I know this is a Sig Forum but have any of you ever fired one of the 5.7 pistols?

Yes, anything specific I can answer for you on the FN 5.7 pistol?

This is the ammunition forum, so if you’re asking about 5.7 pistols in general, then the Sig Pistol forum might be better (non-Sig pistol talk is fine). In answer to your question, I own and have fired both the FN FiveseveN pistol and the Ruger 57 pistol.

I own the Five-7 pistol.

When I brought it, there was a lot of disinformation running rampant. Fact : It will NOT penetrate body armor. I tried.

With Federal and FN offering ammo, the cost has come down. And now that Ruger is offering a 5.7X28 caliber gun, I expect ammo costs to drop even more after the pandemic panic subsides.

The grip is rather large. Recoil is minimal. Only slightly more that a .22 LR. Elite Ammunition offers some firey hot loads for the gun.

Yes, own and like the pistol.

It's great fun at the range - almost no recoil and quite accurate.

They are fun to shoot.

Fun to shoot, not so fun to buy ammo for. I also like the Ruger 57 a lot too, probably even better.

5.7 pistols have a surprising amount of muzzle flash. Although both have their pros and cons, I prefer my FN over my Ruger. The Ruger is a bit more snappy, and I find the narrower grip a little more awkward than the FN grip. Of course, the big selling point for the Ruger is that it’s a lot cheaper.

The other point for the Ruger is that mounting an optic is easier. But Ruger doesn’t seem to
have many plates for popular optics.

Just a thought, but a 320 might be a lovely way to solve the "grip to large", "grip too narrow" problem, particularly with all the aftermarket grip options that keep popping up.

As for muzzle flash, we've heard the same thing about the .22 TCM. Longer-barreled (6" or so) 320s in 5.7 and 10mm, anyone? Throw on some modern optics and those could be some bad-assed little pieces of Tupperware.

The Ruger 57 pistol looks nice, although I haven't shot it yet.

It might just make a fine companion to a Ruger Takedown PCC in the same caliber, using the same mags!

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
Just a thought, but a 320 might be a lovely way to solve the "grip to large", "grip too narrow" problem, particularly with all the aftermarket grip options that keep popping up.

As for muzzle flash, we've heard the same thing about the .22 TCM. Longer-barreled (6" or so) 320s in 5.7 and 10mm, anyone? Throw on some modern optics and those could be some bad-assed little pieces of Tupperware.

The main reason for the grip thickness difference is that the FN uses thicker polymer mags, while the Ruger used thin wall metal mags. As compared to something like 9mm, the 5.7 rounds are longer, but much smaller in diameter. The mag and grip are always going to be deep front to back, but somewhat thin side to side, unless you make a really thick grip.

Understood, but what would be asked of SIG to do something like that is roughly the same kind of skunk works program they went through with the P365 mags. That's something they seemed to have knocked out of the park, and I'd like to believe that the lessons learned with the P365 mags could make developing 5.7 mags (or P320 10mm mags, which are also relatively long) easier, quicker and cheaper.

Huh. Sig cannot change the length of the cartridge. So I don't get even the conceptual basis for the comments.
In any case I have lots of rounds downrange in 5.7 and the ruger. The FN is better, till you get to the optic issue and then Ruger wins hands down. But if you really want to maximize 5.7 for some serious use you need a longer barrel if you have to use current commercial ammo. The PS90 is just about perfect for that (excluding its faults of trigger) and CMMG is making a decent alternative on paper as well but I have not personally run one (on order date unknown).

Its not just as simple as Sig making a P320 frame and mag for 5.7. Neither the Ruger nor the FN are conventional tilting barrel pistols. They are essentially a slightly delayed blowback. They would have to develop a complete upper in addition to the frame and mag. Also, both 5.7 pistols are actually hammer, not striker fired. Essentially a complete new gun would have to be developed, and I can’t see Sig wasting the money for a niche cartridge like the 5.7.

Speaking of CMMG, I have their 8” upper that I’ve used on one of my SBR AR lowers. Works great, suppressed and unsuppressed, and no problems with CMMG’s proprietary 40 round mags.

Honestly op right now ammo is WAY to expensive due to the panic. Its really a round for a specific purpose and is better suited for the FN P90 Carbine.

quote:

CMMG, I have their 8” upper

Have you measured the velocity of one of the std. FN rounds like 190 or 198LF out of that. Its kind of an in between length. I know 10" is enough to get what you need (P90 length) and pistol is not but is 8"?

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:

quote:

CMMG, I have their 8” upper

Have you measured the velocity of one of the std. FN rounds like 190 or 198LF out of that. Its kind of an in between length. I know 10" is enough to get what you need (P90 length) and pistol is not but is 8"?

No, I don’t have a chrono. In any case, the velocity would just be a relatively meaningless number to me as I’m not looking for a particular velocity.

Dorin Technologies makes a slide cover replacement for the FN Five-seveN that provides for an optics mount.

I have the Ruger and the FN. I prefer the FN, other than the odd safety location.

Great option for the recoil sensitive shooter, although the large grip can be a challenge for small hands.

Dorin not useful for those of us that have been at this awhile as needs current model FN. There are others but they aren't really that great. Ruger could be great if they just did an RMR. What is wrong with them? It literally is the best selling optic. I'm hoping the aftermarket figures this out soon (they may have I've parked that project for a bit and am not actively looking)...