22 WMR 40-grain Gold Dot Short Barrel
vs
5.7 FN SS197SR 40gr. Hornady V-Max Ballistic Tip
thanks!
did i ask the wrong question?
197 has a much greater velocity, but I’ve never shot anyone.
Brassfetcher has some good videos of the two rounds in gel in slow motion on youtube.
More effective for what?
Shooting coyotes? Both would work about the same.
Stopping a 250lb maniac or guy armed with a gun? They both suck equally.
^^^This post just made my day.
But I spent a half hour at Brass Fetcher!
Seriously, a buddy has both a 57 pistol and PS90.
We might have to do a little side by side testing at the next range trip.
This needs to be identified for any usable information flow.
ETA:
Doc’s findings regarding 5.7 in a human target
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19913
What will you be testing on?
Do you have a link? I don’t see anything from them on the Gold Dot .22 Mag Short Barrel.
While I like the tests being available at Brassfetcher, and they seem to do a good job, the conclusions they come to can be seriously F’d up.
A guy on Lightfighter was pimping the “5.7 is the awesome” due to that single Brassfetcher test where they concluded in the write-up that the 5.7 was equal to a 230gr .45acp JHP in wounding ability.
They came to this conclusion strictly from their interpretation of “kinetic energy dump”, from the appearance of the temp cavities in the gel on slow-mo video.
chapperjoe–I cannot comment directly on the 22 WMR 40-grain Gold Dot Short Barrel vs 5.7 FN SS197SR 40gr. Hornady V-Max Ballistic Tip, as we have not tested either of those two loads.
LF thread: http://lightfighter.net/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/716105676/m/94120578763/p/1.
Brassfetcher seems to offer a mixed bag. The referenced “Brassfetcher” 5.7mm vs. .45 ACP report compares one of the newest 5.7 mm loads with an older .45 ACP bullet that was state of the art 20 years ago and has been surpassed by many modern, robust expanding JHP projectiles. Even with that stark disparity of technology and completely ignoring the suspect methodology used by Brassfetcher, the report states:
“As tested, both 5.7x28mm cartridges offer lethality that is on par with or slightly greater than a .45ACP 230gr jacketed hollowpoint.”
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of 5.7mm…
Note that the LE agency with the most documented OIS incidents with the FN 5.7 mm P90 stopped using the cartridge base on how POORLY it performed in actual use. Several LF members have actually shot people with the P90 and all have gone back to other weapons systems after being thoroughly unimpressed with the 5.7 mm terminal effects.
As also noted in the LF thread, I went to the Elite ammo web site and found this video of a S4M gel shot: http://www.eliteammunition.net/f/5.7x28mm_Elite_Ammunition_S4M.wmv
Assuming standard gel block size, as depicted in the photo extracted from the video shown above, penetration might be on the shallow side. Certainly the permanent cavity is quite small, around 1/4" in diameter, except in the mid wound track where the bullet yawed over and the PC was a bit closer 1". Note that there are other portions of the video that better depict the TC, but this frame seemed to offer the best image of the PC.
Keep in mind that the velocity of projectile impact and the kinetic energy are not as relevant as what the bullet does in tissue and what specific tissue is effected. There have been tests conducted on small caliber projectiles launched in excess of 6000 fps that produced wounds substantially less destructive than seen with larger caliber projectiles down in the 1000-1500 fps range. What the bullet does in tissue and what tissue is hit is far more important than velocity and KE.
I did a quick read and it seems that they don’t mention PC size in the Brassfetcher report. All they seem interested in it the TC size so, what’s the point? If TC does not represent significant wounding why are they focusing on it to prove lethality of the the bullet?
Am I missing something?
The TC can definitely contribute to wounding if it is large enough and impacts susceptible tissue–this usually occurs with rifle projectiles, as well as some handgun loads like .44 Mag.
In the pics posted in the pdf, the TC doesn’t seem larger than the .45. Wouldn’t the TC have to be much bigger than that of a service pistol TC in order to start tissue tearing? Liver and other inelastic tissues excluded.
Correct.
Why consider either of these calibers given that the PDW caliber size has gotten such a poor track record in the field?
Good question.
to clarify, this is for a ‘wife gun’.
I’m mainly thinking of either a 7rd j-frame as well as an 8rd sp101 (which is hopefully coming soon) and was just wondering if a 5.7 pistol should be on my list of contenders…
and thank you SO much for responding everyone, very helpful.
If she has small hands, I’d be thinking of a M&P with small grip insert, a 1911 with a short trigger, or maybe a Walther PPQ…
Okay…the 5.7 cartridge has a much greater OAL than the .45acp. So, by design it will have a larger grip than other service caliber options.
I agree with Doc. The 9mm is the way to go. Revolvers are actually harder to use for the average shooter. A striker fired pistol with a single trigger condition like the Glock, M&P, Walther PPS are much easier to operate and shoot well. Don’t you want your wife to have a pistol and caliber that she shoots well?