Author Topic: Herstal FN Five-SeveN for the US police force? (Read 1541 times)

J_A_B · « **Reply #30 on:** January 31, 2005, 04:57:19 PM »

"I think that FBI has just a little bit more knowledge then anyone on this bord when it comes to "knock down" power, bodyarmour and their special needs of this gun. "

It's no coincidence that the particular shoot-out I brought up was an FBI affair. They make mistakes too. Alternatively, the new pistol might work out fine. I just wouldn't want to be the first guy who gets to find out.

Incedentally, I like the extra-wide trigger guard. The HK I carry has a similar guard and it really does help.

J_A_B

patrone · « **Reply #31 on:** January 31, 2005, 05:06:31 PM »

The USP is a very fine gun indeed, I am not completly comfterble with its ergonoms, I like the Tanfoglio and the good ol´1911 .45 apc a tad better, but thats just me. And when it comes to revolvers, S&W are the thing here.

bustr · « **Reply #32 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:30:20 PM »

Wasn't the original development of this round with a 10mm case necked down to a 5.56. ON the semi-auto test pistols the receiver face was being destroyed by micro fractures due to the recoil power during the chambering cycle.

bustr · « **Reply #33 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:35:49 PM »

Ok I found it, became the .224 BOZ by CDS.

http://www.civil-defence.org/products/ballistics/boz224/ppw.html

patrone · « **Reply #34 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:40:09 PM »

Thanks Bustr, good reading.

bustr · « **Reply #35 on:** January 31, 2005, 07:31:45 PM »

In the original article I read back in the 90's about the development of the .224 BOZ, it was a knee jerk reaction to the LA bank heist shootout. The need was for a cartrige that could be chambered in a issue size semi-auto to be used by special units against terorrists and armored bad guys. The british gov was even interested in it. The original testing, befor the receiver and slide was damaged at about 100 rds, could put a round through one helmet and a duty issue vest at the same time. I think they were set up at 25 to 50 yards. The round would over penetrate and go almost 100yds. Testing in the UK found that it would pass through a helecopter or a hummer. At close range maximum combat armor was penetrated. Problem was the load that achived these results damage the pistol. Eventually a special slide and receiver was developed in california out of either tungstine or titanium that could withstand the punishment. After that point in the 90's I heard the UK liked where it was going, and were talking to HK about developing a light full automatic around it.

So now comes FN with a 9mm cartrige necked to 5.7 that is not a traditional semi-auto pistol size. I wonder how much the development direction for the 5.7/28 was a response to the .224 BOZ?

patrone · « **Reply #36 on:** January 31, 2005, 07:49:03 PM »

Wow, good questions Bustr.

Theres been an ongoing development since long time back with this kind of rounds. Since beginning of 70´s. I dont know if 224 toz was the first, but I doubt it. Just look at any wildcat, as this is what it really is. Necked down pistol ammo is no news, Mauser 7,63 (tokarev 7,62) is one and I think that Bergman had a very powerful "export" variant, that was necked as well in early 1900, IIRC. The german 7,92x33 is also something semiliar.

I think they have been down in 4mm as well, but it might seem difficult to get a small bullet like that stabile, it must be some kind of "flacette".

Theres also trails going on with a 6.5 undercalibrated 9mm submachinegun at Bofors for police useage. You can switch ammo while you shoot from 9mm to undercalibrated.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #37 on:** January 31, 2005, 09:34:12 PM »

No, 5.56's (are supposed to) shatter. Hence it's more then a .22 . It causes massive flesh wounds.

But .22's don't. They make tiny clean holes.

The FN 5-7 is a useless gun. Yeah, it'll punch through armor, but you'd be hardpressed to find any armor on anyone's face!

Dune · « **Reply #38 on:** January 31, 2005, 09:38:54 PM »

Recoil is one of the main reasons cops use 9mm's anymore. BTW, most forces I'm familar with require standardized firearms. AZ DPS (state troopers) use Sig's, the sheriff's use Berrata's, most of the local PD's use Glocks.

I forget where I heard it, but I had heard that one of the reasons the NYPD went to .38's long ago was that most of their officers were being shot with their own guns. They had hoped that this would make that more survivable. Don't know if that's a fact, but silly **** like that from the higher ups wouldn't surpise me.

But anyways, the problem with most officers isn't the size of the cartridge their carrying, it's the fact they don't hit the target. In almost every shootout I've looked at from our local officers, they fire off a ton of ammo and don't hit crap. And the reason is that most departments don't practice half as much as they should. It's just not stressed near enough.

patrone · « **Reply #39 on:** January 31, 2005, 09:39:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
No, 5.56's (are supposed to) shatter. Hence it's more then a .22 . It causes massive flesh wounds.

But .22's don't. They make tiny clean holes.

The FN 5-7 is a useless gun. Yeah, it'll punch through armor, but you'd be hardpressed to find any armor on anyone's face!

the messure 5.56 equels the messure, .22, sorry man....Its just common facts

patrone · « **Reply #40 on:** January 31, 2005, 09:42:44 PM »

Yuck,,, Glock.....BARRRRFFFF......I rather have a cold guiness

J_A_B · « **Reply #41 on:** January 31, 2005, 10:04:36 PM »

"Recoil is one of the main reasons cops use 9mm's anymore."

Another reason is a lot of guys would rather carry a nice light Glock than an "anchor" like a 1911 or a Ruger or such. Here in Ohio, relatively few departments have standardized weapons.

A LOT of 9mm users seem to be trading up for .40's. I haven't really tried the .40 too much, but a lot of guys seem to praise it and I intend to try one out sometime.

J_A_B

patrone · « **Reply #42 on:** February 01, 2005, 01:13:59 AM »

Glock 17 is army issue here, Could never stand the feel of it.
But, the Glock 18, thats a diffrent story.......

.40 Glock are cheap as dirt here. I would´nt take one if you payed me money.

bustr · « **Reply #43 on:** February 01, 2005, 01:18:20 AM »

I beleive the FBI and Indiana state troopers did tests with 9mm .40S&W and .45 ACP fo the ability to penetrait a car door and glass. .40S&W would penetrait and have enough energy to kill the driver.

The 9mm and .45 had issues with the armor rating of the car door. One of my old employers was shot through the door of his van in a drive by in Oakland CA with a .45 ACP.

It hit him in the side and broke his hip instead of demolishing it and rupturing an artery. Doctors told him if he had not been behind the door he would have died from trauma before getting to the ER. He was lucky, the window was open when he stopped at the light.

I have a glock 27 in .40 for the size and 9 rd mag. It's unobtrusive next to the bed.

patrone · « **Reply #44 on:** February 01, 2005, 01:36:41 AM »

yes, nothing wrong with the round. Never shot the .40 S&W, only the .40 AE (action express) and it was in a IMI Jericho. Pretty neat gun.

I belive the Glock might be a very good service gun, but I am a "shooter" it does not apeal to me at all, sorry.