Zombie Squad

We make dead things deader
It is currently Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:20 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2012 6:14 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:55 am
Posts: 403
Location: Western Suburbia
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:01 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 6:35 pm
Posts: 617
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.

_________________
“Few will understand me, but I write for the connoisseurs, trusting that they will not be offended by the confidence of my opinions.” Field Marshal Maurice Comte de Saxe, My Reveries, 1732

For honest, in-depth gear reviews, please visit:
http://www.good-kit.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:14 pm 
Offline
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:37 pm
Posts: 16029
Location: City of Saint Louis
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,

_________________
MF'N TEAM LEADER

"Some people think that the best way to stop the leopard is to cut the horns off the gazelle. This, my friends, is insane."

Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:56 pm 
Offline
* * * * *

Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:37 pm
Posts: 1813
spyderco monkey wrote:
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 Truth About Guns wrote:
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)

_________________
"If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. That's ridiculous. If I have a gun, what in the hell do I have to be paranoid for."

Once you dread potential danger
You are bound by fear...
Fear is the only enemy.
Face the enemy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:25 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 6:35 pm
Posts: 617
E wrote:
spyderco monkey wrote:
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 Truth About Guns wrote:
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.

Image


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

crypto wrote:
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

_________________
“Few will understand me, but I write for the connoisseurs, trusting that they will not be offended by the confidence of my opinions.” Field Marshal Maurice Comte de Saxe, My Reveries, 1732

For honest, in-depth gear reviews, please visit:
http://www.good-kit.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:48 pm 
Offline
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:37 pm
Posts: 16029
Location: City of Saint Louis
spyderco monkey wrote:
crypto wrote:
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.

_________________
MF'N TEAM LEADER

"Some people think that the best way to stop the leopard is to cut the horns off the gazelle. This, my friends, is insane."

Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 11:08 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 6:35 pm
Posts: 617
crypto wrote:
spyderco monkey wrote:
crypto wrote:
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.

_________________
“Few will understand me, but I write for the connoisseurs, trusting that they will not be offended by the confidence of my opinions.” Field Marshal Maurice Comte de Saxe, My Reveries, 1732

For honest, in-depth gear reviews, please visit:
http://www.good-kit.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 11:23 pm 
Offline
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:06 pm
Posts: 10799
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.

_________________
Opinions subject to change in light of new information.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:50 pm 
Offline
* *
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:06 pm
Posts: 111
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:16 am 
Offline
* *
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:40 pm
Posts: 214
Location: WNC
Sen wrote:
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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:14 pm 
Offline
* *
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:06 pm
Posts: 111
Thanks. Very informative.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:30 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:00 pm
Posts: 1607
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
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.

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejd2rsXoQSI

:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grq0rhtbtAw


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:11 pm 
Offline
* * * * *

Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:37 pm
Posts: 1813
spyderco, I just know what I read on the interwebs. Didn't say I was right, just what I read :D

Regardless, it looks like a fun little round

_________________
"If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. That's ridiculous. If I have a gun, what in the hell do I have to be paranoid for."

Once you dread potential danger
You are bound by fear...
Fear is the only enemy.
Face the enemy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 11:43 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:11 pm
Posts: 2285
Location: pennsylvania
bigmattdaddywack wrote:
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.

_________________
Jungle Recon Trooper wrote:


Biggin wrote:
praharin can be an insufferable dick


Image

Adding as many ponies to as many threads as humanly possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 11:56 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:11 am
Posts: 2634
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 2:30 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 4176
Location: VT
MacAttack wrote:
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.

_________________
docdredd wrote:
those pandas need to harden the fuck up

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 2:42 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:11 am
Posts: 2634
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?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 9:20 am 
Offline
* *
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 5:18 pm
Posts: 230
bigmattdaddywack wrote:
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... :o


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 9:22 am 
Offline
* *
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 5:18 pm
Posts: 230
Deleted... double post...


Last edited by BeTheBall on Mon Jan 16, 2012 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:40 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:11 pm
Posts: 2285
Location: pennsylvania
Must have been really important to make you quote it yourself :lol:




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 :mrgreen:

_________________
Jungle Recon Trooper wrote:


Biggin wrote:
praharin can be an insufferable dick


Image

Adding as many ponies to as many threads as humanly possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:01 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 4176
Location: VT
praharin wrote:
Must have been really important to make you quote it yourself :lol:




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 :mrgreen:


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

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

_________________
docdredd wrote:
those pandas need to harden the fuck up

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:07 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:11 pm
Posts: 2285
Location: pennsylvania
OD for me


Just like my 19 :twisted:


I've been looking for one

_________________
Jungle Recon Trooper wrote:


Biggin wrote:
praharin can be an insufferable dick


Image

Adding as many ponies to as many threads as humanly possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:13 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 4176
Location: VT
praharin wrote:
OD for me


Just like my 19 :twisted:


I've been looking for one


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

_________________
docdredd wrote:
those pandas need to harden the fuck up

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:07 am 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 6:35 pm
Posts: 617
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

_________________
“Few will understand me, but I write for the connoisseurs, trusting that they will not be offended by the confidence of my opinions.” Field Marshal Maurice Comte de Saxe, My Reveries, 1732

For honest, in-depth gear reviews, please visit:
http://www.good-kit.com


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group