[lklawson]

So if it had been called 45 Sig, that would have been OK?

Funny thing is, it did everything the .45 ACP does, it’s a GREAT design in that sense. But the ONLY extra thing it did was let you use smaller guns as .45 launchers. It still limited capacity vs everything else, and cost more, which was why people dumped it so fast once they started trying to pay for training.

The idea for the .45GAP looked great on paper. It does everything then .45ACP does in a smaller, more compact package so it'll fit in more handguns (including the glock). It has exactly the same bullet and same performance as the .45ACP. The guys who love .45ACP will love this!

Except that they didn't realize that the die-hard .45ACP fans don't love it because of empirical performance metrics, regardless of what they claim. And because the .45GAP wasn't a .45ACP the "a 45 won't shrink" folks didn't want to have anything to do with it.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[bumthum]

The idea for the .45GAP looked great on paper. It does everything then .45ACP does in a smaller, more compact package so it'll fit in more handguns (including the glock). It has exactly the same bullet and same performance as the .45ACP. The guys who love .45ACP will love this!

Except that they didn't realize that the die-hard .45ACP fans don't love it because of empirical performance metrics, regardless of what they claim. And because the .45GAP wasn't a .45ACP the "a 45 won't shrink" folks didn't want to have anything to do with it.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

.45 GAP isn't compatible with .45 ACP chambers is it? Drifting back to the days of .45 GAP being the "new hotness" I recall people complaining about the idea of buying a new similar sized gun to essentially get similar performance. I have never been a Glock fan, they're good guns, but I've always considered them to be the Ford Taurus of handguns, reliable, good, but nothing special. I only have vague memories of ,45 GAP, but I remember thinking myself, a 1911 fan, that it wasn't likely to be a successful cartridge because, from a practical perspective, it really only reduced the grip circumference needed on a handgun... and it didn't really seem to reduce it much when held in the hand, at least to me.

I think .357 SIG is a different beast because it offers significantly different performance over other cartridges in similar sized pistols. Likewise, I think .30 SC offers excellent performance potential in smaller pistols and increased capacity without performance loss in similar sized pistols, when compared with 9mm Luger.

Again, I'd like to dive in .30 SC just because, but I want it in something other than a Shield.

 

[lklawson]

.45 GAP isn't compatible with .45 ACP chambers is it?

In the same way that the .380ACP is compatible with the 9mm.
Both the .45ACP and the GAP headspace on the case mouth. The exterior case width is essentially the same (from a quick glance at dimensions posted online). I'm betting you could drop a GAP into an ACP chamber and it would slide all the way down until the case mouth hit the face. I'm also GUESSING that you could load GAP into a 1911 mag and it would feed into the gun and the extractor would hold it in place (again, like a 380 in a 9mm chamber). Max pressure for the GAP is 23K, same as a .45ACP +P, so bad things could happen.

Again, I'd like to dive in .30 SC just because, but I want it in something other than a Shield.

I'd love to see conversion kits for several different cartridges for my gun. .30SC and .22TCM-9R are top on my list. But I doubt that Mossy will ever offer them though.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk