View Full Version : Ra 5.7 Uppers
Anyone here what the deal is? Did they decide not to make them?
I would think now the PS90 is available their niche market is gone.
BTW, yes I know it's not a good defensive round. Yes, I know it sucks. Yes, I know the 50 round magazines reportedly have spring problems. It's not a matter of 'need' or a 'defensive tool' it's a range toy, nothing more.
For those that don't know what Dport s talking about: http://www.rhinelandarms.com/
I have not heard anything new about it.
I am hearing from I-Shot that they are getting a lot of requests for for them to create a discreet case for the P90. So there LE agencies running them.
C4
olds442tyguy
06-16-06, 22:00
On another board I was told by a Rhineland customer that they were trying to catch up on R22 production. This was about a month ago, but you could try calling them at 972-342-2105.
With that said, I think their R22SD (MP5SD like) looks like a cool little rimfire.
I had a lower set aside just for the 5.7 upper, but I'm thinking of getting another POF upper instead. In fact, unless a miracle happens I think I'm going for the piston gun.
Hi Dport,
Regarding the POF upper, I was about this close >><< to buying one. Their reliability/cleaning claims were impressive. I am not a fan of the rail they use, and was considering the upper that uses M4-looking handguards. But after reading this post at 10-8, I decided that I would give another year to hear more feedback (and the Colt 1020 should be out by then).
http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=24148&an=0&page=1#24148
I figure that the instructors that posted in that thread see more AR variants in the same hard-use conditions that I would put my weapon through, so their input ways more with me than the average poster. Also, no one I know personally has one, so it is a pretty expensive guinea pig for me to test with.
Hi Dport,
Regarding the POF upper, I was about this close >><< to buying one. Their reliability/cleaning claims were impressive. I am not a fan of the rail they use, and was considering the upper that uses M4-looking handguards. But after reading this post at 10-8, I decided that I would give another year to hear more feedback (and the Colt 1020 should be out by then).
http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=24148&an=0&page=1#24148
I figure that the instructors that posted in that thread see more AR variants in the same hard-use conditions that I would put my weapon through, so their input ways more with me than the average poster. Also, no one I know personally has one, so it is a pretty expensive guinea pig for me to test with.
I have a 13.6 POF with a Krink perm attached. I have the M4 handguards. I have no need for a full rail system. I love the gun. IMO the recoil is less than the HK416, and it's damned easy to clean. The only problem I had with it was of my own making.
Since this 5.7 upper is vapor-ware and doesn't seem likely to manifest anytime soon, I'm thinking about a 14.5 with a phantom perm attached, with an Accupoint in a LaRue mount.
I think its a cool innovation if it works. Peru uses the 5.7 for CQB. I have an FN FiveSeven and boy a 30rd mag weighs as much as an 8rd 1911 mag. If it was legal to have the SS190 rounds it would really make it worth it.
30! or 20? 30 would be nice...
Why? The SS190 ammunition offer very poor terminal performance...
Why? The SS190 ammunition offer very poor terminal performance...
The SS190 did fairly well in killing all terrorists that seized the Peruvian embassey back in the 90's. Many of which had on soft body armor.
30! or 20? 30 would be nice...
CMMG sells 30rd pistol mags.http://cmmginc.secure-mall.com/shop/images/642.jpg
Too bad the 5.7 mm has not demonstrated the good incapacitation potential and desireable terminal effects in many documented U.S. law enforcement officer involved shooting incidents...
Ok, How do I get one of these? http://www.rhinelandarms.com/57/pics/57shorty.jpg:eek:
Pat_Rogers
08-02-06, 06:33
The SS190 did fairly well in killing all terrorists that seized the Peruvian embassey back in the 90's. Many of which had on soft body armor.
Can you cite your sources on that- that all the t's were killed with 5.7? How many were wearing armor?
The experience in the US is that the 5.7 is a very poor performer- but Gary Roberts, who actually knows a thing or two about ballistics- has already told you that.
Speaking with several people who have used the P90 for real on real deal bad guys paints a much different picture.
Wanting one to play with is a worthwhile endeavor. Wanting one to fight with may be something else entirely, and the 5.56x45mm round can do that job with greater efficiency.
It makes no sense what so ever to take an AR and handicap it with a smaller round. The package is nearly identical in size and weight so...
It makes no sense what so ever to take an AR and handicap it with a smaller round. The package is nearly identical in size and weight so...
With the exception of .22 caliber conversion kits for kids, women, and training I agree with you - Especially given the cost factor with 5.7x28 ammo vs. the cost of .22
I have to say though, I think the RA upper is an innovative design.
Can you cite your sources on that- that all the t's were killed with 5.7? How many were wearing armor?
The experience in the US is that the 5.7 is a very poor performer- but Gary Roberts, who actually knows a thing or two about ballistics- has already told you that.
Speaking with several people who have used the P90 for real on real deal bad guys paints a much different picture.
Wanting one to play with is a worthwhile endeavor. Wanting one to fight with may be something else entirely, and the 5.56x45mm round can do that job with greater efficiency.
Here is a general article on the stand-off:
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9612/23/peru.pm/
Here is additional info:
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9612/23/peru/index.html#1
P90 Info:
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=109
Look I'm not going to argue that the 5.7 is a 5.56 replacement even FN doesn't push that. That would be a foolish statement. The 5.7 P90 is meant as a smg entry weapon that unlike a 9mm MP5 will defeat soft BA. Personally prefered 9mm MP5 round is a Winchester 147gr +p+, but that is not dropping BA tango's. The SS190 is a formidable round. I'm not sure where you are getting poor LE effectiveness? What US LE department is issuing SS190's to SRT and HRT's? If you research the evolution from the IOM to the USG the real reason is the US Secret Service has been looking for a specialty EP sidearm that will defeat soft BA. FN made the changes. No information has been published, I know. Could you imagine the buzz on AP handguns in domestic USG-LE hands? Anyhow, I like the upper because it takes the 50rd P90 mags and firing a P90 with 50rds is really controllable. Try spraying 50rds in a CAR-M4 while clearing a 10X10 room in CQB and keep groups tight.
I for one prefer what has been used for years, and if I had to choose I would use a HK UMP 45ACP for room clearing. But having a 5.7 USG to punch a tango's BA is invaluable.
Besides, have you ever bought anything because it was cool and worked?
How many of you bought shorty M4's with Noveske piggy breaks, are you clearing rooms that cant handle 16'barrels. Or building them because there cool?
It makes no sense what so ever to take an AR and handicap it with a smaller round. The package is nearly identical in size and weight so...
Nitrox, truely no offense but aren't you the one who said that Noveske would'nt be able to make a 6.5 Grendel because AA wouldn't let him? That is until AA owner Bill Alexander said that he would......
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=606&highlight=grendel
Nitrox, truely no offense but aren't you the one who said that Noveske would'nt be able to make a 6.5 Grendel because AA wouldn't let him? That is until AA owner Bill Alexander said that he would......
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=606&highlight=grendel
I don't recall ever saying Noveske wasn't able to make anything, he certainly has the ability. What I said was, and is, accurate. Until AA licenses the reamer specs to Noveske you can't buy a 6.5 barrel from him. The next best thing (or maybe even the same thing depending on how the license agreement is worked out) is to take a PacNor blank and send it to AA.
As far as the 5.7 is concerned, it is completely backward to put it in an AR. The rifle would be the same size and weight and and have an inferior performing cartridge.
Any other questions?
Pat_Rogers
08-03-06, 03:30
Here is a general article on the stand-off:
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9612/23/peru.pm/
Here is additional info:
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9612/23/peru/index.html#1
P90 Info:
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=109
Look I'm not going to argue that the 5.7 is a 5.56 replacement even FN doesn't push that. That would be a foolish statement. The 5.7 P90 is meant as a smg entry weapon that unlike a 9mm MP5 will defeat soft BA. Personally prefered 9mm MP5 round is a Winchester 147gr +p+, but that is not dropping BA tango's. The SS190 is a formidable round. I'm not sure where you are getting poor LE effectiveness? What US LE department is issuing SS190's to SRT and HRT's? If you research the evolution from the IOM to the USG the real reason is the US Secret Service has been looking for a specialty EP sidearm that will defeat soft BA. FN made the changes. No information has been published, I know. Could you imagine the buzz on AP handguns in domestic USG-LE hands? Anyhow, I like the upper because it takes the 50rd P90 mags and firing a P90 with 50rds is really controllable. Try spraying 50rds in a CAR-M4 while clearing a 10X10 room in CQB and keep groups tight.
I for one prefer what has been used for years, and if I had to choose I would use a HK UMP 45ACP for room clearing. But having a 5.7 USG to punch a tango's BA is invaluable.
Besides, have you ever bought anything because it was cool and worked?
How many of you bought shorty M4's with Noveske piggy breaks, are you clearing rooms that cant handle 16'barrels. Or building them because there cool?
Good Morning.
None of your sources states anything other than generalities. If you have definitive information supporting your comments that all of the T's were killed by 5.7 as well as they were wearing armor, i would be interested in seeing it.
Unsure of your background, but CQB is by definition intimate and surgical.
"Spraying" 50 rounds in a bedroom sized area is something that i have never been taught in any of those entry classes i have attended; something i- or anyone i know -teaches; nor is it a TTP that i or anyone that i know uses.
Both Houston TX and Jacksonville FL used P90's. I am not aware if Houston still uses it, but having spoken at length with a J'ville SWAT cop who was involved in multiple shootings with it he had this to say.
"The gun is accurate and controlable. That is a good thing because you need to be able to hit the BG with a lot of rounds- they have little effect. The magazines crack and if we had it to do again, we wouldn't have bought them".
Unsure what you mean by the folowing.
"I for one would prefer what has been used for years..."
OK, then 5.56 would fall into that box. Even NYPD has been using that going back to the 70's, and the military units tasked with DA missions have been using M4 or MK18's for a great many years doing CQB. A great many police teams dropped the sub caliber guns as they are basically un- ergonomic and heavy pistols.
I'm fortunate in that i get to work with some very professional people who have access to a great number of platforms. 5.56x45 is a standard for a reason.
I am not sure what your use for the P90 is. If you are on a team or this is theoretical or whatever. Perforating armor isn't the only criteria. Hey- 22 LR will do that. Not everyone wears armor, and not all shots are taken at ranges under 7yds.
And i would be hard pressed to see the justification under the color of law for "spraying 50 rounds" in a domestic situation.
olds442tyguy
08-03-06, 18:26
I don't think it's fair to assume Rhineland Arms is trying to pass this off as a real world upgrade. Rhineland specializes in novelty firearms, and I think they are great at innovating such products for that niche.
Just like their HK94/MP5 inspired rimfires, I don't think this set up is being designed for combat use. JMO.
That said, I think it would be a very interesting plinker if it were chambered in a less expensive rimfire caliber, especially on a registered receiver. :cool:
ETA: I just went to their site, and the Walther WA2000 inspired USG mag fed rifle is pretty cool looking too. While I'm not a fan of the 5.7, I do find such products amusing.
2nd edit: Wow! They're also offering a WA2000 inspired rifle in 5.56 and 6.5 Grendel also.
Good Morning.
None of your sources states anything other than generalities. If you have definitive information supporting your comments that all of the T's were killed by 5.7 as well as they were wearing armor, i would be interested in seeing it.
Unsure of your background, but CQB is by definition intimate and surgical.
"Spraying" 50 rounds in a bedroom sized area is something that i have never been taught in any of those entry classes i have attended; something i- or anyone i know -teaches; nor is it a TTP that i or anyone that i know uses.
Both Houston TX and Jacksonville FL used P90's. I am not aware if Houston still uses it, but having spoken at length with a J'ville SWAT cop who was involved in multiple shootings with it he had this to say.
"The gun is accurate and controlable. That is a good thing because you need to be able to hit the BG with a lot of rounds- they have little effect. The magazines crack and if we had it to do again, we wouldn't have bought them".
Unsure what you mean by the folowing.
"I for one would prefer what has been used for years..."
OK, then 5.56 would fall into that box. Even NYPD has been using that going back to the 70's, and the military units tasked with DA missions have been using M4 or MK18's for a great many years doing CQB. A great many police teams dropped the sub caliber guns as they are basically un- ergonomic and heavy pistols.
I'm fortunate in that i get to work with some very professional people who have access to a great number of platforms. 5.56x45 is a standard for a reason.
I am not sure what your use for the P90 is. If you are on a team or this is theoretical or whatever. Perforating armor isn't the only criteria. Hey- 22 LR will do that. Not everyone wears armor, and not all shots are taken at ranges under 7yds.
And i would be hard pressed to see the justification under the color of law for "spraying 50 rounds" in a domestic situation.
Who in the world ever said that a P90 is a replacement for an M4? The P90 is to be measured against a 9mm SMG's or better yet 9mm PDW's. Your point regarding 22lr is well put, however the same can be said for M4's with suppressors. In order to really utilize a suppressor you must use subsonic ammo, right? Isn't a subsonic .223 nothing more than a FMJ 22lr? Like I said before I am solid on 45acp's for CQB, I even like a JHP 9mm against soft targets. But, if I have to worry about soft body armor I would be more apt to have SS190's than a 9mm.
Are you telling me that your buddies department is issuing SS190's? That would be new news to me, because I'm pretty sure they don’t. And they may be using the P90 in the wrong application. If they issued HK UMP’s they would be prepared for 90% of their calls.
Why has this thread turned into a comparison of a 5.7 over a 5.56?
I referenced the 50rd CQB because that is the capacity of the P90. No, you wouldn't unload 50rds in a 10X10. But you also don’t chop a Browning BAR and call it an entry weapon.
For the last time a 5.7 is not a 5.56 replacement just as much as a .30 carbine was not a replacement for an M1Garand.
And my experience shouldn't be the question here, 03-21, 03-69 with 3/5 Lima should be enough. With that I’m done, Get Some.
Pat_Rogers
08-06-06, 13:58
Thank you for your service- i have a very soft spot in my heart for 3/5. When were you with them?
Understand that i am just responding to your statements.
You did say that all of the T's at the Japanese embassy in Peru were killed by P90's and some were wearing body armor.
I asked for your sources and didn't get anything.
You brought up "spraying" 50 rounds in a 10'x10' room.
I understand that you are just dancing around, and so i'll just broadly assume that your don't have the info.
Your opinions on CQB are interesting, but don't match up to accepted wisdom. Do you have police experience? If so, where. Just curious as to how you have arrived at your assumptions/ decisions is all.
I think one very important questions has yet to be asked in this thread:
What would Chuck Norris do?
http://i5.tinypic.com/23tlapf.jpg
Robb Jensen
08-06-06, 14:58
I think one very important questions has yet to be asked in this thread:
What would Chuck Norris do?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v408/gotm4/uglylol.gif
Pat_Rogers
08-06-06, 15:31
Excellent!
Of course, Chuck could probably deal death even with P90's!
Chuck would be sliding down a steel cable while engaging bad guys at 1oom's one handed with a P90 and scoring first rd hits.....;) cause that's what I would do.......:)
To quote White Goodman from Dodgeball:
"F*ckin' Chuck Norris!"
:D
-The chief export of Chuck Norris is pain.
-If you can see Chuck Norris, he can see you. If you can't see Chuck Norris you may be only seconds away from death.
-There are no disabled people. Only people who have met Chuck Norris.
-Chuck Norris once shot a German plane down with his finger, by yelling, "Bang!"
And last but not least:
-Chuck Norris had his Micro Uzi's converted to 5.7 and killed Peru.
Hardgear, LLC
08-07-06, 06:18
From an Agency perspective, the P90 becomes an expensive "specialty item" that really doesn't have a place in most entry doctrine. If you're on an HRT, you do not go into a room expecting to spray 50 rnds. It does have some advantages like size and lack of muzzle blast. You could even argue ergonomics. These are offset by questionable terminal performance and the need to field, maintain and train on a different platform.....a specialized platform that does not have the versitilty of the m16 platform.
The design of the P90 is innovative, but IMHO, it is a solution looking for a problem.
Bomber
PS I am biased against the P90 because I don't like the ergonomics.
Thank you for your service- i have a very soft spot in my heart for 3/5. When were you with them?
Understand that i am just responding to your statements.
You did say that all of the T's at the Japanese embassy in Peru were killed by P90's and some were wearing body armor.
I asked for your sources and didn't get anything.
You brought up "spraying" 50 rounds in a 10'x10' room.
I understand that you are just dancing around, and so i'll just broadly assume that your don't have the info.
Your opinions on CQB are interesting, but don't match up to accepted wisdom. Do you have police experience? If so, where. Just curious as to how you have arrived at your assumptions/ decisions is all.
Pat, I spent a good deal of time on the Rock (early 90's). LE, what is this an interview? If not, don’t expect a resume.
No offense, but assuming your not a proponent of the P90 research it yourself for your assessment. You’re not a DI, and my ears aren't wet.
Other then that we can talk, but ease up a bit.
Pat_Rogers
08-09-06, 16:51
Partner, i asked questions about your experince to gauge the validity of your comments. For example, you speak constantly about what is good for CQB. My question about police experience was to understand on what you are basing these assertions.
I am neither a detractor nor supporter of the P90. My only interest is in its use. I have some experience and yes, have done some research- which is why i questioned your sources.
You still haven't answered my questions, have neither the ability nor desireto do, and are content to obfuscate-so i'll just end this pleasent discourse.
Other then Rhineland arms, does anyone else have any current or stated plans for a 5.7 upper in the works or on the design board? That we know of publically?
Partner, i asked questions about your experince to gauge the validity of your comments. For example, you speak constantly about what is good for CQB. My question about police experience was to understand on what you are basing these assertions.
I am neither a detractor nor supporter of the P90. My only interest is in its use. I have some experience and yes, have done some research- which is why i questioned your sources.
You still haven't answered my questions, so i'll just end this pleasent discourse.
Goodness?
I didn't know that I wrote a CQB thesis in a 50 word thread. I spoke on what I prefer. What do you want me to do Pat, tell you about the banana spiders I encountered in SERE training on the Rock? Pat, I looked at your site and can see you’re an old Leatherneck Marine, but don’t assume the rest of the world is filled with FNG's.
Good luck to you.
Al U. 5811
08-19-06, 20:28
Wow!!!!!! Everyone needs to breathe.
Let's not make this like "other" forums.
CQB - Let me remind you that "Pat" is not only a former Marine but an Officer (CWO actually) as well. Show some respect!
You are free to share you opinion. Pat's opinions are formed from an amount greater than the combined knowlege of the participants found on this forum. Please do yourself a favor and listen to what he has to say.
Thanks.
Please keep comments respectful (especially towards our IP's).
davemcdonald
08-21-06, 18:45
Brother CQB, I am not sure of your background and I by no means doubting that you use tactics that we find odd to say the least. By reading your profile one could surmise that you are Portuguese, However saying that you were Fuzileiros and DEA is like someone in the US saying they were a SEAL and part of Special Operations Detachment -D that would cause many to call BS immediately. There are many posers on the internet but the gentlemen that you have been conversing with are not part of that category. Many of these men are credentialed and /or respected members in small circles of very dangerous people. Any bit of information, especially in the tactical arena should be looked upon as a valuable gift. So please do not take this as an insult but you may want to keep an open mind during the discussions on this board.
Dave:cool:
QuietShootr
08-23-06, 10:18
<gets popcorn>
Brother CQB, I am not sure of your background and I by no means doubting that you use tactics that we find odd to say the least. By reading your profile one could surmise that you are Portuguese, However saying that you were Fuzileiros and DEA is like someone in the US saying they were a SEAL and part of Special Operations Detachment -D that would cause many to call BS immediately. There are many posers on the internet but the gentlemen that you have been conversing with are not part of that category. Many of these men are credentialed and /or respected members in small circles of very dangerous people. Any bit of information, especially in the tactical arena should be looked upon as a valuable gift. So please do not take this as an insult but you may want to keep an open mind during the discussions on this board.
Dave:cool:
No one insulted Pat, and as a matter of fact I did say that I checked him out and wished him good luck.
Yes, Fuzileiros and its DAE not DEA(was that a test?).
If you must know I am a born and raised American. Abra queijo e rato vem corrida!
Anyone that has done anything special for this country isn't going to brag about themselves as a poster child for SF, and I'm not going to start.(Only Squids on Marine Taxi's do that)(J/K Sailors)
Just because I dont have a website posting my accomplishments doesn't mean I haven't accomplished anything. Why post my life history on a chat room?
I do have an open mind on this board, but obviously not everyone else does. The P90 is a good weapon, not to say that a 5.7 upper on an AR is. But as you said be open minded right?
Has everyone that made negative comments about the P90 actually shot one? Anyone seen first hand wound channels from a SS190? (Not looking for an answer) What happened was "my" training and background are questioned instead? "dangerous people", small circles"? So all others are FNG's? Maybe I'm taking it wrong but why does it seem like a few of you are calling me out?
Wow, how did it come to this? Respect is full circle Dave. Its M4Carbine.net, not Able Danger, or Infragard.
Take care.
Yes, some people may be calling you out. I'd do my best to answer their questions. But, that's me. I'm at the bottom of the totem pole or food chain. If Pat Rogers asked me a question, I'd answer it. That's all there is to it. I wouldn't pussyfoot around and then ask why he was asking questions. The questions themselves tell you "why" he was asking. He wasn't asking rhetorical questions and he only wanted simple answers.
CQB,
I have shot the P90 and I have analyzed the wound channels. The terminal effects are substandard. I'd personally rather use an MP5 PDW, a Mk18, or even a .30 caliber carbine. The ergonomics on the P90 are also not particularly wonderful.
Other than being able to perforate soft body armor, the 5.7 x 28 mm used in the FN P90 causes wounds less incapacitating than those made by 9 mm FMJ fired from a pistol.
I have personally fired the 5.7 x 28 mm FN P-90; velocity, penetration, and tissue destruction is like a .17 Hornet--far less than we see with 75/77 gr OTM out of our Mk18's. Winchester RA45T 230 gr JHP’s fired from our duty 1911’s crush more tissue and penetrate further than the 5.7 x 28 mm.
Several papers have described the incredibly poor terminal performance of 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.
--Roberts G and Lazzarini D: “Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 31 Grain SS-190 FMJ Bullet Fired by the FN P-90 in 10% Ordnance Gelatin.”, AFTE Journal. 34(3):302-303, Summer 2002.
The current 5.7 x 28 mm 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......
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.
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/docgkr/myhomepage/9mm_vs_5.7mm.JPG
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 best uses for the P90 might be for executive protection details where the threat is expected to be wearing body armor and perhaps as a PDW for vehicle crew and pilots.
I'm taking it wrong but why does it seem like a few of you are calling me out?
Wow, how did it come to this? Respect is full circle Dave. Its M4Carbine.net, not Able Danger, or Infragard.
Take care.
As a moderator of this website, though not directly involved in this forum, I'd like to make a point that may save you some grief in your future on this site:
People posting who have "Industry Professional" under their name are to be treated with the utmost respect. They have certainly earned it. They are recognized, nearly universally, as being a knowledge resource to the community. This is not optional, and not up for debate.
If you wish, M4Carbine.net can provide an avenue for you to present your bona fides, and you can also wear an "Industry Professional" moniker if it's determined that your experience in the field is worthy of note.
Until such time as that is the case, and the Staff and Administrators as a whole are in agreement, you and I are just "regular guys".
It's not about "calling you out". It's about the atmosphere of this website. Pat Rogers' credentials are fairly highly valued in circles far more important than M4Carbine.net.
Thanks for your help in keeping this site free from further outbursts of this kind.
CQB,
No one is calling you out. Our rules here are simple; speak about first hand knowledge or provide references and treat everyone with respect. Industry Professionals ask questions like backgrounds or for sources because they might be able to teach or discuss a piece of information but not until they have a frame of reference or a solid source to back that data up.
Don't take it personal.
Yes, some people may be calling you out. I'd do my best to answer their questions. But, that's me. I'm at the bottom of the totem pole or food chain. If Pat Rogers asked me a question, I'd answer it. That's all there is to it. I wouldn't pussyfoot around and then ask why he was asking questions. The questions themselves tell you "why" he was asking. He wasn't asking rhetorical questions and he only wanted simple answers.
OK? And I think I have been answering it. You obviously didn't pickup on 03-21 3/5 Lima, partner.
CQB,
I have shot the P90 and I have analyzed the wound channels. The terminal effects are substandard. I'd personally rather use an MP5 PDW, a Mk18, or even a .30 caliber carbine. The ergonomics on the P90 are also not particularly wonderful.
Other than being able to perforate soft body armor, the 5.7 x 28 mm used in the FN P90 causes wounds less incapacitating than those made by 9 mm FMJ fired from a pistol.
I have personally fired the 5.7 x 28 mm FN P-90; velocity, penetration, and tissue destruction is like a .17 Hornet--far less than we see with 75/77 gr OTM out of our Mk18's. Winchester RA45T 230 gr JHP’s fired from our duty 1911’s crush more tissue and penetrate further than the 5.7 x 28 mm.
Several papers have described the incredibly poor terminal performance of 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.
--Roberts G and Lazzarini D: “Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 31 Grain SS-190 FMJ Bullet Fired by the FN P-90 in 10% Ordnance Gelatin.”, AFTE Journal. 34(3):302-303, Summer 2002.
The current 5.7 x 28 mm 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......
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.
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/docgkr/myhomepage/9mm_vs_5.7mm.JPG
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 best uses for the P90 might be for executive protection details where the threat is expected to be wearing body armor and perhaps as a PDW for vehicle crew and pilots.
Thank you for the info! I had never heard the .17 hornet info.
Personally prefered 9mm MP5 round is a Winchester 147gr +p+, but that is not dropping BA tango's.
I'm assuming you're talking about the Ranger SXT bullets, and I'm not sure those rounds exist. The heaviest +P+ Winchesters I've seen are 127gr (http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?item=54925475). Further, I don't think anybody makes a 147gr. +P+ round. If you know something I don't know, though, I would love to be enlightened. I've been wrong before. :eek:
I'm assuming you're talking about the Ranger SXT bullets, and I'm not sure those rounds exist. The heaviest +P+ Winchesters I've seen are 127gr (http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?item=54925475). Further, I don't think anybody makes a 147gr. +P+ round. If you know something I don't know, though, I would love to be enlightened. I've been wrong before. :eek:
It is 127gr, not 147...
It is 127gr, not 147...
Okay, cool. We're on the same page then. :D
FWIW Everyone that I have spoken too that has shot someone with a 5.7 has quickly (often immediately) gone back to a 5.56mm system.
There is at least one person on the board who has shot someone withit -- and he is back to 5.56 as well.
German and Belgian SF I have interacted with in Afghanistan have gone back to 5.56mm systems after shootings with the PDW's -- the individuals still using the systems are either in a unit that issues it and no other choice (German regular army -- who typically have not shot anyone) or in the case of the Belgian SF have not yet shot anyone with it (those who have went back 5.56mm either FNC's or a C8/M4 deravative)
FWIW Everyone that I have spoken too that has shot someone with a 5.7 has quickly (often immediately) gone back to a 5.56mm system.
There is at least one person on the board who has shot someone withit -- and he is back to 5.56 as well.
German and Belgian SF I have interacted with in Afghanistan have gone back to 5.56mm systems after shootings with the PDW's -- the individuals still using the systems are either in a unit that issues it and no other choice (German regular army -- who typically have not shot anyone) or in the case of the Belgian SF have not yet shot anyone with it (those who have went back 5.56mm either FNC's or a C8/M4 deravative)
That speaks volumes in and of itself.
Ned Christiansen
08-29-06, 22:41
Some of youse may have seen my article on the PS90 in a recent issue of SWAT Magazine. I tried to stay objective on it in terms of whether or not the caliber is a meaningful one for gunfighting since, although I study these things as best I can, I can't present myself as an authority on them.
An incident I did not relate in the article, and that can now be revealed, is that I have drawn blood with the 5.7. My vehicles were being vandalized by someone with a very small bite radius, chewing through spark plug wires, brake light wires, and even a gas line. OK, a gas line is not vandalism, that's sabotage! I'd had about enough of this and determined that the next unauthorized.... creature I saw within 10' of a car would be fair, um, small game. I kept the PS90 handy, loaded with 50 rounds or SS196, the 40-grain V-Max load at 1700-plus FPS (I think some guys have chrono'd them at 1900-plus in the PS90's 16" barrel).
My vigilance paid off and I spotted the squirrely little culprit casing the car. I quietly and slowly reached for the PS90, estimated the range, and used the appropriate holdover (20 feet and about 3 1/4" due to the PS90's very high-from-the-bore sight), quietly and carefully took it off safe, and sent 40 grains of vengance towards the author of my sorrows.
One shot, one kill. True story.
Obviously this has no serious bearing on the discussion (although it really DID happen) but my intent here is to remind everyone that life is friggin' short and those of us posting here have a sh'load of things in common, that's the cake, and the few differences between us ought to be the frosting. We need to be exchanging info to help each other out, and maybe have a little fun in doing it. Maybe even have a little fun at each other's expense from time to time ;) .
One chum is Kandahar is telling me the Dutch guys are using them too and love them. Doesn't mean they have a lot of notches on their P90's, that I really don't know. Training with a P90, you could sure love it. Low noise, low recoil, low weight, low maint.
Not to dis FNH, but I have wondered why they released a civvy version of the P90 (and FiveseveN for that matter). I have wondered if maybe they see it petering out in terms of military and police sales due to the caliber not really catching on, and figured it would be a good way to wring a little more out of it before discontinuing it. Just a thought. If I'm right, good on 'em for letting us regular folks have a chance to own one if we want.
Which is not to say I wouldn't like to have one, I would. I thought it had a lot of "cool factor" and some features of merit. Would not care to be handed one with orders to "take Fallujah", but as part of a collection and as a fun gun to shoot, definitely.
I have a question for those of you who have fired a full auto P90 and competing platforms. Do the ROF, low recoil and/or ergonomics make it more likely to score multiple hits with the P90?
If so, I could see where more chances at a CNS hit might be worth trading off much better single shot terminal performance.
Griz, I have only a few days playing with the P90's so I am not a good spokeman for it (and I hate the round plays a part too). I found it easy to use - but not more than a Mk18 or M4A1 - I have years of muscle memory with the M16FOW so it is a bit skewed as well.
One of the shootings I am aware of was all neck/face (11rds) -- Two shooters (LE) range was aprox 17m.
Compared to a pistol - great - they hit...
Mk18 -- I would hazard a rather educated guess a lot less rounds would have been used. Face or neck hits with even M855 the shooter could get in 2-3 rds max before the tgt was dropping.
For the record, I started this thread not to debate the merits or lack thereof of the 5.7 round. It was to address the novelty item that is/was/would have been the RA 5.7 upper.
My interest in the 5.7 stems from readings a decade ago. I remember reading about the 5.7 and the .224 BOZ at about the same time. A decade ago those concepts were far out of reach of mere civilians as the AWB was 6 years from sunsetting. To me it is an interesting piece of firearms history. If I could get my hands on a gyrojet, I'd have one of those too.
Firearms are an interest and a hobby for me. Not everything firearms related has to have "serious" uses. I'm far more likely to use something between a .50 cal and a Tomahawk for "serious" use than a rifle, carbine, PDW or pistol.
For the record, I started this thread not to debate the merits or lack thereof of the 5.7 round. It was to address the novelty item that is/was/would have been the RA 5.7 upper.
My interest in the 5.7 stems from readings a decade ago. I remember reading about the 5.7 and the .224 BOZ at about the same time. A decade ago those concepts were far out of reach of mere civilians as the AWB was 6 years from sunsetting. To me it is an interesting piece of firearms history. If I could get my hands on a gyrojet, I'd have one of those too.
Firearms are an interest and a hobby for me. Not everything firearms related has to have "serious" uses. I'm far more likely to use something between a .50 cal and a Tomahawk for "serious" use than a rifle, carbine, PDW or pistol.
How is yours working out?
How is yours working out?
I usually save shooting it for special occassions. I can't afford to shoot it more often than that. To be honest, I haven't shot the damn thing in months.
I usually save shooting it for special occassions. I can't afford to shoot it more often than that. To be honest, I haven't shot the damn thing in months.
I forgot how expensive the ammo is.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.