Attila Posted December 20, 2004 Share Posted December 20, 2004 And if I wanted the standard full-size grip, I would take the 357 Sig, 40 S&W, or 9mm versions before the GAP.Maybe these agencies should try to train for more accurate shooters with the common and plentiful calibers already proven than jumping on the latest fad. Remember the FBI and the S&W 1076 10mm? When they say "Special Ops" I believe they are talking about military. Not civilian LE. They have to use FMJ. They can't use the HP's that make the 9mm and .40 good or equal options when compared to the .45. Many of the units can use ammo other than FMJ. I believe that it was determined that fighting terrorist is not the same as fighting a State and therefore the rules of war such as the use of expanding ammo are not applicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religious Shooter Posted December 20, 2004 Share Posted December 20, 2004 So are you saying that in Iraq and Afghanistan the military special operations units (Special Forces, SEALS & Marine Recon) are using hollow points? If you get down to it that would mean the regular army and marines would also be able to use hollow points. I honestly doubt that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted December 20, 2004 Share Posted December 20, 2004 Thread drift advisory. Thanks! E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spd522 Posted December 20, 2004 Share Posted December 20, 2004 I still think the G37 is an answer to a problem already solved. Why not use the G30 in 45acp if you need a big hole, want a Glock, but have small hands? The GAP has had some problems, just as the G17, G21,and G22 did when they came out. It took a few years for the others to prove themselves. The G17 and G21 were ammo finicky while the G22 had ejector, extractor, and mag follower issues. I sure wouldn't want to trust my life on the front lline to something that unproven. With only 10 rd mags, capacity must not be an issue. Since Sigs are already in the system, I don't see why they wouldn't go with a proven performer in the Sig P220. Glocks don't have any better reliability than Sigs. Even the USP 45 Compact would fit the bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AH6IP Posted December 20, 2004 Author Share Posted December 20, 2004 Well, and this is out of the article-must be 10 rnd mags, must pass the salt, mud, sand, water, etc,etc test. Ya know, there just in no perfect pistol. Never will be. I guess they just want something that fails the least and will go bang most of the time with a big bullet. When asked why do they shoot a .45, they said-'cause they don't make a .46! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 Why not use the G30 in 45acp if you need a big hole, want a Glock, but have small hands? Because a differently shaped backstrap on the G30 actually gives it a longer trigger reach than the G21. I can handle a G21 just fine, but the G30 is a bit much for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 I would have to say that these "agencies" have the best shooters in the world, so training is not the issue. They want to go back to a bigger (bigger is better?) bullet it sounds like. And even though we all love the 1911, it just doesn't pass their torture test, ie, dragging through the mud, sand, etc,etc. Ahem, "... A torture test was conducted on March 3rd, 1911. The test consisted of having each gun fire 6000 rounds. One hundred shots would be fired and the pistol would be allowed to cool for 5 minutes. After every 1000 rounds, the pistol would be cleaned and oiled. After firing those 6000 rounds, the pistol would be tested with deformed cartridges, some seated too deeply, some not seated enough, etc. The gun would then be rusted in acid or submerged in sand and mud and some more tests would then be conducted...." More can be found here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spd522 Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 Because a differently shaped backstrap on the G30 actually gives it a longer trigger reach than the G21. I can handle a G21 just fine, but the G30 is a bit much for me. I find just the opposite for me and I have smaller hands. The G21 is not comfortable for me at all while the G30 feels quite comfortable. Proves there is no perfect gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 True. But I'm not talking about matters of subjective comfort. I'm talking about trigger reach. And the G30 has a longer trigger reach than the G21, thus it's not an instant fix for people who find the G21 too large. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 I still don't understand how is it that Glock made the G36 work fine (at least mine does) with its slim slide and frame but for the GAP they had to go top-heavy. Maybe the guide rod system is the key, but what prevents them to develop one for the duty size pistols. Again, maybe they need to come up with a full size slim-line .45 (read single stack) with a 5" barrel. The Glock of my dreams! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now