FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I just did it this morning, will be REALLY hard to explain the pictures as it did not go straight as it was designed to yaw, but I think it might shut up the people that say this round is useless for self defense.

Compare it to 10% ballistics gellatin or not, I just did a test with my FiveSeven and it penetrated deeper than both the 9mm and 45acp +P, created 2 permanent wound channels and exited the tube to the side after 7.4" of total penetration (Adjusted to 9.9") [:O]
I was expecting the 5.7x28 to be shallower than the +P corbon. They were all tested at the same distance/temp ,so even if you compare the same material itself, this is starting to get interesting.

Will post pics and a drawing of the bullet path/wound channel soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Already on it.





Explanation : Multiply depths by 1.34" to compare to 10% ballistics gelatin (From Bullet Test Tube's website).

Bullet enters Tube from a distance of 15feet in Room Temperature.
Shot through a .06" thick plastic cap on the test tube itself.
Entrance hole is .366" dropping to bullet diameter after 1/4" inside of tube.
First yaw starts at about 2.1" depth rotating full bullet length but also making a thicker than the bullet diameter elliptical permanent cavity.
Second Yaw starts at about 4.5", looks like bullet is traveling butt forward, spinning head over tail as it exits the tube at 7.4" total penetration.
Exit hole from Tube was the bullet tumbling , .285" x .588".

After Exiting the Tube, it bounced around the test room, but did not have enough force to damage anything.
Exited bullet was perfectly preserved, no dents or marks, could probably be reloaded even.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Forgot to add :
I did a test using 115gr 9mm JHP and Corbon 45acp 230gr +P on the same media (Bullet Test tube) and neither went this far, and the 5.7 did NOTICEABLY more damage / larger wound cavity and 2 of them to boot, than the 9mm did.. Something to ponder.

I will have to meltdown the tubes and re-mold them before I can try SS195LF and SS197.
I am guessing SS195LF will be the same thing though, and SS197 should do more damage at a shallower depth. We'll see.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
I'm sure that took a lot of time and effort, thanks for taking the time to show us the results, which are very interesting. I'd look forward to hearing about any results of any additional testing you do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
LOL thanks guys.
It wasn't really that hard to do, of course I am already being pestered on another forum with people saying the test is useless etc.. people sometimes just can't even see common sense when it is staring them in the face.

I will try to do some better testing next batch, but with a bullet that tumbles and changes it's path it is very hard to see and measure.

I have tested 9mm and a 45acp self defense rounds the same way but don't want to spam up the forum. I am posting all the different test results on my custom rifle forum http://customrifles.info/forum/YaBB.pl?board=bulletest. I just wanted to post the 5.7 round as it surprised me how well it really did. It behaves exactly like it was designed to do, same as the russian 7n6 wasp round, which has the nickname 'poison bullet'.

Take that Nay sayers. :-D[/url]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
What the heck?? I can not find ANY retailers locally with SS197 in stock.. :-D
Looks like it will be after the holidays until the SS197 vmax test.

PS. I've been reading up on ballistics gel testing on the 5.7 and it pretty much EXACTLY coincides with what the bullet test tube did in my tests. Depth yaw, deflection and cavities.

But of course on another forum instantly people got their panties in a bunch saying how un-realistic this is vs ballistic gelatin.. (A corbon rep to be exact when I posted the results from the Corbon 45acp +p round test. :-D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
You need to see if your camera has a 'Macro' mode. That way it will focus on what is closer to it, not farther away.

Good results! I'd love to have data showing the 5.7 is better than a simple .22 Mag.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top