PDW Round Comparison 5.7x28mm vs 4.6x30mm

Editor’s Note – Update July 2025: The original publish date of this article was July 20th, 2020. It remains one of the more popular articles that have been published on Ballistic Assistant. Since that time, we have seen the 5.7x28mm become standardized by SAAMI, and we have seen more firearms offered in both 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm. As such we have updated this article to offer a more modern view of both cartridges.

If you spend much time in the shooting world, you eventually grow tired of the “vanilla.” For example, it’s hard to get excited over a basic AR builds unless someone does something that truly bucks the norm. The same goes for ammunition, most new cartridges are just slight tweaks of old ones.

It is for this reason I really do not get overly excited about new cartridges. It is expensive to manufacture a new cartridge, even a cartridge that is simply taking an existing cartridge and necking it up or necking it down to accept a new caliber bullet. For this reason, companies will push hard on the marketing button, and they will claim that it can outperform anything and everything on the market. It can take a bit of work to sort through what fact is and what is fiction.

What I think we often overlook is those cartridges that have been with us for a while but have not seen widespread adoption. These can be hidden gems, that are just lost in the noise. Two rounds that have really been “the apple of my eye” lately are Fabrique Nationale (FN) Herstal’s 5.7x28mm and Heckler & Koch’s (H&K) 4.6x30mm. While many are familiar with the 5.7x28mm due to FN’s firearms and pop culture appearances, the 4.6x30mm remains relatively obscure outside of military and LE circles. However, even that has changed and it’s starting to garner more attention.
 

NATO’s Cold War Era Request

In the 1980’s the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), put out a request for a replacement to the 9×19 Parabellum. Much like the 45 ACP, this round had been developed in 1902, using technology that was cutting edge for the early 1900’s. The primary shortcoming of the 9x19mm was its inability to penetrate Soviet soft body armor that was becoming increasingly common among the Warsaw Pact troops. While this was the driving factor for replacing the nearly century old cartridge, it was not the sole reason.

NATO was looking for the modern version of what we know as the M1 Carbine. A firearm designed to be a lighter, more manageable weapon tailored to the needs of rear echelon troops. This Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) needed to have an effective range of 150-200 meters when fired from a carbine, with a small lightweight cartridge, a high velocity projectile facilitates better terminal ballistics with standard ball ammunition, ambidextrous and low recoil.

The request was made two years prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Answers to the Call

5.56×30 MARS

Domestically, Colt introduced a 22-caliber cartridge that was a -shortened 223 Rem called the 5.56×30 MARS. MARS is short for Mini Assault Rifle System. Reportedly this cartridge would lob a 55-grain projectile a tad shy of 2,600fps. Despite a few patents being issued in 1998 the concept never made it beyond a few prototypes. There is very little mention about this cartridge, but it deserves an honorable mention.

As a side note, there have been discussions about the possibility that there are companies that are interested in reviving the 5.56×30 MARS and produced a replicate of the Colt MARS. With the SHORT and HPA passing, I could definitely see a path forward where a purpose built PDW using the AR layout would grab a lot of attention. I guess we will see.
 
5.7x28mm

FN Herstal’s developed the 5.7x28mm cartridge which fired a 5.68mm (.224in) diameter bullet, from case 28mm long. The cartridge was formally introduced in 1990 as part of the P90 Personal Defense Weapon. It was not standardized by the C.I.P until October of 1993. In 1998 FN Introduced the Five-seveN Pistol, first available in the US Civilian Market in 2004. From there it was 23 years before it was adopted by NATO in March of 2021 under STANAG 4509. It was adopted into the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacture’s Institute (SAAMI) cartridge in July 2024.

While rumored to be based on the 30 Carbine necked down to 5.56 (.223) caliber, the reality is the case was a completely new case designed from scratch. It can be best described as a scaled down rifle cartridge. However, unlike most cartridges the body has no taper to aid in extraction. This allows the cases to be stacked one on top of another without requiring a curved magazine but also requires a lubricating lacquer, or other surface treatment to be applied to the exterior of the case to aid in extraction.

In order to achieve better ballistics, the service pressure must be much higher than your typical pistol cartridge. Whereas 9x19mm has a maximum service pressure of 35,000psi, and 45 ACP has a maximum pressure of 21,000psi. C.I.P lists a maximum pressure 50,000psi (3450 BAR), and SAAMI specifies a Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) of 48,500 PSI. The pressure is slightly below that of .22 Hornet at 49,000psi. For reference, 223 Remington is 55,000psi.

The added pressure drives a 40gr bullet along a 10.3in tube to ~2000fps, imparting ~340ft-lbs of energy. In testing the 5.7x28mm SS190AP loading would reliably penetrate soft Kevlar body armor, due to its high velocity combined with a small cross-sectional area. The performance on soft body armor is what propelled this cartridge into infamy as the media began to hype it up as a “cop killer” round in the early 2000’s. The Brady Campaign and other gun control groups sensationalized the Five-seveN pistol shortly after its introduction falsely claiming it was designed to kill law enforcement officers.

While the 5.7x28mm ability to penetrate body armor was overly hyped, there were other areas that outperformed traditional pistol cartridges.

• Roughly 50% the weight of 9x19mm ammunition which means soldiers could carry twice the ammo.
• Larger magazine capacity,
  • 20rnds for the Five-seveN Pistol, 50rnds for the P90, compared to 15rnds for a Beretta M9 and 30rnds for H&K MP5
• Nearly twice the effective range,
  • 25-50 meters for 9mm, and 50-100 meters for the 5.7x28mm when shot from pistols.
  • 75-100 meters for 9mm when shot from the H&K MP5, and 150 to 200 for the 5.7x28mm meters when shot from P90
• 5.7x28mm has a flatter trajectory, meaning it drops less then a 9mm over a given distance, requires less elevation adjustment, or “Hold Over”
• Easy to manufacture, used existing 5.56 (.224) caliber bullets

Given this performance, you’d have thought it would have been a home run for FN, but the Germans got involved.

4.6x30mm

Heckler and Kock (H&K) were nearly six years late to the party, unveiling their answer to the NATO request in 1999. This came in the form of the 4.6x30mm cartridge, chambered into a new submachine gun, the MP7. At this time the original NATO request was still open, and the design goals of the 4.6x30mm were identical to those of the 5.7x28mm.

H&K took a similar approach as FN. Utilizing a small caliber bullet moving at a high velocity. In this case the caliber is 4.6mm or .183 caliber bullet weighing between 26 to 28 grains. C.I.P lists maximum service pressure of ~58,000psi (4000 bar). Velocity testing is done in a 7in barrel, and typical muzzle velocities are between 2,350 and 2,400fps.

Like the 5.7x28mm the 4.6x30mm is a new case design and is not linked to any existing cartridge case. It is a more conventional design, the case body having a shallow taper that aids in extraction. It met all of NATO’s objectives, having many of the same characteristics as the 5.7×28 and exceeding the performance of the 9x19mm.

When the 4.6×30 was introduced H&K was also working on a companion pistol, the Universal Combat Pistol (UCP), however it never made it past prototype phase. So, the sole firearm chambered in 4.6x30mm was H&K’s MP7.

There is a question that needs to be answered, why 4.6mm (.183in) and not 4.3mm (.173cal). Afterall 17 Cal is an established bullet diameter, and while not as common as .224 caliber it is not rare. It’s hard to find documented reasons why H&K thought it was worth the trouble in moving to a .010 larger bullet.

We can look at it and try to guess, for example the small change increases the sectional density by 12%. This will make a given weight bullet slightly shorter, making it easier to stabilize. You would also be able to increase the diameter of tungsten carbide penetrator while still protecting the bore with a soft copper jacket. You may also get slightly better barrel life as the slightly larger bore would marginally reduce throat erosion.

No doubt that engineers at H&K conducted enough testing that showed the small diameter increase had a margin but meaningful impact on performance that justified going with a 4.6mm rather than a 4.3mm. However, I have not seen concrete evidence as to what the reasoning might be.

At the end of the day, it could be entirely financial on the part of H&K. As in no one makes a 4.6mm bullet, so you must purchase it from us. I see this as being a less likely justification as they sought and obtained NATO standardization. In order to get that they would lose the proprietary nature as NATO member countries would set up independent manufacturing plants to ensure supply.

NATO Trials

Between 2001 and 2003 NATO conducted an exhaustive pitting both the 4.6x30mm and the 5.7x28mm against the 9x19mm. There was a clear winner, FN’s 5.7x28mm generally outperformed both the 9x19mm and the 4.6x30mm. The 4.6x30mm performed better when tested at hard armor, such as helmets, at distances of under 25 meter. The MP7 had lower recoil and reduced muzzle flash when compared to the P90, however the hit probability favored the P90.

Testing was also conducted by the United States, France, and Germany. With similar conclusions reached by most of the testers. However, neither the 5.7x28mm or the 4.6x30mm was adopted by NATO at the conclusion of the 2003 trials. The reasoning was entirely political. The German’s objected.

The formal adoption by NATO of the 5.7x28mm and the 4.6x30mm cartridges via STANAG 4509 and STANAG 4820 respectively. Neither round was adopted as the official NATO PDW round. With the MP7, P90, and Five-seveN pistol having widespread adoption by western militaries, security forces and law enforcement. The NATO standardization allows both cartridges to enter the supply chain and maintains a level of uniformity between suppliers.

Mainstreaming of the 5.7x28mm

It took a long time for the 5.7x28mm to get some market penetration and become more than just a novelty cartridge in the civilian market. Keep in mind this was a cartridge that was introduced in 1993 right before Clinton’s Assault Weapons ban passed. The 1994 passage of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban effectively squashed the introduction of the FN P90 and the Five-SeveN Pistol until the law failed to get renewed in 2004.

In the meantime, FN continues to push sales in the defense industry with many western countries adopting both the P90 and the Five-seveN pistol. Due to the unique design of the P90, it became something of a pop culture icon in video games, on TV and in movies. Probably the most well-known example was its inclusion in the Stargate tv series (1997-2007). Early seasons of the show used the H&K MP 5 as the main weapon for the series protagonist, but they switched to the P90, undoubtedly because of its unique look fitting with the Sci-Fi genre of the series.

Likewise, the Five-seveN Pistol was featured in many movies, TV shows and games such as Call of Duty Modern Warfare. While it was a far more conventional design, it features some unique build characteristics like the extensive use of polymer in not just the grip but the slide also. This made the gun lighter than other conventional firearms, as well as boasting a larger 20 round flush fit magazine capacity, which was five or six rounds more than most 9x19m pistols.

The FN Five-seveN Pistol personally I think this gun is ugly as sin, but folks really like it
The mainstream adoption, and pop culture adoption of both the P90 and the Five-seveN pistol stand in stark contrast with H&K’s MP7. A rough estimate is that the P90 has between 120-140 media credits which is a total of titles in which the P90 makes an appearance, while the FN Five-seveN has a total of 60-80 media title credits. The H&K MP7 has a total of 75-105 media credits. You might ask why that matters.

American’s have largely shifted from a society that mentors the youth, into a society that allows media and tv to the bulk of the mentoring. Gone are the days when a youth’s first introduction to a firearm is with their dad on a shooting range. They are now far more likely to be introduced via video game, movie, or TV series. They then want to emulate their favorite characters, in some ways “relive” the moment’s they saw on TV. This is not meant to be a critique, rather just an observation. So if the firearm gets a ton of screen time, and there is a legal version that is reasonably affordable, there’s a good chance it’s going to end up in the hands of a new gun owner.

H&K is Just Different

H&K’s primary market has always been LEO and Military Contracts; the civilian market plays second fiddle. There is a saying in the firearms community “HK. Because you suck & we hate you”. This is not me throwing shade at H&K, I am a really big fan of their pistols. It is more the firearms community’s resentment that H&K is not forthcoming in providing civilian legal versions of their firearms.

The MP-7 has gained a lot of traction in many paramilitary groups in western countries. It features a more conventional design than the P90, making the switch from the MP5 to the MP7 easier than a switch to the P90. It is a more compact weapon, nearly an inch skinnier, a pound lighter when unloaded, and about three inches shorter. For this reason, it is often used by agencies like the Secret Service where the MP-7 can be concealed much easier than the P90.

In the 25 years since the 4.6x30mm introduction it did not get the same market share in the US civilian market as the 5.7x28mm, for two primary reason. The first was you could not get the ammo unless you were military or law enforcement, and secondly there was no civilian firearms chambered for the cartridge. This has begun to change a little bit in the last five years as CMMG introduced the first AR the “FourSix” chambered in 4.6×30, and high-end European manufacturer Anschutz introduced it as a chambering in their Model 1771 bolt action rifle. Finding 4.6x30mm ammunition used to be like looking for hens’ teeth, but much of that has changed in the last five years, with several companies including Hornady, Fiocchi, Sellier and Bellot each offering a load.

If you are looking for ammo, using AmmoSeek is a good tool. As of this writing Optics Planet, and Midways USA does carry it.

A brief word on reloadability

Both the 4.6×30 and the 5.7x28mm cartridges are reloadable. However, both are usually considered a bit challenging. The small case volume, and fast burn rate powders mean these cartridges are sensitive to small changes in case volume (i.e seating depth) and variations in powder charge. More so than pretty much any other “carbine/pistol” cartridge on the market.

It’s important to note that the necks on both cartridges are very thin, and can be crushed or deformed easily. So special care should be taken to gently flare the case mouth prior to bullet seating to prevent the neck and shoulder from collapsing rather than expanding to take the bullet.

Additionally with the 5.7x28mm, the brass is either lacquer coated, or nickel plated to lower the friction between the case and the chamber. This is needed as there is no taper to the body of the case to ease extraction, otherwise the extractor will rip through the rim. It is important that when cleaning the cases you don’t’ use abrasive or stainless-steel media on brass that has been lacquer coated.

Ultrasonic cleaning, or “part on part” tumbling (wet tumbling with no media) are good alternative methods when dealing with Lacquer coated cases. Brass that has been nickel plated is tougher and the coating will survive harsher cleaning methods, but the plating can still wear down after repeated cleaning cycles.

(As of 7/2025) 4.6mm (.183) bullets are hard to find. I have only found a few listings for factory seconds and no primary sources. Both Hornady and Fiocchi offer loaded ammunition.

What Firearms Are Available for the 4.6x30mm and the 5.7x28mm?

Over the last ten years we have seen an explosion in the firearms chambered in the 5.7x28mm become available to the United States Civilian Market.

Pistols

Semi Auto Carbines

FN PS90

5.7x28mm Bolt Action Rifles

The 2024 standardization of the 5.7x28mm by SAAMI has opened the doors to other larger firearm manufacturers introducing their own firearms chambered in 5.7x28mm. Expect the list to continue to grow over the next five or ten years. Now let’s compare this to the list of 4.6x30mm firearms available to the civilian market.

4.6x30mm Carbines

Tommy Built T7

4.6x30mm Bolt Actions

You might ask yourself why H&K doesn’t market the 4.6x30mm round and pushes for more firearms to be chambered in it. The answer is simple, they don’t make money from the ammunition. Anyone can manufacture the ammunition once the specifications are published. Since it is sold into countries that legally require C.I.P acceptance that information is widely available. H&K makes its money on firearms, and it sells those firearms primarily to Military/LEO.

If there was truly something special about the 4.6x30mm then there would have been a market push by other companies to manufacture firearms and ammunition that are utilized at ammo. That begs the next question…

Why did the 5.7x28mm Win Out to the 4.6x30mm?

Logistics

When the 4.6x30mm was introduced in 1999 the 5.7x28mm has been on the market for six years and had already been gaining market share in Military and LEO circles. In addition, the 5.7×28 was chambered in both the P90 carbine and the Five-seveN pistol. It was a known quantity, and has a proven track record, FN had six years to work out any bugs that existed at the time of launch. In addition, armories and armorers who had adopted the FN’s solution were reluctant to adopt another weapon system.

The MP7 was completely new and started from zero. H&K was developing a companion pistol at the time but later dropped it, the MP-7 arguably could serve both roles as sidearm and a primary, but this did not meet the original NATO Requirements. Had it not been the stubborn opposition by the German delegation, it is highly likely that the 4.6x30mm would have gone the way of the dodo.

The 5.7×28 utilized a 5.56 (.224) diameter bullet. This means any factory that is tooled up to produce 5.56 bullets could also produce a bullet designed for 5.7x28mm without a lengthy retooling of their machines. 4.6mm or .183 caliber, is an odd ball size. This required complete retooling of manufacturing to support the new bullet diameter. There is more to bullet design then just “a set of punches and dies”. There is a whole Research and Development cycle that goes along with it. It is not hyperbolic to state that the transition from producing 5.56 to 4.6mm would be in the millions of dollars.

Performance

This is where the “rubber meets the road”. How does the 5.7x28mm compare to the 4.6x30mm when it comes to performance? The first easy comparison to make is the muzzle energy. The energy contained within a projectile gives the best estimation of how much “work” it can perform when it hits something.

On the chart below I plotted a few different cartridges that are in the same or similar class.

All these cartridges are compared to one another on a rather frequent basis. Our comparison breaks down as follows:

• The 9x19mm and 45 ACP debate is a century old at this point.
  • For both the 9x19mm and the 45 ACP included both a standard load for the 9×19 and a +P load.
• The 5.7×28 is frequently compared to the 22 Winchester Magnum which is a rimfire cartridge
  • We included the data for both the 5.7x28mm being fired from the P90 with a 10.3in barrel, and from the FN Five -seveN with a 4.8in barrel.
• 5.7x28mm is frequently compared to the 22 Winchester Magnum Rimfire.
  • With the 22 WMR we included the SAAMI 24in test barrel velocity, as well as the velocity if fired from a Kel-tec PMR30 Pistol.
• 4.6x30mm as the counter part to the 5.7x28mm, most of the data is generated from the 7in barrel which is standard on the MP-7

What does the data tell us? Well, first off, the people who advocate for the 22 WMR being a better choice then the 5.7×28 in a pistol are clearly wrong. Secondly, we see that the the pistol fired 5.7x28mm lags behind a 9x19mm +P when fired from a pistol by about 25% or ~90ft-lbs. How much more work does that translate too? There are a lot of variables here, including bullet design, but if we try to compare apples to apples, the 9x19mm will penetrate 10% ballistics gel approximately 6in deeper on average then the 5.7x28mm.

Different missions require different tools. The 5.7x28mm SS190 is not generally available for purchase on the civilian market, and general 5.7x28mm defensive loads cannot penetrate soft body armor. 5.7x28mm offers only two real advantages over the 9x19mm in the civilian world, a flatter shooting trajectory, and longer “point blank range” and more ammo in the magazine.

The more interesting comparison is between the 5.7×28 to the 4.6x30mm. Both lightweight projectiles, both have higher velocities then the +P 9x19mm. However because the 4.6x30mm as a higher muzzle velocity, it develops more energy. Remember the equation for muzzle energy is

Where:
E = Energy in Foot-Pounds (ft-lbs)
w = bullet weight in grains
v = velocity in feet per second (fps)
450,240 is a conversion constant that gets us the answer in ft-lbs.

At the muzzle, the 4.6x30mm has more energy then the 5.7x28mm regardless if the 5.7x28mm was fired from a pistol or the P90. However if we run the ballistics, we find that the higher velocity combined with the lighter bullet means the energy bleeds off in the form of drag quicker. That trade off point is between 50-60 yards as shown in the table below.

You would think that the 9×19 124gr bullet would bleed off velocity much faster then either of its smaller brethren due to it being a large fat bullet, but it drops below supersonic quicker, and thus becomes more efficient. The little bit of energy it loses due to generating a shock wave is comparatively small. There is some truth to “Sometimes slow fat and ugly will do the job”.

While bullet energy is a good measurement of how much energy can be delivered to the target, it is not generally a good indication of how well it will penetrate armor. To penetrate armor you want high energy, but also high velocity combined with a small cross sectional area. 9x19mm is slow, fat, but has energy. It largely fails to penetrate soft armor. So to look at armor penetration the next table looks at the velocity.

When looking at the above table, it’s important to keep a few things in mind. First, typical firefights occur within 50 yards in an urban environment. (Doesn’t do you much good if you’re in a firefight that is atypical), and second, we are comparing velocity to generally assess armor penetration, and we are not adjusting for the differences in section density between the 5.68mm (.224cal) bullet and the 4.6mm (.183cal) bullet. Keeping both of those caveats in mind the 4.6x30mm has an advantage in distances within about 60 yards.

Now we are really getting into the minutiae of the comparison. It is in very specific cases where we might expect the 4.6x30mm to outperform the 5.7x28mm. I.E Armored target, within 60yards. If we compare the MP-7 to the P90, the muzzle energy is within 12% or about 45ft-lbs favoring the MP-7. The standard P90 50rnd magazine is larger than the MP-7 at 40rnds, so any difference between the two is more than made up for in additional follow up shots. Bullets passing through body armor do not expand like a conventional hollow point, they make neat holes. This makes terminal ballistics a bit easier to predict, it is more about “location, location, location” rather than a primary and secondary wound cavity, and hydrostatic shock. Either you’d put enough holes in the right places to stop the fight, or you haven’t.

Next we can look at bullet drop, which is useful for determining the “point blank range” or the range in which we can expect to hit the vital zone without having to make adjustments to the sight (i.e the apex of the trajectory and the bullet drop at target fall within a 6in circle never rising 3in above the bore, or dropping 3in below the bore.)

The “point blank range” for both the 4.6x30mm and the 5.7x28mm is nearly identical. You get out to about 75 yards if you assume that the vital zone is 6in. For a 9x19mm it is under 50yrds. Clearly NATO’s request of a “flatter” shooting round was clearly met.
Summing up Performance

A lot of people have run the comparison between 9x19mm and 5.7x28mm. Few have extended it out to the 4.6x30mm. Usually, the conclusions favor the 9x19mm in terms of performance if the evaluator is being honest about the data and is looking at it in the terms of civilian self-defense. Also worth noting, no one is making compact, sub compact, or micro pistols chambered in 5.7x28mm let alone 4.6x30mm. It needs the barrel length to achieve velocities where the round is effective.

Fans of the 45 ACP, which includes myself, are notably perturbed that I haven’t made any direct comparison to the 45 ACP. This is largely because it’s not a good comparison, the 45 ACP, and its fans, have largely been sidelined when it comes to calibers that military and LEO consider viable. Its performance on body armor is worse than 9x19mm, magazine capacity is less, firearms are larger and bulkier, it’s a more expensive round, and its terminal performance is close enough to 9x19mm.

If you came away thinking that the 9x19mm is looking like a clear winner, you are likely not alone. It’s important to note all the comparisons we made above with the assumption that the 9mm round was shot from a 4in SAAMI Test barrel. The moment we start shooting this from an 8.5in MP-5 with an 8.5in barrel length we are going to completely outclass the other two cartridges in all but armor penetration, magazine capacity, and weight.

It really is not hard to see why NATO was reluctant to really jump on either the 5.7x28mm or the 4.6x30mm. Especially when in 1991 the “Iron Curtain” fell and the driving factor for the adoption of a new PDW weapons system that could defeat soft armor literally fell apart overnight. The whole mission changed, and suddenly the investment was not worth it. The 9x19mm was the better choice when the mission went from protecting against a nation state like the USSR with a conventional army, to security missions protecting against unarmored terror cells. This relegated the 5.7x28m and the 4.6x30m to particularly niche missions.

For us as hobby shooters and ballisticians we can really look at the 4.6x30mm and the 5.7x28mm as virtual ballistic twins. So, if you are looking on choosing one over the other, for our purposes it’ll honestly almost always be the 5.7x28mm over the 4.6×30 unless you are like me and you just really like having an odd ball cartridge.
 
Final Thoughts

Personally, I enjoy taking a deep dive into cartridges and comparing across to see where the differences are, and if the differences are enough to give one cartridge the advantage over the other. In this case it is a comparison of two cartridges that have an interesting history that the market during a period of transition between the end of the Cold War and into the War on Terror. While the NATO request, driven by the perceived needs of rear echelon troops facing off against an armored Soviet threat, left us with two rather unique cartridges. While the original niche, vaporized with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, we have seen that both cartridges have survived and at least one, the 5.7x28mm, if gaining significant traction in the civilian market.

Where does it fall with in the market is up for heated debate. Perhaps it will become as heated as the 9mm vs 45 debate of the last century, but I see that as unlikely. 5.7x28mm is a novel cartridge that is fun in a carbine and pistol but does not ultimately outperform the 9x19mm unless we are comparing some very specific scenarios of which very, very few of us are likely to encounter. Even if we were, we would need to have access to the SS109 loads which, at this time, are not something that can be purchased.

Still, it piques my interest as a varmint cartridge. A flat shooting cartridge that is easily reloadable and can be chambering in a light and handy bolt action. It’s a more modern version of the 22 Hornet, without the snap of the 204 Ruger, and lacking the flash of the 17 Rem Fireball. While the 4.6 (.183) caliber bullets are hard to find, I almost would rather deal with that than have extraction issues because the lacquer coating on the 5.7×28 brass case has worn off.

Maybe we need to have a wildcat, neck the 4.6mm (.183 cal) down to take a .173 (4.3mm) caliber bullet it would exceed the performance of any of the .17 caliber rimfires, while being reloadable. You could load it with long heavy for caliber bullets and have something that gives you a velocity of around 2600-2800fps out of a short 10.5in barrel. Match that up with a suppressor, and it’s a light handy ranch gun that’s easy on the barrel life… now I’m just dreaming.

That’s all I got,
Jay

The Ballistic Assistant is a website dedicated to the art of handloading and shooting. We aim to share tips on reloading and shooting, inform others on what’s going on in the firearms community, and provide our opinion and thoughts on firearm related news and events. If you like what you read, we only ask that you subscribe and share with a friend or two.