There's a picture floating around online which was tweeted by Recoil Gun Magazine of a new pistol by Ruger chambered in 5.7x28 FN, aptly named the Ruger-57.

I dunno about you, but I'd be interested in a more affordable alternative to the FN FiveseveN, as I've always liked it, but couldn't justify the $1000+ pricetag.
If Ruger could get the price as low as $500 MSRP, then I could definitely see buying this.

EDIT: IT'S OFFICIAL!
Ruger(R) Ruger-57™ * Centerfire Pistol Model 16401

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Then just buy any .22Mag autopistol.

Wise_A is on a roll lately with his comments in the church shooting and in this thread now as well. 5.7 is not a rimfire cartridge and is no comparison to the 22 mag when it comes to reliability or ballistics. I also love my PMR as much as the next guy but Kel Tec is no Ruger either. Thank you for your contribution but I think its time to step away from the keyboard.

PS. I'm not a neckbeard or a boomer.

OP, I'm really digging this 5.7 concept and hope they move forward with it at a reasonable price. I just read today that they just released their LCPII in 22lr which could be a great companion to its 380 brother if it turns out to be reliable. Pair that with their warranty and customer service and I think they may make a killing on it and this 5.7!

SVT28

I'm interested. I would also be interested in an S&W offering in the 5.7 caliber.

I seriously considered the FN Five Seven. Took a rental test drive and looked at the supply chain for ammo, holsters and other items. I ended up declining for multiple reasons - cost, sketchy OEM support and the lack of any real development for the last 20 years.

The most galling issue was the lack of a truly integrated red dot sight solution. The 5.7 cartridge is made for a RMR type sight to optimize the range and trajectory. My other gripes were the ergonomics, particularly the Euro trash safety, which some folks noted has been accidentally de-activated.

Predictions:
1) Going to sell very well for a year or so

2) Probably a recall in the first few hundred of the Rugers, esp. caused by cheap ammo - the FNs are blowback, but the 5.7 is a small grenade going off and wants a long barrel to burn the powder

3) Will become a gun control cause celebre

I’ve got to hand it to Ruger, while they don’t always introduce stuff I’m into, they are definitely at the forefront when it comes to bringing new products to the market. I’m interested in seeing one of these for myself.

__________________
Some Might Say.

If Ruger makes one....at a decent price...and it functions well...I think it could be a great gun.

The FN five-seven...to me felt like a toy, just a bunch of plastic put together and I wasnt a huge fan of that feel...plus at the time it was somewhat new and ammo was expensive and hard to find.

Definitely interested to see what Ruger does with this.

Count me in. The 5.7 leaves the .22 WMR in the dust.

Here’s the picture being bandied around. Its not any uglier than the FN currently made.

Attached Images

0E984D9F-8EC9-45A2-A6A4-06A6F233368B.jpeg (218.4 KB, 195 views)

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

Interesting, I wish Ruger well if they decide to do this. FWIW, I had the use of a new FN 5.7 pistol for several months on a T&E deal. Reliable pistol with little recoil. Anyway, reference the .22 Mag. comment, the .22 WMR in a pistol is much slower, with much greater velocity spreads, than the 5.7. The FN SS192 ammo I had averaged 2025 FPS from the pistol. I have used .22WMR that was as fast or faster, BUT, that was from 16" and 18" rifle barrels....

__________________
NRA Life, COTEP 640

I had a five-seven for a few months. Nice reliable pistol. Got expensive to shoot when my kids took a liking to it. Even my 14 y.o. (at the time) daughter loved doing mag dumps on it. The pic of the Ruger looks a lot better than the 5.7. Heck, the PMR and 5.7 make the Glock look almost sexy. When I sold it, I bought an RIA .22tcm 1911 and had enough money left over to buy a nice P&R S&W. The .22tcm is close ballistically to the 5.7 and is pretty easy to reload. And of course, it’s a 1911.

__________________
USS Brewton FF1086
SWCA#3597

The 22 TCM runs a 45 grain hp right at 2000 fps with factory ammo and is easily hanldloaded to this velocity out of a 5 in barrel. A good friend has a 57 and both have very similar low recoil and very loud report. Would NOT want to shoot either without ear protection. That being said, I would rethink a decision to carry either for sd or have one in the dresser drawer for home protection. Both are fun calibers, but I'm still trying to figure out what niche they are suppose to fill.

How about a Ruger version of the Kel-tec CRM-30 carbine in 5.7 with a 20-25rd mag??????

Is it a blow back or locked breech? I ask because I had a FN and it's the one gun that I had malfunction in such a way that I was carrying a dead gun for a week...

The commercial shells are way under loaded because no armor piercing rounds that being the case it can make the gun do funny things,like firing a shot but not ejecting and going just hard enough to cock.

If the thing is locked breech I'd be happier with it.

The LCP .22 is interesting too....

__________________
Life's a grave,dig it!

I own both the Five-seveN and PS90. I'd love it if Ruger (and S&W) produced their own versions of the caliber. The 5.7 mm was meant to replace the 9mm and we all know how that went. The PS90 was designed for noncombat troops, like drivers, to defend themselves.

To me, the PS90 is my best solution for home defense (suppressed with subsonic ammunition). Over penetration is mitigated and hearing isn't compromised. These rounds tend to tumble when they hit flesh. This makes for nasty wound channels. I am not interested in penetrating windshields or ballistic armor. I just want to stop the threat:


YouTube

I'll never say never to reloading but the 5.7 platform would be my last choice. The small size, laquered brass and high pressure would be a pain.

Ammo choices now are very limited. The Federal American Eagle is notorious for its utter lack of quality control. They're aware of it but apparently just don't care.

SS197 the "Sporting" blue-tipped round is manufactured by Fiocchi and is the least ridiculously priced viable round. FN restricts the sale of SS198, the best current defensive round but it's readily available to consumers.

If Ruger and others produce their own versions of the Five-seveN, I would hope the amuunition choices might broaden.

It's on Ruger's website now. Pictured is a 20rd version and a 10rd, "state compliant" version. MSRP is listed at $799. Gun store prices will be lower, but not until the "new" wears off.

Here ya go. 8 round magazine. Astra 600 - Wikipedia

Most 380s are blowback action, are they not?
Remington R-51 is a Petersen block delayed blowback 9mm +P.

5.7 Ruger - would imagine that's an earplugs + earmuffs gun. 22 mag out a PMR30 is really loud.

I am sorry to ask what is a probably a laughably stupid question to most here, but I have never personally dealt with a magazine restriction. How does the gun company modify a 20 round magazine to hold 10 rounds? Do they insert some sort of plug, like a plugged shotgun for migratory birds? Or do they make “dedicated” 10 round magazines?

And are the pistols themselves modified to only hold the 10 round magazines, or will they hold both the 20 round and 10 round?

__________________
Possum—The other white meat!

I have actually handled one of these in person.

It arrived at the shop I work in last week for an upcoming demo event at our range. I have to say, it looks better in person than in any of the pics I've seen online.
It points well, has great sights, and also actually feels like a gun and has metal magazines, as opposed to the FN 5.7 which feels like, to me, an airsoft pistol with plastic... well, everything.
The only 5.7x28 that has ever interested me in the past is the PS-90, but I actually want one of these.

Street price is indeed supposed to be around $600 - $650, and at that price I don't think they'll be able to make enough of them.

Never understood the appeal of the 5.7. Especially in a pistol.

__________________
Just hanging with my dogs

Well, I'll risk my credibility by saying that the PPK isn't what it could be. The FEG copies are an improvement because the tang is a little bigger. Oh, and I am referring only to the PPKs in .32 ACP. The .380 PPKs blow chunks to shoot like all small blowback .380s IMHO. I say that as somebody who owns several small locked breech .380 pistols. They are light years better to shoot than any .380 PPK, FEG, P64, or even Beretta 84/85.

__________________
Release the Kraken

Pics online don't look that great to me. I haven't really liked the looks or feeling of Rugers' new offering in semi auto pistols though. I have the PMR30, and although it is fun, .22 mag is not a 5.7

__________________
Proverbs 21:2

Spot on call.
And, that's forgetting to mention an earlier post in which that same individual referred to most of the S&W Forum members as a bunch of old geezers,.... all while basking in his self-congratulatory, pat on his own back, boasting of his marksmanship skills.
Class act.

It's a real shame to see this sort of immature tone on what is otherwise one of the best online forums.

Not a silly question at all. Here's how Steyr did it during the ban days. Note how the 10 round mag has that huge plastic base area and short tube when compared to the 14 round items. They are the same length overall.

Attached Images

	M9_10rds.jpg (4.2 KB, 370 views)
	M9_14rds.jpg (17.3 KB, 377 views)

__________________
Release the Kraken

You'll get no argument from me there. The PP Series in .380 ACP is downright painful to shoot, and the FEGs were straight upgrades, which is undeniable considering that Walther themselves had FEG producing what were essentially rebranded PMK-380s with a few aesthetic tweaks under the name of PPK/E for a good decade.
However, to say that it isn't a good pistol would be downright ridiculous considering just how long it has remained in production, not to mention how many times it has been copied, cloned, or used as the basis for other pistol designs.

No. Please. Don't.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

LOL...I see what you did there

YouTube

__________________
USS Brewton FF1086
SWCA#3597

I am glad to see at least some firearms manufacturers are starting to at least try and listen to what people want, they may be many years behind at the moment but at least someone is listening. Fn will have to lower the price on 5.7 pistols to keep selling them if this new Ruger turns out to be reliable. I am interested in this pistol and will be considering one when my next purchase comes around.

I am sorry, but I am a little lost with the 5.7x28 round.

I took a look at some reloading data,and see if as a low mass, hyper-velocity round. I don't envision it being used for:
a) conventional bullseye matches, not a legal round
b) steel matches, not enough momentum to reliably move steel,
c) metallic silhouette, momentum and range would be iffy,
d) hunting, the round (if hunting legal) would be doubtful in producing a humane kill, and
e) self-defense, the round looks more like a flechet, designed more to maim than kill.

I can see it as a benefit for a rifleman wanting to carry more rounds, but I can envision the range and effectiveness as being compromised.

What am I missing?

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

Gunblast has a video on the Ruger 5.7.

__________________
9tenz

Wounding an adversary, especially with the wound channels the 5.7 creates, is great for defensive use. I don't NEED to kill anyone, just get them to cease their attack. Of course, death is a distinct possibility with any firearm and the notorious Fort Hood massacre illustrates that.

My personal testing with SS198 got rather shallow penetration. I don't really care as long as they produce the desired result.

Thanks for the heads up on this video. From the jump, I noticed a lot of muzzle jump/flip. The presenter referred to it as feeling like a .22LR, but it looked more substantial in the video. The chamber pressure of the 5.7 is pretty impressive.

Also, it looks blowback - is that right?

On the hunting use, it strikes me as very varmit useful. It is probably a bit light for the largest coyotes and ferals, but I see a lot a guys putting these into their tractors, pick-ups and UTVs. Having a pistol always at hand that can hit out to 75 yards is net useful. The $600 price point is a bit high for that utility pistol, but cattlemen using the 5.7 once and saving a single calf will have recouped the investment.

Felt dumb myself. New round to me but then again that 22 TCM caught me by surprise years back. Did read the ammo more affordable lately for Rugers 57. I do have some faith in the new .22 pistol though.

NATO was going to implement a super small caliber handgun because of :

1. Potential armor penetration
2. The constant push to reduce the size of cartridges to save money, strategic resources

Considering a lot of military cartridge considerations are based almost COMPLETELY on the concept that virtually all rounds in combat miss the target as suppression fire and therefore smaller bullets and cases are wasting less missed shots, they aren't the best place to get your civilian/police/security firearm considerations anymore. Or for a long time.

The 5.7's failure to be introduced to NATO has been blamed somewhat on H&K's kicking and screaming about its own failed cartridge that was in competition for acceptance as the new handgun round standard. Some truth in this. The main reason is that field testing with various police and other units have yielded poor results. 5.56 NATO carbines are superior in performance for long arms, 9mm Luger and 45 ACP are superior in handguns. The whole "myth of velocity" thing keeps being touted as "truth" only to be shattered on the wall of reality time and time again. They pushed the 5.7 HARD and instead of gaining ground in the field, they have been generally disliked and pushed out.

Terminally it is inferior to larger calibers in handguns. No, the velocity isn't creating magic wound channels or have magical man stopping effects. No, a tumbling little tiny bullet does not inflict great damage. No, an expanding tiny little bullet with the limited amount of energy in a pistol does not do great damage. They are ice pickers or a little bit better at best. In long guns, they are not that impressive, considering short barreled 5.56 NATO has its own share of problems with terminal performance. Outside of punching through SOFT armor only, it has very little to offer anyone.

Subsonic 5.7? I almost feel like insulting the poster who made that post, simply because implying that subsonic 5.7 is a great terminal performer is an insult to everyone who reads this forum. Folks, a subsonic 5.56 NATO and subsonic 5.7 are literally no better than a 22 LR with equivalent bullet weights. The moment you take away the velocity, the .224 just becomes a rimfire-esque squirrel gun, no, that is too much credit. Even a squirrel gun usually throws rounds out super sonic.

.224 subsonics are the kind of bad joke that you just pretend doesn't exist, because it is that bad of a trend and idea. Rather than the kinds of bad ideas you hang from the oak trees as examples for other bad ideas not to follow, 22 subsonics are the kind of bad idea you bury in the peat bog because it is so shameful you don't want to even ever see it again, you want ti cast from your sight permanently.

"BUT 5.7 FAILED BECAUSE NOBODY MADE AMMO FOR IT". Nobody made ammunition for it because nobody wants it. NATO is holding onto the 9mm Luger, police and security, even civilians, are staying put on their handgun choices. My subsonic Tommy gun is better than your P90, unless the dood is wearing SOFT body armor. The other high velocity .224 offerings have not been that successful either. I don't think Ruger is going to get that far, I don't think FN is going to get that far, and I think FN's push is just plain sad.

I don't think anyone mentioned the fact that the Armscor RIA 22TCM "Combo Pistols" fire that 40 gr HP at around 2000 fps with less expensive ammo, and can be converted to 9mm with only a barrel and recoil spring change.

The 5.7 round and the P90 were specifically developed by FN as a replacement for the 9mm machine pistol carried by rear echelon troops. The round is designed to penetrate Warsaw Pact body armor and helmets out to 200 m (IIRC). Think of it as a little brother to the 5.56 NATO penetrator rounds that were developed for the same purpose at longer range.

If you are missing anything, it is that the round was developed purely as a military item with no thought to civilian use. This is not how new rounds have been developed over the last few decades in the US apart from the caseless and polymer cased ammo experiments. From the 1950s until now, our military rounds have been developed from civilian ammo.

7.62 NATO is an enlarged 300 Savage
5.56 NATO is a uprated 223 Remington
The army's 300 Win Mag is an overpressure variant of the ammo you can buy at Big 5
6.5 Creedmoor has been adopted pretty much as is by some militaries.

All the old "classic" rounds were originally developed for military use during the arms races of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

30-06
7x57 Mauser
7.92x57 Mauser
8mm Lebel
7.5x54 French
7.5x55 Swiss
6.5x55 Swede
6.5 and 7.7 Arisaka
6.5x52 Carcano
.303 British
...and the grandaddy still in use today, 7.62x54R

__________________
Release the Kraken

If you're referring to my post, you missed my point. I never wrote I was interested in piercing body armor.

We all make compromises with our choices. My choice is certainly different than yours and I don't care if you're all about testosterone - who's caliber is better/faster/deadlier/cooler, etc.

For me, it's about overall effectiveness at stopping a threat - not killing, not penetrating body armor or windshields. I also would like to prevent collateral damage...and save what's left of my hearing. I can only offer this as a benchmark but at least it's not hearsay:


I respect your choices, even if I don't agree. Your life, your decision. I stand by my choice for the same reason.

"7.62 NATO is an enlarged 300 Savage" The only "enlargement" is that the 7.62 NATO has a longer case neck and a slightly different shoulder angle.

I am no fan of the 5.7 and in fact have less than zero interest in owning one, but regarding its effectiveness, just remember the Fort Hood shooting.

I was sorely tempted by the 5.7 butt I feared that ammo availability might become a problem like the .45 GAP.

I own five 9mms and two .45 ACPs. They cover virtually any tactical situation a private citizen is likely to find himself in.

A dear friend of mine has a TC chambered for the 5.7x28 and it is quite impressive on Montana prairie dogs out to about 250 yards.....

I know that has nothing to do with the new Ruger, but is is a great varminting round....not far from a .22 Hornet!
Randy

I came close to buying a FN Five-seveN at an auction this summer. the grip was just too big to be comfortable for me. Would like to handle the Ruger.
Yes, I'm a sucker for the odd/different calibers. I don't even own a 9mm anymore!

__________________
_______________
Super Snooper

I noticed that too. I don’t remember that much flip from my 5.7, but it has been a couple of years since I sold it. My kids shot it a lot and never complained about the recoil either. My .22tcm definitely doesn’t have nearly the muzzle rise, but it’s a much heavier 1911 also.

__________________
USS Brewton FF1086
SWCA#3597

This reviewer has shots of the internals showing that the operating system is some kind of funky delayed blowback.

He also said the the slide velocity seemed higher than on many 9mm pistols making the recoil a bit harsh. Interesting. That would be the precise description I would use to describe the recoil on my LC9s.

__________________
Release the Kraken

I think many are missing the points that the 57 is a hyper fast round capable of piercing different barriers, including many types of body armor and has a rather high capacity for a handgun. I am becoming more and more interested in one....

__________________
Proverbs 21:2

Sadly, there are a lot of folks these days who arbitrarily label anything as useless which they themselves can't find a use for.

Honestly, ever notice how many cartridges which are still in production and still have new firearms being chambered for them get called useless?
Furthermore, have you ever noticed how many folks just follow the example of Military/Law Enforcement. You know, like the folks who all carried .40s and said 9mm was too weak right up until the FBI dropped .40 S&W in favor of 9mm Luger, then practically overnight those same folks started saying how .40 S&W is useless because the 9mm Luger can do everything it can but at a lower cost?
I guarantee you that if NATO Forces decided to reconsider the 5.7x28 and were gearing up to replace 9mm with it, then suddenly many folks would find a use for it in a hurry.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

If you’re a Glock fan, you should check out RIA’s .22TCM conversion. It would be a lot cheaper.

__________________
USS Brewton FF1086
SWCA#3597

I don't own a Glock. I own a S&W SIGMA SW40VE, which is a Glock 23 Clone, but the slides and barrels are just different enough that they aren't interchangeable. SIGMA barrels/slides will fit on a Glock frame, but a Glock slides/barrels won't fit on a SIGMA frame, and even in the first case, it still won't actually function.

Besides, I don't care for .22TCM because it's a proprietary cartridge which is only produced by ARMSCOR, of which I've read quite a few horror stories of blowouts from their high pressure cartridges, and it's only loaded in a mere two configurations.

If ARMSCOR would grant other manufacturers a license to produce .22TCM, then I would be far more comfortable with it.

Also, their .22TCM conversion kit costs $423 and is only compatible with .22TCM9R ammo because they don't sell Glock Magazine and the standard 9mm Glock Magazines can't fit the longer standard .22TCM ammo.

So to recap, here are some things to consider...

Glock .22TCM9R Conversion Kit:

• RIA Glock .22TCM9R Conversion Kit costs $431.
• Only compatible with .22TCM9R ammo, standard .22TCM is too long to fit in 9mm Magazines.
• .22TCM is only available from ARMSCOR, and only in two configurations; .22TCM and the shortened .22TCM9R.

Ruger-57:

• The Ruger-57 pistol costs $799 MSRP.
• Compatible with all 5.7x28 FN ammo.
• 5.7x28 FN is available through a few premium brand ammo manufactures including; FN, Fiocchi, Federal, Sellier & Bellot.

So the Glock Conversion Kit is less than half the MSRP of the Ruger-57, but firearms typically sell for substantially less than MSRP, and ammo availability will obviously be much lower due to only being available from one manufacturer and only a single specific configuration will work in the Glock.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.