>34749839

>>34749839
No, You cannot get rifle performance out of a handgun round. Period. End of story.

I would like to see someone neck the cartridge up to a 6.5mm projectile in 90 grain weights. Call it the .265 Blackout.

>>34749839
It would already do that with bullets that are designed for it.

>>34749976
Why not?

I found some load data online. It supposedly originally came out of Guns and Ammo magazine but the source article has since disappeared. I've not tried these loads. None of these are quite there in the pistol but they are starting to get close in the PS90.

5.7x28 LOAD DATA* Bullet Bullet Weight (gr.) Powder Primer Starting Load (grs.) Maximum Load (grs.) Max. Pistol Muzzle Velocity (fps) Max. Pistol Muzzle Velocity (fps)


Hornady V-Max 35 Winchester 231 Remington 3.5 4.5 1,850 2,475


Berger HP Moly 40 Alliant Unique Win.Small Rifle 3.5 4.3 1,750 2,040


Hornady V-Max 40 Accurate No. 5 Federal 205/td> 5.0 6.8 1,800 2,400


Nosler SP 45 IMR 7625 Win. Small Rifle 3.2 4.2 1,650 1,840


Sako HP 45 Hodgdon HS-6 CCI 400 5.0 6.0 1,700 1,925


Hornady Spire Point 45 VihtaVuoriN328 Federal 205 3.5 4.3 1,675 1,890


Nosler Ballistic Tip 50 RamShot True Blue Lapua Small Rifle 4.5 5.4 1,650 1,950


Sierra HP 53 Alliant Power Pistol Lapua Small Rifle 3.8 4.8 1,580 1,915


Nosler Partition 60 Hodgdon Lil Gun CCI-400 5.0 6.0 1,475 1,725


Winchester SP 64 Winchester Action Pistol Rem. 3.5 4.2 1,275 1,475


Army FMJ 68 RamShot True Blue CCI-400 3.5 4.4 1,290 1.525
WARNING: The loads shown here are safe only in the guns for which they were developed. Neither the author nor InterMedia Outdoors Inc. assumes any liability for accidents or injury resulting from the use or misuse of this data.

>>34750046
>Why not?
Because rifles have a lot more powder, at a lot higher pressures, behind a lot longer barrel.

It's called physics.

File: Comfy57.jpg (2MB, 3824x2656px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3824x2656px

>>34750046
>Only vmax and a 40gr HP makes it over 2kfps
Get this shit the fuck out of my face

>>34750061
All that effect KE, sure, but you have to think "what does a bullet do with this KE?" A properly designed bullet at closer range from this 5.7x28mm handgun could probably mimic the effects of a similarly designed bullet in a larger cartridge in a rifle at a father distance.

>>34750046
>>34750046

>40 grain

A 16" AR will launch 40 grain bullets out of a 14.5-16" barrel at damn near 4000fps.

There simply is no comparison.

>>34749461
Elite ammunition "made" (past tense) ammo. Called T6 and it behaved like a rifle round out of the 5.7 pistol. Shame the ATF shut that down. T6B just doesn't show the same results.

5.7 has tons of potential it just needs some better ammunition options

https://youtu.be/xbMlxdp1cSw

>>34750082
>>34750082
>probably mimic the effects of a similarly designed bullet in a larger cartridge in a rifle at a father distance.
Even a 55 grain 5.56 round has more energy at 300 yards than a 5.7x28 does out of the Muzzle of a Fiveseven.

A 77 grain round has more energy out to 500 meters than a fiveseven at the muzzle.

Again, there is absolutely no comparison.

File: img_1288-tfb-300x225.jpg (20KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 300x225px

>>34750061
I'm talking about getting as close as possible to the performance of a small caliber rifle with a short barrel while staying in a commercially available handgun-sized package. If you can't do it with this pistol you're not going to be able to do it at all.

I'm not the only one to have this idea.

>>34750153
Yes, congratulations, you know about energy. You don't know what it means, though. Terminal effects of 5.56x45mm at typical assault rifle engagement distances could probably be mimicked well with the proper bullet design in 5.7x28mm at typical handgun engagement distances.

>>34750156
See>>34750130
It's not far off from getting better then typical pistol ballistics with the right ammo

>>34750179
>>34750153
Case in point>>34750130

>>34750156
>I'm talking about getting as close as possible to the performance of a small caliber rifle with a short barrel
>small caliber short barrel rifle

This is like beating up a paraplegic in attempt to prove you are stronk. Small caliber rifle rounds are garbage out of short barrels. Hell, so are most large caliber rifle rounds.

This is the reason rounds like the .300 BO exist. A 5.7x28 will never ever ever keep up with a .300 BO out of any length barrel and if you want man stopping power out of a short barrel rifle that is the round you pick.

Basically, what you're aiming at with this thought experiment (small caliber rifles rounds out of short barrels) is shit. Your target is literally the worst of the worst, something I wouldn't even trust to shoot coyotes.

>>34750181
So the question remains how much performance can you wring out of this gun and this caliber? How much energy can you get out of it before the gun ends up like the picture above and how much can bullet design compensate for the shortfall in energy? The goal would be to get short-barreled 5.56-like terminal effects within 50 m. Do you know of any gel testing done with this T6?

>>34750179
No, you are not going to get terminal ballisitcs of a rifle from a handgun. Sorry to burst your bubble. Go dream elsewhere.

>>34750236
>This is the reason rounds like the .300 BO exist.
No, it's not. .300 Blackout exists because there was a desire for a cartridge that would be primarily loaded as subsonic, yet still readily capable of cycling an otherwise unmodified AR-15.

>>34750179
>Terminal effects of 5.56x45mm at typical assault rifle engagement distances

You are literally never going to get 5.56 tier terminal performance at 100-200 yards with a 5.7x28 at any range.

A 5.56 will literally have twice the energy at "typical rifle engagement ranges".

>muh boolet design
That road goes both ways. Quality 5.56 bullets have fantastic ballistic performance at 100-200 yards.

>>34750248
That's a great question. A bit anecdotal but at the fort hood shooting, witness testimony Claimed the 5.7 was droppimg people in their tracks. I posted a YouTube video of it above. The results were great even out of the pistol. Sadly, T6 is kaput thanks to some ATF armor piercing ammo bullshit >>34750130

>>34750273
You have nothing to back that up. Go to a thread more your speed, terminal ballistics isn't it.

>>34750289
.300 blackout is not .300 whisper.

>>34750300
>super awesome magical 5.7 boolets outperforming 5.56/.223 rounds with literally twice the muzzle energy
>there's absolutely no way 5.56/.223 rounds can take advantage of this terminal ballistics magic!
>literally over twice the muzzle energy
>BUT IT WILL PERFORM THE SAME WITH LESS POWDER AND A FRACTION OF THE BARREL BECAUSE EXCLUSIVE 5.7 BOOLET MAGIC!

You are an idiot and your argument flatly defies logic and reason.

>>34750236
Who makes a pistol in .300 Blackout anyway? A real pistol, not some ATF defined abortion with some buffer tube hanging off the back. A rifle is more powerful than a pistol. No shit. But a rifle isn't a pistol and doesn't have the other advantages a pistol has and that's the point.

>>34750289
You have no idea what you are talking about.

.300 blackout is an attempt to get 7.62x339 performance out of an AR15 pattern rifle, especially with shorter barrels. The fact that they suppress well is a secondary consideration/benefit.

The .300 whisper was based on the want/need for effective subsonic performance from a rifle cartridge.

>>34750340
Stop making the worlds biggest strawman and stop cocking up what could be an other wise interesting thread.
He isn't saying it's the magic bullet with a bigger wound cavity then 50bmg and more range them. 338 lapua

We are just trying to discuss if 5.7 could be made to behave more like a rifle round (tumbling and fragmenting) then just a standard pistol round

>>34750377
The claim is being made that a 5.7 can return rifle tier terminal performance at typical rifle engagement ranges )see 100-200 yards) from a pistol. This is retarded and wrong.

Then in an attempt to gimp the target and move the goalposts the OP qualifies by mentioning small caliber rifle rounds out of short barrels. in order to sort of bring the rifle cartridge performance down to comparable levels with a 5.7

To this it was replied that this is retarded and small caliber rifle rounds are shit out of short barrels. This is literally the lowest rung of target performance to shoot for with a pistol caliber round. smalll caliber rifle rounds out of short barrels aren't even worth the powder they waste.

Anyone that wants good terminal performance out of a short barrel builds something like a .300 blackout.

A 5.7 will never come close to .300blackout performance at 100-200 yards regardless of barrel length no matter how close you fire the 5.7.

The entire premise behind this argument is retarded 5.7 fanboying while ignoring reality.

>>34750393
He is claiming the 5.7 can match or come close to rifle cartridge performance "at rifle engagement ranges" with a 5.7 at pistol ranges.

This is false unless you fall back on literally the most retarded comparison, a small caliber rifle round out of a short barrel.

That's just three steps away from saying 5.7x28 fired out of a Fivesseven is better than someone throwing a 5.56 round really hard.

Save for some amazing new propellant, you're not getting 5.56 performance out of a pistol. Heck even the shorty 5.56x45 caliber "pistols" and SBRs have questionable performance despite having 2x the case capacity of 5.7.

>>34749976
I want to see this too. Remove the bottleneck but keep the same 20/30 capacity of the Five-seveN.

>>34750447
in addition to this, this guy was claiming that some magical bullet design would somehow make up for the 5.7x28's massive deficiency in muzzle energy, completely ignoring that any bullet design concepts that would improve it's terminal performance could easily be applied to a .223 caliber projectile and likely have much greater performance because of the additional muzzle energy.

>>34750550
Thanks for ruining this thread I was pretty interested in anon. I hope,your happy.

>>34749976
>>34750515
I don't think this would work with 6.5/.264 caliber bullets.

Even if you neck it up to case width (7.95mm), once you account for the case thickness (,68mm times two) you are left with 6.59mm.

A 6.5 bullet is really 6.71mm in diameter. It wouldn't fit.

>>34750574
Glad I could inject a little bit of reality into your meme round fantasy land trigger-free safe space.

>>34749461
ARcucks confirmed for shooting a wimpy handgun tier round.

>>34750447
Why not compare a Glock 19 to a scoped .338 Lapua with a 26 inch barrel? That's an idiotic comparison only an idiot would make. Those are two different weapons with two different purposes.

Comparing a short barreled rifle in a smaller caliber like 5.56 to a pistol is more applicable because they have similar purposes: close-ranged self-defense. The OP very clearly describes a 8-10 inch barreled rifle and the Five-Seven and the estimated ballistic differences between them.

The rifle is more powerful as stated in the OP by 15 grains and at least 600 fps. The pistol is lighter and more compact with half the barrel length.

The OP clearly states the premise: how close can you get to the performance of the short rifle using the pistol-sized package? Is it possible to close the gap with hot handloads and good bullet design to achieve near-5.56 performance in a hand gun with a 20 or 30 round magazine? It was later stated that near-5.56 performance might mean 45 grain and 2500 fps.

Obviously if you're talking about a handgun you're talking ranges of 25-50 yards or less.

Medium caliber rifles and long barrels never entered the discussion until some illiterate mongoloid set them up as a strawman.

>>34750482
Do you understand the size and weight difference between a full-sized rifle and a pistol? Enough to understand why this conversation is interesting? Do you have trouble reading or are you just fucking retarded?

>>34750681
>Why not compare a Glock 19 to a scoped .338 Lapua with a 26 inch barrel?
I'm not the idot that made a thread to compare a 40 grain pistsol cartridge to actual rifle cartridges.

Then had to make the logical job to pissing down rifle round performance by arbitrarily assigning restrictions to bring performance to where said rifle round is useless. Then use this useless rifle round performance out or retarded barrels as the target to shoot for with the pistol round.

Pistol rounds and rifle rounds have their own applications. No the 5.7 does not fill any performance gap between them or stack up to actual fighting rifle rounds in any way.

Making an intellectually dishonest argumentss about "rifle round performance" then trying to use the absolute poorest examples of is a waste of everyone's time.

>>34750716
>Do you understand the size and weight difference between a full-sized rifle and a pistol?
yes, I do. Which is why my point stands. Rifles are leagues ahead any pistol round, including the 5.7.

>Enough to understand why this conversation is interesting?
It's not interesting. The 5.7 does not perform like a rifle round. To say otherwise is intellectually dishonest. It performs like a light fast pistol round, full stop. It's not the first of it's kind to do so either.

>Do you have trouble reading or are you just fucking retarded?
I fully understand the discussion at hand, i just don't think you do.

A 5.7 does not perform like a rifle round terminally or otherwise. To say otherwise is retarded.

>>34750733
You're just the idiot who dragged .30 caliber rifles with 16 inch barrels into a conversation about pistols versus short barreled rifles. The latter are evidently not useless given the proliferation of 10 or 11 inch barrels on military rifles. If there are rifles with 10 inch barrels that fire 55 grain bullets then it's worth discussing them alongside a pistol that fires 40 grain bullets when the velocities differ by less than 1000 fps in factory loadings. Because, if you can work up sufficiently hot handloads for that pistol and reduce the velocity difference, the energies are now much closer out of a gun that's half the size. That would fill a performance gap. If that is actually possible then there is value there. If you can't see the value, then you're a fucking moron.

>>34751027
>You're just the idiot who dragged .30 caliber rifles with 16 inch barrels
Nice strawman faggot. Quote me exactly where I said anything about .30 caliber rifles with 16" barrels or admit right now that you are a lying faggot.

I said if you are going to compare rifle caliber cartridges out of short barrels, use the right cartridges. using small caliber cartridges that to terribly in short barrels as the basis for your comparison is fucking stupid.

I'm not even going to read the rest of your reply as you've proven in the first sentence you don't understand the topic and are willing to flat out lie because your argument is bankrupt.

File: tn_1235245586270.jpg (8KB, 220x180px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 220x180px

>>34751027
> rifles with 10 inch barrels that fire 55 grain bullets
>energies are now much closer out of a gun that's half the size
>That would fill a performance gap.

Congratulations. You just theoretically filled a performance gap between pistols and useless SBR range toys in retarded calibers that no one ever uses for anything other than punching holes in paper.

Pic related.

>>34749671
Why can the Five-seveN not do that?

>>34751062
Tell the Navy Seals and SF who use the HK 416 with a 9 or 10 inch barrel, or the Italian army who uses the ARX with a 10 inch barrel, or the Israelis who use the Tavor with an 11 inch barrel that it performs poorly. All in 5.56, by the way. Gel testing and real world usage show that the combination of barrel length and ammunition perform well enough to be worth the size and weight savings. Otherwise they wouldn't use them.

Sure, technology always advances (which is what this 5.7 discussion is also about), but a short barreled 5.56 is still the current standard in a lot of scenarios which is why it is used for comparison. You're the one who is full of shit and setting up lies instead of arguments with your incessant carping on .300 Blackout and rifle barrels. It's a shame that your impotent rage over the existence of the 5.7 interrupted your daily routine of digging your tiny, flaccid pud out of your fat rolls and yanking on it with your sweaty ham hocks of hands. That's still no reason to defend the idiotic position that there's no reason to try to improve the 5.7 just because a much smaller pistol will never match up to a much larger .30 caliber rifle that throws a bullet weighing three times more.

>>34749727
Why would you carry 5.7 for ccw when you can use .357 magnum or 10mm, hell, even 9mm? The whole appeal of 5.7 is the fact that it's decent armor piercing cartridge which makes sense for military preparing for WW3, but doesn't make sense for CCW where you'll only ever face people with no protection. Here you want relatively heavy hollowpoint ammo that's fast enough only to have manageable bullet drop.

>>34751220
>bunch of uncited internet claims and bullshit

no one cares faggot, kys.

>>34751220
Only time short ass barrels are used is when vehicle transport constrains the usable size of your weapon. In those cases it's the only valid choice. SMG's are obsolete and PDW's are a meme.

And no a Fiveseven does not take the place of a short barrel rifle, even in a vehicle, or even come close.

No one chooses a 5.56 rifle with a 10 inch barrel because it has good terminal ballistics. They choose them because they are literally the only real option for a certain subset of space constrained situations.

>>34751178
Because;

PIZZA, PASTA
PUT IT IN A BOX
DE-LIV-ER IT, TO MY HOUSE
AND PUT IT ON MY COCK MY COCK MY COCK MY COCK MY COCK MY COCK MY COOOOOOOOOOOOCK
CHEESEY ON MY PEENY
AND SAUCE ON MY BALLS

>>34751476
LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!

SO RANDUMB!!!!!!!

>>34750130
How can the ATF shut it down? It was all copper.

>>34749461
>61 posts
No mentions 22TCM

>>34751591
>62 posts
>no one mentions 22 reed

>>34751584
I'm not sure if it was 100% copper, may have been slightly brass. Also ATF didn't actually bring any charges, but scared the guys out of making any more ever again, and confiscated a lot of property and customer data. It's pretty fucked up

>>34751655
It was all copper.
Should have sued the fuck out of the ATF. Wothless pieces of shit. All should seriously be crucified, literally crucified as in staked to a wooden cross.

Now that the fucking faggots have left, here's an interesting blog about reloading the 5.7.

http://www.dayattherange.com/?page_id=3297

>>34751734
If what that guy says is right, it sounds like the 5.7 round and pistol are running right at the ragged edge of the technology and there isn't much room for improvement before you overpressure it.

>>34751620
>22 reed
>in production

>>34751734
It's never going to be a rifle round faggot, especially out of a pistol. Deal with it and stop being so fucking stupid..

>>34749671
we're not talking about a sidearm, we're talking about a handgun. a handgun can be a sidearm, or a primary. It's patently ridiculous to suggest that handgun means sidearm. It is less ridiculous to say that sidearm means handgun, but even that is still ridiculous.

>>34751780
>implying were discussing the availability of a round and not its ballistic and mechanical Merits

>>34750447
you are incorrect about the claim (not actually a claim, but a premise) being made. Its about approaching rifle performance (at rifle ranges) in a pistol (at pistol ranges).

Pistol range is limited by sight radius as much as or more than it is limited by ballistics.

>>34749461
It'd be a great candidate for a standard issued machine pistol. Bonus points if they rigged it like that B&T piece, folding stock and red dot as standard.

File: 52345.jpg (45KB, 750x591px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 750x591px

>>34749976
>You cannot get rifle performance out of a handgun round. Period. End of story.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqaR8AkWuxI

File: 1493684723318.jpg (136KB, 568x800px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 568x800px

>>34749497
I don't get all hate. Modern stance on pistols is "shot placement is the king, terminal ballistics of pistols sucks, different calibers has no perceivable advantage in the damage, shoot more, shoot fast" and FBI switches to 9x19.
Isn't FN Five-Seven fits perfectly in such doctrine? FN was 30 years ahead of the curve.

>>34749461
The ONLY reason the Five-Seven exists is because of the out-dated concept of having the same caliber for your primary and secondary weapons. Once you move past that, and especially when you realize how horrible 5.7x28 is from a reliability perspective - the bullets need to be specifically coated in lubricious paint in order to feed properly, meaning that the cheaper American Eagle loads are less reliable than the FN branded ones, and when they do jam, the bullets get set back and powder spills all over your weapon, disabling it - you'll realize just how bad of an abortion the Five-Seven really is. The muzzle blast is horrendous, enjoy going deaf if you have to use it in self defense; and the ergonomics with the deep grip are not ideal.

It would be better to engineer a compact pistol around a .32 caliber, straight-walled cartridge with enough powder and a heavy enough projectile to achieve power similar to, or exceeding, 9x19mm. I'm thinking, a 100-110 grain projectile traveling at about 1200 fps. You couldn't use .32 ACP as a parent case, since it's semi-rimmed, but the target cartridge would have to be slightly longer to accommodate the extra powder charge; it would be to .32 ACP as 10mm is to .40 S&W.

It shouldn't be too difficult to engineer guns around such a cartridge. In a double stack, you should be able to fit 20 such rounds into a full sized pistol, since the case diameter of 5.7x28 is about .31 caliber anyway, and we know that 20 of those will fit into a full size magazine. The idea is to get away from the lightweight, easily set-back (malfunctiony) 5.7x28 bullets and awkwardly shaped grip of the Five-Seven, while imparting the cartridge with better hard barrier penetration and ballistics more similar to time-tested defensive calibers, and while keeping the very high capacity standard magazines.

>>34752149
Regular lead core 5.7 out of a pistol can not go through 3A body armor, but regular lead core 5.7 out of a rifle WILL go through 3A body armor. Tim, aka Military Arms Channel, did a test on it. I recommend you study the actual ballistics data before spouting off with absolute nonsense. It's not the sight radius that prevented the 5.7 ammo from penetrating the body armor when fired out of a pistol.

>>34752952
The idea of 5.7x28 that it had to have minimum possible recoil, works in open bolt SMG having KE of 9x19.

> out-dated concept of having the same caliber for your primary and secondary weapons.
Since then outdated?

>>34752978
Did I make any claims about "the idea of 5.7x28"? No, I did not. Stop putting words in my mouth. I'm talking about the pistol, which only exists because of the meme of having a rifle and pistol in the same caliber. If not for that meme, the Five-Seven would not exist.

>>34752986
How this reasonable requirement is a meme?

>>34752991
How has every military on Earth managed to supply two different calibers to their troops' long and sidearms simultaneously since guns were first used in war? It's not a "reasonable" requirement that primary and secondary be in the same caliber. It's an experiment that failed.

>>34753005
>It's an experiment that failed.
It's all other pistols failed. From the military point of view currently Five-Seven is only pistol that worth a salt in the age of body armor.

File: projecting this much.png (415KB, 645x367px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 645x367px

>>34753021

>>34752899

It really is the best you can buy isn't it.

>>34752937
Pmr30 is 100 years ahead of the 5-7 then

>>34752937
>Modern stance on pistols is "shot placement is the king, terminal ballistics of pistols sucks, different calibers has no perceivable advantage in the damage, shoot more, shoot fast" and FBI switches to 9x19.
That's just the retards on /k/. Everybody else in the world recognizes the advantages of a more powerful caliber, yes .40 has a big advantage over 9mm, and no, the ballistics are not the same.

Next time someone tries to tell you that "all calibers are the same," ask them why they don't carry a .32 or .25 caliber handgun.

>>34753021
Name a single country that's actively engaged in warfare in the past 17 years AND adopted Five-seveN as their main sidearm.

Not "purchased for field trials", not "reserve", not Police. Frontline military that murdered people in the past 17 years that fields Five-seveN.

>>34753096
He can't because he doesn't know how to use his brain to think, only to project. Notice how everything he said about "other pistols" is true about the Five-Seven.

>>34753096
>>34753096
>Name a single country that's actively engaged in warfare against peer opposition in the past 17 years
ffu. "We only need to fight sandnigers" NATO's new motto.

>>34753112
That's not a country.

If you can't name a single country that utilized Five-seveN to murder people during warfare, how can you claim that Military favors it over other pistols?

>>34753080
>yes .40 has a big advantage over 9mm
What is incapacitation probability of single randomly placed hit of .40 vs 9mm?

File: hmm____by_hidde99-d5zxhy1.png (156KB, 1024x1367px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1024x1367px

>>34753121
What is hard barrier penetration? What is the structure that surrounds a bad guy's heart and lungs?

>>34753118
Operation Chavín de Huantar comes to mind.
>inb4 not warfare
Well Afghanistan is not a real warfare too but glorified police operation.

>>34753127
>What is the structure that surrounds a bad guy's heart and lungs?
Do you know that would be accounted in incapacitation probability right?

>>34753127
>What is the structure that surrounds a bad guy's heart and lungs?

Not anything that constitutes a hard barrier. Bone is as brittle as wood of comparative thickness, and no one is saying either .40 or 9mm won't punch through thin branches.

File: 073ce711c30f60517b72dfb4b0ce9acd.jpg (12KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 200x200px

>>34753140
You sure like statistics, don't you? Using statistics as a bludgeon to "prove" your point often blurs important details and can distort the truth. It's a provable fact that .40 S&W has more ability to penetrate hard barriers than 9mm, and it's a provable fact that bones are a hard barrier that can slow down lightweight projectiles.

>>34753144
This is the problem when the standard of ballistics testing is fucking Jello, and not something that has any actual resemblance to an animal carcass. You have no fucking idea how much energy a projectile loses when it breaks a bone.

>>34753159
>This is the problem when the standard of ballistics testing is fucking Jello, and not something that has any actual resemblance to an animal carcass. You have no fucking idea how much energy a projectile loses when it breaks a bone.

True enough. I don't know why we can't use pig carcasses or something. they're supposed to be good analogues for people in most respects.

>>34753159
>Using statistics
I was thinking about different method
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/359774.pdf

>>34753181
>1965

>>34753191
More recent stuff is classified.

File: 423423.jpg (245KB, 1275x1755px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1275x1755px

>>34753068
Kellgren, is this you?

File: 534534.jpg (265KB, 568x830px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 568x830px

MADMAN

File: 1500762246104.png (235KB, 838x434px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 838x434px

>>34751476
Never change, /k/

>>34753135
Yes, the Unit using it did adopt Five-seveN... Alongside a 9x19 M&P.

I guess I'll take this example if you can provide me evidence that Peruvians used Five-seveN in this raid and praised it's effectiveness against body armored terrorists.

>>34751911
Go back to choking down dicks in an alley beside a dumpster and let the adults talk.

>>34751300
Follow up shots maybe?

>>34751300
What if I am CCing to fight cops? What then fag?

>>34753457
Then you carry juvenile world views you developed in a sheltered bubble and have not adjusted to society well at all.

Unless you're being facetious in which case lololol ecks dee

>>34753897
I'll be laughing all the way to your gun stash when cops decide you don't need that 9mm and you fail to penetrate their vests.

>>34749671
>SWITCHING TO YOUR SIDEARM IS ALWAYS FASTER THAN RELOADING!

Someone is playing too much CoD, handguns aren't just a fucking secondary you dumbass, their small guns, which can be anything from your primary to your only gun to an object you bash people with.

In real life you aren't limited to two guns and you certainly won't be caught reloading your rifle as often as you'll only have a pistol in civilian life.

top 3 worst sights i have ever used in my life

>>34753212
Absolute madman.