The .45 GAP Experience

[Wreck-n-Crew]

The purpose of the GAP is clearly stated: a .45 caliber round that duplicates .45 ACP ballistics that can be shot out of a 9mm frame design.

Frame smame that is the myth. Why?
A: Any Glock 9mm is strong enough for 45acp. If not the frame strength is overstated because more than one platform have the same frame and can change from 45 acp to 9mm with a slide change. The tough or durable label goes away. Since other platforms have the same exact frame from 45 to 9mm why is the gap necessary? Or is it that the Glock frame is weak? I tend to believe the overstated reason for the GAP is the problem not the frame, take your pick.

B:Recoil energy determines frame strength requirements. Two bullets fired from the same gun with the same velocity, same weight, and the only difference being charge weight the recoil energy is so minimal that it's not worth mentioning. There is no real difference in recoil which means there is no more wear on the gun or pressure on the frame between the two. Chamber Pressure: (really irrelevant since barrel can withstand the pressure difference and an increase in recoil energy is nil): well the GAP is higher, not that it matters.

FE:
Recoil and velocity calculator hand load using Longshot powder

Load One 45 GAP
Bullet weight in grains 230
Velocity in fps 1000
Powder charge in grains 6.8
Weight of firearm in lbs 1.7
Recoil Impulse in (lbs sec) 1.14
Velocity of recoiling firearm (fps) 21.61
Free recoil energy in (ft/lbs) 12.33

Load Two 45acp

Bullet weight in grains 230
Velocity in fps 1013
Powder charge in grains 7.8
Weight of firearm in lbs 1.7
Recoil Impulse in (lbs sec) 1.17
Velocity of recoiling firearm (fps) 22.20
Free recoil energy in (ft/lbs) 13.01

In the end the difference is a shorter cartridge and maybe a smaller grip if you with to utilize the small difference. That's it!

Wait...there is one more +p guns in 45acp and then you have many that can shoot 45Super (some without doing a thing like the H&K). Gap can't do that.

9mm recoil energy is less than a 45. with a measurable degree. Using the same powder.
FE:

Bullet weight in grains 147
Velocity in fps 1004
Powder charge in grains 4.7
Weight of firearm in lbs 1.7
Recoil Impulse in (lbs sec) 0.74
Velocity of recoiling firearm (fps) 13.98
Free recoil energy in (ft/lbs) 5.16

See the difference? You can feel it when shooting too. However the Recoil Impulse is not that substantial and the frame strength requirements to go from 45 to 9mm aren't much at all and easily to obtain even in a compact handgun. My conclusion: 45 GAP designed for 9mm frame=Myth.

 

[strambo]

You missed the point Wreck-n-Crew. It wasn't about frame strength, it was about AOL. The 9mm/.40 class cartridges are shorter resulting in shorter frames back strap to front. This gets pretty important once a double stack magazine makes the grip fatter. Double stack .45 ACP guns tend to have really large grips problematic for people with medium and small hands. The 45 GAP attempted to solve that issue and still have a 45 bore size.

I think the OP miss-terms the reasons why most people don't choose to spend money to add a 45 GAP to their stable as "hate" when it is more like "why bother?"

 

[cstarr3]

Isn't this about 20 years too late? The ship has sailed on GAP and it sunk after leaving port.

Yep, pretty much. But because it has been a while, there are plenty of people who not only have never shot GAP, but wouldn't even know where to get a hold of one! Plus, there is always somebody out there just curious enough to look into it.

If you think this review is a little late... wait until I write one up about the .44 AMP.

And I am slated to get a G17 upper for the G37 sometime this year, and will probably get a .30 Luger barrel for it. The .30 Luger ship has sailed, sunk, rotted, was covered up by sediment, and is now being pumped out of the ocean floor as oil. But I still want to have and share the experience.

Thanks for the response. I appreciate it!

 

[cstarr3]

.45 GAP did get more of a foothold than
.400 CorBon = my $240 paperweight

Have you tried the 165 or 155 grain loadings of .400 Corbon from Underwood? If you try it, wear gloves... or you risk singing any androgenic hair you have past your wrists!

(Picture taken of family member shooting Underwood 155 gr. .400 Corbon from a Springfield XD 45 with EFK Firedragon .400 Corbon barrel)

 

[HKGuns]

If you think this review is a little late... wait until I write one up about the .44 AMP.

Thanks for the response. I appreciate it!

Now that was truly hilarious, almost spewed iced tea all over my phone!

Was not intending to insult your review, which was good, just the round and the timing a bit. Yes there are people who aren't aware so I also understand your reasoning.[emoji2]

 

[cstarr3]

Hi all, thanks for your replies.

Most people do see the GAP as being superfluous. I have no beef with those people. However, you are guaranteed to run across someone whose opinion on the subject is accompanied by some chest-thumping and poo-flinging. I realize that most folks aren't really looking to explore new calibers, especially not if it means more expensive ammunition. For most of these people, GAP is just an exercise in superfluity. But I have met people who want a good, reliable gun, with the maximum 10-round capacity, affordable ammunition, and the largest bore diameter possible. For a good many of these people, the .45 ACP is the answer. For small handed people, like myself, the .45 GAP is the answer. The ammunition can be had readily and for not-very-much-more than other popular calibers, if you do a little web shopping. And that extra few millimeters in length can make a big difference. If you don't believe me, just hold a Glock 21 and a Glock 21SF; the difference is about 2 mm.

If you don't have smaller hands, you are probably indifferent to the GAP. And that is perfectly fine by me. I certainly don't believe that if you don't want one, that that makes you a "hater." But if you do enough asking around or looking around, you will find some people are openly hostile to the GAP. The same can be said about 10mm or .357 Sig; most people are indifferent, a few are annoyed by its existence.

Again, thank you all for reading and replying.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

You missed the point Wreck-n-Crew. It wasn't about frame strength, it was about AOL. The 9mm/.40 class cartridges are shorter resulting in shorter frames back strap to front.

Misplaced a quote in the beginning about bullet to bullet comparison and got sidetracked a little.(note to self double check more before post)

I did mention the tradeoff of size not being enough and there is good reason beyond size. Market small and almost niche'. Most gun buyers know little about guns and did not know the difference between the two (lot less than most of us). Lack of marketing (with good reason on afterthought, money better spent on other things). Most people with small hands tend to buy 9mm or 380 compacts over fatter 45 calibers. Got to have a market to be successful and even if the slightly smaller grip size was enticing to most of us, the majority of people who buy guns know very little about the guns they buy and trend to what fits better more than what's bigger in caliber.

IMO the idea of the 45 GAP was thought of from a designers/developers point of view and less from a market view. Eyes on cornering a part of the market with a compact 45 and being seen as innovative blinded them from the real world demand, the consumers point of view. At all the money that could have been spent on marketing the GAP was better spent elsewhere. To me it would have not made enough difference in sales to offset the marketing cost. That was a good move on Glock's part.

 

[IdahoSkies]

The .45 GAP and the .327 Mag have a lot in common. They did answer a very real question, are both good rounds, but the problem was not very many people were asking that question. So few pistols were made in those calibers. Few pistols mean few folks buying ammo, means (and the cycle continues).

In our consumer non custom world, a lot of good ideas don't get adopted because something else almost as good was there first.

 

[Jim K]

The OP goes a long way to justify his interest in and liking of the .45 GAP. He does not need to do so so; he is entitled to his ideas and his choice and need not explain them to the rest of us. He writes, "For small handed people, like myself, the .45 GAP is the answer." That is a perfectly good reason, but not enough for the rest of us to buy a pistol in .45 GAP.

At one time, the .45 GAP might have been the answer to a military need for a large caliber pistol for women, but few forces now use .45 caliber at all, and those that do won't be likely to adopt a different pistol and another caliber just for women or men with small hands.

Jim

 

[Catshooter]

If you think that the gripping area size difference between a Glock 37 and a Glock 21 isn't enough to justify the GAPs existence, sorry but you're WRONG. Glock came out with the GAP a long time ago and they are still making it.

Maybe in your hands, but not in those whose hands just can't make the 21 work BECASUE IT'S TOO FREAKING BIG.

Why is that just so tough to wrap your wits around? I know it's a freaky idea, but there are people other than you in the world. And what makes you happy doesn't always make them happy. Too weird, I know.

Wouldn't it be a hoot if our military, in their search for a new service pistol adopted the GAP? Oh man, that would about kill a bunch of haters for sure.


Cat

 

[strambo]

Why the emotion Catshooter? Of course double stack .45 ACPs are really big, but smaller handed shooters can get 9mm, .40 S&W and .357 SIG.

For the small segment of the market that insists on a .45 caliber in a smaller frame, GAP is the way to go. There is nothing wrong with it and had it caught on popularity-wise it would be a great choice for the masses.

I agree, it would make a great military round...

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The .45 GAP is a "niche" caliber -- but so is .38 Super, and 10mm.

I buy in bulk from Georgia Arms, and from them it's often CHEAPER than .45 A.C.P.

Now that other gunmakers have come out with guns with smaller grips that handle .45 ACP, the "unique" Glock solution may not be the only solution.

All that said, I shoot my Glock 38 better than any .45 I've owned... and I CANNOT deal with the full-size Glock .45.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I tend to dislike .45 GAP for the same reason I dislike .40 S&W and .357 SIG, I just don't like high pressure rounds. They put more wear and tear on the gun and parts have to be replaced more frequently than with lower pressure rounds like ACP or 9mm.

Even though I don't care for the higher pressure rounds, if you like them and shoot them well, go for it. In the case of the GAP, just don't cry and moan when you can't readily find ammo for it.

I missed this the first time through.

Do you like 9mm? It operates in the same pressure range as .40. It is NOT a low-pressure round. Have your 9mm guns worn out? They've been around for about as long as .45 ACP and 9mms aren't infamous for failures due to pressure. I think I've got the pressure figures right:

The S.A.A.M.I. pressure limit for the 9×19mm is 35,000 psi.
The S.A.A.M.I. pressure limit for the 9x 19 mm +P is 38,500 psi (or 10% higher)
The S.A.A.M.I. pressure limit for the .40 S&W is set at 35,000 psi.
The S.A.A.M.I. pressure for the 45 ACP is 19 - 21,000 psi.
The S.A.A.M.I. pressure for .45 ACP +P rounds can go up to 23,000 psi. (or 10% higher)
THE S.A.A.M.I. pressure for .45 GAP rounds vary between 21 - 23,000 psi.​

Disliking .45 GAP because it's a "high-pressure" round just isn't really a valid point. If you shoot .45 GAP, it's only 10% higher than .45 ACP and operates at substantially less pressure (35% lower) than 9mm!! Using .45 GAP in a gun designed to handle that round shouldn't be a problem, just as shooting +P rounds in guns built to handle a diet of 9mm +P shouldn't be a problem. (Many NATO-used weapons are up to the task - as NATO loads are close to +P pressures. And many gunmakers offer weapons that handle +P, and stay under warranty.)

.

 

[Zerodefect]

I've shot a ton of hot ammo though my G23 (.40). It's not showing any wear. I'll bet I'll shoot 30 times the cost in ammo, of the cost of a new Glock. So no worries. I never listen to the "it'll wear out quicker" guys. I could care less if my gun wears out, I'll just buy another and swap my aftermarket parts in. Besides, Glock will replace the frame for $100 if/when if fails. Big deal.

I love the .45 Gap pistols. .45ACP perfomance in a 9mm/.40S&W frame. A couple mm thinner frame is significant. If .45 Gap was available at similar cost as .45ACP and .40, I'd buy one in a heart beat.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

If .45 Gap was available at similar cost as .45ACP and .40, I'd buy one in a heart beat.

Check out http://www.georgia-arms.com/ If you live on the East Coast it's a great source... (buying in bulk, either hardball or hollowpoint.)

I actually paid less for .45 GAP the last time out than I paid for .45 ACP from Georgia Arms.

OOPS... I looked up and see that you're not on the East Coast (of the U.S.). My apologies for not having looked closer before I responded.