# Talk:FN 5.7×28mm

I've pulled about 200 rounds apart as I use the case's for a .17x28, and reused the 40gr V max in my .223.
I've found the factory bullets are sealed in place and in order to get them out at all. Must be pushed back into the case a bit to break the seal.
For powder. Have been unsuccessful in finding out what the powder is. But, there's 5.0gr of a very fine/almost dust like ball powder in this blue tipped v max.
I would like to know if this is patent protected round in the 5.7 form and whether a person could chamber their own arm with this cartridge. Although, it is very low velocity and of limited use.  The .17x28 case produces in excess of 3000fps with 20gr v max. Very good prairie dog round for under 200yds.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgeld (talk • contribs) 

The tone of this article attempts to talk about every piece of ammunition made as the 5.7x28mm cartridge and attempts to pass them off as variants of the 5.7x28mm. They are not. The methodology of the article is analogous to writing an article about the 30-06 Springfield and then filling up space talking about the myriad of ammunition made for the 30-06 be it military or civilian and going on to length talking about the Remington, Winchester, Federal, etc etc etc ammunition as variant. These are in reality different loadings of the same cartridge. We all know that there are no variants of the 5.7x28mm as Belgium is a member of the CIP and has to abide with dimension and specifications enforced by the CIP in Belgium when a cartridge if called the 5.7x28mm whether it be imported, exported or manufactured in a CIP member state. The ammunition infobox reserves the Variant designation for cartridges that have a difference in dimension or specification. For example the .280 Ackley Improved would be a dimensional variant of the .280 Remington or the .38 Special +P+ would be variant of the .38 Special by specification.
We would not consider Remington's R30061, RL30062, PRSC3006C, PRA3006A, R30062, R30063, PRC3006A, L30062, PRA3006B, R3006B, PRC3006B, PRA3006C, PG30064, RS3006A, PRSC3006B, PRC3006C, R30064, R30065, R30066 and R30067 separate variants. This is just ammunition made for the .30-06. The street name of the cartridges are as follows:

R30061	Remington® Express®	125	Pointed Soft Point
RL30062	Remington® Managed Recoil®	125	Pointed Soft Point Core-Lokt®
PRSC3006C	Premier® Scirocco™ Bonded	150	Swift™ Scirocco™ Bonded
PRA3006A	Premier® AccuTip™	150	AccuTip™ Boat Tail
R30062	Remington® Express®	150	Pointed Soft Point Core-Lokt®
R30063	Remington® Express®	150	Bronze Point™
PRC3006A	Premier® Core-Lokt® Ultra	150	Core-Lokt® Ultra Bonded
L30062	UMC®	150	Metal Case
PRA3006B	Premier® AccuTip™	165	AccuTip™ Boat Tail
R3006B	Remington® Express®	165	Pointed Soft Point Core-Lokt®
PRC3006B	Premier® Core-Lokt® Ultra	168	Core-Lokt® Ultra Bonded
PRA3006C	Premier® AccuTip™	180	AccuTip™ Boat Tail
PG30064	Remington® Premier Green®	180	Lapua Naturalis
RS3006A	Premier® A-Frame	180	A-Frame™ Pointed Soft Point
PRSC3006B	Premier® Scirocco™ Bonded	180	Swift™ Scirocco™ Bonded
PRC3006C	Premier® Core-Lokt® Ultra	180	Core-Lokt® Ultra Bonded
R30064	Remington® Express®	180	Soft Point Core-Lokt®
R30065	Remington® Express®	180	Pointed Soft Point Core-Lokt®
R30066	Remington® Express®	180	Bronze Point™
R30067	Remington® Express®	220	Soft Point Core-Lokt®
Are the editors and contributors getting bamboozled when they see a manufacturers ID for the ammo just because there are a bunch of alpha numeric characters and think it is something special? I can understand writing about ammunition which was adopted by the military, but that is not the thrust of the article. It talks about discontinued ammo etc. If someone was talking about discontinued 30-06 ammo one could write a two book volume on it. At present there are over 200 factory loads for the 30-06. Oh and the R30069 is really a variation of the 30-06 street name = Remington Accelerator saboted .224 bullet. DeusImperator (talk) 09:05, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think any of the uses of "variation" in this article are as misleading as you make them out to be. The L191 tracer is accurately described as one variation of the 5.7x28mm cartridge. It is 5.7x28mm, but it is a unique variation, or type, of 5.7x28mm. It is a tracer cartridge, and it is the only tracer cartridge produced in 5.7x28mm. The format used in this article is not analogous to listing every loading produced for the .30-06, because less than a dozen FN factory loadings (past and present) exist, and FN does not frequently add to this lineup. ROG5728 (talk) 09:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
The question to ask is ... so what? Just because FN produces less than a dozen it is not suddenly analogous to listing the available factory loads for the cartridge? The fact that they are list alone proves the analogy. The tracer round is not a variation but falls within specification for the cartridge. The cartridge has no variations. It is indeed misleading as it is used in the article.
The 5.7x28mm cartridge is produced in several variations. SS195LF and SS197SR variations are available... Treating different factory loadings as variants
Several specialized variations of the 5.7x28mm were also developed alongside the SS190, such as the L191 tracer round and the subsonic SB193... again treating different factory loadings as variants
introduced to civilian shooters alongside the new Five-seven IOM variant... again treating different factory loadings as variants
SS197SR variations, which are available to civilian shooters... talking about FN factory loads for the cartridge
SS198LF variation which is restricted by FN for law enforcement and military customers... again factory loadings
SS190 variation is capable of penetrating... The SS190 is the first production factory load... What is this the variation of???
And it goes on.
None of these are Variations on the cartridge. They are indeed the same cartridge, so they are not variants. I think noting the tracer is fine and should be included but lets not call it a variant. The term is absolutely misleading as the term is reserved for cartridges that do not conform in some what to some specification and that is what the infobox is supposed to be for. The redirection is stupid because none of these are variations.
Yeah. Ignoring all that stuff, I just changed the name of the section to Cartridge Types. Enjoy. Grizzly chipmunk (talk) 16:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

The listed mass of the SS90 AP FMJ round doesn't seem right. The listed value for the kinetic energy is 540 J, however if you use KE=(1/2)(m)(v)^2 the actual value should be around 360 J, using the values m=1g and v=850. If you rearrange the equation using the listed kinetic energy and velocity to solve for mass, m=2(KE)÷v^2, the value of the mass should be near 1.5g. Is this an error, or is there a reason for this strange energy output?
(Or alternatively if you solve for velocity while keeping kinetic energy and mass the same the result comes out about 1,040 m/s.)
BradandRose725 (talk) 06:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The SS90's mass is 1.5g, not 1g. The table shows it as 1g due to its display properties. ROG5728 (talk) 17:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I see now. Thanks for clearing it up. That makes much more sense, before I also didn't check the conversion between grains and grams(23 grains comes out at around 1.5g). Anyways, thanks again for clearing up my confusion and sorry for causing any trouble.BradandRose725 (talk) 06:12, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on FN 5.7×28mm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/bharris/stories/wfaa090313_wz_mexiweapons.31e413c2.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110501063934/http://analyse.deredactie.be:80/2011/04/21/bericht-van-het-front-in-libie/ to http://analyse.deredactie.be/2011/04/21/bericht-van-het-front-in-libie
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101122043508/http://excelarms.com/newproducts.html to http://www.excelarms.com/newproducts.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5012743.PN.&OS=PN/5012743&RS=PN/5012743
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/articlearchive/details.aspx?ID=309
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.handgunsmag.com/ammunition/hg_militarytoday_200811/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111002213431/http://www.ontargetmagazine.com:80/content/defensive-handguns-0 to http://www.ontargetmagazine.com/content/defensive-handguns-0
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fnhusa1.com/PDF/FNH08ammunition.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101223022218/http://www.fnhusa.com/le/press/detail.asp?id=22 to http://www.fnhusa.com/le/press/detail.asp?id=22
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.eliteammunition.net/5_7_ammunition.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.fsdip.com/website/LinkClick.aspx?link=268&tabid=285
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.handgunsmag.com/ammunition/hg_militarytoday_200811/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:48, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on FN 5.7×28mm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://analyse.deredactie.be/2011/04/21/bericht-van-het-front-in-libie
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110210171148/http://thegunzone.com/556dw-9.html to http://www.thegunzone.com/556dw-9.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100104174808/http://thegunzone.com/556dw-10.html to http://www.thegunzone.com/556dw-10.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101223023916/http://www.fnhusa.com/le/press/detail.asp?id=61 to http://www.fnhusa.com/le/press/detail.asp?id=61
Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/67Rdnb1ZI?url=http://www.stengg.com/upload/1042HiNo89LUSmLXjcjW.pdf to http://www.stengg.com/upload/1042HiNo89LUSmLXjcjW.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ontargetmagazine.com/content/defensive-handguns-0
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:46, 27 September 2017 (UTC)