Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/1/2010 9:59:58 AM EDT
I'm considering purchasing 2 PDW type weapons (both will be SBR's). A PS-90 is one of my possible options. I've looked on the FAQ here, tried finding info on The Box 'O truth, looked on brassfetcher.com, etc... Do any of the civilian available 5.7 FN loadings meet the FBI minimum penetration?

I know everyone will say Elite Ammunition, but that stuff is entirely too expensive to shoot enough to ensure reliability. I've also heard some very negative reports about their behavior on this board.

Thanks.
Link Posted: 9/1/2010 2:57:51 PM EDT
No one on this board will probably answer this question, most dislike the 5.7 round. All I will say is we all agree shot placement is the most important and I believe the 5.7 is the most accurate gun I can shoot. Now I don't shoot very much, so for the novice shooter I think the lack of kick and ability of the next shot being on target is what makes it so accurate
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 7:31:03 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 7:33:09 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 9:36:32 AM EDT
As an owner of both a PS90 and the FiveseveN, I can say for sure that the factory ammo sold to us plebs is very sub-par. The stuff issued to the military is intended to punch CRISAT armor at 200 meters, which it will do, but the terminal performance is still poor. I reload 50 grain CT Silver Tips for the PS90 and due to the relatively low velocities, it will have only limited fragmentation while still penetrating ~14". The same goes for the 40 grain ballistic tips I load for the FsN. As a PDW, it will be great. The PS90 is truely ambidexterous, well ballanced, compact, good capacity and has a recoil so low, you can watch the rounds print on the target through the sights.

Just remember, the 5.7x28 is not a full power rifle round and will never perform as one and you will be fine.
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 1:15:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/2/2010 1:17:31 PM EDT by FMJ]
Originally Posted By ehryk:
As an owner of both a PS90 and the FiveseveN, I can say for sure that the factory ammo sold to us plebs is very sub-par. The stuff issued to the military is intended to punch CRISAT armor at 200 meters, which it will do, but the terminal performance is still poor. I reload 50 grain CT Silver Tips for the PS90 and due to the relatively low velocities, it will have only limited fragmentation while still penetrating ~14". The same goes for the 40 grain ballistic tips I load for the FsN. As a PDW, it will be great. The PS90 is truely ambidexterous, well ballanced, compact, good capacity and has a recoil so low, you can watch the rounds print on the target through the sights.

Just remember, the 5.7x28 is not a full power rifle round and will never perform as one and you will be fine.


The main thing I like about the 57 pistol
no kick

I havent bought 1 yet
But they look like alot of Fun
Woul be great for my daughter to shoot

To bad we cant have the AP type ammo

Link Posted: 9/2/2010 3:29:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/2/2010 3:37:47 PM EDT by Swat_dude]
I know you said don't mention them but I did buy 600 rounds of Elite Exterminator. This is loaded with a Barnes 45 grain TSX bullet acheiving about 2550 fps out of the PS90. In the post above it was said you can't compare this to rifle round but I tend to disagree. You can. This round will do the same thing from 10 to 50 yards that a similar varmint loading will do at 175 to 225 yards. This load will have about 430 ft.lbs. of energy remaining at 100 yards, similiar to the varmint round at 275 yards. If you are okay with the rifle round performance at those distances then you should be fine with this gun at closer range. As far as an entry weapon or CQB only platform, I believe it betters the performance of the MP-5 in 9mm. But now that I own an STG with a 42 round mag, I see less and less the need for my PS90.
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 4:15:02 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 5:43:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By BM_shorty:
No one on this board will probably answer this question, most dislike the 5.7 round. All I will say is we all agree shot placement is the most important and I believe the 5.7 is the most accurate gun I can shoot. Now I don't shoot very much, so for the novice shooter I think the lack of kick and ability of the next shot being on target is what makes it so accurate

There's no conspiracy that brings about the dislike for 5.7x28; it just plain out doesn't perform well and as such there's a very good reason for the dislike. Accuracy and quick follow-up shots may be a bonus, but won't help you if the target is using cover or if the shot angle is less than perfect. In those cases, the negatives of the 5.7 quickly outweigh its advantages.



This and your previous post make perfect sense. I believe I'll just go for the TP-9 9mm for my SBR PDW's. At least with 9mm there are about a hundred good ammo choices plus cheap 9mm NATO spec to shoot.

I really like the soft armor penetration capability of the 5.7 but its drawbacks seem to outweigh that positive.
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 6:00:55 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 6:20:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By DerekCB:

I really like the soft armor penetration capability of the 5.7 but its drawbacks seem to outweigh that positive.

I'd be more worried if bad guys wearing body armor were becoming a common occurrence. In an ideal world, I'd still take a M4-type rifle with heavy OTMs.
I agree, especially on the first point. The bad guys most of us might meet are far from combat savvy and prone to using personal body armor. They're more likely to go for the "gangsta" style of holding their guns sideways and trying (poorly) to look cool. Hit one of these guys with a .45 Auto or a 75gr OTM and they will fold.
Link Posted: 9/2/2010 9:52:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/2/2010 9:54:55 PM EDT by Swat_dude]
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By Swat_dude:
I know you said don't mention them but I did buy 600 rounds of Elite Exterminator. This is loaded with a Barnes 45 grain TSX bullet acheiving about 2550 fps out of the PS90. In the post above it was said you can't compare this to rifle round but I tend to disagree. You can. This round will do the same thing from 10 to 50 yards that a similar varmint loading will do at 175 to 225 yards. This load will have about 430 ft.lbs. of energy remaining at 100 yards, similiar to the varmint round at 275 yards. If you are okay with the rifle round performance at those distances then you should be fine with this gun at closer range. As far as an entry weapon or CQB only platform, I believe it betters the performance of the MP-5 in 9mm. But now that I own an STG with a 42 round mag, I see less and less the need for my PS90.

Your post fails on multiple points, the primary indicator of which is your use of the "energy" fallacy.

I looked up the ammo on their website, and they list ballistic gelatin numbers, but the BG is not correct as they use a 15% formulation. Let's assume for a moment that their numbers are at least close. In that case, the ammo underpenetrates (although not by a lot), and the TEMPORARY cavity their claim is only 3". On to of that - assuming that the TSX expanded, you're going to end up with an EXPANDED diameter equal to about a .40 FMJ.

Not exactly what I would consider earth-shattering performance.


Your post fails even harder than my post. First, I never said squat about ballistic gelatin or made any comments relating energy to stopping power. I'm not sure how you extrapolated all that information from my post, but you know what they say about what happens when you ASSume. My assertion about the energy of the round is dead nuts accurate as a statement of fact and is based on the ballistic coefficient of the bullet and the resulting velocity of the bullet at one hundred yards based on the quoted muzzle velocity. The other comment I made was that if you would be satisfied with the performance of the varmint round at 175 yards then you would be okay with the performance of the 5.7 at close range. Personally, the performance of a varmint round at 175 yards would not be my first choice. If you had carefully read my post, you would have noted that I have a 5.56 bullpup rifle with a 42 round mag. This is loaded with Sliver State Armory 77 grain 5.56 SMK's and thus my statement of the PS90 being not really being necessary for my collection anymore. The P90 is extremely compact and could fill a nitch when used full auto but I have no intentions of SBR'ing my rifle and obviously it will never be full auto.

Does being the moderator qualify you to rudely advise someone their information is incorrect by telling them their post fails? You shouldn't be so quick to be the "expert" and acttually read the post without inserting a bunch of your personal bias.

Link Posted: 9/3/2010 3:35:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Swat_dude:
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By Swat_dude:
I know you said don't mention them but I did buy 600 rounds of Elite Exterminator. This is loaded with a Barnes 45 grain TSX bullet acheiving about 2550 fps out of the PS90. In the post above it was said you can't compare this to rifle round but I tend to disagree. You can. This round will do the same thing from 10 to 50 yards that a similar varmint loading will do at 175 to 225 yards. This load will have about 430 ft.lbs. of energy remaining at 100 yards, similiar to the varmint round at 275 yards. If you are okay with the rifle round performance at those distances then you should be fine with this gun at closer range. As far as an entry weapon or CQB only platform, I believe it betters the performance of the MP-5 in 9mm. But now that I own an STG with a 42 round mag, I see less and less the need for my PS90.

Your post fails on multiple points, the primary indicator of which is your use of the "energy" fallacy.

I looked up the ammo on their website, and they list ballistic gelatin numbers, but the BG is not correct as they use a 15% formulation. Let's assume for a moment that their numbers are at least close. In that case, the ammo underpenetrates (although not by a lot), and the TEMPORARY cavity their claim is only 3". On to of that - assuming that the TSX expanded, you're going to end up with an EXPANDED diameter equal to about a .40 FMJ.

Not exactly what I would consider earth-shattering performance.


Your post fails even harder than my post. First, I never said squat about ballistic gelatin or made any comments relating energy to stopping power. I'm not sure how you extrapolated all that information from my post, but you know what they say about what happens when you ASSume. My assertion about the energy of the round is dead nuts accurate as a statement of fact and is based on the ballistic coefficient of the bullet and the resulting velocity of the bullet at one hundred yards based on the quoted muzzle velocity. The other comment I made was that if you would be satisfied with the performance of the varmint round at 175 yards then you would be okay with the performance of the 5.7 at close range. Personally, the performance of a varmint round at 175 yards would not be my first choice. If you had carefully read my post, you would have noted that I have a 5.56 bullpup rifle with a 42 round mag. This is loaded with Sliver State Armory 77 grain 5.56 SMK's and thus my statement of the PS90 being not really being necessary for my collection anymore. The P90 is extremely compact and could fill a nitch when used full auto but I have no intentions of SBR'ing my rifle and obviously it will never be full auto.

Does being the moderator qualify you to rudely advise someone their information is incorrect by telling them their post fails? You shouldn't be so quick to be the "expert" and acttually read the post without inserting a bunch of your personal bias.

Reading posts before commenting on them is important-I agree 100%. But you missed something there. Looks to me like he's pointing out that the SITE lists data on gelatin...

Link Posted: 9/3/2010 9:13:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/3/2010 10:38:34 AM EDT by Swat_dude]
Just for the record, I am not saying the 5.7 is a fabulous round. I have seen Elite ammo's website and I am fully aware fo the data there including the ballistic gel. The factory ammo is a joke and SS195 has been dumbed down even more recently. I'm surprised they are even able to sell the platform anymore. The P90 was designed to compete with other sub guns, not rifles, but my point was you CAN compare the round to the performance of AR ammunition. Let me put this in plain terms, would you be comfortable with the performance of MK262 Mod 1 after it traveled 300 yards? IF the PS90 could actually launch the 77 SMK at a lower velocity and have an equivalent velocity at 75 yards to an AR at 300, would you consider the performance of the round at that velocity acceptable? So I just asked the question... Would you consider the Barnes 45 grain bullet's performance at 225 yards acceptle? If so, then the PS90's performance at 50 yards is no different... same bullet-same velocity at impact.

Zhukov, please disregard my previous rant. I just noticed you clearly state you do not play well with others.
Link Posted: 9/3/2010 2:22:32 PM EDT
Why not consider one of the 7.62x25 uppers? Very low recoil, absurdly cheap ammo, and great ballistics for a pistol round.
Link Posted: 9/3/2010 6:26:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/3/2010 6:33:35 PM EDT by ehryk]
Originally Posted By Tomato_Thrower:
Why not consider one of the 7.62x25 uppers? Very low recoil, absurdly cheap ammo, and great ballistics for a pistol round.


Honestly, I would rather have the 5.7 in a PS90 or even a PS90SB than an AR in 7.62x25. That is nothing more than my my NSHO though ;)

Now, as for the 45 grain TSX in the 5.7x28, I tested it a LOT in both the FiveseveN and the 16" PS90. I would not personally use it due to the fact that with the pistol, the petals only opened to maybe 1/8th" per petal. With the PS90, I got the advertised 75% (NOT 175%!!!) expansion from the Elite website. Now, if I would stop taking vacations to Sweden, I would be buying Elite ammo until the bank was broke. I like what they do with this round. Also, they are 100% honest about the performance of their bullets. Anyway... as I was saying about the expansion... this just wasnt enough for me. for the PS90 shooting 50 grain CT Silver Tips at 2008 FPS, I get roughly .4 inch expansion expansion with ~60% weight retained. For the FsN, I use 40 grain ballistic tips at 2026 fps which have nearly identical performance.

I did a test side by side with the 40 grain ballistic tip and the 147 grain Gold Dot over 6.9 grains VV 3N38 from my XDm giving 1209 FPS (published recipe). 9mm is top and right, 5.7 is bottom and left.






The 9mm pistol Vs the FsN are no match. I should have done a comparrison of 9mm Vs PS90 Vs Mk 262 Mod 1, but didnt... sorry lol Still though, I wouldnt discount the FsN at all, eh?

ETA: I forgot to mention, this is in Perma-Gel, NOT 10% ordinance gelatine. It's close, but not exact.
Link Posted: 9/3/2010 6:41:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 7:39:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:
Perma Gel is not close to the real thing. Please don't draw any conclusions from your tests.


closer than wetpack or plain water, eh? Whatever man.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 9:44:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ehryk:
Originally Posted By Zhukov:
Perma Gel is not close to the real thing. Please don't draw any conclusions from your tests.


closer than wetpack or plain water, eh? Whatever man.


Permagel, like plain water and wetpack, is completely worthless and proves absolutely nothing.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 10:47:23 AM EDT
which is exactly why I made it perfectly clear what the block was made of. Ah well.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 11:06:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ehryk:
which is exactly why I made it perfectly clear what the block was made of. Ah well.


Well scientific or not it does provide at least an insight on how the specific loads compare. I for one appreciate your effort.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 11:11:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2010 11:13:40 AM EDT by WayOutWest]
Originally Posted By BB223:
Originally Posted By ehryk:
Originally Posted By Zhukov:
Perma Gel is not close to the real thing. Please don't draw any conclusions from your tests.


closer than wetpack or plain water, eh? Whatever man.


Permagel, like plain water and wetpack, is completely worthless and proves absolutely nothing.


By that logic, isn't everything other than hitting a live human worthless? I mean, apparently if it is not the same, it is worthless.

Anyone giving away permagel because it is worthless, please send it to me.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 11:13:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By robertmegar:
Originally Posted By ehryk:
which is exactly why I made it perfectly clear what the block was made of. Ah well.


Well scientific or not it does provide at least an insight on how the specific loads compare. I for one appreciate your effort.


This +1. Better than someone spouting off with ZERO data.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 6:47:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By WayOutWest:
Originally Posted By BB223:
Originally Posted By ehryk:
Originally Posted By Zhukov:
Perma Gel is not close to the real thing. Please don't draw any conclusions from your tests.


closer than wetpack or plain water, eh? Whatever man.


Permagel, like plain water and wetpack, is completely worthless and proves absolutely nothing.


By that logic, isn't everything other than hitting a live human worthless? I mean, apparently if it is not the same, it is worthless.

Anyone giving away permagel because it is worthless, please send it to me.

The only utility of wetpack, phonebooks and other non-standardized testing media is to see what bullets do in those media.

Properly prepared ballistics gelatin that is properly calibrated generates data that directly correlates with effects in live tissue. That's why it has to be prepared correctly and used correctly. Other media have no scientific relationship to live tissue and simply don't tell you anything about terminal effects in real animals.

If you like Permagel, fine. But while it may be fun to play with, it doesn't have the years of solid science behind its use as a ballistics testing medium that standardized and properly prepared 250 bloom gelatin does.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 7:14:14 PM EDT
Back to my point of shot placement. Yes a larger hole in the heart would be better, but I can hit the heart everytime with the 5.7. Yeah, if their wearing armor, extra clothing, etc... it might not reach right.... But if I can hit the heart, I can hit the head just as easy. All I'm saying is would you rather have an inch gut shot, or a 1/4 inch heart or head shot.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 8:15:41 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 9:10:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GHPorter:
Originally Posted By WayOutWest:
Originally Posted By BB223:
Originally Posted By ehryk:
Originally Posted By Zhukov:
Perma Gel is not close to the real thing. Please don't draw any conclusions from your tests.


closer than wetpack or plain water, eh? Whatever man.


Permagel, like plain water and wetpack, is completely worthless and proves absolutely nothing.


By that logic, isn't everything other than hitting a live human worthless? I mean, apparently if it is not the same, it is worthless.

Anyone giving away permagel because it is worthless, please send it to me.

The only utility of wetpack, phonebooks and other non-standardized testing media is to see what bullets do in those media.

Properly prepared ballistics gelatin that is properly calibrated generates data that directly correlates with effects in live tissue. That's why it has to be prepared correctly and used correctly. Other media have no scientific relationship to live tissue and simply don't tell you anything about terminal effects in real animals.

If you like Permagel, fine. But while it may be fun to play with, it doesn't have the years of solid science behind its use as a ballistics testing medium that standardized and properly prepared 250 bloom gelatin does.


What about bones? How does something with nothing close to as hard as bone
directly correlates with effects in live tissue
gel is gel, and flesh is flesh. The two will never be the same. Although useful, it is not
solid science.
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 12:01:20 AM EDT
Gel testing was not invented in a vacuum, data recorded from OIS autopsies show there is a correlation between gel and flesh.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 8:09:01 PM EDT
Originally Posted By robertmegar:
Originally Posted By ehryk:
which is exactly why I made it perfectly clear what the block was made of. Ah well.


Well scientific or not it does provide at least an insight on how the specific loads compare. I for one appreciate your effort.


no problem
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 7:07:14 AM EDT
Top Top