Im pretty sure im about to start an ODT fire lol...

[Leshaire]

Personal desires/standards are rarely logical....

It's the reason why I don't have an HK45. I love them, I just can't jusitfy the cost. Why in the world does something cost that much when half the gun was likely made for $2. If Glock can do it for $419 why is an HK or FN TWICE as much? ( I am not a Glock guy by any means...)

When I think about buying a plastic gun for around $1k I always end up thinking I'll just save a little more and buy another Les Baer or Dan Wesson. I can see and feel why one of those costs so much.

Like I said, though, personal standards are rarely logical.

Meh I dont concur. Would you only buy a race car thats built of metal materials bc it seems better to you, when carbon fiber and other clearly similar or better strength materials exist and are able to complete the same job with less weight?

The only portion I can agree with is maybe the price factor, in that polymer is cheaper to purchase and mold. That makes sense to me in general, but the 5.7 pistol is different in that it is truly one of a kind. No one else has managed to cram so much bullet and firepower into a pistol package, AND be able to do it in a super lightweight polymer frame for that matter. Just my thought on it though.

 

[Leshaire]

That's logical. If I'm spending big bucks on a handgun, it had better be hand fitted

Is a thousand bucks really "big bucks" though? Pistols range from $299 to hell idk, $5,000 for a Nighthawk or similar? So in reality, I feel its safe to say $1,000 is on the low end of pistols but maybe the high end of typical carry guns? I feel the value is more in the technology in regards to the 5.7 pistol (see above comment).

 

[Shemp]

Meh I dont concur. Would you only buy a race car thats built of metal materials bc it seems better to you, when carbon fiber and other clearly similar or better strength materials exist and are able to complete the same job with less weight?

The only portion I can agree with is maybe the price factor, in that polymer is cheaper to purchase and mold. That makes sense to me in general, but the 5.7 pistol is different in that it is truly one of a kind. No one else has managed to cram so much bullet and firepower into a pistol package, AND be able to do it in a super lightweight polymer frame for that matter. Just my thought on it though.

A race car isn't really a good comparison. They are basically one time use vehicles. Yes, their are exotic materials that will do a much better job than aluminum or steel but they aren't expected to last. Even on hyper cars like Zondas and Paganis...if you can afford the car you can afford to entirely replace it. Most of the CF components that find themselves on mass market cars are small, like BMWs with CF roofs. Even those, however, are still on their $70k cars.

If something is built that NEEDS to last, they are usually built out of steel. If I am spending more than $1k on a gun I want it to outlast me and my children. Can a plastic gun do that? I don't really know. If a 5.7 was steel or aluminum I might be willing to part with $1k for one. It being a "one of a kind" handgun really isn't worth what is likely a $300 premium when I can buy something that will do the same or better a job for half that. I really think that's why it hasn't caught on.

I wouldn't mind having a 5-7 and a PS90 if the price was more in line.

 

[Shemp]

Is a thousand bucks really "big bucks" though? Pistols range from $299 to hell idk, $5,000 for a Nighthawk or similar? So in reality, I feel its safe to say $1,000 is on the low end of pistols but maybe the high end of typical carry guns? I feel the value is more in the technology in regards to the 5.7 pistol (see above comment).

As much as I dislike them but if you use a Glock as the benchmark for what a carry pistol needs to be then yes, $1k is big bucks for a pistol.

 

[pdm]

Is a thousand bucks really "big bucks" though? Pistols range from $299 to hell idk, $5,000 for a Nighthawk or similar? So in reality, I feel its safe to say $1,000 is on the low end of pistols but maybe the high end of typical carry guns? I feel the value is more in the technology in regards to the 5.7 pistol (see above comment).

No, $1000 is not, but if I were to ever buy a handgun for more than about $500, it would be a hand fitted gun from Wilson or similar.

If FN sold as many guns as glock, their price would be the same as well

 

[sovietak474u]

Soviet, it sounds like you are pretty well educated (and invested) on the 5.7. You use it and believe it to be effective. Lets assume that the exotic ammo is not $5 a shot and not hard to get because, frankly, that is irrelevant when it comes to defending life. If someone is looking to obtain a defense handgun, can you provide reason to choose the 5.7 over one of the big 3?

I'm not saying it is a better choice . I don't carry mine . I carry a 9mm. The debate was really about is it suitable for sd and carry use. My answer is yes. Is it more practical than the big 3? Not only no but hell no.

The five seven has its use. I keep mine close by as home invasions with individuals wearing body armor is not uncommon . I keep a ps90 in my trunk as it allows me to walk away from my car with a lot of firepower and lot less weight

 

[chucklenut]

Did you even read the TLDRs??

9mm ammo cost < 5.7 ammo cost

cant speak to effectiveness seeing as how i havent had the chance to shoot people with both calibers

 

[sovietak474u]

No, $1000 is not, but if I were to ever buy a handgun for more than about $500, it would be a hand fitted gun from Wilson or similar.

If FN sold as many guns as glock, their price would be the same as well

My five seven and ps90 are high quality IMO. Granted it is plastic but so is a kel tec . I have broken those .

 

[Flashover16]

well what one desires and buys is that persons choice.
WE can continue to churn out these new super calibers almost weekly but in the end do they do anything that some other caliber already out there do better?
depends on what better means to the buyer?
Look at the ever popular 40 S & W, there were several calibers already in existence that are almost blue print identical in performance but for some reason we needed that one.
same with the 45 GAP Now who thought that baby up?
basically a ballstically identical cartridge to the 45 acp?
the list goes on and on.
build it and a certain number of "I gotta have one" guys will buy it.

 

[sovietak474u]

well what one desires and buys is that persons choice.
WE can continue to churn out these new super calibers almost weekly but in the end do they do anything that some other caliber already out there do better?
depends on what better means to the buyer?
Look at the ever popular 40 S & W, there were several calibers already in existence that are almost blue print identical in performance but for some reason we needed that one.
same with the 45 GAP Now who thought that baby up?
basically a ballstically identical cartridge to the 45 acp?
the list goes on and on.
build it and a certain number of "I gotta have one" guys will buy it.

Now when it comes to 45 gap, the 5.7 has a much more practical use than that waste of powder