.45GAP outperforms .45ACP
- Thread starter Alan Fud
- Start date
- Status
tiberius
Member
"Jeff Copper commerative Glock" ROTFLMAO .. Good spoof.
The GAP: Yeah baby!!!
Really interesting thread: It’s pulled some big dawgs out of the woodwork.
OK, Dick Metcalf's article did not address +P factory .45 ACP ammo in his comparison. And he definitely went overboard pronouncing that the GAP was the clear winner when the fps difference was not really that significant. Other than that, his article was pretty good and informative. I don't think Dick should be blamed because one manufacturer uses a polygonal barrel and another doesn't. If anything, that's the gun manufactuer's fault. Frankly, a lot of .45 ACP fans are projecting their anger at Dick Metcalf and Shooting Times as a scapegoat, simply because the GAP is doing well despite all the naysayers. Most likely, a lot of these same people would have agreed with Dick Metcalf if he would have said the .45 ACP was the clear winner by 5%.
What Dick’s article did show is that the .45 GAP is not a little wimpy short and weak caliber after all. And his statement that the G37 had less perceived recoil than the Commander was also interesting.
In the near future we will be able to compare +P .45 ACP ammo against the hottest .45 GAP ammo made by Cor-Bon (another kind of apples and apples). I predict that when this comparison becomes public, there won’t be a huge difference between the two calibers. Why do I say that? Let’s look at Cor-Bon’s current +P .45 ACP loads:
165 grain +P 1250 fps/573 ft/lbs of energy
185 grain +P 1150 fps/543 ft/lbs of energy
200 grain +P 1050 fps/490 ft/lbs of energy
230 grain +P 950 fps/461 ft/lbs of energy
Here’s some reload data on the gap. By the way, the gap is a hoot to reload --- lot’s of fun.
4.5 inch barrel firing .45 GAP ammo:
200 grain GAP N340 1047 fps/486 ft/lbs of energy
230 grain GAP Longshot 974 fps avg/484 ft/lbs of energy
(Note: the multiple times fired reused brass that was used in the 230 grain full power load still dropped completely into the Glock barrel chamber all the way. The fired brass had no bulging or pressure signs of any kind). Compared to the above +P Corbon loads, the reloaded gap loads look darn good. We’ll wait and see what Peter comes up with.
Just as important, the .45 GAP does very well with lighter loads that are also quite accurate and very tame to shoot. Check out the very good consistency of full power, medium power, and low power .45 GAP loads. The chart shows a low to high fps spread of 383, demonstrating excellent versatility! I say again, the gap appears to work very well from the lightest loads of 582 fps up to the current heaviest loads of 995 fps. Yeah baby!!!
Bullet HiVel LowVel ES AvgVel SD P.F.
230 995 965 29 974 10 224 Full Power H. Longshot
225 760 736 23 747 7 165 Medium Power AA No5
225 612 582 30 599 10 130 Low Power VV N320
Some of the S&W revolver folks are actually getting excited about the gap. Apparently they are claiming faster load/unloads with the gap compared to the acp.
You can poo poo the short gap, but it really does work well. You can make fun of Mr Glock. Why not, everybody else does. All I can say is that the Speer engineers did an excellent job.
One point I will have to add to my gap article though; maybe a section called, “Why didn’t Glock do it this way?â€
If Glock could have combined the HK USP grip (with metal mags) along with the Glock 37 short trigger (yes, the USP45 trigger reach is too long), a new generation ACP pistol would have taken the world by storm, maybe. Why did Glock choose to stay with their tried and true technology that they are familiar with to create the Glock 37? Would the R&D have cost too much for Glock? Is Mr Glock truly the incarnation of pure evil and pure ego as other caliberologists claim? Or, and this is kind of scary, did Glock and Speer actually create a more flexible, updated .45 caliber that will be able to stand on its own merits? I choose the latter.
And as someone jokingly said on the gap forum, "The GAP is the only caliber that has an entire chain of stores to market it". By the way, does someone have $25,000 I could have? I need to buy something with a prime number name.
Take care
pete
Really interesting thread: It’s pulled some big dawgs out of the woodwork.
OK, Dick Metcalf's article did not address +P factory .45 ACP ammo in his comparison. And he definitely went overboard pronouncing that the GAP was the clear winner when the fps difference was not really that significant. Other than that, his article was pretty good and informative. I don't think Dick should be blamed because one manufacturer uses a polygonal barrel and another doesn't. If anything, that's the gun manufactuer's fault. Frankly, a lot of .45 ACP fans are projecting their anger at Dick Metcalf and Shooting Times as a scapegoat, simply because the GAP is doing well despite all the naysayers. Most likely, a lot of these same people would have agreed with Dick Metcalf if he would have said the .45 ACP was the clear winner by 5%.
What Dick’s article did show is that the .45 GAP is not a little wimpy short and weak caliber after all. And his statement that the G37 had less perceived recoil than the Commander was also interesting.
In the near future we will be able to compare +P .45 ACP ammo against the hottest .45 GAP ammo made by Cor-Bon (another kind of apples and apples). I predict that when this comparison becomes public, there won’t be a huge difference between the two calibers. Why do I say that? Let’s look at Cor-Bon’s current +P .45 ACP loads:
165 grain +P 1250 fps/573 ft/lbs of energy
185 grain +P 1150 fps/543 ft/lbs of energy
200 grain +P 1050 fps/490 ft/lbs of energy
230 grain +P 950 fps/461 ft/lbs of energy
Here’s some reload data on the gap. By the way, the gap is a hoot to reload --- lot’s of fun.
4.5 inch barrel firing .45 GAP ammo:
200 grain GAP N340 1047 fps/486 ft/lbs of energy
230 grain GAP Longshot 974 fps avg/484 ft/lbs of energy
(Note: the multiple times fired reused brass that was used in the 230 grain full power load still dropped completely into the Glock barrel chamber all the way. The fired brass had no bulging or pressure signs of any kind). Compared to the above +P Corbon loads, the reloaded gap loads look darn good. We’ll wait and see what Peter comes up with.
Just as important, the .45 GAP does very well with lighter loads that are also quite accurate and very tame to shoot. Check out the very good consistency of full power, medium power, and low power .45 GAP loads. The chart shows a low to high fps spread of 383, demonstrating excellent versatility! I say again, the gap appears to work very well from the lightest loads of 582 fps up to the current heaviest loads of 995 fps. Yeah baby!!!
Bullet HiVel LowVel ES AvgVel SD P.F.
230 995 965 29 974 10 224 Full Power H. Longshot
225 760 736 23 747 7 165 Medium Power AA No5
225 612 582 30 599 10 130 Low Power VV N320
Some of the S&W revolver folks are actually getting excited about the gap. Apparently they are claiming faster load/unloads with the gap compared to the acp.
You can poo poo the short gap, but it really does work well. You can make fun of Mr Glock. Why not, everybody else does.
All I can say is that the Speer engineers did an excellent job.One point I will have to add to my gap article though; maybe a section called, “Why didn’t Glock do it this way?â€
If Glock could have combined the HK USP grip (with metal mags) along with the Glock 37 short trigger (yes, the USP45 trigger reach is too long), a new generation ACP pistol would have taken the world by storm, maybe. Why did Glock choose to stay with their tried and true technology that they are familiar with to create the Glock 37? Would the R&D have cost too much for Glock? Is Mr Glock truly the incarnation of pure evil and pure ego as other caliberologists claim? Or, and this is kind of scary, did Glock and Speer actually create a more flexible, updated .45 caliber that will be able to stand on its own merits? I choose the latter.
And as someone jokingly said on the gap forum, "The GAP is the only caliber that has an entire chain of stores to market it". By the way, does someone have $25,000 I could have? I need to buy something with a prime number name.
Take care
pete
Last edited:
Waxed Canvas
Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2004
- Messages
- 104
let us see what the .45 GAP does in the line of duty, then we can comment
BrokenArrow
Member
No reason why it won't do what all the other 45 bullets at that weight and speed have done; bad guys won't know what case/gun they come out of!
The GAP doesn't really have to do more to be better, just enough; just like the 40 did enough to be "better" than the 10mm?
The GAP doesn't really have to do more to be better, just enough; just like the 40 did enough to be "better" than the 10mm?
Dean Speir
Member
Pete the Enthusiastic Proponent of Superfluous Cartridges writes at length:
When one writes for an outfit such as Primedia, successor to the now-merged Petersen's and PJS publishing empires, never is heard a discouraging word about a product which either is or may be one day an advertiser. And if by some extraordinary circumstance the gunzine writer is compelled to make a critical observation, it had damned well better be down-played, #1, and, #2, counter-balanced by at least half-a-dozen HOO-rah! assessments.
And if you can't find anything about a firearm over which to sing effusive praise, then every little "plus" is cited, no matter how trivial, in order to give the illusion of cumulative "High Honors."
Therefore even 10-15 fps becomes worthy of mention.
I remember ten years ago last month when the cadre had been assembled, courtesy of Smith & Wesson, at a motel/conference center in Fort Lauderdale for the introduction of the Sigma. We had free time that Friday afternoon before the schedule kicked in, and a half-dozen of so of us were sitting around doing what we delight to do on these junkets: sucking up suds and bitching 'bout the miserable pay.
There was a lull in the conversation and Metcalf cast a fearful eye at his fellow farmer/gunwriter, Frank James, and launched into something which clearly had been a burr beneath his tractor saddle for quite some time. He began deconstructing and dismissing Frank's annual "10,000 round torture test" in which he would assemble a crew of his Indiana chums and neighbors, and start shooting a handgun as quickly as possible until it turned into slag or they'd expended the pallets of 200 cases. Magazines would be recharged in teams and cartons would be torn down, notes and photographs would be taken, etc. And out of that Farmer Frank would obtain enough material for a pretty comprehensive article.
Metcalf was highly critical of the "torture test" as unrealistic, and then began extolling the virtues of a protocol of his own devise, something he called "the accelerated wear test."
Frank, a man of infinite good humor but finite patience with foolishness, interrupted Metcalf as politely as possible, and noted that he needed to call home at a certain time, and would have to excuse himself at that point. His exit line was, "You know what they do when they build an Indy car, Dick? They run it hard around a track for a day and see what falls off." (Frank had been annually covering "the Brickyard" as a photo-journalist since before he had his first gunzine byline.) "That's basically all my 'torture test' is." And he left.
In the ensuing silence, Metcalf started again to laud his "accelerated wear test" as superior to the "10k torture test," when I cut him off, pointing out that none of us were scientists, and only Pete Kokalis and Chuck Karwan were even pedigreed engineers, and that what we were, were guys who wrote about small arms and ammunition. And that those of us who tried to do more than re-write a manufacturer's press release, all had our own way of "getting into an article," and that no one's method was necessarily more valid than another's… it's basically what works for the individual writer.
Right after the Sigma launch conference, I passed a newsstand and noticed that the new Shooting Times contained an article my one Dick Metcalf about… wait for it… his the "accelerated wear test," so clearly it was fresh in his mind when we were in Florida.
I don't even know if he still uses that particular protocol, or has moved on to something else. But he's still writing, and still… as do we all… needs a way to "get into the article." I haven't read the "G.A.P. v. ACP" piece, but it sounds like he's still doing what Dick Metcalf has always done… fill a number of pages with what is now called "content," and for which he gets paid handsomely, and the manufacturer is happy, and continues to advertise.
I rejoice that you were not blinded to that fact. But let me impart to you another in the Inside the Gunzine Game tutorials I've shared with you over the years…
When one writes for an outfit such as Primedia, successor to the now-merged Petersen's and PJS publishing empires, never is heard a discouraging word about a product which either is or may be one day an advertiser. And if by some extraordinary circumstance the gunzine writer is compelled to make a critical observation, it had damned well better be down-played, #1, and, #2, counter-balanced by at least half-a-dozen HOO-rah! assessments.
And if you can't find anything about a firearm over which to sing effusive praise, then every little "plus" is cited, no matter how trivial, in order to give the illusion of cumulative "High Honors."
Therefore even 10-15 fps becomes worthy of mention.
See, I always knew that you had it in you to write for the gunzines, Pete… you see, this isn't a fault situation, and no blame need be assigned, so you need not defend his article: it is what it is.
I remember ten years ago last month when the cadre had been assembled, courtesy of Smith & Wesson, at a motel/conference center in Fort Lauderdale for the introduction of the Sigma. We had free time that Friday afternoon before the schedule kicked in, and a half-dozen of so of us were sitting around doing what we delight to do on these junkets: sucking up suds and bitching 'bout the miserable pay.
There was a lull in the conversation and Metcalf cast a fearful eye at his fellow farmer/gunwriter, Frank James, and launched into something which clearly had been a burr beneath his tractor saddle for quite some time. He began deconstructing and dismissing Frank's annual "10,000 round torture test" in which he would assemble a crew of his Indiana chums and neighbors, and start shooting a handgun as quickly as possible until it turned into slag or they'd expended the pallets of 200 cases. Magazines would be recharged in teams and cartons would be torn down, notes and photographs would be taken, etc. And out of that Farmer Frank would obtain enough material for a pretty comprehensive article.
Metcalf was highly critical of the "torture test" as unrealistic, and then began extolling the virtues of a protocol of his own devise, something he called "the accelerated wear test."
Frank, a man of infinite good humor but finite patience with foolishness, interrupted Metcalf as politely as possible, and noted that he needed to call home at a certain time, and would have to excuse himself at that point. His exit line was, "You know what they do when they build an Indy car, Dick? They run it hard around a track for a day and see what falls off." (Frank had been annually covering "the Brickyard" as a photo-journalist since before he had his first gunzine byline.) "That's basically all my 'torture test' is." And he left.
In the ensuing silence, Metcalf started again to laud his "accelerated wear test" as superior to the "10k torture test," when I cut him off, pointing out that none of us were scientists, and only Pete Kokalis and Chuck Karwan were even pedigreed engineers, and that what we were, were guys who wrote about small arms and ammunition. And that those of us who tried to do more than re-write a manufacturer's press release, all had our own way of "getting into an article," and that no one's method was necessarily more valid than another's… it's basically what works for the individual writer.
Right after the Sigma launch conference, I passed a newsstand and noticed that the new Shooting Times contained an article my one Dick Metcalf about… wait for it… his the "accelerated wear test," so clearly it was fresh in his mind when we were in Florida.
I don't even know if he still uses that particular protocol, or has moved on to something else. But he's still writing, and still… as do we all… needs a way to "get into the article." I haven't read the "G.A.P. v. ACP" piece, but it sounds like he's still doing what Dick Metcalf has always done… fill a number of pages with what is now called "content," and for which he gets paid handsomely, and the manufacturer is happy, and continues to advertise.
Aw, Pete, do you even listen to yourself?!? *** cares??? I know some people may be skeptical, but who is actually storming the gates of Shooting Times demanding Metcalf's head on a pike?!? C'mon, already!
I rest my case about you being prime for a gunzine career!
brookstexas
member
I checked with my wife
and she confirmed size IS important!
and she confirmed size IS important!
George Hill
Member
Thank goodness SWAT doesnt' work like that.
Dean stated:
"See, I always knew that you had it in you to write for the gunzines, Pete…"
----
Now don't insult me Dean. You know I do it for free. And adding my name to your joke page above was a cheap shot, but still funny
Your gunzine history lesson is enlightening. However there are some writers who work thru the slime and still give the reader a pretty good idea of what to expect about the pistol and/or ammo they are testing. One example comes to mind:
Glock's New .357s!" by Walt Rauch, Glock Autopistols, 1998 Vol. 4 No. 1.
In fact I remember your excellent article on the USP .45 several years ago and it was very informative. I did not think you were a scum bag for writing the article. So I cannot just globally state that all gun rags and all gun writers cannot be trusted because they've sold their souls. I suppose some might be able to work within the system better than others, and as you said, some just rewrite the ads to fill space.
I'm pretty sure most of us talk-forum-fiends read between the lines and gleam what we can and upchuck the rest on a normal basis anyway.
And yes, there are some acp fanatics who have written to Shooting Times and asked for Dick's head on a platter. Here is a related link from glocktalk.com (see YO is about the 4th person down in the thread, along with comments afterwards):
http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=236502
"See, I always knew that you had it in you to write for the gunzines, Pete…"
----
Now don't insult me Dean. You know I do it for free. And adding my name to your joke page above was a cheap shot, but still funny
Your gunzine history lesson is enlightening. However there are some writers who work thru the slime and still give the reader a pretty good idea of what to expect about the pistol and/or ammo they are testing. One example comes to mind:
Glock's New .357s!" by Walt Rauch, Glock Autopistols, 1998 Vol. 4 No. 1.
In fact I remember your excellent article on the USP .45 several years ago and it was very informative. I did not think you were a scum bag for writing the article. So I cannot just globally state that all gun rags and all gun writers cannot be trusted because they've sold their souls. I suppose some might be able to work within the system better than others, and as you said, some just rewrite the ads to fill space.
I'm pretty sure most of us talk-forum-fiends read between the lines and gleam what we can and upchuck the rest on a normal basis anyway.
And yes, there are some acp fanatics who have written to Shooting Times and asked for Dick's head on a platter. Here is a related link from glocktalk.com (see YO is about the 4th person down in the thread, along with comments afterwards):
http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=236502
Last edited:
George Hill
Member
This thread has outlived it's usefulness.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
