ACP vs GAP?


PDA






tmette
December 28, 2006, 03:08 PM
I have decided that when I have enough money to cover it, the next purchase for me will be a nice Springfield XD .45. My only question is that I've seen them advertised on Springfield's website as either GAP or ACP. ACP is a common term for me and I figured that was the standard for all .45s. What is the GAP? Is it just like the ACP with a different name?

If you enjoyed reading about "ACP vs GAP?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RustyShackelford
December 28, 2006, 03:20 PM
the .45GAP was a new round put out by Glock for a series of pistols that are like the .45acp round. I do not know a lot about the .45GAP loads but I do not see it taking a huge segment of the US handgun market the way the .40S&W or even the .357SIG has over the last few years.

I do know that Chief Bratton/LAPD allows his sworn LEOs to carry Glock .45GAP pistols.

Rusty S

:cool:

Geronimo45
December 28, 2006, 03:21 PM
An autoloader in .45 is likely .45 ACP unless it's explicitly stated otherwise.
.45 GAP is a round Glock made to have a shorter case than .45 ACP with the same power - for putting in smaller handguns. The .45 is around 23mm long, while the GAP is about 19mm long (I think). Ballistics are similar/identical - the shorter GAP cartridge can be chambered in 9mm-sized compact pistols. May offer more capacity, too.

The-Fly
December 28, 2006, 03:26 PM
in the XD's, go with the ACP. ACP XD mags are 13 rounds, the gap is only 9.

jkomp316
December 28, 2006, 03:28 PM
45 ACP = :D

45 GAP = :mad:

carterbeauford
December 28, 2006, 03:31 PM
.45GAP is a fad and a solution to a problem that didn't exist.

Bazooka Joe71
December 28, 2006, 03:31 PM
45 ACP =:D

45 GAP = :mad:

GAP was a solution to something that was never a problem...."If, it ain't broke, don't fix it." Well they tried fixing it anyway.:D

carterbeauford
December 28, 2006, 03:43 PM
great minds apparently post at the same time ;)

tmette, .45ACP stands for .45 Automatic Colt Pistol, a proven cartridge that has been around for literally 100 years. .45GAP stands for .45 Glock Automatic Pistol. .45GAP seems to work well for its intended purpose, but I feel there is still no excuse not to go with .45ACP if you are considering a bigbore semi-auto handgun.

ugaarguy
December 28, 2006, 04:07 PM
As previously stated, the 45 GAP was developed by Glock. It's essentially a shortened 45 ACP case designed to fit their 9mm/40 S&W/357 SIG frames. Glock needed to do this because their 45 ACP frames are quite long and wide in the grip, making them too large for most folks to comfortably handle.

The 45 GAP likely would have done well until Springfield Armory Introduced their 45 ACP Chambered XD 45. On the XD 45 SA tweaked the magwell and magazine design to prodce a 13 + 1 capacity 45 ACP pistol only slightly larger (barely noticeable) in the grip than their 9mm/40 S&W/357 SIG frames. Because SA proved that standard frame guns can be adapted to 45 ACP with minimal increases in dimensions the 45 GAP round became superfluous.

As a side note the 40 S&W's origins are the 10mm auto, shortened to fit 9mm handgun frames that more people can comfortably handle.

XDKingslayer
December 28, 2006, 04:51 PM
I have an XD in .45GAP. The only thing stopping me from getting rid of it to get an XD in .45ACP is the fact that it shoots so darn good.

A lot of people say the GAP is headed for extinction. They've been saying that for over a year now. While Springfield may have shot the GAP in the foot by creating the XD-45, their new EMP will more than likely restore the GAPs usefulness.

I like the GAP round. I don't see the ACP having anything over the GAP. However, I do see the GAP having at least one thing over the ACP and that is it's thicker case webbing. Once more data is available, I think the GAP could become a reloaders dream. Some people will tell you how hard it is to get it or how much more expensive it is, but chances are, they don't have one. I pay the same amount for ACP and can find it just as readily as ACP.

But god forbid we mess with all-mighty .45ACP, expand our horizons, or move to new technology.

ugaarguy
December 28, 2006, 05:43 PM
I like the GAP round. I don't see the ACP having anything over the GAP. However, I do see the GAP having at least one thing over the ACP and that is it's thicker case webbing. Once more data is available, I think the GAP could become a reloaders dream. If you need thicker case webbing to handle hotter loads you can buy 45 Super brass. The 45 Super, based off the ACP, has more case volume to take advantage of the potential the thicker webbing gives you. Either way you'll need a heavier recoil spring for the hotter loads. If the GAP round uses faster burning powders it could be better in short bbl. applications. Much like a 9mm +P+ can reportedly edge the slower burning .357 SIG in sub 3" bbls. That could be really interesting, especially with SA's EMP you mention, and if others start buiding dedicated short action 1911s in 45 GAP as well. The round has potential, but the XD 45 in 45 ACP really did hurt the GAP in the service pistol market.
Some people will tell you how hard it is to get it or how much more expensive it is, but chances are, they don't have one. I pay the same amount for ACP and can find it just as readily as ACP. Sorry, but I cant walk into any gun shop in SW Idaho and get 45 GAP. Nor can I get the inexpensive Blazer Brass in 45 GAP at Wal-Mart like I can the 45 ACP when I'm not up to reloading. Sure, the 45 GAP may be getting easier to find and cheaper, but to say that it can found just as easily as .45 ACP is simply untrue.

Manedwolf
December 28, 2006, 05:56 PM
I thought it was more:

45 ACP = :D

45 GAP = :confused:

To me, it just seems like Gaston's ego couldn't accept using something that JMB had invented, so he had to IMPROVE on it...with something nobody asked for nor needed at all.

HorseSoldier
December 28, 2006, 07:13 PM
To me, it just seems like Gaston's ego couldn't accept using something that JMB had invented, so he had to IMPROVE on it...with something nobody asked for nor needed at all.

He doesn't seem to mind using Georg Luger's 9mm or .40 and .357, which are both actually named for Glock's competitors. Unless John Moses Browning called Gaston's mom fat or something before he died, I don't see how 45 ACP is a special problem. Even then that wouldn't explain why you can buy .380 ACP caliber Glocks in a lot of places, just not here in the US.

I think the problem is that Gaston just isn't innovative and has some real problems with accepting that his particular way to skin a cat just doesn't work for all cats. Gaston tried to just scale the G17 up to make the G21, and it just was not a home run -- some people like it, but a lot of people find the grip entirely too much to handle. Glock could have tried cutting the grip size down the same way H&K and even Taurus did (hint, hint -- metal mags), but in some entirely backwards way it was easier to build a whole new cartridge rather than admit that HK or anyone else was on the right track and Gaston on the wrong one when it came to dealing with 45 ACP.

carterbeauford
December 28, 2006, 07:14 PM
To me, it just seems like Gaston's ego couldn't accept using something that JMB had invented

Using those two names in the same sentence never turns out for the better.

And so it begins... :evil:

ugaarguy
December 28, 2006, 07:19 PM
but in some entirely backwards way it was easier to build a whole new cartridge rather than admit that HK or anyone else was on the right track and Gaston on the wrong one when it came to dealing with 45 ACP. "But my Glocks are 'Perfection'!" cried little Gaston, oblivious to the third revision of them that was getting ready to ship. :neener:

Redneck with a 40
December 28, 2006, 07:27 PM
Seems to me everyone is trying to make a name for themselves with caliber introductions. S&W did it with the 40, Sig and Federal did it with the 357 Sig, and now Gaston is trying to do it with the 45 GAP. In my opinion, the 45 GAP offers NOTHING over the 40 S&W, the bullet weights and performance are almost identical. The 45 GAP performance suffers with bullets over 200 grains, shorter case.

abarth
December 28, 2006, 07:28 PM
I think of .45 GAP as an update of the .45 ACP. With modern poweder you don't need the long case of the .45 acp to obtain the same power. With a shorter case of the GAP, a pistol can be design with much narrower grip. I seen review of a Springfield smaller 1911 (EMP?) that chamber GAP, but last I heard the .45 GAP EMP will not be in production any time soon. To me as a reloader and paper puncher I will continue to use ACP pistol unless GAP gains popularity.

Black Majik
December 28, 2006, 07:47 PM
Also, .45 GAP doesn't come in WWB Value packs ;)

Walkalong
December 28, 2006, 09:02 PM
13 + 1 capacity 45 ACP pistol only slightly larger (barely noticeable)


NOT

Not huge but definitively bigger. Advertising hype.

GRR
December 28, 2006, 09:12 PM
Don't suppose many here who neasay the GAP have ever fired one, much less own one. I carried a G23 for 6 years. Once I tried the GAP the 40 got moved to the safe. I now carry a G38 every day loaded with 230gr Winchester Rangers. Don't know where the comment above about the GAP performance suffering with bullets over 200gr came from. I've loaded and shot several thousand 230gr bullets through my 37 and 38.

Tried the 21 but just couldn't come to like it. Tried Sigs, HK's, XD's. I'm down to Glocks and 1911's now.

The G21SF may be what kills the GAP if its configured like the last rumor I heard. Basically a G37 with the grip extended front to back to fit the ACP round. 10 round mags plus an ambi mag release.

BTW the G37 holds 10 in the mag not 9.

possum
December 28, 2006, 09:17 PM
.45 GAP translates to mean to me, ammo price isn't worth it, and if i can't afford to shoot it and shoot it alot i don't want it. plus i don't beleive it will be around very long anyway, i have no need or desire at all for it.

10-Ring
December 28, 2006, 09:18 PM
Welcome to THR! What a great 1st thread ;)

Go w/ the ACP...:D

jwerlc
December 28, 2006, 09:31 PM
The 45 Long Colt? Any auto pistols chambered for it that I haven't heard of? Any Glock alterations for that?

Ian
December 28, 2006, 10:13 PM
Nope, .45 Colt is a rimmed cartridge, and those are generally not used in automatic pistols. The rim makes feeding tricky (but it's a great design for use in revolvers).

ugaarguy
December 28, 2006, 10:47 PM
13 + 1 capacity 45 ACP pistol only slightly larger (barely noticeable)


NOT

Not huge but definitively bigger. Advertising hype.
No need to yell. My opinion from handling an XD 45 side by side with an XD 9 is that the XD 45 feels slightly larger, noticeably, but just barely. The Difference between the XD's chief competitor, Glock's models 17 and 21 (or is it a 20 thats in 45 ACP? I always get those two backwards) is more significant, and very noticeable. Of course hand size varies, and I have fat, kinda short fingers, so perhaps the size difference in the Glocks feels more pronounced to me. I will look at the new slimmer G21 SF (hope I got the nomenclature right) and see how it compares when they get in stores. Gotta keep your options open. ;)

Geronimo45
December 28, 2006, 11:38 PM
"The 45 Long Colt? Any auto pistols chambered for it that I haven't heard of?"
That's what .45 ACP is - the ballistics of a .45 Long Colt in a rimless, shorter package. Newer powders allowed JMB to make a smaller cartridge that worked the same way. Even newer powders and better metallurgy allow .45 Long Colt/ACP power in an even shorter package - .45 GAP. Whether that shortness gives any major benefit is beyond my pay grade. Both cartridges are still rimless.

The-Fly
December 29, 2006, 12:06 AM
My apologies for the thread jack.

I own a G17 and G26, love em both. I've shot my brother's G21, and found the grip to be too big for my small hands. I rented a XD-45 a month ago, and loved it instantly. I now own a 5" XD-45. The grips on the XD-45 are a tad bit bigger then the G17, but not anywhere near as bad as the G21 is.

I think Springfield has hit a home run with the XD series.

Mjoilner1911
December 29, 2006, 01:14 AM
.45 GAP=.45 Glock Advertising Ploy

Babalouie
December 29, 2006, 03:05 PM
45 ACP= Robust, potent, virile

45 GAP= Flacid, short, diminutive

:evil:

mljdeckard
December 29, 2006, 03:17 PM
To be fair, saying the GAP is equivalent to a ACP isn't strictly accurate. A +P loaded GAP is roughly equal to a NORMAL PRESSURE ACP. If you load a ACP to +P pressure, it is more powerful than a GAP.

It's not that it's a terrible idea, it's just that it was already superfluous. Gaston had already made a great sub-compact pistol in ACP. Why was it necessary to solve a problem that had already been solved?

robertbank
December 29, 2006, 03:31 PM
Call me stupid if you want but the thickness of the .45GAP case is the same as the .45acp therefore how you get more capacity is beyond me as the only advantage you get is the GAP is a shorter round. The PARA P- 14 grip is hardly wider than a single stack grip and holds 14 rounds. I suppose the shorter length of the cartridge makes for a shorter, depth wise, grip but is can't be any narrower than a .45acp double stack. Like somebody said it is a solution to a non existant problem. I guess if you got real short fingers than you might get some advantage in the shorter depth of the grip.

Take Care

Bob

.357 magnum
December 29, 2006, 04:09 PM
First Welcome to THR! Excellent first post. Although I have nothing against the .45GAP The .45acp is the way to go. With a mag capacity of 13 rounds [+1 in the chamber] you just cannot beat the XD .45acp. Even in a city the size of Omaha, where ammo is easy to find. You can still get better deals on the .45acp. At Walmart I am still getting CCI Brass for under 10 a box, if you are not reloading. I really like the .45acp it is easy to shoot, a proven man-stopper with many ammo choices. The .45 GAP has the same ballistics so I am sure it is a great man-stopper, but a 13 round mag in .45acp is awesome!

The Best to You and Yours!

Frank

mpmarty
December 29, 2006, 04:30 PM
difference between factory loads in .45acp and .45gap. The big difference is how they arrive at the performance. In effect Gaston took a 350 V8 out and put in a supercharged four banger. Performance is the same, pressures are a whole different story. Average chamber pressures for acp runs around 17000 psi while to get the same performance out of the crippled midget 45 they ran the pressures up to 34000 psi. What this means to me is there is absolutely no margin for error in the gap and lots of room for safety in the acp. Does KA-BOOM sound like a familiar expression to you? Gasping Anemic Pistol would probably be my translation of gap.

benelli12
December 29, 2006, 10:08 PM
45 ACP=:cool:

45 GAP=:uhoh:

Redneck with a 40
December 29, 2006, 11:30 PM
GRR, you can keep your 45 GAP, I'll keep my 40.:neener:

Bullet
December 30, 2006, 12:20 AM
I have a Glock 17 - 9mm. It fits my hand perfect. When Glock came out with their 45 ACP model I wanted one until I picked it up (the grip is too big for me) same with the 10mm model. But when Glock came out with the Model 37 – 45 GAP it fit just right. Now I have a 45-caliber pistol. I also have a model 22 – 40 S&W. If you don’t like the 45 GAP that’s fine with me and if someone wants to purchase a Springfield XD .45 that’s fine too. 13 rounds of 45 ACP sounds pretty good. It seems to me that some people just want me to have what they have. Human nature I guess.

I was at the shooting range the other day when a guy there shooting a Springfield XD .45 let me pick it up. It fit my hand pretty good, it wasn’t much bigger than my Glock 45 GAP. If I ever purchase another handgun I think the Springfield XD .45 will be high on my list to consider.

tmette

If you have decided on purchasing a Springfield XD .45 I’d go with the 45 ACP model because it holds more rounds.

GRIZ22
December 30, 2006, 12:31 AM
Quote:

45GAP is a fad and a solution to a problem that didn't exist.
__________________

Agreed. To get grips a little smaller you are giving up ammo availability. Try to get 45 GAP at the local discount store. I own a couple of 45 ACP handguns already and wouldn't give up the ammo compatability buying a GAP.

I have a 21 and 30. My hands are normal size but my fingers are short and I don't find any problem with these guns. Yes the grips are large but not impossible. I looked a t the 30 and 36 at the same time and decided I'd rather have the larger capacity than the not that much smaller size.

Bullet
December 30, 2006, 12:52 AM
GRIZ22
Agreed. To get grips a little smaller you are giving up ammo availability. Try to get 45 GAP at the local discount store. I own a couple of 45 ACP handguns already and wouldn't give up the ammo compatability buying a GAP.

I load my own so this isnít a problem for me but if you donít it is worth considering. You guys that donít load your own are sure missing out.

History Prof
December 30, 2006, 01:26 AM
13 + 1 capacity 45 ACP pistol only slightly larger (barely noticeable)


NOT

Not huge but definitively bigger. Advertising hype.


True that the XD 45 is "definitively bigger" than the XD9/40/GAP. But "advertising hype?" The real comparison to be made is not to the others in the XD line, but to the Glock 21 and the USP45. And the XD45 is IMMENSELY smaller than the Glock, and noticebly smaller than the UPS. Further, the extra size is generally in the length of the XD45 grip, which is not too problematic for open carry or range shooting.

Bullet
December 30, 2006, 01:32 AM
mpmarty
Performance is the same, pressures are a whole different story. Average chamber pressures for acp runs around 17000 psi while to get the same performance out of the crippled midget 45 they ran the pressures up to 34000 psi.


I believe you are wrong about pressure.
Hodgdon lists for the 45 ACP 200gr bullet MAX pressure load at 1013fps.
Hodgdon also lists for 45 GAP 200gr bullet MAX pressure load at 1000 fps – 22,300 psi.

22,300 psi is not even close to what you listed 34,000 psi.

http://www.hodgdon.com/data/pistol/45glockauto.php

While the GAP does use higher pressure than the ACP in standard loads achieving almost identical bullet speeds. The pressure difference should not be a problem since 45 GAP uses stronger brass. With this said the 45 ACP can be loaded to +p pressures and achieve bullet speeds faster than the 45GAP.

hnm201
December 30, 2006, 01:49 AM
The .45 GAP sucks but the 10mm GAP tastes great and is less filling.

So. Cal Man
December 30, 2006, 02:10 AM
I was reading an article in a magazine about the .45 GAP vs. .45 ACP. The end result of the article pretty much stated that the GAP round is pushed to it's maximum limit as is and that there was not much further you could tweak the round. The test results showed the GAP, for the most part neck n' neck with standard .45 ACP defensive ammunition. The benefit of the .45 ACP was that if you selected +P or +P+ rounds or load your own to higher pressures, it would outperform the .45 GAP anywhere from 100-200 ft per second.

Walkalong
December 30, 2006, 09:12 AM
No need to yell. My opinion from handling an XD 45 side by side with an XD 9 is that the XD 45 feels slightly larger, noticeably, but just barely

Just get tired of advertising hype. My apologies. I still think it is quite a bit more than slightly larger. We must agree to disagree my friend. :)

Walkalong
December 30, 2006, 09:18 AM
True that the XD 45 is "definitively bigger" than the XD9/40/GAP. But "advertising hype?" The real comparison to be made is not to the others in the XD line, but to the Glock 21 and the USP45. And the XD45 is IMMENSELY smaller than the Glock, and noticebly smaller than the UPS. Further, the extra size is generally in the length of the XD45 grip, which is not too problematic for open carry or range shooting.


Yes, They were comparing it to their other XD. I will agree with your accessment of it compared to other pistols. Other large pistols I also don't want to carry concealed ,although as a duty pistol they would be great. I would tote the HK over the others as a duty pistol as long as a 1911 isn't considered an option. :)

Glockfan.45
December 30, 2006, 10:29 AM
I would stick to the ACP. ACP is proven and common, GAP is new and hard to find on the shelf.

Walkalong
December 30, 2006, 10:40 AM
But it's so cute. I still may get an XD in GAP just to reload for.
If the EMP comes out in .45 GAP it will be a must buy! :)

Bullet
December 31, 2006, 03:09 AM
This will give a comparison of 45 GAP - 45 ACP

http://www.miragetechnologies.net/45_gap_technical_brief.htm

mete
December 31, 2006, 03:29 AM
In any case the NY and PA state police are going to the 45GAP in new Glocks in the new year !! Sometimes people who make those decisions don't know too much. The 40 works very well , as well as the 45acp in my experience so the GAP isn't really needed.

Walkalong
December 31, 2006, 09:28 AM
Nice link Bullet. Thanks, I had not sen that one.

Glockfan.45
January 2, 2007, 11:15 AM
I have two uncles that work at Olin Brass (Winchester). They claim that Olin is now gearing up to really start cranking out the GAP. Looks like this round may be here to stay after all. Is it going to be the new .40S&W ?

Master Blaster
January 2, 2007, 11:26 AM
Well lets see, similar performance, with a smaller case and higher pressure, the pistol is smaller and the chamber walls are thinner in a Gap pistol, but the pressure is higher its loaded to .45 acp +p pressure. That also means the round is more sensitive to setback which may raise the pressures to KABOOM level.

.45 GAP also can't take the heavier rounds some like to use like the 230, and 255 grainers 200 grains is max.

The pistols will wear out faster and have harsher recoil than a .45 acp pistol.

No thanks, I will stick to .45 acp.

I predict that when these police departments start issueing the pistol we will start to hear bout the KABOOMS just like with the .40 S&W. Officer friendly will rechamber the same round a few times setting the bullet back, and then raising the pressure beyond what the pistol can handle. This will be more of a problem than with the .40 S&W because the bullets are not as long and will have less case tension holding them.


This also means that I will have more crap to throw away in the range brass I buy.

HorseSoldier
January 2, 2007, 11:27 AM
In any case the NY and PA state police are going to the 45GAP in new Glocks in the new year !!

The Georgia State Patrol is doing the same thing, I believe.

robertbank
January 2, 2007, 12:43 PM
Well if nothing else you will be able to cut down your .45acp cases that split or crack at the mouth and get to use them in your .45GAP. Seems to me a cartridge that will generate a lot of new sales for gun manufacturers at the expense of taxpayers. I will stick to the .45acp. Lower pressures and I have the other two cartridges ie 9MM and .40cal covered already.

Take Care

Bob

PedalBiker
January 2, 2007, 12:45 PM
http://www.handgunsmag.com/gap_1118/

Winchester makes 230 g GAP ammo.

I bought a .260 rem barrel for my savage a while back. There's no reason for that cartridge either (it's so similar to a .257 Improved or a .25-06 or a 7mm-08 or a...)

The big drawback to the 45 GAP is that it has no parent case you can use for brass if it fails to catch on. I also wonder at the feeding reliability of such a short fat case.

I still like the idea, though. I don't own a pistol in either, but if I were buying a polymer pistol I'd give the GAP serious consideration. I don't like any of the plastic ACPs that I've seen so far except for the P345.

XDKingslayer
January 2, 2007, 01:27 PM
To be fair, saying the GAP is equivalent to a ACP isn't strictly accurate. A +P loaded GAP is roughly equal to a NORMAL PRESSURE ACP. If you load a ACP to +P pressure, it is more powerful than a GAP.

Another one that knows nothing about .45 GAP...

First and foremost, there is no .45GAP +P. The .45GAP is loaded to it's maximum pressure in it's normal form. The .45GAP's maximum average pressure is about 23,000 PSI, or equal to a .45ACP +P.

So, you're completely wrong. Your statement should be a +P ACP is roughly equal to a NORMAL PRESSURE GAP.

So, pressure wise, a normal ACP is weaker than a normal pressure GAP.

Well lets see, similar performance, with a smaller case and higher pressure, the pistol is smaller and the chamber walls are thinner in a Gap pistol, but the pressure is higher its loaded to .45 acp +p pressure. That also means the round is more sensitive to setback which may raise the pressures to KABOOM level.

.45 GAP also can't take the heavier rounds some like to use like the 230, and 255 grainers 200 grains is max.

The pistols will wear out faster and have harsher recoil than a .45 acp pistol.

Another one...

You can get 230 grain .45GAP from numberous manufacturers. True you can't get 255, but the max is NOT 200 gr. As for the rest of your statements I could go on all day. Considering that there are really only 2 or 3 GAP models out, could you please tell me which one uses thinner chamber walls? And please link to something concrete, not your opinion which seems to be skewing the truth.

The pistols will wear out faster and have a harsher recoil? Again, which models are you shooting in which to compare?

Well if nothing else you will be able to cut down your .45acp cases that split or crack at the mouth and get to use them in your .45GAP.

Would you people please read up. There are so many differences between the ACP and GAP cases that you simply can't cut down the case. The extractor angle is different (by 10 degrees) and it uses a small primer where the ACP uses a large primer. Cutting down an ACP case will more than likely cause an overpressure.

I can go on all day on this stuff. I love it when people bring up a .45 GAP thread because you can instantly find which members of THR talk out their butts because their head doesn't know any better.

Somebody already posted a good link to GAP information. Please read it before you post your ignorant responces. Maybe the GAP would become a little more popular if you people actually knew what you were talking about.

Walkalong
January 2, 2007, 01:40 PM
D*** xdkingslayer. Although I agree. :)

KimberTLE.45
January 2, 2007, 02:06 PM
Gap Sucks... IMO But I was told the opposite of what XDkingslayer was saying by my local gunsmith. GAP is weaker all the way around.

yhtomit
January 2, 2007, 02:09 PM
(That's *me* *me* *me*! :))

There are jillions of calibers out there, and all of them were created for some reason -- that is, "it seemed like a good idea at the time."

.45GAP's "good idea" isn't a hard one to comprehend, and everyone knows it -- ballistics of a .45ACP in a case short enough to make feasible smaller grips than those found on (up to then) .45 pistols. ("Good idea" #2 of course, is the thought on the part of Glock and Speer that they'd benefit if the cartridge caught on.)

So, I find nothing wrong with the cartridge conceptually -- and I'd be content with it as my main one, in fact, if not for two things:

a) Common ammo is good. It's a bit like why I have an iPod despite some objections (proprietary battery, opaque file organization*); the network effects are tremendous. Similarly with ammo; Yes, you can reload (most) cartridges, but by sticking with an ammo type that's 102 years old and still well-liked, I think that I've upped my odds I'll have ready, affordable access to that same ammo in 20 or 50 years. That way I don't need to pass on to my (hypothetical) grandchildren "This 20th century gun and this chest full of reloading equipment and hoarded ingredients."

Also, though I intend to start soon, I don't yet do *any* reloading -- just saving brass, so far! Even with the idea of keeping to commonly available ammo types, it's still easy to fall into collecting quite a few kinds; so far, I'm holding at .22, 9mm, 12ga and .45, but that's already 4, and a .223 is sounding good. (And one day a 50BMG?) But each of these is distinct enough from the others, and at least slightly cheaper than the next-nearest-most-similar cousin, that I'm not tempted to expand into 9mm Makarov, or .357sig, or 17HMR, or or or ... guns are an expensive hobby, so I have to budget according to money I can rationalize "doesn't get spent on beer or cigarettes" -- not that it would anyhow, in my case.

(Vicissitudes of fortune:If 45GAP of today had been named 45ACP in 1905, and one metric planetful of guns had been designed around it, then great, it would probably be my pick. When the more flexible but longer 45EXT (Extended -- looks and tastes just like today's 45ACP ;)) was introduced in this alternate reality, I'd most likely shun it on the basis that the differences aren't enough to give up a smaller grip and easy ammo availability.)

b) Though my hands are small for an adult man's (genetic curse), .45 pistols I've handled just haven't been that bad. A Desert Eagle in 50AE, *that's* too big ;). It says something about the XD45 that everyone's naming it as the reason that .45GAP suddenly seems like less of a breakthrough than advertised, because 14 rounds fit into a very handleable package. I'll chime in with another vote on that idea right now! (However, it's a bit slippery, since the GAP's size means that makers can just create an even *smaller* pistol equivalent; Springfield themselves have done this with the EMP, smaller than the .45ACP chambered Micro 1911, and, since they're supporting the GAP cartridge in one line, I'd be surprised if they didn't soon come out with an XD45GAP.) Upshot is that I agree with the refrain that the .45GAP is a "solution for a problem that doesn't exist" -- for me :) For folks with even smaller hands than me, though, I get it, and applaud. Just don't want it for myself.

EDIT: As XDKingslayer points out, there *is* an XD in .45GAP, which I had wiped from my gloriously wrinkle-free brain. Somewhere, I have the poster that shows it, too. D'oh! Maybe I'd forgotten it because I haven't seen one for sale in the past 18 months ;)

timothy

* It's off topic in this forum except as a passing mention, so I don't get deeply into it, but here's how I resolved one of my objections to the iPod: http://tinyurl.com/ybo5bw

XDKingslayer
January 2, 2007, 02:10 PM
Gap Sucks... IMO But I was told the opposite of what XDkingslayer was saying by my local gunsmith. GAP is weaker all the way around.

And being a gunsmith doesn't make him any less an idiot. You can see a dozen people in this thread that don't know squat about that round, you think the title "Gunsmith" makes him any better?

I'd be surprised if they didn't soon come out with an XD45GAP.)

They've had one out for at least 2 years now. I've had mine for a year. They created it before the ACP XD.

D*** xdkingslayer. Although I agree.

I know I'm harsh, but each and every one of them deserve it, and more. How can you possibly contribute to someone's decision if you don't know a freakin thing about it? And to make it worse you have someone relying on a gunsmith's word simply because he's a gun smith. God forbid they read a link or two, we'll just believe the gunsmith because he knows everything by default.

This is exactly why all these rounds we debate about which is next to die, are in line to die. Most of them are great performers, it's just that ignorance is bliss and we'd rather not know anything new or different.

yhtomit
January 2, 2007, 02:38 PM
I should have remembered / realized (or at least checked!) about the 45GAP in XD; I blanked on that. My point on it doesn't change, but I'm happy for the correction!

timothy

Walkalong
January 2, 2007, 02:45 PM
http://www.speer-bullets.com/pdf/45GAP%20Tech%20Brief_150dpi.pdf

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/gap-v-auto.html

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/petej/

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/45gap.html

This last one gives a good pic and description of the .45 GAP case.

Just for informations sake.

XDKingslayer
January 2, 2007, 03:31 PM
I should have remembered / realized (or at least checked!) about the 45GAP in XD; I blanked on that. My point on it doesn't change, but I'm happy for the correction!

yhtomit, I apologize, I made it seem like I was lumping you in with the other .45GAP "experts". That wasn't my intention. I should have answered you with a seperate post.

Yours was an honest mistake not one coming from ignorance and prejudice.

ugaarguy
January 2, 2007, 06:58 PM
Seems to me a cartridge that will generate a lot of new sales for gun manufacturers at the expense of taxpayers.

Mr. Bank, it won't cost the taxpayers anymore than the same guns in current chamberings. LE Agencies trade old pistols and update to new ones on a regular interval. Even if the new pistol is exactly the same as the old one they update on a regular basis. Old magazines are also frequently traded in. A caliber change just means a different caliber for the new guns they're already getting.

Then taxpayers like myself who like firearms will get a good deal on a used pistol when they go thru CDNN or one of the other brokers and buy the guns that were traded in. :evil:

5Wire
January 2, 2007, 08:29 PM
there is still no excuse not to go with .45ACP if you are considering a bigbore semi-auto handgun.
I agree with that. It seems to me the GAP allows the overall length of a gun to be shorter but not narrower, all other things being equal. The Standard G39 in .45 GAP (6+1rds) is 6.25 in x 4.17, about the same size as the Springfield XD9802 in .40 S&W (9+1 Rds). The Kimber Ultra Carry II in .45 ACP (7+1 Rds.) is slightly larger at 6.8 in x 4.75. Para Ordnance Carry LDA in .45 ACP (6+1 Rds) is 6.5 in x 4.75 and double stack single action Warthog in .45 ACP (10+1 Rds.). Not much difference in size or power among the bunch. Thick or thin is the main distinction. No advantage to .45 GAP other than free publicity coming from the "G" the way "C" might have boosted Colt.

$0.02

Greg8098
January 2, 2007, 09:09 PM
The G.A.P round seems completely useless to me. Of all the modern rounds, I would have to say that this is one that I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in owning, ( even if it was free :neener: ).

Walkalong
January 2, 2007, 10:22 PM
If the EMP comes out in .45 GAP it will be a must buy!

I still would get one no matter how "useless" the cartrige is. :)

JohnKSa
January 2, 2007, 10:38 PM
Maybe the GAP would become a little more popular if you people actually knew what you were talking about.It does seem that there are a good number of uninformed people who are determined to share their lack of knowledge on this particular topic.

Surprising since this is such a simple subject and the information is so readily available.

The .45GAP lets you put standard pressure .45ACP performance into a 9mm/.40 sized frame because it has a shorter case length than the .45ACP.

.45GAP velocity is the same as (or very slightly higher than) .45ACP standard pressure and this is achieved by loading the .45GAP to slightly higher pressures than the .45ACP. .45GAP pressures are identical to .45ACP +P pressures.

There is no .45GAP +P, and .45ACP +P offers higher velocity than the GAP is capable of.

Basically, the .45GAP is to the .45ACP as the .40S&W was to the 10mm--a shorter cartridge designed to fit into a 9mm sized frame while using the same bullet diameter as the longer cartridge--BUT with a couple of important differences:

1. The .45GAP duplicates.45ACP performance while the .40S&W has considerably less power potential than the 10mm.
2. The .45GAP is slightly higher pressure than the .45ACP while the .40S&W is slightly lower pressure than the 10mm.

Not surprisingly, there was a good amount of the same kind of vitriol printed against the .40S&W when it first came out. It would have been much worse had the 10mm been as popular and as firmly entrenched as the .45ACP.

Stachie
January 3, 2007, 03:24 AM
The GAP round may be a nice cartridge, but there is nothing wrong with the good old ACP!

Master Blaster
January 3, 2007, 02:49 PM
Another one...

You can get 230 grain .45GAP from numberous manufacturers. True you can't get 255, but the max is NOT 200 gr. As for the rest of your statements I could go on all day. Considering that there are really only 2 or 3 GAP models out, could you please tell me which one uses thinner chamber walls? And please link to something concrete, not your opinion which seems to be skewing the truth.

The pistols will wear out faster and have a harsher recoil? Again, which models are you shooting in which to compare

How many Numberous manufacturers are making 230 grain?? It appears Speer is not, so that leaves Winchester/Olin???

True I am not a .45 Gap expert, so how many pistols in .45GAP do you own and how many tens of thousands of rounds have you fired out of them to assess their durability????? Could you mesure the thickness of the chamber wall on one of those .45 GAP glocks you own???, or on your XD and compare it to the same model in ACP??

If the gun is smaller and the round runs at higher pressure it tends to have a shorter life and more felt recoil, thats my experience in 30+ years of shooting, and 10 years of reloading.

Since I have 8 .45 acp pistols, and I shoot and reload about 10,000 rounds of .45 acp per year, I cant see running out and buying a new caliber that only offers me the advantage of higher pressure for the same performance in a very slightly smaller pistol.

As far as the setback issue goes, we will see.

It will be more CRAP that I have to throw out in my range brass, that is a fact, since I dont plan to reload for or own a .45 GAP pistol.

Please dont take offense at my post.

Thanks

Walkalong
January 3, 2007, 03:02 PM
I love :) the .45 ACP, but I will own a .45 GAP before it is all over, just for fun.

XDKingslayer
January 3, 2007, 07:38 PM
How many Numberous manufacturers are making 230 grain?? It appears Speer is not, so that leaves Winchester/Olin???

Federal and Remington just to name a few...
Here: http://www.midwayusa.com/ebrowse.exe/browse?TabID=3&Categoryid=9851&categorystring=653***691***

True I am not a .45 Gap expert, so how many pistols in .45GAP do you own and how many tens of thousands of rounds have you fired out of them to assess their durability????? Could you mesure the thickness of the chamber wall on one of those .45 GAP glocks you own???, or on your XD and compare it to the same model in ACP??

It's obvious you're not an expert. But at least I can back up the things I spew forth. Yes, I own an XD in .45GAP with 8000 rounds through it. That appears to be one more than you so that puts me just a tad bit ahead of you in experience. If you'd like, I CAN measure the thickness of an XD GAP and an XD ACP, can you? No, you can't and that means you have absolutely no basis to support your opinion. And that's exactly what you have. Opinion.

Besides, do you honestly think gun makers would use a thinner chamber wall on something with higher pressures? Please apply a little common sense here.

If the gun is smaller and the round runs at higher pressure it tends to have a shorter life and more felt recoil, thats my experience in 30+ years of shooting, and 10 years of reloading.

My GAP is not smaller than an ACP XD. Seeing as that is the case how can you possibly say what you said with any accuracy? You simply can't. You have 30+ years of shooting and 10 years of reloading. How many of that were with .45GAP? Yep. None. Zip. Zilch. So you have, again, nothing more than unsupported opinion as you don't own one.

Since I have 8 .45 acp pistols, and I shoot and reload about 10,000 rounds of .45 acp per year, I cant see running out and buying a new caliber that only offers me the advantage of higher pressure for the same performance in a very slightly smaller pistol.

Right. It would make no sense to use a caliber that can utilize half the equipment you already have (the GAP). Instead let's get a comletely different caliber so you have to buy ALL new dies. That makes about as much sense as everything else you've said so far. At least your consistant.

But at least the truth comes out in this paragraph. You own 8 ACP firearms. You're exactly what I thought. You're one of the ones that can't see past the letters ACP, and if it doesn't say ACP then it's automatically junk and you'll refuse to learn anything about it.

As far as the setback issue goes, we will see.

It will be more CRAP that I have to throw out in my range brass, that is a fact, since I dont plan to reload for or own a .45 GAP pistol.

Please dont take offense at my post.

The only thing I take offence to is the fact that you put down a round that you know nothing about when someone is trying to make a decision on that round. You aren't being helpful to the guy at all and nothing you've put up has made it past the BS opinion meter yet.

Thanks

You're welcome. Thanks for playing.

Redhat
January 3, 2007, 10:05 PM
You're right, let's answer the man's question...is the GAP like the ACP with a different name?

NO

by the way, are you sure the XD 45GAP is the same size as the XD45 ACP?

Master Blaster
January 4, 2007, 09:28 AM
But at least the truth comes out in this paragraph. You own 8 ACP firearms. You're exactly what I thought. You're one of the ones that can't see past the letters ACP, and if it doesn't say ACP then it's automatically junk and you'll refuse to learn anything about it.


Educate me why is it better???? Will it knock the bowling pins down better?? will it increase my Bullseye scores? If a I shoot a badguy will it kill him faster than an ACP?? Will it save me money on cases, primers, bullets???

The only advantage I have heard is that you can get it in a slightly smaller gun, or possibly have one or two more rounds in the same size gun.

The big disadvantage is that it will crap up my range brass.:neener:

As far as messing up folks decision process with my ignorance goes, I would recommend a .45 acp over a gap to a newbie any day of the week.

Of course I am one of those strange people who owned a .40 S&W gun and got rid of it because I couldnt see any advantage of the .40S&W over a .45 ACP for me. IMHO the .40 S&W does have an advantage over .45 acp for some people, in that you can get more rounds into a smaller gun, and acheive similar performance in stopping power.

robertbank
January 4, 2007, 10:51 AM
Several have suggested you can get more .45gap in a similar size pistol. Please enlighten me on how that is achieved given the round is the same diameter as the .45acp. I am sure the .45GAP will fill a niche market. Not at all sure what niche that is but then I am not likely ever to have a reason or need for such a gun.

Take Care

Bob

XDKingslayer
January 4, 2007, 01:23 PM
Educate me why is it better????

No, just educate you period.

I haven't said the GAP is better than the ACP. I've just simply corrected your ignorant and incorrect replies as to why the GAP is inferior.

I'm also not recommending a GAP over the ACP. Again, just correcting the "experts" so the OP can make an informed, educated decision instead of one filled with ignoranant and prejudiced input.

I could care less what he chooses in the end, but let's at least give him factual information. The only thing factual I've seen from you is that it will mess up your range brass.

Several have suggested you can get more .45gap in a similar size pistol. Please enlighten me on how that is achieved given the round is the same diameter as the .45acp. I am sure the .45GAP will fill a niche market. Not at all sure what niche that is but then I am not likely ever to have a reason or need for such a gun.

No idea, as I wasn't one of them. If I recall it was Springfield Arms that originally stated this but I haven't heard or seen that from them since the XD-45 which strangely enough holds more rounds than the .45GAP XD...I think it originally started before the birth of their EMP which has been in the works for a while now and just now starting to hit shelves in 9mm.

Purely speculation here, but I think if Springfield chambers the EMP in .45 GAP it will really help the GAP take off. Others are going to copy that miniature 1911 design if it's popular and staying .45GAP instead of going ACP will keep grip size from getting larger. The EMP was supposed to be designed around the GAP, why it came out in 9mm first, I don't know. I'm guessing it's a marketing move more than a design issue. If SA doesn't chamber the EMP in .45 GAP then the GAP will die a slow death in under 10 years. The only people with GAP firearms are Glock and SA and neither are very popular.

by the way, are you sure the XD 45GAP is the same size as the XD45 ACP?

Roughly, yes. There are differences in the two but they are minute and if I set them side by side 10 feet apart you wouldn't be able to tell me which is which.

ugaarguy
January 4, 2007, 02:07 PM
by the way, are you sure the XD 45GAP is the same size as the XD45 ACP?
Roughly, yes. There are differences in the two but they are minute and if I set them side by side 10 feet apart you wouldn't be able to tell me which is which.

XDKingSlayer, you rant on and on about others being misinformed, and spewing bad info. First you say your XD in 45 GAP is the same size as an XD in 45 ACP, but then you abmit that it actually is smaller when pressed on the issue. Talk about spewing bad info.

Now, I agree that the in the XD platform the 45 ACP model's frame dimensions being ever so slightly larger than those of the 9mm/40 S&W/357 SIG/45 GAP frame that it is insignificant for the majority of handgun owners. Which is exactly the point several other folks have tried to make - you don't need a new round. When good engineering is applied the weapon can use the 45 ACP with only insignificant (to most shooters) increases in frame dimensions. Springfield engineered a better frame for the XD in 45 ACP. In contrast, Glock decided to invent a new round. Could their engineers not figure out how to pull off what was done on the XD? They did they just not want to? Would doing so be an admission that the Americans & Croations behind the XD 45 ACP had made a better pistol than their "Glock. Perfection." model 21? Will the new 4th Gen G21 SF rival the XD 45 ACP in size & capacity? Did Glock just have caliber name envy of the .357 SIG & 40 S&W, and want to invent a new caliber to stick their name on? Would a .45 round on their existing small (9mm, etc.) frames keep production costs down, while leaving the G20 and G21 large frames in the large handed niche they currently fill? Who knows.

As for the EMP, will it really be that much smaller than a standard 1911 with an extreme grip reduction done by a top gunsmith? Will the EMP which uses some proprietary parts keep some of the 1911 crowd away?

I'm not debating whether the GAP round is good or bad. I just have my doubts as to it's necessity outside of a very small niche market. Had SA not pulled off what they did with the XD 45 ACP we'd likely not be having this conversation.

Lastly, thank you for providing all the links and additional info that have better informed us on the particulars of the 45 GAP round.

robertbank
January 4, 2007, 02:53 PM
I believe Para is now making a 1911 model for this cartridge. I will be surprised frankly if the cartridge ever gets much of a following or even lasts but it wouldn't be the first time I was wrong.

Take Care

Bob

mete
January 4, 2007, 03:05 PM
BTW, a reminder, originally there were two loads for the 45acp - 230 gr military and 200 gr civilian .So there's nothing strange about a 200 gr 45 load whether it be in acp or GAP . I have never found any difference shooting live things , between the 40S&W and the 45 acp !! Many will agree. Therefore the GAP is a moot point but brought about by those who hold the 45 as a 'miracle' round .

mdao
January 4, 2007, 03:09 PM
Springfield engineered a better frame for the XD in 45 ACP. In contrast, Glock decided to invent a new round. Could their engineers not figure out how to pull off what was done on the XD? They did they just not want to? Would doing so be an admission that the Americans & Croations behind the XD 45 ACP had made a better pistol than their "Glock. Perfection." model 21?

I the reason is efficiency. Why bother designing two new frames (one for 9mm/.40S&W, one for .45 ACP) each time you revamp your product when you can design one frame that will handle 9mm, .40S&W, and .45 GAP? Considering Glock's large market penetration and the fact that most shooters are not reloaders, the .45 GAP makes lots of sense. I'm surprised that more companies haven't followed suit.

/Still thinks Glock would have had more market success if they made it .50 GAP instead of .45 GAP.

ugaarguy
January 4, 2007, 03:39 PM
Mdao, you misquote me. At the end of the paragraph you partially quote I did say Would a .45 round on their existing small (9mm, etc.) frames keep production costs down, while leaving the G20 and G21 large frames in the large handed niche they currently fill? I suspected efficiency, worded as lower production cost, might be a reason. I should clarify, that I meant overall cost, but said production cost, as design and tooling are a part of the cost of producing anything. From that perspective it does make sense. Forgive my less than perfect expression of that thought.

Caliber name envy is a side benefit. I can only imagine that a man arrogant enough to call his pistol perfection - with it's 3rd revision soon to be released - must envy that two of his main competitors, S&W and SIG, had their names on a cartride headstamp and he did not. However, that is my opinion. Ergo, it bears no weight in a discussion of the 45 GAP's relevance and practicality.

XDKingslayer
January 4, 2007, 04:02 PM
XDKingSlayer, you rant on and on about others being misinformed, and spewing bad info. First you say your XD in 45 GAP is the same size as an XD in 45 ACP, but then you abmit that it actually is smaller when pressed on the issue. Talk about spewing bad info.

Where did I say it was smaller? You even quoted me...

Now, in your defence, I did change my wording in that area. I did say that the ACP was bigger in the magwell. If you're hanging me out to dry over that you need a new hobby. The ACP is doublestack, the GAP is single so the magwell being bigger is kinda a no brainer.

Now, I agree that the in the XD platform the 45 ACP model's frame dimensions being ever so slightly larger than those of the 9mm/40 S&W/357 SIG/45 GAP frame that it is insignificant for the majority of handgun owners. Which is exactly the point several other folks have tried to make - you don't need a new round. When good engineering is applied the weapon can use the 45 ACP with only insignificant (to most shooters) increases in frame dimensions. Springfield engineered a better frame for the XD in 45 ACP. In contrast, Glock decided to invent a new round. Could their engineers not figure out how to pull off what was done on the XD? They did they just not want to? Would doing so be an admission that the Americans & Croations behind the XD 45 ACP had made a better pistol than their "Glock. Perfection." model 21? Will the new 4th Gen G21 SF rival the XD 45 ACP in size & capacity? Did Glock just have caliber name envy of the .357 SIG & 40 S&W, and want to invent a new caliber to stick their name on? Would a .45 round on their existing small (9mm, etc.) frames keep production costs down, while leaving the G20 and G21 large frames in the large handed niche they currently fill? Who knows.

What exactly is your point here? Are you questioning why these companies wasted their time in creating GAP chamered pistols when they could have just invested the time and money into ACP chambered pistols? I haven't the foggiest. In linear terms, it doesn't make sense to me. If I was a gun maker I wouldn't have bothered with the GAP.

As for the EMP, will it really be that much smaller than a standard 1911 with an extreme grip reduction done by a top gunsmith? Will the EMP which uses some proprietary parts keep some of the 1911 crowd away?

I don't know if the EMP will be smaller in the grip than a 1911 with a reduction, but there are other places that the EMP appeared to be smaller. It was in overall length and I believe maybe a tad in width, I'm not sure, and the trigger guard area was smaller. Springfield has a layover graphic on their site that shows the difference. It appears to a shrunk down 1911 in just about every area.

Going on that it appears that the EMP is going to have a lot of proprietary pieces. I don't know if simple things like hammers, safeties, triggers and sights are going be drop in like a normal 1911. Going by nothing than the graphic on SA's site, I don't think so.

Will that scare off 1911 fans. Yep. But most of them are going to shy away from it simply because it's not a true 1911, heck they shy away from honest 1911s simply because it has Taurus stamped on the barrel. Those that can think outside the John Moses Browning box will probably love them.

I'm not debating whether the GAP round is good or bad. I just have my doubts as to it's necessity outside of a very small niche market. Had SA not pulled off what they did with the XD 45 ACP we'd likely not be having this conversation.

Considering just about everyone now has .45ACP polymer pistols, there really isn't a necessity for the GAP. The funny thing is that those that made the jump from .40 to .45 ACP didn't stop in the middle with the GAP. Taurus, Sig, Baretta, S&W, all skipped the GAP.

As much as I love my GAP, it's original purpose was to fit in smaller sized handguns. That never really happened. Springfield never made the GAP in it's 3" subcompact model and I'm not sure about Glock. In fact, the XD.45 is made in basically the same sizes that the GAP is. So it really accomplished nothing. Again we're back to the EMP being the only thing left to save the GAP. It's not going to fade away, but nobody will make new guns around it. There will still be people shooting it because they bought one and I'm in that crowd.

I do think that if SA hadn't made the XD45 we WOULD still be having this conversation. Someone still would have made a .45ACP polymer pistol. Probably Taurus as they were hot on the heels of SA with the MilPro .45. They still would have made it. Every gun company out there knows exactly what you see on this board in GAP vs. ACP threads. That there are a lot of bullheaded people that think the ACP is the end all of pistol rounds. They would be silly to not take advantadge of that stubborness.

Is it a good round? Yes. I think it's a very good round. It demands high end powders, has a good strong case design with the thicker webbing, and has .45ACP+p performance levels. I can't see anything in that package that makes it a bad round. If you removed ACP prejudice and stubborness, introduced the GAP after Cooper died, and waited until the wind was right, the GAP could have easily replaced the 100 year old ACP. At least it would have been a common sense upgrade.

mdao
January 4, 2007, 04:49 PM
Mdao, you misquote me. At the end of the paragraph you partially quote I did say

Would a .45 round on their existing small (9mm, etc.) frames keep production costs down, while leaving the G20 and G21 large frames in the large handed niche they currently fill?

I suspected efficiency, worded as lower production cost, might be a reason. I should clarify, that I meant overall cost, but said production cost, as design and tooling are a part of the cost of producing anything. From that perspective it does make sense. Forgive my less than perfect expression of that thought.

Sorry about that, there was no intent to misstate your intentions. Just thinking along different lines.

If the .45 GAP had taken off like Glock wanted it to, I think that the larger frame Glocks would eventually be discontinued. .45 ACP is redundant if .45 GAP is available, and there isn't much of a business case for keeping a platform around solely for the 10 mm. That greatly simplifies their product line and future engineering efforts, and the only real cost is the loss of 10 mm support. Not much short term savings, as the engineering effort for the G20/21 had already been expended and the tooling costs have already been paid. But, over the long run, not bad at all.

What exactly is your point here? Are you questioning why these companies wasted their time in creating GAP chamered pistols when they could have just invested the time and money into ACP chambered pistols? I haven't the foggiest. In linear terms, it doesn't make sense to me. If I was a gun maker I wouldn't have bothered with the GAP.

Making a pistol designed for 9mm/.40 cal into .45 ACP pistol is a much greater redesign/retooling effort than rechambering it for .45 GAP. With .45 GAP, you're just a slide, barrel, and mag change away. To do .45 ACP, you also need a new frame.

ugaarguy
January 4, 2007, 05:57 PM
If you're hanging me out to dry over that you need a new hobby. The ACP is doublestack, the GAP is single so the magwell being bigger is kinda a no brainer.
Not trying to hang you out to dry XDKS, just trying to bring a little levity. I'm sorry if I was a bit heavy handed.

It is interesting that SA used a single stack mag for the GAP XD and kept it on the smaller 9mm, etc. frame. I know they added a bit of additional grip frame height to let the double stack run taller rather than wider on the ACP pistol which let them pull off the very slight additional grip frame width. The Glock 37 magazines I've seen appear to be tall doublestack 10 rounders that maintain the standard frame width - it's been a while since I've seen one though because I'm currently overseas, so correct me if that isn't the case.

On everything else in your post I'm with you up until here I do think that if SA hadn't made the XD45 we WOULD still be having this conversation. Someone still would have made a .45ACP polymer pistol. Probably Taurus as they were hot on the heels of SA with the MilPro .45. They still would have made it. Every gun company out there knows exactly what you see on this board in GAP vs. ACP threads. That there are a lot of bullheaded people that think the ACP is the end all of pistol rounds. They would be silly to not take advantadge of that stubborness.
I did forget about the MilPro in 45, which was a 45 ACP adaptation in a similar manner to the XD as you note. I don't think it's totally bullheaded-ness against the cartridge that causes folks to resist the GAP. Rather, I think it's the examples from SA, Taurus, and now others that with a little engineering you can run the ACP with what most people consider insignificant size increases over your 9mm, etc frames. So a bullheaded guy like me will say hey, the G21 was way big for my hands. Why get a gun in 45 GAP when the XD 45 ACP fits me well, and shoots the same ammo as my 1911? I can't totally rule out stubborness though. We, humans, like what is familiar. That's in our nature, sometimes to our benefit, and sometimes to our detriment. I'm not gonna mess with creation (or evolution if you prefer) and try to fool with that ;) .

Your last paragraph is where we have our largest differences of opinion.
Is it a good round? Yes. I think it's a very good round.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with the GAP round.
It demands high end powders, has a good strong case design with the thicker webbing, and has .45ACP+p performance levels. I can't see anything in that package that makes it a bad round. If you removed ACP prejudice and stubborness, introduced the GAP after Cooper died, and waited until the wind was right, the GAP could have easily replaced the 100 year old ACP. At least it would have been a common sense upgrade. If we're talking better performance from brass that handles higher pressure I think the 45 Super makes much more sense. Not only do you get the thicker web and tighter grain, you get practically the same case capacity as the ACP; http://www.starlinebrass.com/descriptions.html#45%20Super. The extra case capacity allows for more powder to take further advantage of the upgraded brass. We've already discussed the crop of new easy handling polymer .45 ACPs. With those pistols available the 45 Super makes alot of sense to me for stepping up in power.

With Super brass you can get near 10mm power. For Example, Buffalo Bore's 200 gr. 10mm & 45 Super loading are equal in velocity & energy at 1200 fps & 639 FPE. Given the 10mm 180 gr. at 728 FPE, by virtue of a 50 FPS velocity advatage, does outclass the 45 Super 180 gr. that only ;) makes 694 FPE. http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#45s. For fair comparison, Double Tap does load their heavy 10mm a bit hotter.

Double Tap doesn't load 45 Super, but they do load ACP and GAP. This gives a true head to head comparison of what each round can do when loaded for top performance. The 185gr. 45 ACP runs 616 FPE, beating their GAP loading at 543 FPE using the same bullet. At 200 gr. the ACP's 562 FPE bests the GAP's 490 FPE. The 230 gr. load is 521 FPE to 447 FPE, again in favor of the ACP. http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/.

I just read those figures, and I'm surprised. I would have thought that the GAP's thicker web would have allowed it to be loaded to perform much closer to the ACP :scrutiny: . Despite the ACP's better performance, those GAP numbers are nothing to sneeze at. I'll keep my ACP, but I've no doubt the GAP can get it done.

XDKingslayer
January 4, 2007, 07:25 PM
Making a pistol designed for 9mm/.40 cal into .45 ACP pistol is a much greater redesign/retooling effort than rechambering it for .45 GAP. With .45 GAP, you're just a slide, barrel, and mag change away. To do .45 ACP, you also need a new frame.

Absolutely true, but look how may other companies went directly to ACP and didn't bother to make anything in GAP even though it's easier to built a gun chambered in GAP. They spent the extra money to redesign the frame for the longer ACP round.

Glock I can understand creating a GAP pistol simply because they invented the round. But why did SA bother when they were going to create the XD in ACP anyways? That's what doesn't make sense. Maybe it's because they are made in Croatia and not by SA. They took the cheaper route as you laid out and then used that to buy time to build the XD45. I don't know. I honestly don't know why SA even bothered. One would think with the money they wasted on the XD-45LE (GAP) could have been used to get the XD45 to us a whole lot sooner.

Now, there is a place where the GAP could have been an interest to both Glock and SA and I honestly wish I had numbers to prove my theory right or wrong.

In Central and South America there are countries that have banned the use of government adopted rounds. Most of those countries governments use .45 ACP. This is the perfect market for the GAP. This would make the GAP legal for civilians in those markets to own. Like I said, I love to see sales numbers from Glock and SA in those areas to see if they had larger sales from those countries.

If we're talking better performance from brass that handles higher pressure I think the 45 Super makes much more sense.

I can't argue with that. But the Super has less of a following than the GAP. And honestly it SHOULD have been the round that caused the ACP to be phased out completely. I don't think anyone makes a polymer pistol specifically chambered for Super. I'd have to dig around to find a semi-auto specifically for Super. It's mostly people shooting Super out of ACP chambered pistols correct? If that's the case, how may polymer frames could handle it? I don't think I'd try it too many times in an XD and wouldn't even consider it once in the Taurus.

Double Tap doesn't load 45 Super, but they do load ACP and GAP. This gives a true head to head comparison of what each round can do when loaded for top performance. The 185gr. 45 ACP runs 616 FPE, beating their GAP loading at 543 FPE using the same bullet. At 200 gr. the ACP's 562 FPE bests the GAP's 490 FPE. The 230 gr. load is 521 FPE to 447 FPE, again in favor of the ACP. http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/.

I just read those figures, and I'm surprised. I would have thought that the GAP's thicker web would have allowed it to be loaded to perform much closer to the ACP . Despite the ACP's better performance, those GAP numbers are nothing to sneeze at. I'll keep my ACP, but I've no doubt the GAP can get it done.

I've seen those numbers from DoubleTap and that's why I've avoided their GAP ammo. They are pretty much the only ones with GAP numbers less than ACP. It makes me wonder what they are doing wrong and I believe it's powder choice. It also could be barrel length difference as I don't think they specify.

Speer's numbers put the GAP ahead of the ACP. I don't understand why DoubleTap can't duplicate that. I would expect the 230 grain to be a little shy on peformance as usually the case with GAP. But 185 and 200 gr numbers are usually higher in the GAP.

That's why I stick to Speer for target rounds and either Speer or HydraShocks for hollow point. Maybe I'll email DoubleTap and see what the dealio is.

OpFlash
January 4, 2007, 07:34 PM
The GAP is for men with small uh, digits, who need the smaller grip. :evil:

HorseSoldier
January 4, 2007, 08:05 PM
In Central and South America there are countries that have banned the use of government adopted rounds. Most of those countries governments use .45 ACP. This is the perfect market for the GAP. This would make the GAP legal for civilians in those markets to own. Like I said, I love to see sales numbers from Glock and SA in those areas to see if they had larger sales from those countries.


I'm not an expert, but I think that many (most?) of the countries that ban the civilian use of military cartridges in South America, also put additional complications on the issue like limiting civilian use to smaller and weaker rounds as well. Uruguay or Paraguay (can't recall which) only allows .32 ACP handguns if I'm not mistaken, for instance. Mexico only allows .380 ACP or lighter, legally (again, if I understand the situation correctly).

Obviously, most of these nations are such that those with the $$$$ and connections can sidestep the law illegally or semi-legally, but I don't see Glock actively pursuing that market, and I don't see 45 GAP being any stronger a seller on the black/grey market than other hand gun cartridges.

Italy and France had similar laws (may still have them on the books), and GAP might be a better seller there unless 45 ACP is not classed as a military round by those nations.

ugaarguy
January 4, 2007, 09:11 PM
Speer's numbers put the GAP ahead of the ACP. I don't understand why DoubleTap can't duplicate that. I would expect the 230 grain to be a little shy on peformance as usually the case with GAP. But 185 and 200 gr numbers are usually higher in the GAP.
I just checked Speer's web page. Their 200 gr GDHP in the GAP loading is 401 FPE at the muzzle, while the same round from their 45 ACP +P is 518 FPE at the muzzle. They do state that the ACP round was tested with a 5" bbl, and the GAP with a 4" bbl. which may make up for the difference. The DT website lists the firearm used as a Glock 37, which has a 4.49" bbl. So Speer is stating 401 FPE muzzle from a 4" bbl, and DT is stating 490 FPE muzzle with the same 200 gr. bullet. Double Tap list the 200 gr. GDHP as being fired from a 5" 1911, vs. the 5" test bbl from Speer, and DT has 44 more FPE at the muzzle. It may be that the case volume combined with a slower burning powder to take advantage of the 5" bbl is what's giving the DT loading the edge. Going back to the 200 gr load in the GAP, DT is still getting 89 FPE more at the muzzle than Speer and only using a 1/2" longer bbl. Of course the GAP is still new, and I'm sure they're still tweaking loads for it. I'd be interested to see what Double Tap says if you do e-mail them.
I can't argue with that. But the Super has less of a following than the GAP. And honestly it SHOULD have been the round that caused the ACP to be phased out completely. I don't think anyone makes a polymer pistol specifically chambered for Super. I'd have to dig around to find a semi-auto specifically for Super. It's mostly people shooting Super out of ACP chambered pistols correct? If that's the case, how may polymer frames could handle it? I don't think I'd try it too many times in an XD and wouldn't even consider it once in the Taurus.
I don't know of any factory guns chambered for 45 Super. Its chamber dimensions are identical to those of the 45 ACP, and all you need to do is upgrade to a beefier recoil spring to shoot it. I don't think there's a reason to offer it as a Super off the shelf; the ACP is fine for most, and those who want the super can easily get the capability for a few bucks and the time it takes to swap recoil springs. I'd try it in a SIG, or SA XD 45. I'd also try it in a G21 snce it shares its frame with the 10mm G20. On the all of them I would very carefully look for any signs of excessive/abnormal frame wear. The Super is not recommended in aluminium frame 1911s. I've read reports of the Super battering the aluminium frame and causing it to crack. On a polymer frame might the tendency to flex rather than crack be a benefit in this case? Perhaps someone with more Super experience can enlighten us.

JohnKSa
January 4, 2007, 11:49 PM
I just checked Speer's web page. Their 200 gr GDHP in the GAP loading is 401 FPE at the muzzle, while the same round from their 45 ACP +P is 518 FPE at the muzzle.It's been stated at least once that .45GAP duplicates standard pressure .45ACP loads but that .45ACP +P loads will outperform the .45GAP.

I know because I posted it. ;)

As far as comparing DT's loads to other makers' loads, I think you'll find that in nearly every caliber DT exceeds what other makers offer.

gudel
January 5, 2007, 12:04 AM
i think the 45acp people are afraid to 45gap, because they're 'fraid it might do what the 40 did to the ten :p

Walkalong
January 5, 2007, 07:15 AM
HA - lost your mind, You need to rethink that one grudel. That will never happen, and I still would like to have one in the right gun just for fun. It just does not offer anything extra so it will never replace the .45. The .40 offered less recoil which many liked. :)

45auto
January 5, 2007, 08:08 AM
I assume the 1911 is, by far, the largest selling ACP design so the GAP couldn't displace the ACP. The GAP doesn't seem to make much sense in 1911s IMO. Perhaps, a doublestack but that market is pretty small.

If the GAP was around when the 40 was developed, it might be a different story.

If Glock comes through with a slim-lined 21 and a "singlestack ACP", they may kill off the consumer potential for the GAP. It will still exist like the 357SIG and the 10mm, but not much wide appeal or need....and Glock still sells those!

Redhat
January 5, 2007, 09:18 AM
.45 ACP = Invented here

.45 GAP = Not invented here

Take a hike!!!:D

robertbank
January 5, 2007, 09:24 AM
The 45 GAP isn't about to displace the .45acp, not unless you believe in parellel universes. Nice round but for the life of me other than oferring the market yet another "needed" round why it was developed is beyond me. Seems like the handgun industry is trying to emulate the rifle crowd with calibers that offer "improved" ways of throwing a .3o cal bullet down range at exactly the same speed as the .30-06/.308 cartridge. Just another "new" and "improved" round we all have been clammering for.

Take Care

Bob

Innova
January 5, 2007, 09:57 AM
This may be the wrong place to post this...But what about the .45 gap in a revolver? There is one place where the size could be a bigger factor, especially in a bug or carry piece. I would be interested in a lightweight 2" .45gap. Just a thought.

DrDremel
January 5, 2007, 10:30 AM
The GAP round is destined to become a round with a small following. With the recently put on hold military pistol trials, most companies have designed new .45 ACP handguns. This futher strengthens the position of the .45 ACP as the dominant round. Even Glock is coming out with a new one. The GAP round has very few firearms that are being made for it. As for the NY and PA adopting it, they may have adopted it specifically because it is an obscure round. This makes it easier to tell whether a shooting was a police shooting or not. It also means that a stolen police gun will be easier to track down someone buyijng ammo for it at a local store as less places carry that ammo.

I expect the Gap will shortly (no pun intended) reside next to rounds like the .41 magnum and .41 AE round as a round with a very small following. Even the 10mm will have a larger following than the GAP round. The only pistols to have a big benefit from this round are the EMP and the Glock, which may ultimately be the one that nails the coffin with their new .45 ACP pistols. The EMP is in itself a niche firearm as the popularity of the 1911 in it's current form is simply huge.

I have nothing against the round but unless it is chambered in more firearms, it is a round headed for obscurity.

Other rounds introduced in the last 20 or so years had more benefits to offer. The .40 S&W was a round that truly was between the 9mm and .45 ACP in the same sixe as a 9mm gun. It had a big benefit to offer as it offered a ballistic benefit and a firearm size benefit. The .357 SIG had the benefit of a faster 9mm/.357 bullet in a .40 S&W round with the change of a barrel. It offers a ballistic benefit as well as being a simple change for most firearms. The GAP offers a bullet at the same speed and same bullet diameter as one of the most popular rounds currently available while offering only one real benefit. That is a slightly smaller grip. This grip reduction only comes with a significant redesign of the firearm. Most 9mm and .40 caliber pistols will not accomodate the round. Since there is no ballistic benefit, there is little reason for most people to consider it.

XDKingslayer
January 5, 2007, 10:46 AM
It's been stated at least once that .45GAP duplicates standard pressure .45ACP loads but that .45ACP +P loads will outperform the .45GAP.

I know because I posted it.

Speer says different.

http://www.miragetechnologies.net/45_gap_technical_brief.htm

Second paragraph under .45 G.A.P. Performance it clearly says that "the 45 GAP is loaded to the same maximum average pressure .45 Auto +P - 23,000 PSI."

Now, Speer on that same page shows velocity/energy higher in the .45ACP, but also keep in mind that the ACP was out of a 5" barrel and the GAP out of a 4" barrel and the numbers aren't that far off. The numbers aren't far off between the GAP and the ACP +P either.

Walkalong
January 5, 2007, 11:54 AM
Where the .45 ACP clearly outdoes the .45 GAP ( as if it needed to ) is with the 230 grain bullet. With the greater case capacity to work with you can push it faster. Sort of like the 3006 vs 308 - kinda

ugaarguy
January 5, 2007, 12:26 PM
It's been stated at least once that .45GAP duplicates standard pressure .45ACP loads but that .45ACP +P loads will outperform the .45GAP.

I know because I posted it.
JohnKSa, I'm not entirely sure. The Speer factory load in ACP +P is leading the GAP with 518 FPE to 401 FPE. The other side of the coin is that the ACP +P is running 1080 FPS out of a 5" bbl to get that energy. The GAP is 950 FPS out of a 4" bbl. In the Double Tap 200gr load the ACP has a 73 FPE advantage, with an 1125 FPS to 1050 FPS advantage from only an extra 1/2" of bbl when compared to the GAP. I'm not a ballistics expert by any means, so I don't know how much velocity the GAP would pick with the extra bbl. length, nor how much the ACP would lose with an equally short bbl.

As far as comparing DT's loads to other makers' loads, I think you'll find that in nearly every caliber DT exceeds what other makers offer.
I agree. I sited the DT loadings as a comparison of what both rounds will do when pushed to the edge (within reason) by folks who specialize in doing so. Again, I'd love to see how much velocity the GAP would get from a longer bbl, and how much the ACP would lose from a shorter one. I think the ACP would still have the edge, but I wonder by how much closer of a margin.

mdao
January 5, 2007, 12:34 PM
The GAP offers a bullet at the same speed and same bullet diameter as one of the most popular rounds currently available while offering only one real benefit. That is a slightly smaller grip. This grip reduction only comes with a significant redesign of the firearm. Most 9mm and .40 caliber pistols will not accomodate the round. Since there is no ballistic benefit, there is little reason for most people to consider it.

The main benefit from .45 GAP is not a smaller grip. That's just a neat side effect. The main benefit from .45 GAP is production simplification. Guns can be designed from the ground up to accommodate .357 SIG/9mm/.40 S&W/.45 GAP with just minor changes to the slide, barrel, and mags.

With .45 GAP subbing in as a near ballistic duplicate for common .45 ACP loads, the need for designing a pistol from the ground up for use with .45 ACP (like the XD-45 and G-21) is removed. It also simplifies production lines. Both of these things would lower production cost and provide cheaper pistols to the masses.

XDKingslayer
January 5, 2007, 01:17 PM
Where the .45 ACP clearly outdoes the .45 GAP ( as if it needed to ) is with the 230 grain bullet. With the greater case capacity to work with you can push it faster. Sort of like the 3006 vs 308 - kinda

Yep. One site that I was on said it was due to the physical size of the 230 gr. bullet and the room inside the case that was cause of it dying off at 230.

Walkalong
January 5, 2007, 01:29 PM
due to the physical size of the 230 gr. bullet and the room inside

Or the lack thereof: Right XDKingslayer. :)

Master Blaster
January 5, 2007, 03:52 PM
XDRingSlayer wrote:

As much as I love my GAP, it's original purpose was to fit in smaller sized handguns. That never really happened. Springfield never made the GAP in it's 3" subcompact model and I'm not sure about Glock. In fact, the XD.45 is made in basically the same sizes that the GAP is. So it really accomplished nothing. Again we're back to the EMP being the only thing left to save the GAP. It's not going to fade away, but nobody will make new guns around it. There will still be people shooting it because they bought one and I'm in that crowd.


Yep,Glad to see you finally agreed with me, instead of accusing me of being ignorant and turning folks off to a great NEW round:scrutiny:

And the real problem is it would get in my .45 acp brass and I would have more crap to throw away.

:neener:

kenpocop
January 5, 2007, 04:32 PM
Let me start by saying that I did not read all the posts in this tread, since it seems to be a long string of my gun/round is better than your gun/round. Blah...Blah...Blah...Isn't this the same thread that ran a few years ago about the .357SIG?

It seems to me that the reason we have ACP and GAP and all the other stuff is so we can have a choice! Do we really want a Soviet style market where all you can have is the state approved weapon? Variety is the spice of life!

With an incoming Lib congress, we need to support ALL the gun ownership and manufacturers that are in the market there supporting our addictive habit! It will only take one school shooting for the HGC to start grabbing again.

As far as my .02 (before taxes) on the GAP I like it! It did answer a question that had not been answered. The GAP series of pistols put a "big-bore" into a small package. That is a good thing if you have small digital manipulators or if you can't carry a single action. Maybe you just weren't the on asking the question. If I had my way, I would be carrying a 10mm 1911, but since I can't, I carry what I can carry.Right now it is a Glock 17 loaded with 127 +P+. Would I carry a GAP? Sure would! Would I carry an ACP XD, Sure would!

Remember, being a senior member only defines how much time you have behind the keyboard, not behind the trigger.

Walkalong
January 5, 2007, 04:39 PM
It never has accomplished anything like getting smaller guns for it, short of the EMP, but it is a nice little cartridge which will fill a niche and that is just fine. If they never get it to work in the EMP or some new small gun I will have to say it was a bust.

ElPasoWrangler
January 5, 2007, 06:25 PM
About 100 years ago the US Army had a problem stopping suicidal, hopped up, Morros. They finally went back to using the 45lc to get the job done and got John Browning looking for a way to satisfy the need to knock down a gurella wrapped in cloth and willling to die. 45ACP has been doing the job ever since so why not use it? I own an XD 45acp and have owned my share of 1911's. 14 rounds feels nice in comparison to 7. Shoots good too. By teh way if you invite me to a gun fight a pistol is my last choice if I know in advance.

ElPasoWrangler
January 5, 2007, 06:32 PM
When my son was small enough to ride on my sholders, I took him one night to greet the returning troops flying back from the middle east. The nine had been adopted but almost every trooper off the plane was carrying 1911's. When I asked some of them why they said they trusted their lives with it and not a nine. TRUST is the name of the game and none of them could carry hotrod hollow points (illegal in war).

Walkalong
January 5, 2007, 06:40 PM
About 100 years ago the US Army had a problem stopping suicidal, hopped up, Morros. They finally went back to using the 45lc to get the job done and got John Browning looking for a way to satisfy the need to knock down a gurella wrapped in cloth and willling to die.

Amen brother, Amen

kenpocop
January 5, 2007, 08:49 PM
Walkalong,

Correct me if I am wrong, but If we compare weapon systems that chamber both rounds I think that you will see the error in your supposition. The Glock 37 is smaller dimensionally than the Glock 21. The SAXD in 45GAP is smaller dimensionally than the SAXD in 45ACP. The SA EMP is smaller than the 1911.

ElPaso,

While that is a very touching story of your son and the military troops, I seriously doubt any of them were carrying any sidearm, as that is restricted by FAA regulations.

Moros,

The last relevant research statement regarding military action in the Philipines in the early part of the century, it was found that the .45 ACP did not fare much better than the .38 that it replaced. That is why, as you say, a pistol is not the weapon of choice if you know you are going to a gunfight. That is why then, as now, military troops rely on their rifles in combat, not their pistols. Pistols are secondary tools intended for ease of carry or low profile use.

The last time I saw a discussion of the development of the .45ACP it was for knocking down horses, not Filipinos, although I had no idea how reliable that information is.

None the less, for my part I tire of seeing the gun enthusiast community self distruct. I'm going to get away from here and go train.

JohnKSa
January 5, 2007, 11:17 PM
kenpocop,

RE: Moros. The 45 in that story was the .45LC, not the .45ACP, but the rest of what you posted matches with what I've read elsewhere.

ugaarguy,

More case capacity + equal pressure = higher velocity. The GAP operates at .45ACP +P pressure levels but has less case capacity. That means that the .45ACP +P can be loaded to higher velocities than the GAP with the same barrel length and bullet weight. What ammo companies choose to do may not reflect that, but the fact remains.

The comparisons of DT ammo to other company's ammo is not productive for drawing conclusions pertaining to ammunition performance, IMO. If you want to compare a DT loading to another DT loading, or a SPEER loading to another SPEER loading, that's got a much better chance of revealing something other than how willing each company is to push the limits.

XDKingslayer,

Pressure is not performance. The .45ACP +P and the .45GAP have identical PRESSURE LIMITS, not identical performance. .45ACP (NOT +P) and .45GAP DO have identical performance although they have different pressures. See the comment I made to ugaarguy.

Walkalong,

The .45ACP and .45GAP performance with 230gr bullets is surprisingly similar even though the initial cartridge specs said that the GAP wasn't well suited to this bullet weight. The added case capacity of the .45ACP is compensated for by its pressure disadvantage compared to the GAP. But yes, in general, the case with more capacity will usually outperform the smaller case with heavier bullets. In this case it's pretty equal--which is gravy considering that the initial design said the GAP would be significantly handicapped when loaded with 230gr bullets.

mdao has it right.

BTW, don't have a .45ACP, don't have a .45GAP. Have plans to get neither. Just trying to see that the facts are straight.

Walkalong
January 6, 2007, 08:37 AM
Correct me if I am wrong, but If we compare weapon systems that chamber both rounds I think that you will see the error in your supposition. The Glock 37 is smaller dimensionally than the Glock 21. The SAXD in 45GAP is smaller dimensionally than the SAXD in 45ACP.

It is not the fact that one model is smaller than the other. It is the fact that they are not small at all. The 3" 1911 .45 ACP is smaller/thinner than XD's and Glock's so we have not gained anything here. The EMP is the only gun so far were we gain a little bit in size reduction.

Walkalong
January 6, 2007, 08:48 AM
kenpocop,

RE: Moros. The 45 in that story was the .45LC, not the .45ACP, but the rest of what you posted matches with what I've read elsewhere.

Yep. He knows that and he said that. The .45 ACP was for duplicating that success in an auto.

ugaarguy,

More case capacity + equal pressure = higher velocity. The GAP operates at .45ACP +P pressure levels but has less case capacity. That means that the .45ACP +P can be loaded to higher velocities than the GAP with the same barrel length and bullet weight. What ammo companies choose to do may not reflect that, but the fact remains.

And your point is?
Yes it can outperform the GAP at all bullet wieghts but the difference gets greater at the 230 Gr. level


XDKingslayer,

Pressure is not performance. The .45ACP +P and the .45GAP have identical PRESSURE LIMITS, not identical performance. .45ACP (NOT +P) and .45GAP DO have identical performance although they have different pressures. See the comment I made to ugaarguy.


And?

Walkalong,

The .45ACP and .45GAP performance with 230gr bullets is surprisingly similar even though the initial cartridge specs said that the GAP wasn't well suited to this bullet weight. The added case capacity of the .45ACP is compensated for by its pressure disadvantage compared to the GAP. But yes, in general, the case with more capacity will usually outperform the smaller case with heavier bullets. In this case it's pretty equal--which is gravy considering that the initial design said the GAP would be significantly handicapped when loaded with 230gr bullets.

I think that was our point.

mdao has it right.

Nah, don't think so, but this is purely speculative.


BTW, don't have a .45ACP, don't have a .45GAP. Have plans to get neither. Just trying to see that the facts are straight.

Ah, Theres the rub. :banghead:

Hey guys, hope you don't mind my answering for you. Please put in your 2 cents as well. :)

JohnKSa
January 6, 2007, 11:51 AM
Ah, Theres the rub.Not a bit. Nothing I posted was something that requires personal experience to know. In fact, everything I posted is readily available from reliable sources.Yep. He knows that and he said that.Not calling your reading comprehension into question, but could you please show me where kenpocop said anything about the 45LC on this thread?

As far as my comment about pressure not equaling performance, it was in reference to XDKingslayer's post above mine where he said. "...it clearly says that "the 45 GAP is loaded to the same maximum average pressure .45 Auto +P - 23,000 PSI." " which was, in turn a response to MY comment about PERFORMANCE. In other words, it seemed that he was rebutting my comment about performance differences by saying that the pressures were the same. The pressures ARE the same, but the performance is different. Thus the comment, pressure does not equal performance.

My comment about the 230gr performance of both the 45GAP and the .45ACP (NOT +P) was pointing out that the performance is very similar if not identical in this bullet weight in spite of the fact that the initial release by the GAP developers said that the GAP wouldn't perform well with a bullet this heavy. In other words, the GAP turned out to perform better than the designers had hoped. I just think it's amusing that people are now taking this "windfall" and trying to make it seem like a horrible shortcoming.

Walkalong
January 6, 2007, 02:44 PM
About 100 years ago the US Army had a problem stopping suicidal, hopped up, Morros. They finally went back to using the 45lc to get the job done and got John Browning looking for a way to satisfy the need to knock down a gurella wrapped in cloth and willling to die.

Here you go. (45lc)

Walkalong
January 6, 2007, 02:46 PM
One of my favorite lines from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

"You just keep on thinkin' there Butch, that's what your good at"

Master Blaster
January 6, 2007, 05:38 PM
The Moros and .38 long colt

38 Long Colt
The .38 Long Colt was introduced by Colt's Manufacturing Company in 1875. It is slightly more potent than the .38 Short Colt. It is also known as simply the .38 LC. The .38 LC and SC differ only in case length. The United States Army adopted the .38 Long Colt in 1892 and it remained in service until 1911, when the military adopted the .45 ACP and the M1911 autoloading pistol. The .38 LC develops an anemic (by modern day standards) 195 ft.lbf (264 J) at the muzzle. These poor ballistics were highlighted during the Phillipine Insurrection of 1899-1902 against Moro tribesman. The dismal performance of the round against the fanatical and narcotized Moro led to the emergency re-adoption of revolvers chambered for the more powerful .45 Long Colt cartridge, whose ballistics were emulated by the later .45 ACP round.

The 38LC is known as having a "heel-base" bullet. This means that the front of the bullet is the same diameter as the brass case. The bottom of the bullet (the heel) is reduced in size to fit inside the case. The lubrication was entirely outside of the case. Although there were many heel-base cartridges at one time, the only one still in regular production today is the .22 Long Rifle.


The >38 S&W special round was also developed around this time and could shoot through a stack of pine boards, the army also bought revolvers chambered in this round up until the .45 acp went into production as a result of the poor performance of .38 LC and .38 S&W (not Special).

ugaarguy
January 6, 2007, 07:19 PM
JohnKSa, you said
ugaarguy,

More case capacity + equal pressure = higher velocity. The GAP operates at .45ACP +P pressure levels but has less case capacity. That means that the .45ACP +P can be loaded to higher velocities than the GAP with the same barrel length and bullet weight. What ammo companies choose to do may not reflect that, but the fact remains.
Not entirely. Remember, the bbl also becomes part of the expansion chamber as the bullet moves down it. This effect requires slower burning powders to be used to full advantage. Hence some rounds are dependent on bbl length to maximize pressure (ergo velocity) from their slower burning powders. This allows other cartridges with faster burning powders to gain a velocity edge in a shorter bbl. when the they would not have such an edge in a longer bbl. They do this because their faster powder is fully combusted before the bullet leaves the bbl. Hence the maximum possible gas expansion occurs. On the other hand the slower burning powder is not fully combusted before leaving the short bbl. and the resultant gas expansion, no longer linearly confined, is lost.

My question is, does the GAP generally use faster burning powders than the ACP? If so, the GAP could potentially edge the ACP in short bbls - like the 3" bbl found on the SA EMP.
The comparisons of DT ammo to other company's ammo is not productive for drawing conclusions pertaining to ammunition performance, IMO. If you want to compare a DT loading to another DT loading, or a SPEER loading to another SPEER loading, that's got a much better chance of revealing something other than how willing each company is to push the limits.
It's productive by showing what kind of performance a shooter can expect from either cartridge in off the shelf loadings, and showing the performance each cartridge is capable of when a specialty manufacturer (or careful handloader) pushes it closer to the edge. The Speer and Double Tap loads were cited as representatives from the respective categories.

JohnKSa
January 6, 2007, 08:26 PM
One of my favorite lines from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

"You just keep on thinkin' there Butch, that's what your good at"Niiiiice... :rolleyes:

BTW, the quote you listed was from a post by ElPasoWrangler NOT kenpocop--kenpocop has never posted anything about the .45LC on this thread.My question is, does the GAP generally use faster burning powders than the ACP? If so, the GAP could potentially edge the ACP in short bbls - like the 3" bbl found on the SA EMP.I suppose it's possible, but I can't find enough information along those lines to make a comment worthwhile. I agree in theory with what you said, but both the case capacity and pressure differences are so minor, I'm not sure that there's enough difference to get the effect you describe.The Speer and Double Tap loads were cited as representatives from the respective categories.Except I'm leaning away from using DT loads as representative of anything but DT's willingness to push the limits. For example, I contacted Hornady some time ago and asked why they didn't load the 10mm hotter than they were. Their reply was that they were limited by SAAMI standards and didn't feel they could load it any hotter. Kind of interesting coming from the company that gave us Light Magnum technology... After that, I've looked at offerings from DT and BuffaloBore (to name a couple of "boutique" ammo companies) in a slightly different light.

ugaarguy
January 6, 2007, 09:58 PM
I agree in theory with what you said, but both the case capacity and pressure differences are so minor, I'm not sure that there's enough difference to get the effect you describe.
I see what you're saying.

I'm also wondering, if the GAP is running at ACP +P pressure levels why was the thicker case web necissary? Following up on that I wonder if that thicker case web means there is potential for a GAP +P spec yet. I'm guessing that they'd have to use a powder yields high pressure for comparably low weight to deal with the case capacity. This (the 45 GAP) is a young cartridge and may have a little room still to grow, but I'm just making a semi educated guess. What do you think?

JohnKSa
January 6, 2007, 10:33 PM
I'm also wondering, if the GAP is running at ACP +P pressure levels why was the thicker case web necissary?I really don't know.

These days, I'd be tempted to lean toward explaining it as some sort of a CYA rather than painting it as a plan for "future expansion". Perhaps it's intended to provide an extra safety margin for the higher GAP pressures in the typically oversize Glock chambers... That's pure speculation on my part.

Given that Glock had slide velocity issues with their first GAP pistol and were forced to go with a larger, heavier slide than they initially wanted to use, I suspect that the potential for hotrodding the GAP may not be terribly promising. I tend to think it's going to be something like the .40S&W--a decent off-the-shelf round that can't (and probably shouldn't) be "stretched" much.

Walkalong
January 7, 2007, 11:58 AM
BTW, the quote you listed was from a post by ElPasoWrangler NOT kenpocop--kenpocop has never posted anything about the .45LC on this thread.

Yup, Wrong guy, right point. :)

Redhat
January 7, 2007, 12:03 PM
JohnSka,

As to thicker case web, you think maybe is was because they were trying to avoid Ka-booms due to lack of case support in the Glock chamber?

Matt King
January 7, 2007, 12:04 PM
ACP. You won't be sorry.~;)

If you enjoyed reading about "ACP vs GAP?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!