Five-seven Vs RIA .22 TCM

[DarkandShiny]

I own the 5-7 and the PS90 (well technically they belong to my wife as they are the only firearms she will shoot). All arguments so far are good ones, but my philosophy hasn't changed. If you like the 5-7 and shoot it well then get it. If you like RIA in .22 TCM then get it. Preparing/training with either gun is going to be the same and neither will be cheap.

Buy what you like. Prepare with what you've got.

In my opinion, all things being equal I think FN has the edge over RIA product.

[spyderco monkey]

I'm a huge fan of the a high velocity cartridge that works in a 9mm, but the TCM has one serious issue, which is the use of the truncated bullet design.

By using such a short projectile, it won't be able to tumble, which is the only way these types of calibers can really perform. The reason the 5.7 is so long, and works as well as it does, is that it's projectile is over .80" long, and tumbles.

It appears the TCM uses bullets very similar to the .22lr, while the 5.7 uses actual rifle bullets.

I will be at SHOT and will find out more.

[crypto]

5.7 doesnt fragment on impact? with the velocity it has, I suspect it does, unless its made out of bronze or copper or some shit.


Whats going to kill the .22TCM at range is the awful ballistic coefficient its got to have,

[E]

I'm a huge fan of the a high velocity cartridge that works in a 9mm, but the TCM has one serious issue, which is the use of the truncated bullet design.

By using such a short projectile, it won't be able to tumble, which is the only way these types of calibers can really perform. The reason the 5.7 is so long, and works as well as it does, is that it's projectile is over .80" long, and tumbles.

It appears the TCM uses bullets very similar to the .22lr, while the 5.7 uses actual rifle bullets.

I will be at SHOT and will find out more.

The .22 TCM is a funky cartridge. It’s designed from a necked down piece of 9mm Parabellum brass to take a .223 caliber bullet (the same bullet used in 5.56x45mm NATO rifles) and fire from a handgun.

source: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/1 ... m-firearm/

The way I read this was it uses the same bullet in terms of dimensions (size, weight, length, etc)

[spyderco monkey]

I'm a huge fan of the a high velocity cartridge that works in a 9mm, but the TCM has one serious issue, which is the use of the truncated bullet design.

By using such a short projectile, it won't be able to tumble, which is the only way these types of calibers can really perform. The reason the 5.7 is so long, and works as well as it does, is that it's projectile is over .80" long, and tumbles.

It appears the TCM uses bullets very similar to the .22lr, while the 5.7 uses actual rifle bullets.

I will be at SHOT and will find out more.

The .22 TCM is a funky cartridge. It’s designed from a necked down piece of 9mm Parabellum brass to take a .223 caliber bullet (the same bullet used in 5.56x45mm NATO rifles) and fire from a handgun.

source: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/1 ... m-firearm/

The way I read this was it uses the same bullet in terms of dimensions (size, weight, length, etc)

His information is incorect hearsay- the cartridge is made of shortened 5.56 brass, not 9mm as he states. As for the projectile, the designer Frede Craig describes it as a truncated projectile (which is how it works in the 9mm).

Furthermore, there is direct visual evidence- just look at the cartridge and you can see its very similar to the SJHP from a .22lr/ .22mag, and not a Spitzer/5.56 style rifle bullet.




Here's an even better image, but too large for ZS
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MSg-F8_RxIo/T ... G_0692.JPG

5.7 doesnt fragment on impact? with the velocity it has, I suspect it does, unless its made out of bronze or copper or some shit.

the SS197 V-max does indeed expand and fragment, and is decently effective. But to get the 9mm/45 level of performance it is capable of, the SS195/SS190, tumbling projectiles are needed. It just makes sense really- whats better, a .22 expanding to .45, or a .22 tumbling to .80"? Brassfetcher in his testing rates the 5.7x28 tumbling ammunition as more effective than the .45.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/5.7x28mm%20 ... ummary.pdf


All this being said, I'm super hoping I'm wrong about the TCM as I would love there to be more competition with the 5.7x28, but just from looking at what info is available now, I think 5.7 is superior (and 6.5 CBJ owns all!)

http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/cbj/cbj_crtg.htm

http://www.cbjtech.com/sida.asp?sida=2_6.5x25%20CBJ

[crypto]

5.7 doesnt fragment on impact? with the velocity it has, I suspect it does, unless its made out of bronze or copper or some shit.

the SS197 V-max does indeed expand and fragment, and is decently effective. But to get the 9mm/45 level of performance it is capable of, the SS195/SS190, tumbling projectiles are needed. It just makes sense really- whats better, a .22 expanding to .45, or a .22 tumbling to .80"? Brassfetcher in his testing rates the 5.7x28 tumbling ammunition as more effective than the .45.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/5.7x28mm%20 ... ummary.pdf

Tumbling doesnt get you a very large permanent wound cavity, as the Soviets found out much to their disappointment after introducing their 5.45mm cartridge. Dr. Martin Fackler conclusively disproved the myth about temporary wound cavities about 30 years ago for the pentagon in his research on live pigs. Living tissue is just too elastic for a tumbling bullet to do much damage beyond its immediate dimensions. Both expanding ammo that drags sharp edges through tissue and fragmenting ammo that rips into dozens of pieces and spreads out do far more terminal effect.


If you have enough velocity to fragment a projectile, you will get much better terminal performance provided it has the ass to penetrate sufficiently.

[spyderco monkey]

5.7 doesnt fragment on impact? with the velocity it has, I suspect it does, unless its made out of bronze or copper or some shit.

the SS197 V-max does indeed expand and fragment, and is decently effective. But to get the 9mm/45 level of performance it is capable of, the SS195/SS190, tumbling projectiles are needed. It just makes sense really- whats better, a .22 expanding to .45, or a .22 tumbling to .80"? Brassfetcher in his testing rates the 5.7x28 tumbling ammunition as more effective than the .45.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/5.7x28mm%20 ... ummary.pdf

Tumbling doesnt get you a very large permanent wound cavity, as the Soviets found out much to their disappointment after introducing their 5.45mm cartridge. Dr. Martin Fackler conclusively disproved the myth about temporary wound cavities about 30 years ago for the pentagon in his research on live pigs. Living tissue is just too elastic for a tumbling bullet to do much damage beyond its immediate dimensions. Both expanding ammo that drags sharp edges through tissue and fragmenting ammo that rips into dozens of pieces and spreads out do far more terminal effect.


If you have enough velocity to fragment a projectile, you will get much better terminal performance provided it has the ass to penetrate sufficiently.

I think it's important to distinguish between the fragmentation exhibited by the 5.56 55gr @ 3000fps (which pwns 5.45) and the fragmentation of the SS197 at 1700fps, or the Protector (same 40gr VMax) at 2100 fps vs. the tumbling SS195 at 1900 fps and the tumbling/fragmenting S4M at 2400-2600fps.

Within pretty much all testing of the 5.7x28 the tumbling projectiles have outperformed the expanding/ fragmenting ones.

The .22 TCM appears to use the same SJHP as the Armscor .22 Mag, and pushes it at similar velocities as a .22mag from 18" barrel. So comparing the .22mag rifle in gel blocks on brass fetcher with fragmenting/expanding JHP (a bit of a stretch but please bear with me) to the tumbling SS195, I think its clear the tumbling has the advantage.

Here is the .22 mag from a rifle testing (not saying the TCM will perform the same, only that its using a very smilar projectile to the .22mag, at similar vel to the .22mag from a rifle.) Most rounds here fragment, but not spectacularly, and result in poor penetration due to lack of mass/ quality bullet design.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/22MagnumVariousRifle.html

Compared to the 5.7 with the VMax and the SS195 tumbling rounds, which are well designed rifle projectiles. Better penetration and far superior wounding characteristics.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/SS195%20FMJ ... 20clothing).html

Of course, without any TCM data this is all conjecture on my part, and I look forward to grilling them at SHOT for ballistics testing, armor penetration, and every other detail I can think of.

[Doctorr Fabulous]

On the truncated bullet thing, I think it will work fine for a high-velocity round at short range. I don't think TCM will compete with 5.7, as 5.7 makes a good buddy cartridge (easily a 25m+ hangun, with a good lightweight rifle for ranges out to 200m) whereas the TCm seems to be a shorter range piece.

Just my 2c, and I know nothing except what I've read on the net, so I could be horribly wrong.

[Sen]

IMO the Five-seveN is a concept gun that FN pushed to help market the 5.7 ammo. 5.7mm rounds are simply not meant to be shot out of a 5in barrel, too much of the energy is lost. This can be easily verified by shooting the 5-7, you'll notice it has almost no kick but spits out a large fireball. That fireball is powder that should have gone toward pushing the round faster. I'm not sure, but I suspect that most of the ballistics tests and data about the 5.7mm was acquired from firing the round out of a barrel longer than 5in.

As for the .22TCM, I am intrigued. I will watch out for it, and may one day try to get a conversion barrel/spring for my Beretta M9.

[Raindog]

IMO the Five-seveN is a concept gun that FN pushed to help market the 5.7 ammo. 5.7mm rounds are simply not meant to be shot out of a 5in barrel, too much of the energy is lost. This can be easily verified by shooting the 5-7, you'll notice it has almost no kick but spits out a large fireball. That fireball is powder that should have gone toward pushing the round faster. I'm not sure, but I suspect that most of the ballistics tests and data about the 5.7mm was acquired from firing the round out of a barrel longer than 5in.

There is plenty of data for the fiveseven, one test that comes to mind is the one done right here on this forum by a dedicated bunch and BeTheBall's awesome editing skills.


The entire post can be found here... viewtopic.php?f=110&t=78715&hilit=5.7x28&start=504

[Sen]

Thanks. Very informative.

[bigmattdaddywack]

The only real purpose for a round like that is penetration through soft body armor. It appears due to inherent bullet limitations it will fail. The 5.7 works in that regard. But the rounds that penetrate in the 5.7 are illegal.
This TCM round appears to be a marketing ploy with no real use. It will not take bullets that would fully realize its potential. I think that is a wonderfully thought out liability issue defense tool.
Very, very, crafty thinking.

[E]

spyderco, I just know what I read on the interwebs. Didn't say I was right, just what I read

Regardless, it looks like a fun little round

[praharin]

The only real purpose for a round like that is penetration through soft body armor.

Do decreased recoil, cumulative cartridge weight and performance at increased range mean anything?

For me personally, I have a 3 point hierarchy that applies to combat shooting:

1: hits
2: GOOD hits
3: Hard hits

In that order hits take priority. If I'm in a really bad situation and the only part of the bad guy I can see is his left ring finger I'm going to do everything I can to shoot that sumbitch off (presuming I don't have a tactical reason not to). If I can though, I'm going to attempt to deliver every round to the important parts. If I can do that, I would really prefer to do it with as much force as possible because I'd rather have it be over sooner rather than later.


Even if they are not terminally perfect, .22 diameter holes, possibly out to 100 yards with a good shooter, in your body will not be fun and will take the fight out of a lot of people. That distance is more likely with sub-caliber rounds like these than they would be with normal pistol rounds. This is thanks to their flatter trajectory. In the case of the 5.7 you can also get a carbine. If the 22 TCM catches on it's likely that we'll see a carbine for that down the line too. The weight of these rounds would be less than an equal number of 5.56 and probably even 9mm. While everyone can agree that terminal performance is important we can't forget that you've got to get those rounds on target before terminal effect means anything. Not every bad guy needs to be DRT for a well placed shot to be effective. He may not even need to be hit to make him decide to leave the fight. I'll say again, a few .22 diameter holes in your body will ruin your day no matter where they are. Less recoil will allow smaller shooters to be more comfortable with using the weapon. Training is more important than bullet diameter, every time.

I'm not saying the 22 TCM is the best answer to any of these propositions, just pointing out that you might be tunnel visioning to say that they have "only" that one purpose.

[MacAttack]

How about a full auto M-11? just switch out the barrels and use the same 30 round 9mm mags.

Every 9mm carbine or pistol could be converted to this round very simply. And it would use a standard .22/.223/5.56 suppressor.

[AKFTW]

How about a full auto M-11? just switch out the barrels and use the same 30 round 9mm mags.

Every 9mm carbine or pistol could be converted to this round very simply. And it would use a standard .22/.223/5.56 suppressor.

See THIS is where I think this round has potential over 5.7, 4.6, and other small pistol "PDW" calibers before it. If they can make a drop-in conversion barrel for 9mm Glocks for around $100 (lone wolf, are you listening?), this round could really gain a following. The fact that you can convert basically any 9mm to this round (in theory) makes it a serious contender IMO.

[MacAttack]

If FN was thinking ahead they could have made the 5.7 the same length and case diameter as a .45acp.

Using the same mags as any .45 and bolt face.
How about full auto Mac-10's converted to 5.7?

[BeTheBall]

The only real purpose for a round like that is penetration through soft body armor. It appears due to inherent bullet limitations it will fail. The 5.7 works in that regard. But the rounds that penetrate in the 5.7 are illegal.
This TCM round appears to be a marketing ploy with no real use. It will not take bullets that would fully realize its potential. I think that is a wonderfully thought out liability issue defense tool.
Very, very, crafty thinking.

This.

It's incorrect.

FN has limited the distribution of those rounds to LEO and military, however it is a self-imposed policy on their part. The rounds are legal for civilian carry (check you local laws) and can be found on gunbroker.com all day/every day. Additionally, check out Elite Ammunition's offerings, in particular the S4M round. You can see the ballistics test in my video that was posted earlier in the thread. What you don't see is the level IIIa armor test. I didn't want to post it because there are enough gun-grabbers out there that think the FsN is a "cop killer" and I'm not sure they need any more fuel added to their fire.

I will tell you, and you can confirm it with the other forum members who witnessed it, that it was pretty devastating and... they are legal to own.

Feel free to PM me with any Q's regarding that...

[BeTheBall]

Deleted... double post...

[praharin]

Must have been really important to make you quote it yourself




What sort of velocity do you think you could get from the 22 TCM from something like this?

http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx ... 25&CAT=237

That's the longest Glock 9mm barrel I have seen at 6.56" for the 17L and threaded. It's got 2 full inches+ on my 19, so it should have a decent velocity gain. I've been thinking I need a 17L anyway

[AKFTW]

Must have been really important to make you quote it yourself




What sort of velocity do you think you could get from the 22 TCM from something like this?

http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx ... 25&CAT=237

That's the longest Glock 9mm barrel I have seen at 6.56" for the 17L and threaded. It's got 2 full inches+ on my 19, so it should have a decent velocity gain. I've been thinking I need a 17L anyway

Yeah, i've always thought a 17L would look awesome done like this:


Except with a matte-white frame instead of the sliver that this came out.

[praharin]

OD for me


Just like my 19


I've been looking for one

[AKFTW]

OD for me


Just like my 19


I've been looking for one

Wish I could have found an OD Glock...really hard to find now, especially in 9mm.

[spyderco monkey]

Didn't find them at SHOT today, hopefully will have more info by tomorrow.

In the meantime, .22TCM appears to be hell on watermelons:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TksIKuu8Neg