ACP vs GAP?
- Thread starter tmette
- Start date
- Status
Master Blaster
Member
XDRingSlayer wrote:
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
And the real problem is it would get in my .45 acp brass and I would have more crap to throw away.
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
And the real problem is it would get in my .45 acp brass and I would have more crap to throw away.
Is all the bashing necessary?
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.
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.
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
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 63
100 years for 45acp
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.
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
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 63
Just an observation.
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).
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,
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yep. He knows that and he said that. The .45 ACP was for duplicating that success in an auto.
And your point is?
Yes it can outperform the GAP at all bullet wieghts but the difference gets greater at the 230 Gr. level
And?
I think that was our point.
Nah, don't think so, but this is purely speculative.
Ah, Theres the rub. :banghead:
Hey guys, hope you don't mind my answering for you. Please put in your 2 cents as well.
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.
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.
Master Blaster
Member
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).
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
Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 13,828
JohnKSa, you said
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.
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.
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.
Niiiiice...Walkalong said:
BTW, the quote you listed was from a post by ElPasoWrangler NOT kenpocop--kenpocop has never posted anything about the .45LC on this thread.
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.ugaarguy said:
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
Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 13,828
.
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?
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.
- Status