Futuristic Gun You Can Own...Now!

[Taosman]

The future of hand guns is already here in the FNH 5.7.

Called the FiveSeveN, the gun fires a submachine gun round. Light weight bullet at high speed for more knockdown power like a military rifle. And you can buy it now!

 

[Taosman]

Here is what the rounds compare to.

So. What's all the fuss? Well, it kicks about like a .22. Making it very accurate and easy to target. Price is high right now but this is the start of a new wave of handguns based on this ammo.

 

[Muck]

You know why it kicks like a .22?

Because it hits like one too.

 

[Taosman]

You know why it kicks like a .22?

Because it hits like one too.

Still in love with that big old .45, huh? :tongue2:

 

[Muck]

Still in love with that big old .45, huh? :tongue2:

I'm in love with results.

Give me a phased plasma rifle in the 40w range if it'll work better. If not, skip it.

FN's 5.7 was designed for one purpose, to defeat body armour at short to moderate ranges. Terminal ballistics was not a major design concern.

The reason the standard bearer for "light & fast" (the 5.56) is an effective round is because it fragments relatively quickly within a body. A large part of the criticism of the 5.56 stemming from the current conflict is because it's being launched from the M4 which has a 5.5" shorter barrel than an M-16.

Under 2,500 FPS the M855 does not fragment reliably and it's wounding ability is significantly reduced. Out of an M-16 the M855 drops below 2,500 fps at around 200m, out of an M4 it crosses that threshold at less than 100m.

The 32gr SS190 out of a P90? It leaves the barrel at 2,300fps (Yes this is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison as we are talking about two different bullet weights & designs but it does give a rough idea).

So we're talking about a round that weighs half as much as the current issue M855 round (62gr) leaving the muzzle at about 800fps slower.

That's about the same performance as a .22 Magnum. Now does anyone think the .22WMR is the next great combat round?

How do you think a 32gr projectile will handle being fired in brush or it's ability to defeat an intermediate barrier?

BTW the 5.7mm rounds you can buy are very different from the military SS190 AP round. The current civilian round (SS196) is a 40gr vmax hollowpoint that comes out of the pistol at around 1,600fps. Not exactly an .88 Magnum there kids (ie it won't shoot through schools).


The 5.7mm FN & it's 4.6mm cousin from HK were designed for use in PDW. The Personal Defense Weapon concept is touted as a means of increasing the firepower of rear echelon folks who don't normally carry a rifle. They were never meant as a replacement for assault/battle rifles carried by front line troops.

 

[Mike80]

This is some kind of fucked up twilight zone in this thread....

Taos pushing guns on people? NFW...

:p

 

[cincibuck]

The 5.7mm FN & it's 4.6mm cousin from HK were designed for use in PDW. The Personal Defense Weapon concept is touted as a means of increasing the firepower of rear echelon folks who don't normally carry a rifle. They were never meant as a replacement for assault/battle rifles carried by front line troops.

Gun afficinado I'm not, but I know this from my active duty time; this kind of crap gets foisted off on the military from somewhere outside the realm of actual combat experience. The 45 does what it's suppossed to do, provide a knock out punch to bad folks at short range. It has no match for doing what it's suppossed to do. The reasons given for the transfer to the 9mm Beretta were lighter ammo, more rounds per basic load and clips and accuracy... sound familar? And guess what, the Army went back to the reality that in close quarters the 45 does what the 9mm won't do, knock the other guy down.

That same thinking, light weight, no kick, high velocity, has led to the long running cluster fuck of weapons built around the M-16, a rifle which still lacks the dependability, knock down power and accuracy of the AK-47, and the SAW aka the jam-o-matic.

Anyone on board who has had a different experience, or heard differently about the 9mm, the M-16 or the SAW?

 

[BUCKYLE]

I'm in love with results.

Give me a phased plasma rifle in the 40w range if it'll work better. If not, skip it.

FN's 5.7 was designed for one purpose, to defeat body armour at short to moderate ranges. Terminal ballistics was not a major design concern.

The reason the standard bearer for "light & fast" (the 5.56) is an effective round is because it fragments relatively quickly within a body. A large part of the criticism of the 5.56 stemming from the current conflict is because it's being launched from the M4 which has a 5.5" shorter barrel than an M-16.

Under 2,500 FPS the M855 does not fragment reliably and it's wounding ability is significantly reduced. Out of an M-16 the M855 drops below 2,500 fps at around 200m, out of an M4 it crosses that threshold at less than 100m.

The 32gr SS190 out of a P90? It leaves the barrel at 2,300fps (Yes this is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison as we are talking about two different bullet weights & designs but it does give a rough idea).

So we're talking about a round that weighs half as much as the current issue M855 round (62gr) leaving the muzzle at about 800fps slower.

That's about the same performance as a .22 Magnum. Now does anyone think the .22WMR is the next great combat round?

How do you think a 32gr projectile will handle being fired in brush or it's ability to defeat an intermediate barrier?

BTW the 5.7mm rounds you can buy are very different from the military SS190 AP round. The current civilian round (SS196) is a 40gr vmax hollowpoint that comes out of the pistol at around 1,600fps. Not exactly an .88 Magnum there kids (ie it won't shoot through schools).


The 5.7mm FN & it's 4.6mm cousin from HK were designed for use in PDW. The Personal Defense Weapon concept is touted as a means of increasing the firepower of rear echelon folks who don't normally carry a rifle. They were never meant as a replacement for assault/battle rifles carried by front line troops.

Crimony, you're like Nic Cage's character in Lord of War.

 

[Mike80]

Anyone on board who has had a different experience, or heard differently about the 9mm, the M-16 or the SAW?

I never had a single problem with my M-16, but then again I never had to use it in combat.

As for accuracy, sometimes it's safer to stand in front of some people than to either side :p

 

[Muck]

Gun afficinado I'm not, but I know this from my active duty time; this kind of crap gets foisted off on the military from somewhere outside the realm of actual combat experience. The 45 does what it's suppossed to do, provide a knock out punch to bad folks at short range. It has no match for doing what it's suppossed to do. The reasons given for the transfer to the 9mm Beretta were lighter ammo, more rounds per basic load and clips and accuracy... sound familar? And guess what, the Army went back to the reality that in close quarters the 45 does what the 9mm won't do, knock the other guy down.

Think of the PDW concept more as a modern M-1 Carbine than anything else.
The idea is to get something in the hands of the guys who are currently carrying pistols that approaches a rifle in effectiveness without the size/weight.

As far as I'm concerned a handgun is a handgun and a rifle is a rifle. There is an order of magnitude between the two in effectiveness. If you can get a rifle into a small enough package for tankers & other vehicle bound troops to be able to carry easily...amen!

As the late Col. Jeff Cooper would say "A pistol is what you use to fight your way back to your rifle".

The real reason we went to the 9mm was politics, as a sop to NATO in order to make up for some of the things we foisted on them.

That same thinking, light weight, no kick, high velocity, has led to the long running cluster fuck of weapons built around the M-16, a rifle which still lacks the dependability, knock down power and accuracy of the AK-47, and the SAW aka the jam-o-matic.

Anyone on board who has had a different experience, or heard differently about the 9mm, the M-16 or the SAW?

Sure you want to open this can of worms?

The Beretta is a decent pistol.

9mm ball ammo is not up to the task (ball was bolded for a reason, JHP are another matter entirely but outside of the scope of this discussion due to the Hague).

The big problem guys are having with the Beretta in the sandbox are the magazines...they're junk. If you know someone in Iraq or Afghanistan who's carrying an M9 and you want to send them something in a care package....go out and buy some good mags and send 'em over.

The M-16 family's problems are GROSSLY exaggerated in my opinion. If taken care of the M-16 runs fine. Yes that means you have to clean it sometimes. So what. If you're on my team and carrying an AK you damn well better be cleaning it too.

I've seen Hadji's with poorly maintained AK's have failures to fire often enough that I'm not going wager my life on the "you can bury and sand and it'll still fire" nonsense.

Properly maintanence means breaking her down and cleaning her every day. You don't have to scrub it until it'll pass the idiot q-tip test at the armory, you just need to make sure everything is clean & not covered in gunk.

LUBE THE FUCK OUT OF IT

Yes the M-16 is meant to be run wet. That means liberal lubrication INSIDE THE BOLT & BOLT CARRIER GROUP where it belongs. That doesn't mean dump a bunch of CLP in the chamber. Keep it lubed where it matters, inside where all those little moving parts are.

Again make sure you take care of your magazines. The aluminum mags we use were originally meant as a "disposable" item. Of course no self respecting supply pogue is actually going to get rid of them, he's going to reuse them until they disintegrate into dust. Tear down your magazines every night, wipe 'em out. Make sure the springs are fine. Check the feed lips to make sure they aren't bent.

If you have a mag that gives you problems. Smash it into pieces with something heavy and then turn it in. Don't use it and don't return it in a condition that it could possibly be reissued to some other poor shmuck.

Other than that the M-16 runs fine. The only time I've seen any recurring problems are because of either user error (Pvt Shmuckatelly doesn't take care of his shit) or because of bad mags.

There are some problems with the M-4, but those aren't issues that are going to crop up for the average grunt. They're problems that SOCOM has run into because they run their weapons very differently than the typical 0311. Laying down massive amounts of supressive fire with am M-4 is a recipe for failure. She gets hot, REALLY hot and that is when failures start to occur. There are also some problems related to timing issues that occur because of the shorter gas tube.

But again the normal infantryman doesn't blow through his basic load in a firefight, let alone 5x as much in a short period of time so those issues are NOT something that affects 99% of the troopers out there.


The M-16 is a good platform, much better than it gets credit for. Take a look at what the British & Australian SAS carry...it ain't L85s & AUGs. The same holds true for SOCOM equivalents of most western militaries.

Those guys don't carry M-4s because they're junk and they have to...they do it for a reason.

I touched on the issues with the 5.56 somewhat in the earlier post. If it falls below a certain velocity it doesn't fragment reliably and it isn't as effective. Again that threshold with the M-4 is 75-100m which is still longer than most engagements in Iraq are occurring (Afghanistan is certainly another matter entirely).

They've been using a 77gr OTP round (Mk262 Mod 1) in the various M-16 based designated marksman platforms which has been giving very good results at longer ranges. So the answer may not necessarily be a new caliber so much as a new bullet.

As for the SAW I think the biggest problem is that it's been misused it's entire time in US service. It doesn't make a very good automatic rifle replacement at the fire team level which is how it's been deployed. It's too heavy and unwieldy in that roll. As a support weapon it's fine, but if that is where it's best used...then stick it in the weapons co where it belongs.

FWIW the newer Mk46 Mod 0 version designed by FN for the SEALs is a pretty nice piece of kit. It ditches the useless mag well among other improvements...

The Marine Corps has tinkering with the idea for a replacement for the SAW for awhile now and finally put out a RFP for an "IAR" (Infantry Automatic Rifle) a few years ago. Basically the idea is to give the rifleman in each fire team something more like the lines of the old BAR (ie a magazine fed weapon capable of full auto and designed for non-sustained supressive fire).

I like that idea a lot and think that it would offer a hell of a lot of flexibility to Marines in the types of combat they typically face.

As for accuracy, sometimes it's safer to stand in front of some people than to either side :p

Hot brass burns! :(

 

[Muck]

Found the original RFP, here's the relevant data for the IAR proposal:

The United States Marine Corps is currently seeking information for a non-developmental, 5.56mm, Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR).

CAPABILITY DISCUSSION.
The IAR will enable the fire team to rapidly suppress point and area targets of immediate concern. The IAR will replace the infantry?s M249 Squad Automatic Weapons (SAWs) with an automatic rifle easily operable by a single infantry Marine that emphasizes lightweight and portability in order to maximize dismounted maneuverability.

SYSTEM ATTRIBUTES.
The attributes that follow describe some of the specific characteristics that are required to provide the desired capability. Some attributes include threshold and objective criteria. A threshold criterion is defined as a mandatory requirement and an objective criterion is defined as a desirable (but not mandatory) requirement.

System Portability. The IAR (excluding the magazine and accessories) shall weigh less than 12.5 pounds empty (Threshold), 10.5 pounds (Obj! ective).

Ammunition Commonality. The IAR shall fire 5.56 mm ammunition.

Interoperability. The IAR shall possess a military standard 1913 rail interface.

Sustained Rate of Fire. The IAR shall be capable of a sustained rate of fire of 36 rounds per minute (Threshold), 75 rounds per minute (Objective). (Sustained rate is defined as the rate at which a weapon can fire indefinitely without experiencing a major malfunction such as [but not limited to] a cook-off or a significant degradation in accuracy.)

Magazine. The IAR shall utilize a magazine with a capacity of 100 rounds (Threshold). The magazine shall permit rapid visual determination of the number of rounds remaining (Objective).

Magazine Compatibility. The IAR shall accept and function with the current Marine Corps service rifle (the M16A4) 30 round magazines.

Firing modes. The IAR shall be capable of both semi-automatic and full automatic firing.

Collapsible/Adjustable Bipod. The IAR shall possess a robust, detachable, collapsible, and adjustable bipod.

 

[SparkyOSU]

Stupid asses!!!!

Everyone knows you gots to hold the guns sideways if you really need to killz some bitches... fucking n00bs. Turning sideways effectively increases the impact 20 fold. Beeotch.

 

[The KSB]

That same thinking, light weight, no kick, high velocity, has led to the long running cluster fuck of weapons built around the M-16, a rifle which still lacks the dependability, knock down power and accuracy of the AK-47, and the SAW aka the jam-o-matic.

Anyone on board who has had a different experience, or heard differently about the 9mm, the M-16 or the SAW?

9mm - prefer my 10mm. Never used a 45 so I can't compare
SAW - Shit Ass Weapon. Hate the damn thing. Lucky for my unit we only have M240B's
M-16 - Much more accurate than the AK-47. Requires an unrealistic amount of maint. Don't really like it at all. I would much prefer something simple and reliable w/o all the bells and whistles.

 

[Gatorubet]

You know why it kicks like a .22?

Because it hits like one too.

But you get 20 of 'em...:tongue2:

 

[Taosman]

My interest in guns is simply one of an interest in all things mechinaical. Like most guys I like to see how things function, whether it's a high tech weapon or a car or a stereo/tv. I have given up my personal collection long ago. They mostly collected dust. And my hearing suffered. :(

But, I digress. Science and weapons thought marches on. There is a difference in thought between NATO and American military. The handgun to NATO partners is generally considered a weapon of last resort. While American thought is one of a front line/in use tool. So, there are pulls in both directions. If your a tanker carrying a sub as your personal weapon it makes sense to have a matching caliber side arm.
If your busting down doors in Iraq, you may well want something with more first shot/knock down power.