.45 GAP

[AH6IP]

OK, let the games begin. Is it really worth the effort? Still need a bigger holster(slide); now you need different tooling for reloading?? And new brass--not sure the additional cost to get set up for the GAP will outway the fact you get a slightly smaller grip(and then there is ARS that can slim down any Glock 21 grip to where it feels like a 1911 for a WHOLE lot less)!!!

[TriggerT]

.45 GAP just seems to me to be the answer to the question nobody asked.

[EricW]

A grip reduction on a 21 is just not the same as the smaller frame. I've felt a couple 21's with reduction jobs and yes, they're better than what they were, but are still unusable for people like me.

I don't get the point of ragging on the 37. If you're an LEO and you're having it shoved down your throat, I could understand some animosity, but if this is a consumer choice issue, why not simply *not* buy one? Market economics at work. Problem solved.

[Religious Shooter]

I don't think it's worth it for games. For self-defense I think it's a good a idea. But for games? Stick with the other calibers. It's easier on the wallet. ... Mi dos centavos.

[jcmios]

I have a G-37 and a G-21 plus 7 other Glocks. I enjoy the G-37 very much, it is fun to shoot and to reload for. The GAP fills a need for those that want a 45 but can't shoot the large frame G21 sue to hand size or are just not comfortable with the large grip of the G-21.

There are many guns that people think are worthless but others find very useful to their particular needs.

If the G-37 or other guns are not for you then don't buy them but also don't dis it just because it's not to your liking.

Jim

[AH6IP]

Ain't bad mouthin' it, just wondering what the underlings think about it. Seems Glock ( FWIW-I got 3 of em!) could make a real nice slimmer trimmer .45 ACP. I do understand economics, it's got to be cheaper to invent a new round than change up their tooling for frame manufacture.

[TriggerT]

I agree. I love my G-36, and there aren't any Glocks I can think of that I don't like. I'm not knocking the gun, I am just not so sure about the need for the .45 Gap round. We can all discuss this until we are blue in the face, but only time will tell the story. I think if Glock pushes the round hard enough, and gives enough LF agencies a break on that caliber of gun, then the GAP will probably do OK.

[Flexmoney]

The need it fills is seems clear to me (just my guess)...

It's a small framed gun...and it's a "45". They will likely sell them by the wheelbarrow full.

(I am pretty sure there are some early version of this Glock that had the skinny (G22/17 width) slide. They must not have been holding up.

[Joe D]

The .45 GAP is a much more efficient round than the ACP. There is so much wasted space in the ACP case. Too bad Glock did not take the G36, extend the frame to a 8 + 1 size and put a 5" slide on it.

I worked up some loads for a friend's G37 using a 230 gr bullet. It is a very soft shooting gun when loaded to a 170 PF.

[AH6IP]

Is it still considered a low pressure round?? And if so, surely they can go to a standard size frame-maybe even a gun ala G35 style?? That would be interesting. Do you think the ammo manufacturers will jump on and support it? Interestingly-I just read an article where the USMC has purchased 10000 G37's for the Corp. Of course, the article mentions they could not verify this info, but it sounds legit. The more I read, the cooler it sounds. Check this out-

45GAP

[AH6IP]

And this-

www.45GAP.com

BTW-does it require a new resizing die to reload, or just adjustment of your ACP stuff??

[EricW]

Marines buy 10,000 of the much hated, despised, maligned, devil-incarnate Glock 37 and are all going to hell in a handbasket for their crime against humanity and the spirit of John Moses Browning.

As far as I can tell, it all may be urban legend. There is only one article on the subject on the defense review site and everybody and their brother is referencing that one article. I guess I'll just call Glock and ask tomorrow.

[AH6IP]

As they protect for us the right to be able to own whatever blaster we want! And that's from an Army pilot(must be the beer). Hey-if your scared of Glocks, say so. LOL

I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE-check out my add in the classifieds!!!

[EricW]

As they protect for us the right to be able to own whatever blaster we want! And that's from an Army pilot(must be the beer). Hey-if your scared of Glocks, say so. LOL

No, I own 4 Glocks - one of which is literally worn slick. I just don't see what the "problem" is. I guess I'm just dense.

Has it been resolved yet whether the G37 uses THE SAME frame as the G17/22, or is it merely a frame that is SIMILAR in dimensions? I read Robin Taylor's article in FS and there seems to be some question there still. His 37 frame is not dimensionally identical to the 17/22, but Glock claims they are indeed one and the same.

[Religious Shooter]

Apparently that article is BS. The author apparently was getting his chain pulled.

I'm the author of the story, and I'm not going to lie to you guys. I did go somewhat out on a limb on this one, in that I'm relying on a single source for this info. When I first heard about it, I was, of course, skeptical as well. If you read the story, you can see that the information knocked me for a loop when I first heard it. So, why did I believe my source and go ahead and publish the piece without secondary confirmation? Three reasons: 1) My source assured me he was positive that the info he was telling me was accurate 2) to be first, and 3) by the time I got this info, it was too late to contact anyone at USMC Infantry Weapons or USMCHQ to confirm it. So, I bit the bullet, so to speak, and went with my source on this one.

Now, if it turns out that he was messing with me (in which case, I'd have to track him down and publicly flog him with a pimp stick in front of his wife and children--kidding), or he's gone on a one way trip to crazyville, well...then I guess I'll have to print a REALLY BIG retraction along with a giant helping of mea culpa. Oh, and don't forget the big fat apology I'll have to issue to all of you for my being so brazen and stupid.

I'm (sincerely) hoping that doesn't happen. Just one more thing--usually, in order to be first (whether it be a story, or a product, or whatever), you have to take some risks. Well, I've certainly taken one here. And, ya' know what? I gotta' say, I'm feelin' kinda' lucky. :-) Now, where did I put those dice?

__________________

David Crane

DefenseReview.com

david@defensereview.com

http://www.defensereview.com

Niner's Club #6668

http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=...37&pagenumber=2

http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?n...article&sid=474

[petej]

1. frame size the same as a G19/22? Yes, although the gap frame has a bigger locking block and as Robin found out, it sports the newer security tabs inside the grip void area.

2. Die set? Yes, I just use a Dillon .45 ACP die set along with a factory Lee carbide crimp die. There are some variations that you can read about at 45gap.com in the reloading article, or by visiting the gap forum at glocktalk.com.

3. Why is the frame beefed up? This is how it was explained to me. Apparently, the standard size Glock 22 slide worked most of the time, but was a little too dependent on springs so there were slight variations that could occasionally cause reliability problems. Glock ended up mating a re-contoured, highly beveled, shorter (by 0.27”/7mm) Glock 21 heavy slide to a Glock 17/22/31/37 sized frame. In fact, the nicely beveled G37 slide looks very sleek compared to a huge G21 blocky slide. The new Glock 37 weighs 3.03 oz./85 g. more than a Glock 22. Going with the heavier slide really was the best solution to maintain long term reliability and durability of the pistol, instead of relying too much on springs alone to tame the high momentum slide action. If you compare the width of the G17/22/31 slide to frame fit, the slide is actually a little bit narrower than the frame! On the other hand, the Glock 37 slide is actually flush with the frame and looks quite symmetrical, and is not oversized at all.

4. 10 +1, is that it? No, when new hi-caps are legal again, the G37 mag can immediately jump to 11 + 1 with a +2 mag extension.

5. Why not just do a grip reduction? Simple. The grip backstrap on the G37 actually helps absorb and spread out the recoil impulse.

6. Does factory GAP ammo really have a 23,000 psi pressure? No, although that's the SAAMI max average pressure. According to various sources, GAP factory ammo runs between 19,900 to just under 22,000 psi, in order to make it fairly friendly to shoot. The strong reinforced brass can take major punishment. Here is a link to my latest findings on gap acp comparions:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/petej/45gap.45acp.plusp.htm

7. As Robin mentioned in his Front Sight GAP article, the GAP should fair fine in Limited 10 in either minor or major. It might work well in Revolver Division also. Hopefully S&W will give the GAP a thumbs up officially. I'm assuming that production division will bump up the mag limit when hi-caps are legal again, which would affect the GAP a bit? Oh, and Robin demonstrated that the GAP works great in the bowling pins event.

cheers,

pete

[EricW]

Thanks Pete.

BTW, Robin is a him...

[petej]

Fixed. I really do need an editor.

[Vince Pinto]

Apart from any marketing hype and/or ballistic arguments, one important reason for the "GAP" round (from the factory point of view) is so that Glock have their very own calibre.

Remember there's 45ACP (Colt), 40S&W and 357SIG

[kevin c]

So, what's stamped on the bbl? .45 GAP I'm sure, as opposed to .45 (for the ACP), .40 (for the S&W round) and .357 (for SIG's).

[Duane Thomas]

Has it been resolved yet whether the G37 uses THE SAME frame as the G17/22, or is it merely a frame that is SIMILAR in dimensions? I read Robin Taylor's article in FS and there seems to be some question there still. His 37 frame is not dimensionally identical to the 17/22, but Glock claims they are indeed one and the same.

Just got through doing a couple of articles on the G37. According to Glock, the only difference between a G37 and G17/22/etc. frame is the different ejector (the same one used in the G21 AAMOF).

[Duane Thomas]

.45 GAP just seems to me to be the answer to the question nobody asked.

Actually, the question was, "How can we get a .45 caliber auto pistol cartridge into a medium frame gun?" The length of the .45 ACP absolutely requires a large frame gun. Even the "small" .45 ACPs are cut-down large frames. The .45 GAP gives the opportunity to have 9mm/.40/.45 all in medium frames.

[Duane Thomas]

Is it still considered a low pressure round??

SAAMI pressure spec for the .45 GAP is 23,000 psi. By contrast, for the .45 ACP it's 21,000. Interestingly, the spec for .45 ACP +P is also 23,000 psi, same as the .45 GAP.

[Gun Geek]

Been thinking about this subject a little.

I come down on the side that the 45 GAP is a good thing.

What you're seeing is the result of the march of technology - better powders, brass, etc allowing us to get a more efficient round. Somebody said above that the 45ACP has lots of wasted case space. I completely agree. I put 4.3gn (admittedly a light load at 170pf) of Clays into a 45ACP and it fills about 1/3 - 1/2 of the useable space. If I cranked it up, I'd still have lots of space left. If I could trade that unused space for more rounds in the gun, well, that seems sort of obvious doesn't it? The best solution would be that there is NO case, so any step in that direction is a good thing.

The GAP is an affront to John Browning's fantastic 100 year old design. So? Betcha somebody said the same thing about the 45ACP when it came out, and everyone still shot 45 colt wheelies! If JMB still walked the earth today, he'd probably be wondering why we want to cling to something that is clearly outdone by new technology. Heck, he would have probably invented the GAP (or something better!) himself and called it the 45 JMB (since we're more into marketing these days).

I haven't heard anything in the yapping that is truly a technical problem or drawback. Yes, Glock is working out bugs in the 37, but so what. That will come around. I think we didn't get the 1911 right until Kimber forced the stock manufs to straighten up.

This stuff is just like the argument against the short and supershort mags in the rifle world. If it truly is give it a few years and there won't be much of the old stuff sold. The WSM and WSSMs are better and they are eroding the sales of traditional cartridges.

What I'm waiting for is the 1911 holding 10 or 11 GAPs. Now, we're smokin.

BTW I do think Glock is being disrespectful when they omit other manufacturer's names off of the barrels stamp or literature. I'd like to see the other guys come up with something so they don't have to put "GAP" on their barrel. Maybe 45 NAP (New Auto Pistol).

Ok, my 2!

[AH6IP]

For Duane Thomas-

So-is the standard trigger/bar used in a G17/22 used in the G37?