Author Topic: Glock's new 45GAP (Read 1459 times)

Varmint Hunter · « **on:** April 10, 2004, 03:49:24 AM »

Does anyone have any experience with the new 45GAP cartridge or the guns that are chambered for it?

VH

wallynut · « **Reply #1 on:** April 11, 2004, 11:31:56 AM »

What is it you want to know? It shoots the same as a 45acp. For those that may not like the grip size of the 21, the 37 may be what you are looking for. The recoil is no different, accuracy is the same and so is the velocity for the most part, the gap does better with lighter bullets, while the acp does better with 230grs for speed. Only down side I've had yet is the availability of ammo at retailers, but if you reload that is no problem. You can use acp reloading dies. Not sure if Glock is still pushing lower prices on the distributors, when I got mine, it was $50 less then the rest of the line.

Dutch/AL · « **Reply #2 on:** April 16, 2004, 05:35:28 AM »

Where I live they are selling them for $125-$150 cheaper than the other Glock models. When I asked the fellow at the gun store "why" he stated that they were having a hard time getting anyone to buy them, and when they moved out the ones they had, they weren't going to stock them anymore.

JohnK · « **Reply #3 on:** May 15, 2004, 04:02:01 PM »

I rented the Glock 37 to try it out. It recoiled about the same as my Sig 220, which you'd expect since they're about the same weight. It did reinforce why I don't own a Glock yet, they just don't feel quite right in my hand.

I think the 45 GAP is an interesting caliber, I'll just wait to get it in something other than a Glock, maybe a XD when/if they chamber for it.

One gunshop in town said they'd sold exactly 1 Glock 37 so far and didn't expect to sell any more either. If the gun mags keep up the hype about it and some other companies chamber for it soon I think it will do well, otherwise it's likely to fade away like the 41 AE.

jerry68 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 03, 2004, 05:35:50 AM »

The Glock 37 may go away... but the 45GAP is here to stay... much like the 40S&W, it is the next big thing. Glock will eventually have to chamber the 45GAP in a true 19/23 size pistol(eliminating the 21 size slide), which will sell like hotcakes.

Savage · « **Reply #5 on:** October 03, 2004, 01:52:58 PM »

I see the GAP as a solution searching for a problem.
Savage

JimInNJ · « **Reply #6 on:** October 08, 2004, 02:35:14 PM »

I really like my model 37.

- Jim

aimless · « **Reply #7 on:** October 15, 2004, 02:45:24 AM »

It allows Glock to market a pistol to police departments that has "45acp power" with a smaller grip size (v. 21's thick grip) that smaller men and women can use. Also they avoid having to manufacture another frame to handle a full size single stack 45 pistol-I think they would have been smarter to make a 1911 size 45acp Glock.

Savage · « **Reply #8 on:** October 15, 2004, 08:42:03 AM »

I still need to handle a mdl37. I'm still in the dark about how shortening the cartridge makes the double stack grip thinner.

Reduce the depth of the grip, front to back--------yep, but the width? Sounds like someone has just violated the laws of physics!
Savage

aimless · « **Reply #9 on:** October 16, 2004, 09:22:17 AM »

The lower plastic section of the pistol is the same size as a model 17. The slide is beefier, sort of like a model 21 slide on a 17 frame.

Savage · « **Reply #10 on:** October 16, 2004, 01:31:55 PM »

aimless,
Ok---------help me here,-------------is the 17 grip the same width as the 21? As the GAP uses the same case as the ACP only shorter, this must be true. Seems to me the only dimension that could be reduced is the "backstrap to frontstrap" dimension. I have a 21 but do not own a 17.
My 21 has had a grip mod, so it is not factory spec. If anyone would care to post the actual grip measurements of a 17 I would be interested.
Savage

minutemen1776 · « **Reply #11 on:** March 01, 2005, 09:00:46 AM »

Quote from: Savage

I see the GAP as a solution searching for a problem.
Savage

I think the "problem" is one borne by the manufacturers, not the shooters. The different case lengths of the 9mm/.40 S&W cartridges versus the .45 ACP mean that a frame from the former cannot be used in a gun chambered for the latter. Ever notice how, when a new pistol design is introduced, the 9mm and .40 models come first, and then the .45 ACP follows much later? This is because the gun must be redesigned to accommodate the larger dimensions of the .45 ACP cartridge. If, however, case lengths could be standardized, pistol frames could become a true one-size-fits-all affair. This principally benefits the manufacturer, though the shooter might realize a marginal benefit from a slightly reduced frame length. Otherwise, what does the .45 GAP give the world that it does not already have? Nothing really. Frankly, the near-sacred status of the .45 ACP, coupled with no real benefit being bestowed by the .45 GAP, will probably doom this cartridge.