Mark23 review and comparison to my FN 5-7

[eccvets]

I just picked up a brand new HK Mark23 last week and I wonder how it will compare to my 5-7. So far, my 5-7 has been the best gun I have ever fired. I can easily and regularly tag a IPSC human target out past 100 yards (~130 yards just about to be honest and at that range the target is getting pretty damn fuzzy and I have better then 20/20 vision!) without resting it on sandbags or any kind of rest. The trigger pull is so freaken smooth but I don't like the pre-travel (I though the trigger on a Mark23 would be super tight with a hair trigger) and there is no stop like the USP taticals I have looked at have to stop the trigger after the trigger lets go. My 5-7 is pretty much the same way with pre and over trigger travel but its not quite as smooth on the release. I think a .45acp will drop at that range quite a bit though... I can pratically tack drive anything under 25 yards with my 5-7 so I guess I'll have to test the Mark23's ability to do that.

After handling and getting to know my Mark23 a bit better. I am still loving the trigger and how butter smooth it is and I have noticed that although people say its a huge gun, I dont really think it is that bad. True it is nearly the same size as a desert eagle but I wear 7 1/2 surgical gloves (which is some what small to medium size) and I can easily get a good grip on it. It's about half the weight of the deagle I'd say, perhaps a bit less. Also, people say it's impossible to use it in DA mode unless you have super huge hands but I don't think so at all. I can easily manipulate and reach the trigger with even one hand. The trigger seems exactly where one would expect although I must admit, my right hand thumb cant reach the slide release unless I shift my hand postion to reach for it or use my left hand to release it. One odd thing about this gun is that you can't put the safety on unless the hammer is cocked back. If you dont have it cocked back, you have to leave it in DA mode. The decocker is some what odd as well as I have had to learn to put just a bit of pressure on the trigger or have your thumb on the hammer which is probally safer, release the decocker and then slowly let the trigger/hammer go to make it decock silently. I'm also some what disappointed that there is no slide hold but then again, I'm not really out to assassinate anyone... How cool would that feature be though just to be able to say it was made to do that

I've handled and shot a few Hk USPs before and none were really built as tough as this one is. Just racking the slide feels different which is some what odd. It looks like a usp but doesn't really feel like one. It is heafty but I wouldn't say its that heavy and would say it feels as heavy as any 1911 or any other full metal gun which is quite a bit smaller. I mean I have always sorta though of USPs as more plastic then metal but this one feels more metal then plastic some how. Sorta like it was made to last if that makes any sense...

[eccvets]

So I went to shoot the Mark23 today and it is by far the smoothest .45 I ever shot! It's weird but some how when you are actually shooting this gun with live ammo, the trigger feels so much more smooth. There is still a bit of pretravel but the release is so clean and crisp that it puts other usp's I have shot to shame! Recoil is also the lowest out of any .45 I have ever shoot and I have shot custom 1911's with compensators and what not. It feels nearly as light as my 5-7 is and is even less then some 9mm I have felt which really did surpise me pleasently and follow up shots were easily placed. It was shooting about 2 inchs to the right but I was able to put a few rounds thru the same hole off hand at 25 feet (I'm making my way up to 25 yards) which is pretty good for a stock gun which I have never shot before. Some how I forgot to shoot this gun from a rest so perhaps I'm just a bit off to the right. It's really is a fantastic gun though and it really is worth the trouble and money I put towards getting it. Two thumbs up. As for right now, I think my 5-7 is more accurate but I have had it longer and it was able to hit exactly where I wanted right out of the box, I might need to adjust the sites on the Mark23 a bit to get it where I want.

On another note, I got to play with a usp expert today and it felt so light and flimsy that I could hardly believe it was what it was. I mean the slide felt like it was made out of plastic compared to the Mark23 and the recoil spring was so light that it felt like an airsoft gun. Even the usp tatical felt better then the expert has a longer slide. The trigger had the lightest spring out of any HK I have ever handled though.

[Falcon.grease.monkey]

Welcome to the forum. I'm gald to hear that you like the mark 23. I have been breaking one in myself lately. I thought it was well worth the money. If you think the recoil on the Mark 23 is pleasant try the HK45 and 45c models. In my opinion they are in a class of their own as far as shooter comfort 45s. HKs recoil reduction system is excellent.

[Big Bore]

I also have both the Mark 23 and the Five-seveN, civilian USG SAO model, not the crazy trigger guard DAO LEO OSG model. IMO they are not even in the same ball game. The two-stages of take up on my 5.7 before release makes it the worst trigger I have by far on any handgun. And considering the 5.7 only gives .22 magnum rifle performance out of a handgun, well, YAWN!
It is an interesting pistol but I sure would not carry one for any type of serious use any more than I would carry a .22 magnum for any type of serious use. I feel the same way about my PS-90. Interesting concept, works, but performance wise with the ammo that is available to civilians, I'll take a 5.56 any day of the week and twice on Sunday. True the 5.7 has very little recoil, but so does a .22 LR and the .22 LR is a lot cheaper to shoot and will be a lot less destructive on small game animals.
To my way of thinking the most attractive thing about the 5.7 is it pisses the liberals off, as does the PS-90, which is exactly why I bought both. They are about the two most worthless firearms in my collection. The Mark 23, for myself, is pretty much useless also but at least it serves as a collection piece. I have short fingers and cannot fire the pistol in DA mode without adjusting the grip, but it is at least chambered in a serious round and is easily usable in SA mode, and both of the Mark 23s I have owned have had the heaviest trigger pulls of any HK pistol I have owned. I still don't think the Mark 23 trigger is anything to write home about and I still like the Tactical a lot better. For myself, the 5.7 does not inspire confidence. I want to do more than hit something, I want to stop it, and the 5.7 does not do it for me. The .45, well, that's my baby. I'll take big and slow over small and fast any day so when one points out the KE figures of the 5.7 all I see is a puny little bullet going relatively fast with not much more to offer. I cannot think of a single instance of where I would choose the 5.7 over anything else. For rabbit and squirrel hunting, I'll take a .22 LR, for CCW or woods walking, the .45 is going with me. For deer hunting and up, the 5.7 and the HKs are staying at home where they belong.
JMO of the pistols, YMMV.

[Falcon.grease.monkey]

The only thing wrong with the 5.7 round is possible over penetration. (and cost, at least in buffalo) The high capacity ability is great. And the round is accurate. In a defensive sitation though I tend to agree with bigbore. Give me a round with some surface area and proven stopping power! I wouldn't hesitate to defend myself or my home with that Mark 23. New york's low capacity magazine laws tend to lean people toward the .45 handguns anyway. I have always kinda wanted a five-seven but I would be willing to bet that it will be a front and center target of the anti-gun community. I can see ammo getting scarce and prices driving up.

[Hammerfist]

Unless you're being deployed overseas and have the freedom to bring your own arms, I don't see alot of purpose for the FN. The penetration is too great and the diameter too small for close range defense, while the cost of ammunition makes it expensive for a range gun. On the other hand, the MK23 doesn't really fit into a concealed carry application, so I can't speak to the OP's intentions. For my money, I would buy a PMR-30 from Keltec before the FN, purely for the ease of finding factory ammunition and cost difference.

[mew]

yea, I think comparing a Mk23 to an FN 5.7 is like comparing apples to apricots............. I don't even see any observation that could be compared. Am I missing something?????????

[Falcon.grease.monkey]

yea, I think comparing a Mk23 to an FN 5.7 is like comparing apples to apricots............. I don't even see any observation that could be compared. Am I missing something?????????

They are both handguns?!

[Landpimp]

the civy 40g 5.7 round will go thru a ballistic vest at 20ft......I was not really suprised

I love my 5.7,I carry is my pack(hidden part of) with 4 mags, thats alot of firepower to lay down fast and it wieghts little, no its not my carry gun but I do think it has a place

Over penetration??

Over penetration is not a problem the 5.7 suffers from. It is similar to a .223 round from a AR, in that tumbles when it hits matter. Brassfetcher tests demonstrate this well. I've yet to see any test that indicate the 5.7 penetrates any more than a typical 9mm round. Almost every police agency in the U.S. uses the .223 platform because of it's CQ qualities. The 5.7 offers similar qualities in a pistol...what's wrong with that?

[eccvets]

sheesh, calm down everyone. I didnt start this thread to start a caliber pissing match, Just saying how great the mark23 is. can we all agree on that at least?