FN Five Seven vs Smith and Wesson 357 Revolver?

[Milsurp Collector]

Which is more likely to get banned first?
Hint---It's available For Now...

"And this gun's not at all cheap, especially not on the secondary market. People somehow think it's worth a lot of money, mainly because people are afraid it's going to get banned. But so what if it gets banned, it's an awful awful gun."

- The Yankee Marshall



.

[solipsism]

Who the hell cross shops these two guns? You couldn't find two that were any more different from each other.

[gryffinwings]

There isn't anything an FN Five-seveN can do that a .22LR handgun can't do as well, or better, at a fraction of the price.



Why ask for people's opinions



if you have already made up your mind, are going to dismiss opposing opinions, and only want to hear from people who will reinforce what you have already decided? Next time just start a thread that says "I think FN Five-seveNs are really cool, who else thinks they're really cool?"

Colion's comments at the end of this video sums it up pretty well

I get it, I think the video is amusing, but what's wrong in wanting to own something different when you already have a few guns to begin with? Thanks for sharing the video.

However I do think his other FN Five Seven video is really amusing

[spfabrication]

Not an SW, but there's just something about revolvers that get you right there , like a nice big arse.
[IMG][/IMG]

[Sunday]

The 5.7 is a poor self defense round especially out of a pistol. Get a 9mm but then if you get a 357 you can shoot 38 specials

[plumbum]

Dude, a good .357 is mandatory - 5.7 is an oddball range toy.

[NYT]

And a .22LR handgun fits that role perfectly, at a fraction of the cost of an FN Five-seveN. And the ammo is both cheaper and readily available.

And you're just making the case for a .22LR handgun. Thanks!

And the vote for the .357 revolver is now up to 78%.

If the OP had already made up his mind when he started this thread, he's just wasting the time of everyone participating in it. People who have already made up their mind and are going to ignore the advice and votes given to do whatever it is they have already decided to do should state that up front so we don't waste our time. They should just say at the beginning "I've already decided I want to get this gun, everyone tell me what a great decision I'm making" and we can spend our time helping other people who really want advice.

so now youre bringing alternate guns into the convo?

im fine with almost 80% stating that they will take the revolver over the fn 57, that doesnt make them right, only that they prefer it to the fn. in reality there are very few here who currently or at one point owned both firearms in question. i own an fn 57 and i have a few revolvers that have been carried down through my family. i wouldnt carry any of them over the fn 57.

Let's think about that for a second. Which of the two scenarios do you think is more likely:

A: Adding mass and diameter to a round of similar velocity actually, legitimately reduces its leathality under otherwise identical circumstances.

or

B: Shootings with .38 are more likely to be defensive shootings with rapid, poorly placed shots at range while the .22's are more likely to be used for up-close murders by people who can't afford or just don't happen to own/have stolen anything better.


If you look at the statistics for one-shot stop percentages, failures to stop, average shots-to-stop etc, you'll notice that 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP are all fairly similar to one another, but get absolutely dominated by .22LR and .25 ACP. In fact, those "mouse gun" rounds group up with .44 and .357 magnums in most metrics, if not surpassing them!


Just to give you an idea of how silly of a metric this "% of hits that were fatal" thing is, here's a few more calibers[1].

.22LR: 34%
.25 ACP: 25%
.38 Special: 29%
.45 ACP: 29%
.40 S&W: 24%
9mm Luger: 24%
.357 Magnum: 34%
.44 Magnum: 26%

That's right folks, Dirty Harry should have carried a Walther P22 if he really wanted to do some damage!

[1]

who in the hell uses a 22 lr for up close murders? youve been watching too many hitman movies.

its a combination of ease of use and accuracy vs reactive shooting with a caliber that the owner cannot shoot with accuracy. a 44 mag is only as good as its owner. a 22 can be handled efficiently by damn near anyone.

Link?
Or did you actually hear this from a "guy" at your LGS?

it was linked a few posts up and has been a hot topic on this forum as well as others.

https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

[LoadedM333]

So if you want a gun that a little girl can shoot get a 5.7mm. If you want a gun that a man shoots get a .357 magnum revolver. Did I get that right?

LOL....

[Milsurp Collector]

I get it, I think the video is amusing, but what's wrong in wanting to own something different when you already have a few guns to begin with?

"Everything about this gun screams 'hipster', because like most hipsters, it's different just to say it's different, even if the differences could be considered flaws."

- Colion Noir

There is different, and there is "different". If what makes a gun "different" is that it is way overpriced and it does nothing well - it's not a good home defense gun, it's not a good carry gun, it's not as good a target shooting gun as guns that cost much less, it's not a good hunting gun, it's not a good plinking gun (its ammo is too expensive for plinking) - then what's the point in owning it? To impress your friends? The FN Five-seveN is not a useful gun, which makes it "different" from almost every other gun on the market.

Even this gun at least fires a useful self-defense round, something the FN Five-seveN that costs 9 times as much can't do.



Add the fact that the FN Five-seveN is ridiculously expensive for what it is, and its weak ammo is uncommon, and there really is no good reason to own it, especially in California which takes away its one "advantage" of high capacity magazines, unless like a hipster you just want something "different".

If you just want something "different" to show off to your friends or attract attention at the range at least pick something that is a useful gun. Something that has a reason for owning it other than "it's different".

But if you are a hipster, then the FN Five-seveN is the gun for you.



Now, if for whatever reason the hipster in you just has to have an FN Five-seveN because it's "different", then fine, it's your money. Waste Spend it on anything you like. But please don't waste our time with threads like this with insincere polls and advice you're just going to dismiss and ignore, because you have already made up your mind. Just buy the gun and then post pictures of it here so the other people who think it is "cool" and "different" can ooh and aah. Mission accomplished!

.

[Milsurp Collector]

so now youre bringing alternate guns into the convo?

Way back in post #35 http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...1&postcount=35 I listed several other guns he should get before even thinking about an FN Five-seveN, including .22 handguns. Try to keep up with the conversation.

i own an fn 57 and i have a few revolvers that have been carried down through my family. i wouldnt carry any of them over the fn 57.

So you fell for the hype and are trying to justify your expensive purchase, including actually talking about carrying a gun that shoots an anemic - someone in this thread called it "impotent" - round for self-defense. I understand.


.

[357manny]

Let's think about that for a second. Which of the two scenarios do you think is more likely:



A: Adding mass and diameter to a round of similar velocity actually, legitimately reduces its leathality under otherwise identical circumstances.



or



B: Shootings with .38 are more likely to be defensive shootings with rapid, poorly placed shots at range while the .22's are more likely to be used for up-close murders by people who can't afford or just don't happen to own/have stolen anything better.





If you look at the statistics for one-shot stop percentages, failures to stop, average shots-to-stop etc, you'll notice that 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP are all fairly similar to one another, but get absolutely dominated by .22LR and .25 ACP. In fact, those "mouse gun" rounds group up with .44 and .357 magnums in most metrics, if not surpassing them!





Just to give you an idea of how silly of a metric this "% of hits that were fatal" thing is, here's a few more calibers[1].



.22LR: 34%

.25 ACP: 25%

.38 Special: 29%

.45 ACP: 29%

.40 S&W: 24%

9mm Luger: 24%

.357 Magnum: 34%

.44 Magnum: 26%



That's right folks, Dirty Harry should have carried a Walther P22 if he really wanted to do some damage!



[1]

Wow excellent article/blog/premise. Thanks for sharing.

[fmunk]

if you have already made up your mind, are going to dismiss opposing opinions, and only want to hear from people who will reinforce what you have already decided? Next time just start a thread that says "I think FN Five-seveNs are really cool, who else thinks they're really cool?"

He's looking for affirmation of his decision. Like "does this dress make me look fat?"

[rob145]

This is America. Just get both and be happy!!! That being said I personally prefer revolvers. Colt and SW revolvers have a special place in my heart.

[FullMetalJacket]

If sensibility matters, get the .357 Magnum. Much more practical, useful, economical, powerful.

If having a cool gun is more important, get the Five-Seven.

(For what it's worth, a Five-Seven is on my list, but I already own a couple of .357s.)

[Unsilenced]

who in the hell uses a 22 lr for up close murders? youve been watching too many hitman movies.

its a combination of ease of use and accuracy vs reactive shooting with a caliber that the owner cannot shoot with accuracy. a 44 mag is only as good as its owner. a 22 can be handled efficiently by damn near anyone.

Accuracy (head and torso hits) :

44 Magnum: 88%
.22LR: 76%

https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

Also worth remembering that .357 is the only other handgun round that could go toe-to-toe with .22LR for percentage of hits that were fatal. It's no .44 sure, but if it really comes down to handling, how does .357 so totally outclass .38 special and 9mm?

.44's freakishly low numbers can probably be attributed to the low sample size (24 shootings), but most of the more exotic rounds seem to get a weird boost in their statistics while common calibers for police and self defense carry all look like turds by comparison, even with larger sample sizes.

The author even says that he's not recommending everyone carry .22, despite it being a stand out winner over pretty much everything but shotguns and rifles when it comes to %of shots that were lethal, because of factors not represented in the data, and points to % of people who were not incapacitated to perhaps give a clearer picture.

22LR:
% of people who were not incapacitated - 31%

.38 special:
% of people who were not incapacitated - 17%

.44 Magnum
% of people who were not incapacitated - 13%