[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


This one cartridge scares nine-miltards
>>
File: download.jpg (4 KB, 259x194)
4 KB
4 KB JPG
>he thinks hes top shit
cute
>>
> iPhone poster
> Yeah, maybe if it was produced in similar quantities and sold at similar rates to 9mm.
>>
We had the chance to replace 9mm with it when we were going for a new SMG & pistol.
>>
>>47369200
Nine miltards and 5.7 dipshits are both competing for the fucking bronze at the special Olympics.
>>
>>47369200
that's not .22 TCM
>>
>>47369200
durrr....22 magnum is the shit!
>>
>>47369200
>Needs a 5" barrel to work right
>>
>>47369200
>expensive
>under penetrates
Kek
>>
File: 1604990454601.png (152 KB, 198x551)
152 KB
152 KB PNG
>>47369200
Here's a real chad round
>>
>>47369200
>either under penetrated or doesnt expand and ice picks to depth
>>
>>47369595
based TCMchad

rifle velocities out of a subby pistol barrel
>>
10mm in it's original norma load is the ideal defensive pistol round.

>200gr @1200 fps or 180gr @ 1300 fps
>expansion to .80" and 18" of penetration
>greater capacity than 45 acp in the same sized gun
>>
>>47369200
Laughs in 7.5 FK
>>
>>47369200
Blocks your path with spilt spaghetti
>>
>>47369771
Thread
>>
>>47369200
but that's not 5.45x18
>>
>>47369200
>Okay retard

I'm gonna keep slotting nigs with my HiPower.
>>
File: 22tcm.jpg (37 KB, 1280x720)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>47369200
That's not .22 TCM
>>
>>47369771
9sig is pretty good, or by pistol standards, very good. it's like the .30 tok of modern times. But even 5.7 and 4.6 beat it in wounding, let alone something like .22 TCM
>>
>>47369276
Why were the Soviets so far ahead of the curve on ammo development? 7.62x25 is 90 years old, and the closest western equivalent of .357 SIG wasn't made until the 90's. The Soviets even started developing 9x39 in the 40's.
>>
>>47369684
>>47369595
>36gr @ 1000fps
Kek
>>
>>47369771
.357 sig has horrible terminal ballistics.
>>
>>47369922
[Citation needed]
>>
>>47369911
>40gr @ 2070 fps
Yes.

>>47369922
citation?
>>
File: 1572049718064.jpg (160 KB, 603x1232)
160 KB
160 KB JPG
>>47369200
>>
>>47369922
Kills dogs dead.
>>
>>47369881
The closest western development was 7.65×21mm Parabellum, which is what the tokarev round was based off of due to the C96 being is common use in the Russian/Soviet armies.

The Soviets did start designing the 9x39mm, based off the 7.62x39 round in the 40s but it didn't see any significant improvements or designing until the 80s and 90s, that we know off.
>>
>>47370008
Its fucking 5.45x18mm you dumb fuck.
>>
>>47369528
>compares neutered ammo FN made to appease the Brady campaign out of a pistol to top shelf 22winmag out of a rifle
>while only paying attention to energy ft-lbs and ignoring wounding mechanics
>>
>>47369674
Expansion is an outdated wounding mechanic. See "2016-17 Joint Agency Ballistics Test for Defensive Handgun Ammunition" at https://viperweapons.us/ballistics-testing-1

Vanguard Blackfang 5.7 outperformed ALL expanding hollow point rounds in ALL calibers tested, with significantly more penetration than necessary.

>>47369822
And that's a good thing.
>>
>>47370261
>muh cope meme round almost performs as well as 9mm for only 5x the price!
>>
>>47370261
No it isn't. Its a reliable one.
>>
File: 5.45x18mm-compared.jpg (230 KB, 1500x521)
230 KB
230 KB JPG
zipperheads
>>
>>47370342
So what kind of penetration could .223 timbs achieve with an m855 or 995 projectile
>>
>>47370261
Did they test Elite Ammunition 5.7 ammo selections?
>>
>>47369200
>I bought a shitty iver procedure gun and the inky ammo for it that even comes close to the performance if 9mm is a custom $2/per round cartridge so I need to make a cope thread to validate my purchase and attempt to decrease my buyers remorse.
>>
>>47370400
They didnt test any 5.7
>>
>>47370299
Read the study, it outperforms even 10mm.

>>47370328
Tumbling is more reliable. A hollow point can get clogged and fail to expand, especially after a barrier. Black Fang will do it's thing every. single. time.

>>47370400
Some, but Vanguard did better.

>>47370425
Read the study.
>>
>>47370418
False. The right ammo outperforms 10mm in damage while outperforming 9mm in capacity and recoil.
>>
>>47370433
>Tumbling
Is extremely unreliable and unpredictable. If you want to wound you tumble. If you want to kill with any certainty you expand, or break apart to the point there is not enough mass to penetrate any further than desired. Frangible bullets do this well
>>
>>47370459
The data doesn't back your claim. The Vanguard tumbled every time. Many hollow points failed to expand post-barrier.
>>
>>47370488
Tumbling is extremely unreliable and unpredictable. A hollow point that fails to expand (not an issue with even remotely decent ammunition) is still on the trajectory you intended for it. Ball ammunition through the heart is still a hole in the heart.
Tumbling is unpredictable and unreliable.
>>
Can someone explain to me why bottlenecked pistol cartridges haven't really taken off or gone anywhere if they're supposedly better? Is it the case where even though it's better it's not better enough to justify using it?
>>
>>47370514
Ammunition choice doesn't matter if it gets clogged by a barrier. Trajectory can change, but in a human the trajectory can't change fast enough to miss the heart before going off course with where it's situated. But it can cause the bullet that went through the heart to go down into the lungs instead of doing fuckall on the other side of the heart. The trajectory change of tumbling rounds can only realistically serve to help you.

Tumbling is trusted by every major military for the arm they actually expect to use.

>>47370538
Fudds who don't understand actual wounding mechanics.
>>
>>47370555
>a dead soldier is one. And injured soldier takes multiple soldiers out of the fight and possibly brings more targets into the open.
Do not bring the military into this if you do not understand its tactics.
Tumbling is not reliable or predictable.
You saying that an unpredictable trajectory is bettet than a predictable one is a childs argument. Its illogical. If random can play to your favor it can play against it.
You do not roll the dice in terminal ballistics. You control every variable possible.
Now you know why next to nobody uses your meme round.
>>
>fuckall on the other side of the heart
You mean the spine? The thing if you blow through that instantly stops someone?
>>
>>47370433
>read the study!
>it proves 5.7 is better
Except they didn't test any 5.7 in that study fucktard.
>>
>>47370443
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>
>>47370598
That's a longstanding Fuddlore myth. 5.56 is absolutely meant to kill, designed to kill, and in practice kills. People shot in the vitals with it fucking die.

The important part of the trajectory IS predictable. A shot to the heart with a tumbling bullet WILL hit the heart, a million times out of a million. There isn't enough time for it to deflect. From there, a predictable trajectory will, at best, exit the heart from the back and hit nothing else of importance. An unpredictable trajectory will do that same thing at worst, but at best possibly hit other vital organs as well. It's only random AFTER what you want it to do is already done.

>>47370625
Your heart is not centered on your body. The spine is not directly behind it.

>>47370674
Yes they did. The "2016-17 Joint Agency Ballistics Test for Defensive Handgun Ammunition" at https://viperweapons.us/ballistics-testing-1 tested 12 different kinds of 5.7x28mm ammunition. Make sure you're reading that one and not the "Dynamic Munitions 9mm Ballistics Test"

>>47370683
Data > typing out laughter. The facts are facts. Read the study.
>>
>>47370433
>>47370443
>Read the study
>Read the stduy
>the study proves 5.7 is best!
And pic related is from your cited study, and is all they calibers the study tested.
Go lie somewhere else faggot.
>>
>>47370443
>posts study that shows 9mm and 10mm have no discernable difference in wounding
>also claims 5.7 is better than 10mm and that 10mm is better than 9mm
Wew lad
>>
>>47370702
>>47370690
Pictured is a list of calibers tested in that study you are spamming.
>>
File: 20201121_230737.jpg (199 KB, 720x834)
199 KB
199 KB JPG
>>47370690
Yup, quality results from the 5.7, clearly superior to all others.
>>
>>47370702
Keep reading. That chart is from a PRIOR study. This study did test 5.7 and did not test 380 or the revolver rounds.

Here's how that chart is introduced:
"Six large scale tests from US Federal Government agencies and independent
organizations have been completed prior to this test. Each of the six tests, compared
terminal ballistics for pistol hollow points. Permanent Wound Cavities were
calculated for every shot in each test. Each test calculated separately PWC and BR.

SIX PRIOR TEST RESULT OBSERVATIONS:"
Note how it's introducing it as results from OTHER peoples studies PRIOR to this one.

Attached is some results from THIS test and not a prior one. Thanks for proving 5.7 detractors can't properly read studies.

>>47370713
The best 10mm hollow points in THIS study, NOT the prior one by other entities, did significantly better than the best 9mm hollow points. The best 10mm Underwood XD rounds also did far better than the best Underwood XD 9mm rounds. The 10mm Underwood XD rounds also outperformed all 5.7 rounds, but I'm perfectly comfortable with a round that beats out all 10mm hollow points even if other ammunition can top it.
>>
>>47370756
>posting the penetration results
Wow, the least relevant test.
Compare the wound area of 10mm to that of the Vanguard Black Fang in >>47370763

The 5.7 beats the hollow points hands down.
>>
>>47369200
>average ammo is 3x 9mm and performs worse than .22 mag
>best ammo gets almost as good as 9mm but costs 4x as much as premium SD 9mm
Nice cope thread.
>>
>>47370776
Do you know the definition if deluded?
Because you're fucking deluded.
>>
>>47370791
You're the one denying clear data.
>>
They're even clear in their findings that the best 5.7 outperformed all hollow points.

The low end stuff does have pretty shit performance, though.
>>
>>47370802
Oh, and reminder that NATO found the same thing. They would have replaced 9mm with 5.7 entirely if not for Germany throwing a fit that their worse cartridge wasn't chosen.
>>
File: file.png (669 KB, 640x480)
669 KB
669 KB PNG
>>47369771
>gets 200ft/lbs more than you
>>
>>47370018
Based
>>
Handgun rounds are suppose to be large and heavy. Anything below 7.5 mm in a handgun is a meme.
>>
For me, it’s 9x25 dillon.
>>
>>47369881
just because of soviet doctrine
the west for the longest time wanted hard hitting, full power cartridges, in both rifles and handguns
the soviets simply didnt give a shit and just wanted something cheap but effective that could be shoveled into the enemy quickly, and they made their own cartridges to meet this
i also believe that they probably had a bad taste in their mouths from having outdated guns, the mosin was a piece of shit and the
nagant revolver they had was the shittiest military issue pistol out there
>>
>>47370342
pistol sabots make my pp hard
>>
>>47370356
considering 7.62x25 already is known for being great at penetration, having the sabot in it would make it fucking insane
>>
>>47370538
the grips are more akward i imagine
>>
>>47370053
How about 7.63x25mm
>>
>>47369200
>troll thread still up
Good job janies.
>>
>>47370598
>unpredictable predictability, trust me.
>>
>>47370261
Nice, too bad there are no good options for 5.7 pistols.
>>
>>47371671
The FN Five-seveN is a borderline perfect pistol. The only thing that could reasonably be considered a minor flaw is the safety location.
>>
>>47371695
And that it shoots a shitty meme round.
>>
>>47371698
>>47370261
It shoots a round more effective than 10mm with lower recoil and higher capacity than 9mm.
>>
>>47371703
Its not more effective than anything. It is unreliable and unpredictable in terminal velocity
>>
>>47371744
Ballistics
>>
>>47371744
Incorrect. Read >>47370261

It had both better and more consistent performance than hollow points in all calibers.
>>
>>47371776
Nope, they were unreliable and unpredictable. Even in FBI gel tests, plywood and pig carcas. The 10mm proved to be extremely reliable and predictable.
>>
>>47371808
Read the study, >>47370261
It performs excellently with the correct ammunition. Doing more damage to real tissue than 10mm, and being barrier blind to a plywood barrier.
Maybe it didn't do so hot in a 1988 test, I don't know or care. I care how it does with the best ammunition available NOW. And with that, it leaves 10mm hollow points in the fucking dust.
>>
>>47371824
Nah. Its a 40g bullet doing 1600fps out of a chronograph with an unpredictable and unreliable path and terminal ballistics.
Several common handgun rounds reach near enough that velocity with a lot more mass. Sorry but you bought snake oil.
>>
>>47371824
>Maybe it didn't do so hot in a 1988 test, I don't know or care. I care how it does with the best ammunition available NOW. And with that, it leaves 10mm hollow points in the fucking dust
It didn't. It came up short. But wouldn't you want to compare the best ammo avalible for everything?
>>
>>47371834
Tumbling is a better wounding mechanic than expanding. And tumbling doesn't start until well past the depth of the heart, ensuring the desired damage is done and any derailment can only hit something equally or more vital than a straith path would have. Vanguard Black Fang is also chrono'd at over 2,100fps in both that study and by other independent testers, not your 1,600 claim: https://youtu.be/w3eTHn9VrzE

>>47371837
Yes and no. If 5.7x28mm is better than any 10mm hollow point, which it factually is, then it's more than sufficient by any reasonable measure. With that established, I value the armor piercing capabilities, capacity, and lack of recoil more than the extra performance a 10mm or 357sig Underwood XD "screwdriver" round would have, which is the ONLY way to meet or exceed its performance in any other pistol caliber.
>>
>>47369811
Broke bitch
>>
>>47371892
>tumbling
Is unpredictable and unreliable and has beed shown in this round to cause "premature cavitation" and deviation meaning it can in fact miss vital tissues due to its unpredictability and unreliability. Fact.
>10mm, 357, 9mm
It has been show to be LESS reliable and LESS damaging than 9mm. All but the trashiest hollowpoints are very reliable. 10mm and 357 sig as well as apparently 9mm, .40 all out perform the 5.7 in all areas of terminal ballistics that count
Bump them up to the underwood high velocity and the gap gets even larger.
I'll tell you something you have been told before.
Unless you are trying to penetrate helmets at 5.7s 50 max effective range or poking little holes in vests (unreliable wounding after) the 5.7 offers nothing over even the standard pistol rounds.
Come back with some substantial evidence that refutes the claims of the independent testing I have provided and we will talk. Nobody is going to use your partial test info as a source because they will not release all of the testing results
>>
File: Viper.jpg (14 KB, 220x451)
14 KB
14 KB JPG
New meme rounds never outperform
>>
>>47369472

Everyone knows 45acp and 10mm already took home gold and silver.
>>
>>47371695

FNs are cheap feeling dogshit. Give me a 2011 in 5.7x28, and I would gladly shovel 5k your way.
>>
>>47372826
Nice proofs
I suspect you’re mad because you can’t afford 5.7
>>
>>47373529
Lightweight > the false feeling of security from metal

Metal frames are crap
>>
>>47376582

I've never had a problem with metal frames, but to be fair I dont cheap out on guns.
>>
>>47369881
>Why were the Germans so far ahead of the curve on ammo development?*
Soviets can only steal, like communists do.
>>
>>47369510
This. 5.7 was completely useless the moment someone realized that you could have the same ballistics by necking down an existing cartridge rather than starting from nothing.
>>
>>47370018
i cc 10mm cuz dey dont make an 11mm
>>
>>47369922
> fast 9mm has bad terminal ballistics
How do you feel about 9mm then? Is the same bullet but slower horrible? What is your definition of horrible? I feel like we're missing context from this statement, but something like this makes more sense:
> .357 sig has horrible terminal ballistics when you compare it to rifle rounds or magnum rounds that you can't find in duty sized semiautomatics and I have no problem making an apples to oranges comparison because my mother drank when she was pregnant.
>>
>>47378312
They make .50AE
>>
>>47371695
Fn trigger is garbage but they make aftermarket ones that help
>>
>>47378000
They're heavy. That's a problem for a carry gun. There is no way around this problem but "not using a metal frame".
>>
>>47378631
Maybe pre-MKII, I hear the USG triggers really sucked, but the MKII trigger is great.
>>
>>47379097
Pussy s o y
>>
>>47369510
still in the jr trials
>>
>>47379097
>They're heavy. That's a problem for a carry gun.
On what basis?
>>
>>47379223
>>47379577
The impact it has on the way pants sit. A heavy gun clipped onto a belt will produce a noticeable difference in the way pants sit if you know what to look for.

If you're carrying in a shoulder holster or another non-waistband carry method, then it doesn't much matter.
>>
>>47379675
You aren't some CIA spy.
If anything other people seeing you have a gun is for the better, with exceptions for some stores or restaurants.
>>
>>47379869
Only if you actually disarm when entering places you aren't legally allowed to carry like banks. I don't, and won't, disarm for anywhere without a metal detector so would rather not give any tells security might pick up on.
>>
>>47378306
>5.7 was completely useless the moment someone realized that you could have the same ballistics by
Better ballistics. 5.7 doesn't attain rifle velocities out of pistol barrels, .22 TCM does
>>
>>47380227
But a FAR worse wounding mechanic
>>
>>47369200
>the AP ammo the 5.7 guns are designed to use is unobtainium, leaving us with an overpriced 22 mag
>>
>>47380516
Buy how many you can afford https://www.gunbroker.com/All/search?Keywords=ss190.
Also look into Elite Ammunition and Black Dragon offering, they will penetrate 3a.
>>
>>47380516
See https://youtu.be/w3eTHn9VrzE
You can EASILY get ammo that sails through IIIa like it's not even there, does more damage than a 9mm round in its wound channel, and still penetrates far enough to fully exit the block.

You can't get 5.7 armor piercing is fuddlore.
>>
>>47380588
>50 rounds
>$370
lmao
>>
>>47380622
Just giving you a source of where to get it, didn't say it was gonna be cheap.
>>
>>47380622
The FN military restricted ammo is outright worse than >>47380601 at both armor penetration and damage to tissue.

Just get the Vanguard Black Fang. $2/rd isn't exactly cheap, but it's not full on cost prohibitive for carry ammo either if you mostly stick to the cheaper shit to train.
>>
>>47379675
You didn't know but nigger fashion was actually invented so FBI could carry their steel frames comfortably.
>>
>>47380698
It all makes sense now
>>
>>47369200
>>47369276
>>47369595
>>47369749
>>47369771
no guns here
which of these is the best to get shot with in the face at close range?
>>
>>47382203
22lr, it'll bounce around in the skull.
>>
File: 1606111319016.jpg (78 KB, 1020x884)
78 KB
78 KB JPG
>>47369200
Ok, OP.
>>
>>47371892
Tumbling is only delayed when hitting pure gel. Upon hitting ribs 5.7 tumbles immediately and follows a mostly straight trajectory.
>>
>>47383252
Perhaps I used poor phrasing, and what would be less ambiguous is "tumbling doesn't start to impact the path of the bullet until well past the depth of the heart"
>>
>>47369881
7.62 tok is a copy of the broomhandle Mauser round, bud
>>
>>47369922
yes

9mm bullet at .357 mag speed = bad
>>
>>47370053
7.65x21mm parabellum aka luger

Luger round

7.63x25mm Mauser

Broomhandle Mauser round

7.62 tok is a copy of the mauser round

9mm is based on the 7.65mm parabellum
>>
>>47383284
Looks like long bullets can be the future for pistols then
>>
>>47369999
fucking quads destroying retarded double dubs. insane moment.
>>
>>47383384
They should. But they probably won't.
Pistols are mostly irrelevant. If you might need someone dead and you don't have to conceal your weapon, you're using a rifle. So pistol development just hinges around market feedback instead of actual innovation. The military isn't dumping billions into finding more effective pistols like they do with rifles.
>>
>>47379675
fair comment.
>>
>>47383574
But pistols are never going to be irrelevant for civilians.
Maybe in the future cast single-grain HITP projectiles will allow for even longer telescoped bullets, possibly allowing pistols to catch up with less powerful 5.45 bullets in terms of wounding capability.
>>
>>47384129
Civilians aren't dumping billions for innovation. Pistols for civilians will continue to just follow market demands forever.
>>
>>47382667
KEK
>>
>>47373502
45 super was caught juicing and was thrown out
>>
>>47376582
I own a FiveseveN and they really are cheap dogshit. The tolerances are fucking laughable, the barrel sits completely untouched in the bushing, nothing is hand fit, the trigger is mushier than fuck etc. I like the gun for what it is, but its build quality is about as cheap and shitty as glock. I contacted FN because I was appalled at how much play there is at the muzzle when in battery but I was told repeatedly that the gun was designed like that, and has very large clearances. Its a 6.5 or 7/10 for me
>>
>>47380320
Really, why? Wouldn't they be pretty similar?
>>
>>47385007
Expansion is a more reliable and predictable wounding mechanism than tumbling. It is also a more reliable in trajectory and in reaching a consistent depth.
Tumbling is a band aid for a lack of mass and diameter. It is easier to penetrate hard objects by getting something smaller to go faster than something larger. But then the effect on "soft targets" is less than desireable. As was found out by independent testing with the 5.7.
Look to the people who are told that when they kill it must be done as quickly and humanely as possible.
>>
>>47385040
WRONG. >>47371892
EVERY modern military trusts tumbling for the arms they actually expect to use. Expansion fails FAR more frequently than tumbling. Independent testing of aftermarket 5.7 ammo like Vanguard finds it to be by far better than ANY expanding ammunition in ANY caliber (viperweapons.us/ballistics-testing-1).

FN ammo is trash. Of course independent testing finds it to be trash. It's unrelated to this discussion, only Vanguard Black Fang's performance matters.
>>
>>47385196
Tumbling is unreliable and unpredictable. Sources, every military and bullet development group in history ever.
5.7.
Its small and light. It failed repeatedly in testing. To the point all its energy and damage was spent before it would have reached the vitals of a skinny naked human. It struggles with bone. It is unreliable and unpredictable.
You have zero evidence otherwise. The ONLY tests you can point to are incomplete. They have publicly declared they are withholding information and none of the data or comparisons are complete.
Seethe.
>>
>>47385196
>Expansion fails FAR more frequently than tumbling.
Provide evidence for this claim.
>>
>>47369200
Might scare a squirrel or something too if you're a good shot
>>
>>47370238
>It's a really good round bro I promise you just can't buy the good loads legally
The absolute state
>>
>>47385196
tumbling is literally trash. provide proofs for your claim of it being more reliable than expansion
>>
>>47369200
>5.7 is the new future of firearms.
This ammo failed.
>well not that ammo
This ammo and weight failed as well
>well not that ammo
this ammo went through armor at close range then failed to tumble of cavitate.
>well it went through armor, you have to use this different ammo for people.
That ammo doesn't penetrate armor and is unreliable and unpredictable. It isn't as good as 9mm in tests.
>but WAAAAAAAAAA 5.7 WAAAAAAA IM A BIG FAT FAGGOT WAAAAAAAAAAA JUST BELIEVE MY LARP WAAAAAAAA WHY CANT YOU JUST LET PEOPLE SAY STUPID SHIT WAAAAAAAAA MOMMY!
>>
>>47385763
>t. Hasn't read the thread
>>
File: IMG_4115.jpg (2.12 MB, 2500x1404)
2.12 MB
2.12 MB JPG
>>47371698
it easily bests 9mm in fast stops on actual living targets.
Tumbling >> expansion
>>
>>47385677
the study cited shows it tumbles with near 100% reliability.
>>
>>47385763
You can: https://www.vanguardoutfittersllc.com/57x28-custom-ammo/custom-ammo-1476/blackfang-obsidian-dragon-14761867
These are the best rounds available.
>>
>>47385793
Yeah he should check out the tests where they say 5.7 did *redacted* to *redacted*. Its really good believe us. Dont want to believe us? *redacted* said it worked great when *redacted* as long as you *redacted* and don't need *redacted* or *redacted*
(This testing in no way was supported or witnessed by any military or law enforcement group. This is a paid advertisement for our shitty product)
>>
>>47385905
9mm did better in independent testing in every metric when it came to terminal ballistics on unarmored humans.
>>
>>47385932
Vanguard is not Viper Weapons.

The ONLY redacted information is the agencies involved as they do not wish to be publicly named.
>>
>>47385925
Feel free to poat up the independent full testing comparing these rounds to quality rounds from other handguns.
>>
>>47385943
Against FN ammunition, NOT against Vanguard Black Fang. Which matches Viper Weapons testing perfectly.
>>
>>47385954
Ok.
The testing is in the file "2016-17 Joint Agency Ballistics Test for Defensive Handgun Ammunition (pdf)" at https://viperweapons.us/ballistics-testing-1
>>
>>47385972
Nope, YOU post the parts of the "testing" you think supports your claim.
I see a pistol that shoots a tiny bullet that can penetrate armor but just pokes holes, or you can buy the meme BFD V57 Black^Fang ammo that fails to cavitate past 10 inches in soft non spec gel and falls short of that in actual tissue.
If you really want to piss somebody off shoot them with a 5.7. If you want to kill them buy anything else
>>
>>47386027
The Vanguard Black Fang wound sizes in tissue were significantly larger than the wound sizes of any 45acp or 10mm hollow point, let alone 9mm.

The only rounds in the entire test to match or beat it were Underwood XD captivating rounds. Expansion is a dead wounding mechanic.
>>
File: 57_results.jpg (553 KB, 1600x975)
553 KB
553 KB JPG
Testing the 5.7 in CLEAR gel
>30 grain 5.7mm FN JHP
Shot 1: 10 inches of penetration
Shot 2: 10 inches of penetration
Shot 3: 9.5 inches of penetration
Shot 4: N/A (left the block from the side about 2" in)
Shot 5: N/A (left the block from the side about 2" in)
>However, if you choose 5.7mm, you’ll need to realize that it may not penetrate far enough into the target to reach a vital area and stop the threat. This means you must pay close attention to where your shots are landing and be prepared to switch over to a failure to stop drill at a moment’s notice if things aren’t going well.

Tumbling is unpredictable and unreliable.
>>
>>47386027
>>47386126
It's even made absolutely clear in the tests conclusions that the Vanguard absolutely smoked every hollow point tested. See screenshot here >>47370802
>>
>>47386132
NOT with Vanguard Black Fang.

The FN ammunition underpenetrates, yes. Vanguard gets a solid 19"+. See also testing in https://youtu.be/w3eTHn9VrzE.
Stuff can go through IIIa armor and still completely exit the gel.
>>
>>47386149
5.7 didn't even do as good as .45 lmao
>>
>>47386170
Thats the ammo that failed to cavitate past 10" on bare gel and failed to penetrate armor on multiple youtube tests. 5.7 FAIL
>>
>>47386203
Vanguard Black Fang, .69, beat out every single 45acp hollow point, the very best of which got .61, and the very best traditional hollow point all the way down at .55

>>47386231
False on both accounts.
>>
>>47386231
Also:
-it's a tumbling round, not a captivating round
-gel doesn't captivate like flesh, look at Underwood XDs testing in flesh vs in gel
>>
>>47386246
No it didn't. Post the whole test. Lmao. This is great. Ive seen the entire tests. Its a fucking joke. You are trying to cherry pick part of the test without the part thst shows WHY it was a fail. You fucking dildo. 5.7 on humans will be hitting and exiting making superficial wounds more than killing them.
>>
>>47386266
This is testing damage on actual tissue. It's the single most important part of the tests.

They even outright claim it the victor over all hollow points >>47370802
>>
>>47386170
Posts a video showing perminent cavity in gel alone at 10" then the same to confirm it. Both tracts not as big as a 9mm, 45, 40, 357, 10mm, 44.
Lol. Silly faggot your video does not support your claim.
>>
>>47386280
>It's the single most important part of the tests.
No. The fact the cavitation and damage with the 5.7 happened BEFORE it would have reached vital organs was the single most inportant part of the tests. It is why no group will use it as a standard side arm.
The groups that use them use them SOLELY as an armor penetrator in very specific situations.
>>
>>47386297
See the testing in >>47386126
In ACTUAL TISSUE it outperforms 10mm and 45acp.
>>
>>47386280
Ammo company says untrue things about ammo.
Wait until you hear about santa kid.
>>
>>47386320
Nope. Cavitated to early. All just superficial wounding and erratic unpredictable behavior and path.
>>
>>47386335
Viper Weapons is a testing and training company. They do not manufacturer any ammunition. They do not sell any ammunition. They do not have any relation to Vanguard besides both starting with a V. They aren't even in the same fucking state.

>>47386316
>>47386345
Not in tissue. It's outright said it did better in the actual tissue than all hollow points tested. >>47370802
>>
>>47386345
>>47386316
Also, it's not a fucking captivating round. It's a tumbling round.
>>
>>47386320
Enters the boneless flesh chunk immediately tumbles and exits at a 90° angle 3" from the entrance.
>we won! We won! Look at that tissue damage!
This is why nobody takes you serously.
>>
>>47386365
Tumbling is the mechanism it uses to create cavitation. Its how itty bitty transfers its energy and does damage. Cavitation. Through tumbling.
They found it leaves actual meat too early and is unpredictable. Its a no go. Unless you just want to blow some dudes pec off.
>>
>>47382203
If you're really going to commit suicide, at least do it like a real man and use a train.
Retards who kill themselves with guns only serve as bad rep for the rest of us.
>>
>>47386365
This. This is why we laugh at you.
>>
>>47386369
Not reflective of the testing. Animal tissue used was 7-8" thick, NOT 3". Just shows you didn't actually read the study and are just arguing off your own false intuitions, and not off of the real data.

>>47386418
>>47386407
Is captivation created through tumbling? Yes. However, the physical bullet tumbling through flesh is also damaging. End to end, it's over half an inch wide. It produces captivation, but isn't reliant on captivation like say Underwood XD.
>>
>>47386453
1. The bullets exited the medium after 3" that does not mean the medium was 3" thick. That means the path of the projectile was so erratic even in a boneless ham that it turned 90° and exited. Something that was repeated with a completely different ammo type in a clear gel medium in two out of 5 shots.
Unpredictable and unreliable.
2. Its over a half inch wide.
Yeah, no. Its a half inch long boat shaped object when sideways.
Pistol bullets expand and have a larger surface area.
3. Captivation
Its cavitation numb nuts.
4. If the tiny bullet is not dependent on energy dump and tumbling (it is) and your argument is surface area then
Every single expanding bullet 9mm and up has a greater surface area, more reliable path and more reliable penetration.
4. Hollow point failure to expand rate. .
Is far less than 2 out of 5 and that is the failure to reach the vitals rate of the 5.7

Your "evidence" is a test that showed tje 5.7 creates wounding early due to cavitation then fails to reach or do any significant damage at the vitals.
Something that was shown very early on in clay models. As was its propensity to leave the target early at eratic angles
Boneless meat
Was too much for the 5.7
>>
has 5.7 ever actually been used to kill someone?

as far as I know, it was adopted by Belgium armed police in the 90s, and some other random police forces, and the US Secret Service, but I've never seen or heard of it being used irl whatsoever.
>>
>>47386870
A guy shot like 34 people in texas with it. 13 died.
>>
>>47386881
wait what
>>
>>47386870
Nobody uses it as a main side arm. No group. Belgium doesn't count. They are not real people
>>
>>47386886
Fort Hood
>>
>>47386886
He even shot someone point blank right in the kill zone and they lived. Total meme round. Shit goes in and changes direction half the time. So fast its just nasty looking superficial wounding
>>
Yeah the only tests we have and actual useage all shot it is unpredictable and unreliable.
Who knew? Other than EVERYONE who has ever tested it. It cant even travel straight through 7" of ham without turning and exiting 3" in.
>>
>>47386807
1. They didn't. That's just something you pulled out of fucking nowhere.
4. False. The Vanguard 5.7 rounds fully penetrated in every single test.

>>47386881
He completely missed the vitals on all but one of the survivors. It's a fucking weird pistol to shoot and the guy never even shot the thing before his spree.

>>47386918
One single person shot in the vitals lived. Everyone else hit in the vitals died. You get outliers even with fucking battle rifle rounds.

>>47386948
Not true.
>>
>>47386948
Also, even IF the bullets veered after 3" of actual tissue, which they don't, that's more than enough distance to have already entered the heart.

Remember this is tissue, not gel. 3"=3", not some conversion for dealing with the different properties of gel vs tissue.
>>
>>47386995
So many erratic entery and exit wounds you can make zero claims none.
13 people died out of 34.
Umarmed. Mostly unaware.
Its a shit round.
>>
>>47385040
>>47385196
>expansion
>tumbling

What are these niggers conveniently omitting? The most damaging effect? The one specifically designed for by the richest army on the planet?

Das rite. Fragmentation. M855A1/M80A1 fragments every time at 1900 (1700s in some tests) fps.

We need a M855A1 style bullet for the 5.7.
>>
>>47387023
>3" is more than enough to reach the heart.
Nah, it really isn't. So many variables including bone. 3 inches of boob. A guy in a jacket and sweatshirt. A fat guy. Muscular man.
Your meme bullets left a gel block at 2" and a boneless ham at 3".
That is failure. A failure that was repeated in real time at FT hood.
Nobody would choose this round ror anything other than as an armor penetrating round in very specific circumstances.
>>
>>47387047
The guy fucking missed the vitals on all but one survivor. You can look up the locations of hits. He's a shit shooter.
>>
>>47387084
R&R makes many fragmenting 5.7 rounds
>>
>>47387084
Lacks the mass.
>>
>>47387091
Provide evidence of this claim. Enter and exit locations of all people shot.
>>
File: 9984174.png (188 KB, 571x739)
188 KB
188 KB PNG
>>47387084
It exists in 4.6mm and meets FBI standards.
>>
File: 9994562.png (42 KB, 571x739)
42 KB
42 KB PNG
>>47387151
>>
>>47387087
They don't do either of those things. Vanguard Black Fang does not deflect in meat or gel. Watch videos of it. Your claim either comes from absolutely nowhere or a round that's not relevant to this conversation.

>>47387114
Entry locations listed here in the casualties section: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort_Hood_shooting

All the survivors, save for two (I falsely remembered one earlier, apologies), were not shot in the chest. The guy couldn't fucking aim the gun he bought for a spree and didn't train with even one single time that shoots nothing like any other handgun. 13/15 shot in the vitals died.

>>47387151
Found to be less effective than even the crappy FN 5.7 ammo in NATO testing.
>>
Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang
Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang
Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang
Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang
Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang
Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang
Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang Vanguard Black Fang
>>
>>47387087
>boob
Men attack people, not women.
>clothes
The rounds are all almost entirely barrier blind, they start tumbling in flesh, not clothes
>>
>>47387178
Present the facts.
>>
>>47387178
>13 of15 who the 5.7 reached the vitals died.
FIFY
>>
Prove to me why .950 JDJ isn’t the most absolutely based cartridge of all time.
>>
Bigger is always better.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2688536
>>
>>47387323
The points of impact are listed https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort_Hood_shooting

The rounds that didn't "reach vitals" didn't because the shooter didn't hit anywhere fucking near the vitals. It's a weird gun to shoot, extremely sensitive to recoil mitigation habits you pick up with other guns, and the guy never trained with it.

>>47387306
Already have with both the results of an independent study and with video proof. Not once in any of those tests did the Vanguard Black Fang veer off course. You've presented no evidence to the contrary of the evidence I've presented.

>>47387349
Maybe if you're relying on a dated mechanic like expansion.
>>
>>47387423
Bigger is always better. Your round went 13 for 32. Two were shot point blank in the vitals. And walked away.
>>
>Try our 5.7 meme! So good the bullet avoids the vitals.
>>
>>47387423
Provide impacts, exits and trajectory. None of your claims have been supported by the links you provide.
>>
Some further proof Vanguard Black Fang goes in one side of the 7-8" thick meat slab and out the back, NOT veering off and exiting the side. For those lack reading comprehension, you can see video proof for yourself:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=026N215JeGQ

>>47387678
Happens even with rifles. 13/15 to the vitals dying is abnormally high for a pistol.

>>47387710
Impacts are what's relevant here. Only 15 shots had impacts at the vitals. No bullet is to be expected to travel from not-vitals to vitals. The death toll if the shooter used .357mag or 5.56 or 7.62 or fucking 50bmg would still be 13-15/32 because all of the other shots fucking missed the target. You don't kill people by fucking missing with any man-fired rifles. Maybe if he used a fucking tank, but can't exactly carry that.
>>
Try our new 5.7! If you walk up and shoot 15 people point blank in the vitals 13 will probably die.
>>
>>47387759
The vitals are inside the body retard. You need the entrance, exit and position of the shooter to determine intended trajectory. Shooting somebody straight in the chest is not the only path to the vitals.
None of your claims are actually factual.
>>
>>47387776
Which is well over what you'd expect with any other handgun caliber! 9mm, 45acp, etc all have higher failure to kill rates, with shots to the chest, than that. So much lower I expect 5.7's isn't actually that high and Ft. Hood was a fluke, those are rifle fatality rates and as nice as 5.7 is, it's still no fuckin rifle.
>>
>>47387810
There's no shot to the fucking arm or leg that hits the heart, retard.
>>
>>47387828
There is with the new 5.7, it could end up anywhere!
>>
>>47387759
Posts a video showing beyond the shadow of a doubt that 9mm makes bigger holes than 5.7. Also showing that 357sig, .40, .45acp, 10mm, 357 magnum nd 44 magnum all would as well.
Bravo shill, bravo!
>>
>>47387877
Entry holes, yes. The exit holes are bigger with 5.7, they're the holes measured in >>47386126

They just didn't turn the meat over to show the exit holes. But that's ok since the measurements are reported, and this is proof the measurements are taken at the back and not the side as you (or someone else) claimed was the case.
>>
This asshole proved that any pistol will have better performance than the 5.7. He also proved that underwood philps head technology is vastly superior to Vanguard Black Fang.
So the real takeaway here is there is no reason to buy Vanguard Black Fang or 5.7. Just get a box of Underwood +pp+ Phillips head fangslayers in whatever you already have and you are good.
>>
>>47387916
9mm made bigger holes than the 5.7. Fact.
>>
>>47387936
Please reread the numbers in >>47386126 and compare them to the numbers here.

The biggest 9mm hollow point exit hole has an area of .42
The biggest 9mm exit hole of any kind, the Underwood XD, is .62

Both of those numbers are smaller than, not larger than, Vanguard Black Fang's .69

>>47387923
Any other pistol would have less than 13/15 dead with shots to the vitals.
No pistol would have made his misses into kills.
Underwood XD is better than 5.7 in calibers of .357sig and larger, though. I'd rather take the extra capacity and lower recoil of the Vanguard when I'm already working with a round better than every single hollow point pistol round in existence, but the Underwood ammo would grant additional lethality over the Vanguard, that is fact.
>>
>>47388002
Nope. If you can only show picture evidence of one side those are the facts.
9mm makes bigger holes than 5.7
>>
>>47388012
The measurements are taken by a reputable tester. Entry holes are obviously going to be larger for 9mm, but the entry holes are irrelevant. Your refusal to acknowledge fact does not change fact.
>>
>>47388002
All pistols have an extremely high fatality rate when used at point blank range. I would dare say if the ft hood shooter was using a larger caliber handgun all the vitims he aimed for the vitals on would be hit in the vitals. AND the 15 he shot point blank in the vitals would be dead.
This assertion is backed up by the boston study and the fact that the only shooter I know of simular to the FT Hood incident who used .45acp shot 10 people and 10 people died
>>
>>47388028
Nope 9mm made bigger holes.
>yeah we had a camera but didnt bother to take pictures of the side that showed our product actually worked.
Lol
>>
>>47388028
>entry holes are irrelevant
Boy you are dumb.
>>
>>47388038
People survive 9mm, 45acp, etc to the chest all the time. No pistols have great lethality, even in shots to the chest.
15 is a larger sample size than 10. The more people you shoot in the chest, the more likely it is someone survives.

If we're going to ignore sample size, 45acp failed to kill a guy until hours later even with six shots to the chest here: https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job-clGBbLYpnqqHxwMq/
But in reality that's not a knock against 45acp, it's just that pistols in general aren't great at ensuring fatality and fundamentally can't be as long as we're restrained by gunpowder as we know it.

>>47388051
ITS. NOT. THEIR. PRODUCT.
VANGUARD IS NOT VIPER WEAPONS.
Viper Weapons is a testing and training facility in San Leon Texas. They do not make or sell ammunition. They do not sell any products. They sell training, and provide testing for LE/MIL agencies.
Vanguard Outfitters is a retailer and ammunition manufacturer in Plant City, FL.

They didn't show the other side for the video because it's a fucking trailer to get LE/MIL agencies to look at their full study, and not relevant to anyone because "oooh look at that" is less useful than real data. The only reason I need to post it is to shut up the bullshit claim it "turned 90° and exited after 3 inches"
>>
>>47388132
>entrance woumds are irrelevant
>I don't know what point blank means
>my own evidence shows that 9mm makes larger holes than 5.7
>every pistol roumd is better than 5.7
>how do I cope?
>Underwood slayed the viper, how do I go on?
>>
>>47388132
>turned 90° and exited after 3 inches"
It does. You see the thing about sample size is.....
You are so fucking dumb it hurts.
>>
>>47388160
See
>>47388002
>>47386126

5.7 produced larger holes than any 9mm round of any kind, including Underwood, and larger exit holes than any hollow point in any caliber.
>>
>>47388171
There is not one existing sample of Vanguard Black Fang doing that, where not one of the 8 rounds in tissue or 8 rounds fired in gel for the Viper Weapons testing did that.
>>
>>47388176
Nope. From your privided data and pictures 9mm made bigger entry and exit holes. 9mm is superior to 5.7 by the evidence provided by you
>>
>>
>>47388326
>>47388355
Exit holes aren't shown. They're measured in >>47388002 and >>47386126

Do you think .62 is a larger number than .69? Because it's not.
>>
>>47388355
That should read>
Note that they INSTANTLY started to tumble. Meaning they are unreliable and inconsistent. Stick some ribs behind an already unstable tumbling light weight bullet and you will get less than favorable results
>>
>>47388377
The 9mm holes are bigger than the 5.7 holes. And consistent. Fact
>but muh irrelevant claim about exit holes that may or may not be true on solid meat
Yeah call us when they put it through the ribs as well.
>>
>>47388355
Note the inconsistent size and shape as well as the inconsistent entry angle on the 5.7.
Notice the larger more uniform entry wound channels of the predictable reliable 9mm.
>>
>>47388380
Tumbling doesn't mean tumbling off course. Tumbling immediately is a good thing. You can see in that meat the deviation is minimal even through 7-8" of tissue, so the minor difference shows tumbling is doing damage without significantly altering course for the round.

>>47388399
.69 is a larger number than .62, fact. The Vanguard holes were measured with an area of .69 and the Underwood 9mm holes with an area of .62, fact. Real measurements are more accurate than you glancing at a frame from a video, fact.
>>
>>47388399
As for ribs, the 5.7 projectiles showed virtually no change after shooting through 3/4" plywood in front of the tissue. The rounds tumble in tissue, they're barely effected by hard shit.
>>
>>47388416
All the evidence provided has shown your claims to be false.
Unpredictable and unreliable.
Smaller holes than 9mm
Worse preformance than regular hollow points.
Underwood ammunition is the real winner here
>>
>>47388494
The actual measurements show that even with Underwood XD, the holes produced by 9mm are smaller than those produced by Vanguard Black Fang. The rounds are also specifically noted to be perfectly reliable and as consistent shot to shot as fmj
>>
>>47388416
.69 is an irrelevant number because it is an unsubstantiated claim about an exit wound in 7" of meat with no bone or vital organs.
Exit holes are irrelevant in a non animal anolog.
>>
5.7 vs 9mm is much more interesting than 9mm vs .45. Both sides have to work that much harder on their cases.
>>
>>47388531
9mm is shooting through the same medium. Vanguard's 5.7 does between in the same medium. It's an even ground between the calibers.
>>
>>47388529
9mm holes are bigger. We can all see it.
Pictures are worth a thousand words. The underwood ammunition performance was fucking flawless. Uniform. And the holes were larger than your 5.7 meme.
>but one exit you can not see was bigger
Nah, sit down bitch underwood is here. Get your viper meme shit the fuck out of here >>47388546
>>
>>47388570
The holes are measured with tools more accurate than looking at a youtube video.
>>
>>47388570
And yes, the Underwood performs well. It's the ONLY non 5.7 ammunition I'd ever consider carrying. Blows hollow points away just like 5.7 does. The Underwood in calibers larger than 9mm even topped 5.7, where the 9mm just tied (lets be real, .07 difference in favor of the 5.7 is a tie, not a 5.7 victory) it.

But since Vanguard is factually better than any 10mm hollow point, I'll take its capacity and negligible recoil any day since it's already more overkill than rounds widely considered overkill like 10mm.
>>
>>47388582
357 sig hollowpoint entry holes. Bigger than .69
5.7 is garbage.
Thanks Paul.
>>
>>47388622
5.7 sig is factually unpredictable, unreliable and by the evidence YOU provided not as good as anything 9mm or larger.
Also the Underwood guy just banged your mom, sister and your old lady. At the same time.
>>
>>47369881
It's a crime that we never got more modern pistols available in 7.62x25.
>>
>>47388648
Different, if similar, medium. The Viper tests shot all rounds at the SAME medium. The Vanguard may well make larger holes than that in the same meat.

>>47388665
Factually not the case, it was specifically noted to be one of the MOST reliable rounds in testing, with shot to shot consistency on par with FMJ rounds >>47388529
>>
File: Swr-portrait-marisa.png (115 KB, 300x300)
115 KB
115 KB PNG
>>47370261
t.
>>
This whole thread proves the OP to be entirely correct
>>
>>47388772
Honestly it just proves people, myself included, get too heated about fucking bullets
>>
>>47388772
Op stroking himself off samefagging
>>47388691
The only picture evedence you have provided shows that 9mm is better than 5.7
>>
>>47388812
See the actual data in the report. Eyeballing is not an accurate way to find total surface area of a hole.
>>
Other bullets 9mm and above make a bigger wound channel in gel. Picture evedence provided in this thread.
9mm bullets make bigger holes in meat. Picture evedence provided by you.
Other bullets make bigger holes in meat. Picture evidence provided by me.
The 5.7 has an unreliable flight path and sub par penetration. Picture AND testing quote provided by me.
You have only one test backing any of your claims and the ONLY picture evidence from said tests supports MY claims.
Fucking tard.
>>
>>47388862
The picture evidence is of holes that were measured for the test.
The measurements found the 5.7 holes to be larger.
>>
>>47388870
No. The picture shows the 9mm holes are bigger. The claim by you is the holes on the other side are bigger.
Present them.
>>
>>47388879
Now you’re doubling down anon
>>
>>47388879
Measurements are here
>>47370763
>>47388002
Eyeballing is not a valid form of measurement. Real measurements found the pictured 5.7 holes to be larger.
>>
>>47388897
The picture shows the 9mm holes are bigger. Where is the photo evidence of the other side where the "bigger" exit holes are?
>>
I fucking love that you can't even show that the 5.7 makes bigger holes than the enemic 124g 9mm bullets that everyone shits all over as underperforming.
The fucking cope.
Where is the beef target with the 10mm and .45 holes? Lol.
Idiot with a meme pistol.
>>
File: shrug.png (20 KB, 560x407)
20 KB
20 KB PNG
>>47388954
Well, after spending so much money in a handgun, I suppose you might as well defend it on the internet like your life depended on it.
>>
I saw someone shoot a ham with 5.7 black viper online. It was still a ham after. I have seen multiple people shoot hams with everything from 9mm to 44mag. It is no longer a ham when a hollowpoint hits it.
Me thinks your tests are bullshit to sell an inferior product.
>>
>>47388913
The photo shows 5.7 holes that were measured to be larger than the 9mm holes measured. Your eyes are not measurement instruments.
>>
>>47388954
The study also lists hole sizes from 45acp and 10mm hollow points
>>47386126
>>
>>47389009
Its a thousand. You could have gotten a real pistol for that. Almost.
>>
>>47389009
The Five-seveN is cheaper than a LTT Beretta, cheaper than a SIG Legion, etc
>>
>>47389030
The photo shows the 9mm holes are bigger. You claim the 5.7 holes are bigger on the other side. Present the other side. You even claimed entry holes are irrelevant. Then i showed you a dead mamal with only an entry wound.
>>
>>47389048
Show the pictorial evidence. Surely this phenomenon that flies in the face of physics was documented thoroughly!
>>
>>47389083
>>47389095
I have the data. The data shows the 5.7 holes pictured there are larger than the 9mm holes pictured there. A screenshot from a video trailer made to sell law enforcement agencies training is not data.
>>
Meat is not a static substance. How the holes look in a picture of the meat laid flat is not necessarily representative of their actual measurable surface area. That's why the holes are MEASURED and not just eyeballed.
>>
File: FNP90wEOTECHsight.jpg (205 KB, 700x473)
205 KB
205 KB JPG
Reminder that 5.7 does indeed have powerful wound ballistics that leave 9mm and .45 behind... WHEN fired from a decent length barrel.
>>
>>47389130
All of the testing in the Viper Weapons of Texas study was conducted using a pistol.
>>
>>47389075
Don't forget the very inexpensive 5.7 ammo, anon!
>>
>>47389141
For carry ammunition? Completely irrelevant. I'll shoot maybe $40 worth of it a year.

The training ammo is no more expensive than .45acp.
>>
File: 1595026031795.jpg (58 KB, 960x738)
58 KB
58 KB JPG
>>47369771
Based fellow .357sig bro
>>
>>47385196
>EVERY modern military trusts tumbling for the arms they actually expect to use.
The US Army replaced M855 with M855A1 because it discovered tumbling is completely unpredictable and reliable fragmentation is far superior.
>>
File: underwood xd.png (250 KB, 720x723)
250 KB
250 KB PNG
The .45 beats your meme round with ball ammunition.
Anyway pic related, Underwood xd fucks!
>>
>>47390098
>reliable fragmentation is far superior.
This. Tumbling is unpredictable and unreliable.
They created a round that looses pretty minimal mass and becomes two projectiles in tissue.
>>
>>
>>47390826
Still the king.
>>
>>47383338
>>47378215
It's loaded much hotter, though, to the point where c96s can't handle it.
>>
>>47378312
They always have.
>>
>>47391229
Based.
>>
>>47391229
Truth
>>
>>47390098
>>47390232
Why r u responding to urself?
>>
>>47391504
>>
>>47391532
>>
>>47391504
>T-Two guys agreeing on something I disagree with?? Preposterous! SAMEFAG! SAMEFAG!!!
>>
>>47391654
calm down?
>>
>I made an entirethread based on a single claim based of incomplete testing where half the data for only my meme round was thrown out and more than one person calls me out on my many false claims?
Thsts inconceivable!
>>
Does tests in 7" of meat. Throws out all testing for 5.7 in gel. The medium that most acts like the elastic inner organs. Talked about curved trajectories and inability to measure because it was temporary wound channels and small wounds here and there unlike the others that all left uniform predictable wounds and tracts in the medium.
Sounds like NONE of the 5.7 performed as well as ANY of the other handgun rounds in gel. 2 out of 5 go off track.
>>
>>47392261
They outperformed all other rounds in gel, to such a ridiculous extent they threw out the 5.7 gel tests because of how badly it destroyed everything else, save the other solid rounds like the Underwood, in gel to the point it's unbelievable. They used the tissue test because it's better by a believable amount instead of several times better like it is in gel.

They also comment on how well they stay ON track, with shot-to-shot consistency matching FMJ rounds and far exceeding hollow points.
>>
>>47393704
They literally say the tracts were curved. It was hard to measure as most of it would be guesswork. Where the bullet was tracking there would be an almost complete absence of any wound or channel at all then it would flip and there would be a small wound then nothing again.
Sorry pal. 7 inches of meat with no bone or organ tissue tells us nothing. Everything we need to know about muscle tissue interactions we find out in the first one to three inches.
Bone is not like muscle. Organs are not like muscle and bone.
Using a singular medium is more about what the medium causes the bullet to do, not a representation of what the bullet will do to a living mammal.
This test really missed the mark. While it confirms a few things from tests before it. You should take note that its findings are contradictory to no less than six previous tests. And that raises questions.
Without the full data from these tests your 5.7 result is worthless.
>>
>>47393805
THE ROUNDS FOLLOWED A FAIRLY LINEAR PATH.
Curving was only exhibited by some types of 5.7 ammunition, and not enough to consider the paths nonlinear. This matches what is seen in ALL videos of Vanguard Black Fang, almost totally linear (not almost all paths being linear, but ALL 100% of paths being almost totally linear) paths.
The tumbling also created some areas along the path with massive damage.
There were tests through 3/4" plywood with virtually no negative effect on performance.
The data is all there, people who want to hang on to WWI cartridges just refuse to recognition it.
>>
>>47394097
What you say and what you quote are two different things. Stop lying to yourself.
>>
>>47394175
Show me one single example of a Vanguard Black Fang round going off course in gel. Just one. You can't do it, none exist.
>>
>>47394205
Based 5.7 anon keep up the good work. Though i don't know why you keep saying vanguard black fang when on paper the elite devastator 37gr has bigger PWC.
>>
>>47394456
It's true the Devastator did about as well with no barrier, and better with a barrier, but you can reasonably GET the Vanguard where the EA is next to impossible these days. When they're so similar in performance, I'd rather carry the one I can somewhat easily get so that I can check point of impact with a round of it vs my practice ammo at the range to be sure I'm not just wasting my time and not feel like I've lost something irreplaceable. When the supply chain clears up again, they definitely have a few solid choices though.
>>
The only issue with 5.7 is the cartridge length. I want Textron to win the NGSW because they'll kickstart the development of all manner of telescoped cartridges, which might lead to a refreshment of 5.7 that is in a smaller package.
>>
>>47369200
5.7 is a perfectly acceptable round but I like .40 better
>>
>>47394877
It really is weirdly long. I don't mind the grip that results from it, actually, but it's certainly unusual.
>>
>>47386416
Go fuck yourself, buddy. If a man wants to kill himself he can do it thru any means.
>>
>>47378215
Just like with SVT and Gewehr 43, right wehraboo? Fucking retard.
>>
>>47370238
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U40ArShS6M&ab_channel=BrassFetcher

5.7x28 has piss poor performance out of a handgun. that wound channel is basically air rifle tier, the temporary cavity is baby sized and that caliber is a meme
>>
Literally better for every application but subsonic suppressed.

Only trolls and retards argue about this.
>>
>>47394205
What you say and the test you quote are in direct opposition to each other.
The damage is so minimal in gel its pathetic.
>>
>>47396461
They are saying it has significant temporary expansion like rifle rounds and so has the potential to deal more real damage than the size of the final hole. It's really not complicated.
>>
>>47396517
It has less temporary expansion than pistol rounds. We can see that. Try a new lie or move to a world where people have 7" of meat on them.
>>
>>47396531
>40 militaries in the world use it
>over 300 Special Forces and swat teams
Yes I am sure all of these countries just wanted to waste money to adopt something that didn't outperform what they had immediately when it became available.

My question is. Do you know you are not very bright or do you think you are average?
>>
>>47396711
Evidence of your claims?

Its a pistol that shoots fmjs that penetrates helmets and armor. Thats the parlour trick. It makes total sense groups would pick up a few. Especially before.
At this point in ammunition development you have 357sig that can travel 2100fps and .45ACP that can penetrate level 3.
It was a one trick pony that has been outclassed. Turns out you can do what it does and better out of pretty much any duty pistol.
>>
>>47396741
Not at that price
>>
>>47396830
You would have to be mentally retarded to pay the initial price they were asking. Even now the $1000 is about $600to high for what they are selling. I would not be suprised if high volume sales were in the 300-400 dollar range. Although there is no reason to buy them at all and especially not in high volume.
>>
>>47396741
Perhaps I need to expand more. Why carry less ammo or more weight ro fire ultra high speed rounds (barrel wear) to achieve the same thing. Its overall more costly and less efficient.
>>
>>47396911
What you get as a US civilian is not what militaries and government agencies get. Peice wise.
>>
>>47396933
You are preaching to the choir. It was and always has been a meme. People buy snake oil all the time. The 5.7 is snake oil.
>>
>>47396941
No shit Sherlock. Thats what I just said. The M9 was under 200 a unit. 130 I think.
>>
I posted this thread as a meme I never expected it to get bump limit from two schizos trying to brainwash each other with key phrases
>>
>>47396993
Nice try samefag.
>>
>>47396958
Standard mag on the m9 is 15 for law and 20 for 5.7
>>
>>47397000
Do you think you’re CIA or something
>>
>>47397028
It was painful obvious.
>>
>>47397032
Not a good grasp on reading comprehension though clearly
>>
>>47397066
The justification using an incomplete single source that itself comes with the caveat that is findings are contradictory to six previous tests and that it through out the all the results in a medium for a single test subject really says all we need to know.
This is very real for you. You have the syndrome.
>>
>>47396349
FN ammunition is trash. Vanguard does GREAT out of a handgun. https://youtu.be/w3eTHn9VrzE
>>
>>47396461
They're saying the damage in gel is so much ridiculously higher than the damage in tissue, WHICH IS ALREADY HIGHER THAN ALL HOLLOW POINTS, that it must be impossible



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.