Author Topic: Herstal FN Five-SeveN for the US police force? (Read 1832 times)

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #60 on:** February 02, 2005, 02:56:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Saintaw
Yes, it looks like the FBI (Federal police?).
Main point seems to be that the bullets will go through bullet proof vests. I thought this was an ammunition feature, not a gun feature.

Why would they need that then?
Bullet proof vests are illegal here.

patrone · « **Reply #61 on:** February 02, 2005, 02:56:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
and patrone... I don't know but it appears that your testing was not very good. No chrongraph data.. no energy data. no load data at all.

testing was.... shooting at some vests hanging on a tree? maybe at some soap blocks? (we use ballistic gell here).

I just don't see how you got to your conclussions based on your methods unless your methods were very poor.

lazs

And I am sorry that I cant remember all loaddata, ammotype and chronograhpdata, as the test did´nt belong to me, the test was payed for and bought by a company.

You name my methods to be very poor, but they where good enough for the UN/Nato.

On one Vest you could only fire one bullet, then the vest was destroyed and disposed.
And as a vest is not a very cheap thing (220$-270$), simply hanging it from a tree just are´nt really good enough.

Oh, yes, ballistic gele, that stuff you could just get at the local supermarket 10 years ago.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #62 on:** February 02, 2005, 03:00:11 PM »

And my accusation was just proved, not by someone else, but by patrone himself. Have fun with that Patrone.

patrone · « **Reply #63 on:** February 02, 2005, 03:03:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
And my accusation was just proved, not by someone else, but by patrone himself. Have fun with that Patrone.

That I am a charlattan cause I tell you caliber .22 has the messure 5,56 mm?

Or for the existant of the M193 whitch was layed of in med 80´s?

airguard · « **Reply #64 on:** February 02, 2005, 03:30:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
the trigger guard is european style. They worry about using the gun with gloves on there. The feds have a history of jumping into untested and mostly worthless pistol designs.

I think that If I had to use a bottleneck cartridge it would be a .357 sig. That round looks like it was designed specificly to penetrate soft armor and kill as many bystanders as possible.

lazs

Worrying abou gloves ? I was pretty sure you guys didnt have snow or icebears

wulfie · « **Reply #65 on:** February 02, 2005, 04:18:36 PM »

mauser,

All I can think of is that the tests you refer to dealt with different types of ammunition than is currently in use (at least in the case of the people mentioned below).

I have talked to guys fairly recently that carry the weapons in question. These guys have shot people with them. They were amazed by how badly they tore up the people they shot.

I'll see if I can get a more detailed description from them re: ammunition types.

Mike/wulfie

lazs2 · « **Reply #66 on:** February 03, 2005, 08:55:52 AM »

ok here is some .22 data from a 10" thompson contender handgun.

45 grain boat tail spitzer speer bullet at 2400 fps. Can you guess what cartridge(s) got these velocities? The ancient 22 jet and 22 hornet both achieved these numbers.

patrone. I don't care what you were paid or how much you spent or who paid you in your testing... You simply give no data so your tests should not have even been brought up in the discussion.

This is like me saying that in my testing I fired various calibers into car bodies and some of the .308's did not penetrate as well as the .32 auto pistol rounds... depending on how I did the test I could make that happen.

lazs

patrone · « **Reply #67 on:** February 03, 2005, 05:29:17 PM »

LOL, I see Laz2.

Like the fox said about the grapes..............

lazs2 · « **Reply #68 on:** February 04, 2005, 10:48:27 AM »

patrone... might I suggest "Street Stoppers" by Evan P. Marshall and Edwin J. Sanow?

If you have never heard of them and are being paid to conduct testing on bullet effects on humans then I am in the wrong line of work. If I could get by on your testing methods then I should be in urop getting a fat check for doing some testing..

A chronograph (bullet speed thingie) is only bout a hundred bucks... I can give you the formula for figuring out energy based on bullet weight and velocity too. Would really make you look good in the next "testing" session.

lazs

patrone · « **Reply #69 on:** February 04, 2005, 11:00:41 AM »

Nope, no more "monkey buisness" like that.

To much work, to little money. Fun while it was going on and great that it was a succes.

Shooting is going down the drain soon as well, it aint fun anymore.
I get an awfule headache after about 5000 rounds and how many times can you kill a sellmarking target?

Yes, test and see what is the "ultimate" mankilling round and handloading is just for Idiots.

lazs2 · « **Reply #70 on:** February 04, 2005, 11:02:00 AM »

Oh... and, don't get me wrong... I believe that any high velocity 22 that will work with varied bullet designs and weight is the perfect or, near perfect, submachine gun round.

At even 600 rounds per minute... you are assured of getting 3-4 hits on a bad guy with a short burst. recoil is light so more hits are likely... if the ammo performs at say 33% of optimal... that is, say... of three hits, 2 make little 22 caliber holes that miss vitals and bones and drill little 22 holes with small wound channels and one performs at optimal.... tumbles and destroys organs and expldes bones.... Then you have a great round and gun... I have allways been a fan of the chech scorpion for this reason.

now, use the same round in a pistol.... unless you are 100% sure of the bad guys being armored out to the hilt and for some strange reason you have no other weapon available but a handgun.... you might want to take a chance on the .22... most likely you won't get but 1 hit out of 6 or 7 shots... most likely, it will penetrate but you have maybe a 1 in 3 chance that it will immediately disable the bad guy. It won't cause much shock in most cases.

I would carry the subgun but stick with a full caliber handgun in the 500 lf lbs of energy range with about 13 inches of penetration. Personaly, I would use a 44 mag revolver with alternating hyro shocks and solid copper conical rounds but... a handgun is a crap shoot anyway on moving targets and it takes years to learn to handle recoil.

for the untrained.... small of stature or, conversly, extremely highly trained.... the .22 handgun might be the best bet... for the untrained and small... less recoil... any hit with a 22 is better than 6 misses with a 44... for the highly trained... double taps in vital areas are more possible with the 22 but by no means assured.

lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #71 on:** February 04, 2005, 11:10:29 AM »

why is handloading for idiots? it is cheaper, produces more accurate and reliable rounds and can give you choices not available.

Most of the great rounds you see if not all of them started out on somebodys loading bench. Most hunters use rounds that started out as handloads... the most respected names in the bussiness use handload data including self defense rounds like the hydroshock and cor bon. How are these people idiots?

I guess if all I ever shot at was self sealing targets at known ranges using factory ammo that I had no idea of the ballistics on... I would be getting tired of shooting too.

lazs

patrone · « **Reply #72 on:** February 04, 2005, 11:23:11 AM »

Guess you might enjoy ballistics, not shooting.

so handloading is cheaper than free? I dont think so and I bought my first chronograph in end of 80´s had 4 diffrent since then, sold all or traded them for guns.

I have shoot over 70000 9mm P in my life and suffered from 1 click. Its always the "idiot" that was handloading, that are loosing the competition, cause: "click". or worse, no powder in the case....."pew"....

Boxer is pure chite......

lazs2 · « **Reply #73 on:** February 04, 2005, 11:34:24 AM »

ok.... so you claim that using factory ammo is free but handloaders have to spend money? You said handloading was for idiots.. Now you seem to be saying that it would be idiotic for YOU to handload because in your special little world of shooting little 9mm rounds that you don't know anything about at self sealing boring targets at known ranges is.... free? Seems like you are paying a pretty hefty price to me.

seems your way of fun drove you right out of the sport.

I have had more factory rounds fail than my own reloads. Ballistics is part of the fun.. saving money is a good thing.. watching groups shrink with different combos is fun and keeps the interest.

seems my way keeps me interested.

lazs

patrone · « **Reply #74 on:** February 04, 2005, 12:04:14 PM »

Well, As I do a lot of shooting, in diffrent ways, I learned that the main thing is to hit the target.

Fieldshooting is one special scandinavian diciplin where you shoot on targets on unknow distances, within a very short timelimit.
We do this shooting mostly during the period late fall-early spring.
For this I use the 7,65 a "hot" round and the 9 mm P.

Then theres the IPS shooting indoor with the Police, I use mostly 45 acp for this. But also 9mm P.

The 357, I use mostly for plinking on the islands, with my brother.

Then theres the 2 y Machinegun excersises every year and the "Shootproof" with the G3 and the AK-5 (FNC), also yearly.

I use to shoot a lot of Submachinegun as well, but I laid it of a couple of years ago. Same with Blackpowder.

Summer month, its targetshooting, on selfseals. And meanwhile all that: airgun pistolshooting.

I started to shoot when I was 12 years old, got my first "Proof of automaticrifle" when I was 17.

Ive shoot all kinds of guns in diffrent brands, rifles, automatics, pistols, revolvers, shootguns, Automaticcannons. grenadelaunchers, Costalbattery guns, fieldguns, recoilless guns and rifles.

The chronograph was used mainly to determinate the variations in brands and to find the "ultimate" factory load.

Please dont tell me what works and does not work for me, in my shooting.