Ruger 57 (5.7x28mm)

[Siggy-06]

I got to hold one of these at my lgs today, first one he's gotten in. The sights were nice, weight was light, the grip was a little large but my medium hands got a solid purchase. Felt very similar to the security-9 with a slightly wider grip(front to back). I wish ruger had made these with changeable backstraps. All in all neat pistol.

[10-96]

On the bolt gun idea... The .22 Hornet is getting pretty old and not-so-common. I've always wondered what would come along to replace it as a "garden gun"? But, these days, not many folks seem interested in something of that variety. Maybe if the right bait was offered?

Can either the 5.7 or the TCM be as accurate and relatively quiet as the Hornet of old? Either one of the new offerings would seem to be more reloader friendly. I've never reloaded for the Hornet, but more than a couple manuals hint at possible difficulties such as crushed cases. To me, the .222, .222 Magnum, and the .223 were in a different ballgame than the Hornet, and alas the first two of those are both pretty much gone and done for. What will replace the .22 Hornet in ya'lls opinions?

[darkgael]

Either one of the new offerings would seem to be more reloader friendly.

More reloader friendly? Not the 5.7 X28......There are a number of issues to pay attention to that are concerning. The shoulder of the case blows forward more than any other round that I have seen (and I reload for more than 40 different cartridges, including the .22 Hornet). In addition, the charge window is small....the difference between minimum and maximum can be less than one grain. Then there is the poly coating on the case which tends to wear off, especially at the shoulder. When the cases separate, and they do after a few loads, the break is always at the neck. The case extracts, the next one goes in but not all the way because the neck of the broken case is still in the chamber.

[darkgael]

double post

[Areoflyer09]

Originally Posted by 10-96

On the bolt gun idea... The .22 Hornet is getting pretty old and not-so-common. I've always wondered what would come along to replace it as a "garden gun"? But, these days, not many folks seem interested in something of that variety. Maybe if the right bait was offered?

Can either the 5.7 or the TCM be as accurate and relatively quiet as the Hornet of old? Either one of the new offerings would seem to be more reloader friendly. I've never reloaded for the Hornet, but more than a couple manuals hint at possible difficulties such as crushed cases. To me, the .222, .222 Magnum, and the .223 were in a different ballgame than the Hornet, and alas the first two of those are both pretty much gone and done for. What will replace the .22 Hornet in ya'lls opinions?

The TCM already existed as a bolt gun. It didn’t do well and I don’t know if it’s even in production anymore. Which would be a shame because it had some nice features, like sharing the magazine with the double stack 1911. I think I’ve I’ve seen more of the rifles converted to 9mm at this point than I’ve seen of them in 22TCM. But that may just be from the 9mm sticking in my memory better.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by 10-96

On the bolt gun idea... The .22 Hornet is getting pretty old and not-so-common. I've always wondered what would come along to replace it as a "garden gun"? But, these days, not many folks seem interested in something of that variety. Maybe if the right bait was offered?

Can either the 5.7 or the TCM be as accurate and relatively quiet as the Hornet of old? Either one of the new offerings would seem to be more reloader friendly. I've never reloaded for the Hornet, but more than a couple manuals hint at possible difficulties such as crushed cases. To me, the .222, .222 Magnum, and the .223 were in a different ballgame than the Hornet, and alas the first two of those are both pretty much gone and done for. What will replace the .22 Hornet in ya'lls opinions?

I have serious doubts about reloading .22 TCM, it looks like a nightmare. 5.7 would probably be the better of the two to reload. You're right about .22 Hornet tho and other early 20th Century cartridges like .218 Bee and .219 Zipper, they would all fit a niche, but they're pretty much obsolete and if you could have a bolt action rifle in 5.7 meant for accuracy, it would be more suited for the modern times we live in.

That said, I think the .327 is a better choice for a reloader. Easy case to work with, decent bullet selection, anything from 85 grains up to 130 grain projectile. Is it going to be 3000 fps capable? No, but 2200 with an 85 grain is very possible and would work fine in the role, plenty of power to do the job at distances up to 150 yards.

[wild cat mccane]

most 5.7 I've seen is beat pretty good after one go...

[darkgael]

As mentioned earlier. Note the shoulder.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by darkgael

As mentioned earlier. Note the shoulder.

You weren't kidding, that looks like an entirely different case! Are you sure it's not just something wrong with the chamber in your gun?

If this is the norm for the 5.7, this is a reloader's nightmare and I can't see any reason to buy a 5.7 rifle, not when the brass life is maybe 2 reloads at the max.

Seeing the brass like that, I would rather have a .17 HMR. I would still prefer my .327, but I do wish there was a good spitzer bullet for the .327. IDK, I think I'm going to have to write Hornady and ask them to make a VMax or FTX bullet for the .312 caliber that's under 100 grains.

[Forte S+W]

$799 is still too much in my opinion, especially considering the simplicity of the pistol's design, but it's still a lot cheaper than a FiveseveN, and after a few months it will probably drop in price to a more reasonable $650.

Still, if I were Ruger, then I would sooner opt for a business strategy in which the firearm is marketed as cheaply as possible in order to overcome any reservations folks have in regards to ammo cost, as well as begin producing ammunition and selling it as cheaply as possible.
But then again, I'm thinking along the lines of wanting to really pushing the pistol, whereas Ruger probably only made this to tap into a perceived niche market, not because they actually plan on this being a huge success.

As other folks have been saying, it would be great if Ruger modified this platform and chambered it in other niche cartridge like 7.62x25 Tokarev. Now a pistol that fires cheap yet plentiful military surplus ammo would definitely be a hit.
Zastava has been successful in selling reproduction TT-33s, so there's definitely still interest in the cartridge.

[Areoflyer09]

I have a local shop that has/had one in store priced at $599.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by Forte S+W

$799 is still too much in my opinion, especially considering the simplicity of the pistol's design, but it's still a lot cheaper than a FiveseveN, and after a few months it will probably drop in price to a more reasonable $650.

Still, if I were Ruger, then I would sooner opt for a business strategy in which the firearm is marketed as cheaply as possible in order to overcome any reservations folks have in regards to ammo cost, as well as begin producing ammunition and selling it as cheaply as possible.
But then again, I'm thinking along the lines of wanting to really pushing the pistol, whereas Ruger probably only made this to tap into a perceived niche market, not because they actually plan on this being a huge success.

As other folks have been saying, it would be great if Ruger modified this platform and chambered it in other niche cartridge like 7.62x25 Tokarev. Now a pistol that fires cheap yet plentiful military surplus ammo would definitely be a hit.
Zastava has been successful in selling reproduction TT-33s, so there's definitely still interest in the cartridge.

Yes, and I just bought one of those too. When you can get a steel framed pistol for $300 in a serious cartridge, why not? The only thing holding back the 7.62x25 is a lot like what's holding back 5.7: lack of ammo options and higher price.

I'm not sure what Ruger is forecasting with this gun, they either came to a conclusion that they could make a profit off a niche gun or they're rolling the dice hoping this gun is going to cause a paradigm shift and cause the demand for 5.7 to explode.

That is a heck of a gamble if it's the latter and something that is absolute fact is that bottleneck pistols are not popular in the US. .22 TCM, 7.62x25, .357 Sig, and various other bottlenecks are as obscure as obscure gets. You can argue .357 Sig isn't obscure, but it's very rapidly becoming so as more police dump it for 9mm.

While I like 7.62x25 for various reasons, there's a lot of people who are going to look at 5.7 and see no reason to need one. Not all loads are able to defeat soft armor, what threats are you expecting to where soft armor, is 5.7 against an unarmored target better than other calibers? These are questions people are going to ask themselves and most are going to conclude it's interesting, but not for them.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

It appears that Ruger might be using the same materials to build all their newer semi's. LCP 22, LCPll, Security9 and now the 5.7. If so, then I would say they will reap a huge profit on the 5.7 even if they do not sell a lot. A security 9 for three times as much, just different caliber. If so, then Smart move by Ruger. I will pass.

[darkgael]

Originally Posted by TruthTellers

You weren't kidding, that looks like an entirely different case! Are you sure it's not just something wrong with the chamber in your gun?

If this is the norm for the 5.7, this is a reloader's nightmare and I can't see any reason to buy a 5.7 rifle, not when the brass life is maybe 2 reloads at the max.

Seeing the brass like that, I would rather have a .17 HMR. I would still prefer my .327, but I do wish there was a good spitzer bullet for the .327. IDK, I think I'm going to have to write Hornady and ask them to make a VMax or FTX bullet for the .312 caliber that's under 100 grains.

I am pretty sure that the shoulder movement is an artifact of the delayed blowback system.
Early on, when I started reloading the 5.7, I bought a bunch of once fired brass and those cases all had the shoulder pushed forward.

[Metric]

It's interesting and I want to like it, but I don't know what I'd use it for. Too big for SD carry, too expensive for small game/plinking, too light for bigger animals.

[zoo]

High power, flat shooting, great penetration, high capacity, relatively small, made by Ruger. I'd be willing to pick one up new for much closer to $600.00!

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by darkgael

I am pretty sure that the shoulder movement is an artifact of the delayed blowback system.
Early on, when I started reloading the 5.7, I bought a bunch of once fired brass and those cases all had the shoulder pushed forward.

Whatever it is, 5.7 is proving to not be a cartridge for reloaders and with the price of the ammo being what it is, it's tough for me to want this new pistol. A year or two from now, if the ammo situation improves and the 57 proves to be a good gun, my opinion may change.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by Carl the Floor Walker

It appears that Ruger might be using the same materials to build all their newer semi's. LCP 22, LCPll, Security9 and now the 5.7. If so, then I would say they will reap a huge profit on the 5.7 even if they do not sell a lot. A security 9 for three times as much, just different caliber. If so, then Smart move by Ruger. I will pass.

The American Pistol aside, Ruger has really been hitting everything out of the park with their semi pistols the past 5+ years. They're probably making a lot more profit off those than they are their revolvers, thus I expect over the next 5-10 years, Ruger is going to be making even more pistols that are going to shake the industry up.

Can't say they'll be Glock bulletproof, but at $500+ Ruger seems to make a damn good semi auto.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

Originally Posted by TruthTellers

The American Pistol aside, Ruger has really been hitting everything out of the park with their semi pistols the past 5+ years. They're probably making a lot more profit off those than they are their revolvers, thus I expect over the next 5-10 years, Ruger is going to be making even more pistols that are going to shake the industry up.

Can't say they'll be Glock bulletproof, but at $500+ Ruger seems to make a damn good semi auto.

I think Ruger has always hit it out of the park, with new purchasers unfamiliar with other firearms. And I think that is their Niche. (other than the American). But I doubt you will ever see another gun with the quality of the SR9C for instance. Ruger IMO now makes a good quality reliable gun for folks that do not shoot many rounds through them. Which is IMO the vast majority of EDC and night stand gun owners. A few trips to the range each year and that is about it.
I have never owned a Taurus, but they almost seem to be taking a lead over Ruger in better quality and at a low price. Given the choice, I would purchase a Taurus G series over any Ruger, (except the SR9) JMO