|
There has always been a debate between the large caliber/slow round and the smaller caliber/ fast round. There is the Marshall and Sanow school, of which I loosely belong, that finds a correlation between the muzzle velocity of a round and its effectiveness is more important then the grain weight. M&S concluded, for example, that a 125 grain .357 round traveling at about 1450 fps was much more effective then, say, a 230 grain .45 cal round traveling at about 900 fps. It is a matter of how many foot pounds of energy a bullet of a certain weight traveling at a certain speed will generate when it impacts. Now M&S had a loose grasp of science and statistics, but the idea that muzzle energy matters more then the grain weight or caliber makes sense to me. Of course there is a point of diminishing return when going too light, and there is the practicality of the amount of recoil in a handgun a shooter can manage. The 5.56mm/.223 round, at only 55 grains, but with a muzzle velocity of over 3000 fps, is very effective, both in the foot pounds of energy on impact and the wound channel that it generates. The 5.7mm round is using that basic formula: A relatively light round traveling at a high speed will be as, or more effective, then a slower, heavier round. I have yet to shoot a 5.7, but I hear the recoil is very light and the round is super accurate. There will always be those folks, often older men in hats, who say the size of the bullet is all that matters. Looking at the havoc smaller, lighter, high velocity rounds cause, I am not so sure they are right.
|