Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/1/2005 3:19:20 PM EDT
seems like there are some real rivalries going on between the two camps.

was the GAP really the answer to a question that was never asked? what was the point of introducing the GAP?
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 3:20:48 PM EDT
your answer may be in the handgun /calibers forum.  or www.glocktalk.com
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 3:21:21 PM EDT
The Glockers like the GAP.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 3:22:22 PM EDT
It's hard to make a high cap .45 acp that feels good in the average hand because of the length and girth, the guns that feel okay end up going thin on material.

Glock can only get their mag wells so thin with their plastic, so they are pushing their shortened .45 gap, same width but shorter so it feels better in the hand.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 3:22:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/1/2005 3:23:46 PM EDT by mjohn3006]
45 GAP   ETA, ha.  just saw that I stole the pic from the Scottish Socialist Party site.

Link Posted: 1/1/2005 3:29:51 PM EDT
The one I shot was comfortable to shoot, I enjoyed it.   That being said, the Lawman .45 GAP ammo I shot patterned rather than grouped and the recoil from those hot loads were worse than normal .45ACP.  When Winchester Whitebox was put through it, the groups tightened right up and shot POA and was a lot better.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 3:47:40 PM EDT
The gap was so ole Gaston could put his name on a round. Anyways it can be a bit more forgiving about feeding and ejecting in  small CCW pistols. [IE short slides] However it comes at a price, namely, much higher pressures then the 45acp. It runs about double the pressures to do the same thing an .45ACP does and if one uses a +P+ACP round then it becomes moot. You cannot +P the gap as far as I can see. But I am sure someone will try.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 4:17:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By fxntime:
The gap was so ole Gaston could put his name on a round



+1

Not to mention sell more guns.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 4:24:01 PM EDT
45AutomaticColtPistol

45GayAndProud

You decide?
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 4:25:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By clean_cut:
The Glockers like the GAP.



Not the case. I thought it would be a good idea if they could get a .45 into a .40 slide. They failed. The niche they were looking for was never created.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 4:27:29 PM EDT
one is an american original

the other was created to work in a POS pistol.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 6:36:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By clean_cut:
The Glockers like the GAP.



Kaboom in 2 .45s
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 6:39:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ArevaloSOCOM:
one is an american original

the other was created to work in a POS pistol.



That's funny.  You think they are POS, but this horse has been beaten for a while now so I will add: IMHO.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 6:45:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By enigma2y0u:

Originally Posted By ArevaloSOCOM:
one is an american original

the other was created to work in a POS pistol.



That's funny.  You think they are POS, but this horse has been beaten for a while now so I will add: IMHO.




HK dammit.
Link Posted: 1/1/2005 7:23:41 PM EDT
Umm about 10 bucks a box?

Link Posted: 1/1/2005 7:27:54 PM EDT
When you want to sell something that no one needs the first step is to tell them they need it.

Example...go to the supermarket and see how many "New&improved" products there are.

SGtar15
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 3:03:50 AM EDT
Well I needed it before they ever came out with it.  Do the detractors have another source for .45 that will fit in a shorter grip frame to better fit my hand that is not single stacked?
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 3:07:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AK_Mike:
Well I needed it before they ever came out with it.  Do the detractors have another source for .45 that will fit in a shorter grip frame to better fit my hand that is not single stacked?




I have had many short statured females with tiny hands take to a full size 1911 like a duck to water. Unless you're cursed with dwarf hands, I cannot imagine a 1911 being too big for you?
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 3:14:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By AK_Mike:
Well I needed it before they ever came out with it.  Do the detractors have another source for .45 that will fit in a shorter grip frame to better fit my hand that is not single stacked?




I have had many short statured females with tiny hands take to a full size 1911 like a duck to water. Unless you're cursed with dwarf hands, I cannot imagine a 1911 being too big for you?



Exactly...I'm not that big of a guy and I handle my Para-Ordnance just fine.
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 3:16:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By AK_Mike:
Well I needed it before they ever came out with it.  Do the detractors have another source for .45 that will fit in a shorter grip frame to better fit my hand that is not single stacked?




I have had many short statured females with tiny hands take to a full size 1911 like a duck to water. Unless you're cursed with dwarf hands, I cannot imagine a 1911 being too big for you?



Reread the gentleman's post. He wants a dual stack .45 that fits his hands, not a "full size 1911."

Personally, I don't think that Para's dual stack or any other dual stack that is out there is too big, but then again I'm not stuck with AK_Mike's hands.
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 3:17:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By AK_Mike:
Well I needed it before they ever came out with it.  Do the detractors have another source for .45 that will fit in a shorter grip frame to better fit my hand that is not single stacked?




I have had many short statured females with tiny hands take to a full size 1911 like a duck to water. Unless you're cursed with dwarf hands, I cannot imagine a 1911 being too big for you?



The 1911 is very thin thinner than even my 9mm pistols.


I would skip on the gap, higher pressure less velocity, less bullet weight. Might as well go with 45acp +P
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 3:27:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By poink:
seems like there are some real rivalries going on between the two camps.

was the GAP really the answer to a question that was never asked? what was the point of introducing the GAP?

 

There are only internet rivalries going on.  Those that know better, go ACP.  Those that think Glocktalk.com is the best thing since sliced bread, go GAP.  Get it?
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 3:53:21 PM EDT
All the gun rags are toting it like it's the best thing since sliced bread, and giving all these stats and whatnot.

It's about the same speed. It's much higher pressure. It has more foot pounds at the muzzle when they hop it up and use lighter bullets.

They compare a 230 ACP to a 200 GAP and it looks like the GAP is better, because the velocity is higher and the footpounds are higher. But the bullets are different weights, so that's cheating.

It's interesting, but isn't necessary. It might, might, catch on in law enforcement. I don't really like the GAP, but a .45 is still better than an 9mm icepick.

on a lighter note:



Originally Posted By BobCole:
I have had many short statured females with tiny hands take to a full size 1911 like a duck to water.



My girlfriend and her best friend are both five and a half, 115-120 lbs, little hands, girly wrists, the whole shebang. They both love my 1911s, especially the one with the flat MSH. They also love my Ruger MkII .22/45.


Link Posted: 1/2/2005 3:54:41 PM EDT
One has a long, proud tradition of service the U.S. Military...



...and the other goes:
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 4:08:35 PM EDT
The .45 GAP is basically the New Coke of the 21st Century.  Its a fix to a problem that doesn't exist, any improvement of a cartridge that cannot be improved upon, and is targeted to people who are all ready happy with the product they have.

Did I miss anything?  
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 4:14:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FedGunner:
Umm about 10 bucks a box?




Don't forget the 45 GAP is also something like 1/8 inch shorter in case length. Arvin
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 4:14:18 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 4:24:03 PM EDT
45 GAP is to 45 ACP

as

XM8 is to the M1-16 / AR platform.

Link Posted: 1/2/2005 4:32:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 4:35:00 PM EDT
Not even my hydrashock 9mm?

Link Posted: 1/2/2005 5:58:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 6:12:03 PM EDT
reprinted from guntests mag


The Glock 37 was the size of a Glock 17/22/31 (albeit with a taller and wider slide) and carried 11 rounds of .45 (ten in the magazine, one in the chamber). To fit a 10-shot .45 mag into a grip the same size as the company’s medium-frame guns, Glock, in association, with Speer developed their own .45 auto cartridge, the .45 GAP (Glock Automatic Pistol). Calling the .45 GAP “a shortened .45 ACP” was unfair to Speer, and downplays what they accomplished. Speer didn’t just make a few changes to the .45 ACP and call it good, they designed their own .45 caliber auto pistol cartridge from the ground up. However, because that description of the .45 GAP did sum up its essence — a shorter cartridge launching the same bullets as the .45 ACP, we understand why people used it.

The .45 GAP was initially going to be called the .45 Glock. According to Ernest Durham, the ammunition development engineer who, working at Speer, designed the .45 GAP, there’s actually about 50,000 rounds of ammo out there with headstamps reading “.45 GLOCK”. Compared to the .45 ACP, the major difference in .45 GAP was naturally that its cartridge casing was considerably shorter, .755 in. versus .898 in. respectively. By comparison the 9mm Para casing was .754 in. long, the .40 S&W .850 in. For all practical purposes .45 GAP case length was identical to 9mm Parabellum.

The .45 GAP used a small pistol primer versus the .45 ACP’s large pistol primer. Many people have assumed the small pistol primer was used to prevent possible cartridge detonation when racking a live round out of the chamber, that the gun’s ejector might hit a large pistol primer if the round became slightly misaligned during the process. However according to Ernest Durham that wasn’t the case: for all the time people spend worrying about that possibility it’s actually a very unrealistic concern. It requires a very hard, precisely focused blow to ignite a primer (like what we get from a firing pin, amazingly enough). A nudge from an ejector as the slide was pulled slowly to the rear wouldn’t do the job. No, the reason the .45 GAP used a small pistol primer was to avoid having the stripper rail (that part of the underside of the slide that compressed the top cartridge in the magazine when the slide was forward, and stripped off the top round during feeding) from hitting the primer as the slide drove forward during the recoil cycle.

The .45 GAP, generating .45 ACP ballistics from a smaller casing necessarily operated at higher pressures, though not as much as you might think. The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturing Institute (SAAMI) set a max chamber pressure standard for the .45 GAP at 23,000 psi. By contrast for standard pressure .45 ACP, it’s 21,000, and .45 ACP +P is 23,000, identical to the .45 GAP.

Examining its internal dimensions, the .45 GAP casing was much more robustly constructed than .45 ACP. The web of the .45 GAP, as well as the amount of brass from its very base to the bottom of its interior around the flash hole, were both considerably thicker than .45 ACP. The .45 GAP had a rebated case rim (i.e. the rim was smaller than the case body) as an aid to feed reliability. As a cartridge began to feed out of the magazine, its rim didn’t drag on the cartridge below it. (An interesting piece of trivia, we think: most people don’t realize the .45 ACP is actually a rimmed casing, albeit barely. Its rim is one-half of one-millimeter wider than the case body.)

The G37’s slide was considerably taller and wider than other medium frame Glocks, so much so it was actually quite a bit wider than the frame. The G37 used the extended slide release first seen on Glock’s long slide competition models. If it had used the standard flat slide stop, the slide would overhang it so much you couldn’t reach it with your thumb.

Glock’s original plan was that the G37 be externally dimensionally identical to a Glock 17. Prototypes with a G17 size slide were built, tested and even shown at some trade shows. Eventually it was realized the slide velocity generated when you pop a G17 sized slide with .45 auto level recoil was simply too much for the high standard of feed reliability Glock demanded for their gun. They could have tried to compensate by going to a really heavy recoil spring but that would have made the gun difficult to operate. (The Glock 37 used an 18-pound recoil spring.) A better solution was simply to put more weight into the slide by making it larger.

One question many people have asked and not been able to answer: how close was the G37 butt in size and shape to other medium frame Glocks? Well, here’s the answer, straight from Glock: it’s the same frame. The frames for the Glocks 17, 22, 31, 34, 35 and 37 all come out of the same mold. They’re dimensionally identical. The only difference between the bottom half of a G37 and the other guns was a different ejector (the same part used in the .45 ACP chambered Glock 21).

Glock 37s come standard with fixed plastic sights notorious for breaking under hard use; price would be $614 suggested retail. $632 gets you a set of adjustable plastic sights even more fragile than their fixed counterpart. There are two Glock factory options for steel sights. The first, dimensionally identical to the plastic sights but made of steel, goes $636. Finally you can have those sights with 3-dot tritium inserts for $661; our test gun was so fitted, and all three lamps survived our testing. The front blade was short and fat (.168 in. tall by .160 in. wide). The rear notch was decently wide and somewhat shallow (.130 in. wide by .102 in. deep). Unfortunately, given the fat front sight, even that wide rear notch still gave a cramped sight picture with narrow light bars.

The extractor doubled as a loaded chamber indicator. When a round was in the firing chamber, the hinged extractor pivoted outward; this could be verified by sight or feel. We distrust all such devices and always partially retract the slide to do a visual chamber check even on guns so equipped.

Magazines were the same size as the Glock 17/22/etc. and would fit into closely molded pouches for same. Capacity was ten rounds. This was not one of those “military/law enforcement gets one thing, we get another” situations. Maximum capacity for this mag was ten rounds period — and it took some slick design work to get that.

Out-of-the-box the magazine springs were very stiff. Inserting all ten cartridges when the mags were new required using the supplied loading tool. After leaving the magazines fully loaded for a month, they could then be loaded without the tool, but it still wasn’t easy.

When an auto pistol magazine is fully loaded, ideally, when pushing down on the top round you want to be able to depress the “stack” about half a cartridge diameter. This ensures you could easily snap the magazine into the gun even with the slide forward. With G37 magazines by contrast there was very little compression left over. It required a serious whack with the heel of the hand to seat a fully loaded G37 10-round mag with the slide forward. Also, even though magazines were of the fully metal lined “drop free” variety, they wouldn’t drop when loaded with the full ten rounds. Pop out one round, and with nine rounds loaded when you punched the mag button they’d drop just fine.

Eventually we figured out the solution to these problems. With the magazine fully loaded, place the Glock loading tool on top of the “stack” and push downward as hard as you can. This depresses the rounds in the magazine, creating a much better stack. After that, not only would the magazine insert into the gun much more easily, it would also drop when fully loaded.

Trigger pulls went six pounds even - typical for a Glock running the standard “5.5-pound connector.” There’s approximately 1/2 in. takeup, and considerable creep, overtravel and reset distance. Don’t get us wrong, these are not bad trigger pulls unless you’ve been spoiled by much 1911 shooting. In order to find an out-of-the-box trigger action easier to shoot than a Glock, you’ve pretty much got to go to a 1911.

Three companies now produce .45 GAP ammo: Speer (four loads), Federal (one) and Winchester (four). Speer, the .45 GAP’s originator, makes 185- and 200-grain loads in both Lawman Total Metal Jacket (TMJ) and Gold Dot hollowpoint configuration. Federal has a 185-grain Hydra Shok. Finally, Winchester produces a 230-grain Winclean BEB (Brass Enclosed Base, a “lead free” training round), 230-grain Full Metal Jacket (FMJ), 230-grain jacketed hollowpoint (JHP) and 185-grain. Silvertip. Of the nine existing loads we tested eight. Speer had none of their 185-grain TMJs available at the time of this article.

Speer initially felt there was no way to load a 230-grain bullet in .45 GAP; the heaviest bullet weight possible was 200 grains; the necessarily longer 230-grainers would cause case bulging. Winchester solved that problem by changing the internal case dimensions. Inside Winchester .45 GAP brass the point at which the casing begins to angle in to form the web (called by Winchester the lead-in) starts slightly lower, thus 230-grain bullets could be seated without case bulging.

Overall this was by far the most accurate gun tested. Still not match quality accurate, mind you, but decent. In an upcoming evaluation of .45 GAP ammunition, our test gun didn’t post quite as good groups (which just goes to show, sometimes human beings can fire more accurately than a Ransom Rest). Best accuracy from the G37 came with Federal Hydra Shoks at 1.2 in. Only slightly larger were the Speer 200-grain TMJs and Winchester 185-grain Silvertips, both at 1.3 in. Speer 200-grain Gold Dots gave 1.5 in. The 185-grain Gold Dots and Winchester 230-grain JHPs were tied at 1.6 in. The Winchester 230-grain BEBs and 230-grain FMJs were 2 and 2.2 in. respectively. Winchester ball was by far the least accurate ammo in the G37 at 3.2 in. for its best effort.

For purposes of accuracy comparison with the other two test guns chambered for .45 ACP, fortunately Winchester makes a 185-grain Silvertip in both .45 ACP and .45 GAP. Winchester makes 230-grain hollowpoints in both cartridges. Granted the .45 ACP load is their excellent SXT, and in .45 GAP it’s a standard JHP in their “white box” line. Finally, 230-grain hardball was available in both cartridges; we fired American Eagle in .45 ACP and Winchester in .45 GAP. See the accompanying chart for full comparison info.

Groups were excellent for elevation, either spot-on or in some cases just slightly high. The fact the G37’s front/rear sight heights were so well adjusted out of the box for point of impact/point of aim shows Glock was really paying attention. As to windage, every group fired hit about 1 inch left. This could have been rectified by tapping the G37’s rear sight to the right in its dovetail.

Feed reliability was flawless. The gun fed, fired, ejected, locked its slide to the rear when empty, everything an auto pistol should do, every time. Given the basic Glock design’s cavernous ejection port, it came as no surprise the gun would easily live eject anything we loaded into it.
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 6:28:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 6:33:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By brasspile:
We all know what happens when you increase the pressure in a Glock > 9mm.



That is so much BS.

What is the best selling 10mm Auto? Glock. How many kBs do you hear about that one? None.

What about .357 Sig? The only kB I've heard with a Glock was using an aftermarket bbl.

Federal produces out of spec .40 cases and Glocks get labeled by people who have surfed more websites than have fired rounds from a Glock.

Ignorance must be bliss, it's so popular.
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 8:12:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By AK_Mike:
Well I needed it before they ever came out with it.  Do the detractors have another source for .45 that will fit in a shorter grip frame to better fit my hand that is not single stacked?




I have had many short statured females with tiny hands take to a full size 1911 like a duck to water. Unless you're cursed with dwarf hands, I cannot imagine a 1911 being too big for you?



Reread the gentleman's post. He wants a dual stack .45 that fits his hands, not a "full size 1911."

Personally, I don't think that Para's dual stack or any other dual stack that is out there is too big, but then again I'm not stuck with AK_Mike's hands.



Thanks dport.  You pointed out the critical point.  Normally I go with a single stack 1911, fits very well, but double stack 45's like the Para are just to bulky for me.  If I want more capacity than single stack, then shortening then length helps compensate for extra width.  I want a really compact .45 that is not single stacked.

I have a Glock 36 in .45 hat had a grip I could handle as opposed to the regular Glock .45/10 frame.  Now if they would make it in .45GAP, it would fit me even better.  However, Glock grips are another matter altogether.

I have gotten to shoot a Glock in .45GAP.  It was comfortable and accurate.

If someone made a short .50, I would be there in a flash.  The bigger the diameter, the better (larger crush cavity).  If .45 expands to .80, think about a .50.  50AE is too long for me and I don't need that much power.  I know someone is already working on such a cartridge (I've seen it), but I'm still waiting for true production.
Link Posted: 1/2/2005 8:19:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/5/2005 11:59:32 PM EDT
I was saying I like the .45 GAP for the reduced frame size, and I like the 1911 single stacks but couldn't handle the dual stack mags.

Now I just read S&W will be making a 1911 in .45 GAP, 7/8th size of a regular 1911.  I may get my wish yet.  While the 1911 grip is normally good for even small hands, the new model may be even more comfortable.
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 12:25:24 AM EDT
I think the only reason I would buy one would be if I lived in a country that banned calibers used by militrary forces.
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 4:33:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AK_Mike:

If someone made a short .50, I would be there in a flash.  




Now THAT would too cool!!!!!    
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 4:56:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By iNuhBaDNayburhood:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By brasspile:
We all know what happens when you increase the pressure in a Glock > 9mm.


That is so much BS.

What is the best selling 10mm Auto? Glock. How many kBs do you hear about that one? None.
<SNIP>


Obviously because the 10mm on the market today is a PUSSYCAT compared to the original 10mm velocities and pressures used in the past.  Due to liability in various firearms, ammunition manufacturers tamed down their 10mm loads.

Similarly, 8mm commercial rifle ammunition is also tamed down to work with rifles that may not be able to handle the pressures of the original cartridge's load specs.



Go to Glocktalk and specifically their 10mm forum and see what type of loads those guys are pushing out of their Glocks. Hardly pussycat loads.
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 5:34:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By brasspile:
We all know what happens when you increase the pressure in a Glock > 9mm.



That is so much BS.

What is the best selling 10mm Auto? Glock. How many kBs do you hear about that one? None.<snip>



The G20 was designed from the ground up to handle the high pressure loads of the 10. If Glock had scaled DOWN the G20 to get the G22 instead of scaling UP the G17, KBs would be just a myth. But instead, they went from a low pressure round to a higher one, without considering the implications.
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 5:47:08 PM EDT
First there are .40 cases laying all over the range like snowflakes and now this...
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 6:01:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By AK_Mike:

If someone made a short .50, I would be there in a flash.  




Now THAT would too cool!!!!!    



.50 GI? www.guncrafterindustries.com/model_1.htm
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 6:14:35 PM EDT
What was the question?

For a moment I thought that someone thought that the 45 GAP was equal to 45 ACP in ballistic performance.  If so,  why couldn't they load the 45 ACP with a similar load to even better performance?  

Dumb question, I guess?
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 6:48:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Centauro97:
What was the question?

For a moment I thought that someone thought that the 45 GAP was equal to 45 ACP in ballistic performance.  If so,  why couldn't they load the 45 ACP with a similar load to even better performance?  

Dumb question, I guess?



They can, it's called a 45ACP +P. The GAP is basically a 45 in a smaller case with increased pressure. Like the .40S&W its standard pressure is so high there is not +P rating for it.  With the .45ACP there is ability for a wider range of rounds and pressures, like the 9mm, for instance. With the GAP and the S&W you're pretty much stuck unless you want to under load it.

I still don't understand why Glock couldn't make a Practical/Tactical sized single stack. I think they would have went like hot cakes. Hell, I would have bought a GAP if they managed to keep the slide the same size as the .40s, but they weren't able to. Kinda defeated the purpose for me.
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 7:52:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2005 7:53:57 PM EDT by AK_Mike]

Originally Posted By Alien:

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By AK_Mike:

If someone made a short .50, I would be there in a flash.  




Now THAT would too cool!!!!!    



.50 GI? www.guncrafterindustries.com/model_1.htm



That's exactly what I'm talking about and who I was referring to but alas it's still a proprietory cartridge and handgun.  Also, it's still full length and I'd like it in a short GAP type envelope.
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 7:56:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By fxntime:
The gap was so ole Gaston could put his name on a round



+1

Not to mention sell more guns.



Make that +2
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 8:00:43 PM EDT
thing is, my hands aren't big and the Glock 21 feels fine, as does the Glock 30
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 8:01:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By poink:


was the GAP really the answer to a question that was never asked?



That answer works for me
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 3:49:13 PM EDT
I can't imagine ever buying a gun in this caliber unless I did not have knowledge of everything else that is available on the market.  If you want the regular frame Glock because the G21 is a bit too much, swallow your pride, buy a G22 and change to .40 cal.  I'd much rather have this proven gun than the G37 with the new bastard round.  

Not only would you get a couple extra rounds in the G22, you would not piss off the entire population of 45ACP shooters who didn't want or need the current standard to be re-invented...

Sig, S&W and others have managed to pack .45acp in a decent size pistol.  The HK USP seems to have an AWESOME double stack .45 that is easier to handle than the G21 - IMHO.  Sig did not have to invent a special round to fit the .45acp into the P228.  They used common sense and left well enough alone with the .40 cal 229.

The 45GAP is gun marketing at it's purest...
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 3:52:44 AM EDT
You people just don't get it, do you?  People with small hands want a .45 in a 9mm frame, is that so hard to understand?  It's only silly to those who don't have problems holding a double stack .45.

I don't hear anyone coming up with any other practical alternatives.  The mfg's have answered the call of those in need.  Do you really think they are basing their sales on the sole premise it's a new thing so should sell based on that?  Bugger off and leave it to people who need it.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top