Any desires for 45 GAP in other pistols??

[RsqVet]

Anyone else out there waiting and wanting to see the 45 GAP in other pistols? If so what?

So far as full size service pistols I'll take the 45 ACP every time cause it's cheaper to shoot, and for my avarage + hands I can deal with their size.

Personaly I would love to see Sig make a 239 with a stainless frame in 45 GAP --- maybe it's never going to happen but a pistol in the size of a 239 in a 45 cal round would be something to love.

Any other thoughts?

[ATW525]

I'm interested to see what Para is going to come up with, since they supposedly are working on .45 GAP pistols. I wouldn't mind a .45 GAP offering in Beretta 92 series, either, but "At this time the 92/96 is only being offer in a .9mm and .40 cal. There is no near future plans for this year of being offer in a .45 GAP"

[tulsamal]

Combat Handguns this month has a review of the new Glock 38 and 39. The 38 is the size of the 19. The 39 is like the 26/27. The reviewer said the 39 had "more pleasant" recoil than the 27 in .40 S&W. It would make a heck of a CCW gun if you carried in a Safepacker or fanny pack. I would like to shoot one at a rental range just to see for myself.

The one I actually want to buy NOW is the 5" SA XD Tactical in .45 GAP. That's more like what I expected from the Glock 37 but didn't really get.

Gregg

[Handy]

You know, the Glock GAP guns are NOT the same size as their 9mm counterparts. The frame is, but the slides are heavier and wider.


Imagine a Beretta 92 type with an even bigger top end.

[auto45]

A double stack 1911 might be an interesting one for the GAP. A redesigned frame of course.

I don't think it will do much in the 1911 singlestack arena unless Springfield can make their 3" more reliable than an ACP.

[CastleBravo]

I think the best use of .45 GAP isn't to convert 9mm guns to a caliber they can't handle without colossal slides, but rather to shrink the grips of large-frame .45 ACP guns for smaller hands. The problem with the Glock 37 is that they stuck to the plastic magazine bodies, which add bulk, when the whole purpose of .45 GAP is space efficiency.

I bet with a properly designed frame and grip panels, you could make a 10+1 flush fit magazine 1911 derivative in .45 GAP that is not very different in grip circumference from a 8+1 single-stack .45 ACP. Use thinner grip panels to compensate for the greater side-to-side thickness of the magazines, and .45 GAP is of course shorter front-to-back anyway. That would be interesting...

[Handy]

Sean,

The problem you run into when you go to minimum dimensions is that the grip ends up being almost square in cross section. The real question is whether you'd want the grip any shorter from to back than a KZ-45 or not.

[FirstFreedom]

I bet with a properly designed frame and grip panels, you could make a 10+1 flush fit magazine 1911 derivative in .45 GAP that is not very different in grip circumference from a 8+1 single-stack .45 ACP.

You sure could, and Wilson already did it - IN .45 ACP! It's called the KZ-45. And that's with a plastic frame - it could be even smaller than it is now, with other materials and proper design. [Hint... .45 GAP ===> just as worthless as it was last 13 times we discussed it].

So, the answer to the question asked in the thread title is a resounding No.

[IZinterrogator]

Personaly I would love to see Sig make a 239 with a stainless frame in 45 GAP --- maybe it's never going to happen but a pistol in the size of a 239 in a 45 cal round would be something to love.Almost definitely isn't going to happen. The 245 is already the size of the 229 and only holds six rounds. A 239 in the .45 GAP would have a grip too small to hold a useful capacity and would require heavily re-engineering both the frame and slide assembly. The 229 or the 245 could be re-engineered to take the round (245-new frame, 229-new slide), but it would require a large effort on the part of Sig for a round that has not yet proven it will hold a large market share. Personally, I think that 5-10 years down the road, the .45 GAP will outsell the .357 Sig, but like the Glock 37, Sig will have to engineer a whole new gun to utilize the round effectively. The .357 Sig is a much easier transition for a gun company because any .40 can be modified to handle the .357 Sig. All it takes is a new barrel and in a few cases, a new magazine.

[ATW525]

You sure could, and Wilson already did it - IN .45 ACP! It's called the KZ-45. And that's with a plastic frame - it could be even smaller than it is now, with other materials and proper design. [Hint... .45 GAP ===> just as worthless as it was last 13 times we discussed it].

Yeah, and for the price of one KZ-45 you could most likely have a Glock 37, 38 and a 39 to boot.

[Bullrock]

No!

[marshall2]

The Kel-Tec P11 is a 9mm that weighs a mere 14 oz. How about the P11 in 45 GAP?! :)

[RsqVet]

Did not mean to retread old paths here --- I can understand why folks would not be gung ho on the 45 GAP unless the firearm that chambers it offers something really superior --- which for the most part I agree has yet to happen --- though on the 239 would be very compact --- and if a 239 can hold 7 of .40 cal would 6 of .45 be unreasonable?

A 45 GAP 229 would sure be intresting as well.

[FirstFreedom]

Don't get me wrong - the gap is semi-useful and interesting in the *short* run (10-15 years), given the reality of the short-term profit motive of the manufs. But in the long run, big picture, I don't see buying something that technology WILL render obsolete (once enough competition drives manufs to re-design and re-tool), given the entrenchment of .45 acp. And the proof that technology will render it obsolete eventually is already here - the Wilson and the Taurus 24/7 & MilPro .45s already have equally ergo grips in .45 acp. The slides aren't any narrower regardless, so that's a wash (moot point). And I don't see wanting to *encourage* the manufs to be lazy / non-innovative by feeding the monster (buying a gap). But hey, more power to ya if you like it. In the short run, it's a fairly useful development for obtaining a nicer grip in a forty-five.

[JMC]

Any desires for 45 GAP in other pistols??

None what so ever. Not even the Gluck 37 or whatever they call it. :barf:

[dairycreek]

.............(I really am a crotchety old man) but, to me, the 45 GAP seems to be the absolute answer to a nonexistent problem. Other than Glock wanting their own proprietary caliber it just does not make a lot of sense to me. Oh well, the marketplace will make the final decision in the long run. My bet is that the 45 GAP will fall into insignificancy. We'll see ;)

[IZinterrogator]

It all comes down to grip length and width since you're talking about a single-stack, Rsqvet. I'm holding a 239 mag next to a 245 mag right now and although they are a similar length, the width of the 239 mag is pushing the limit of what can fit in the 239 grip. The way the bullets nest together in the mag at that angle may knock the capacity down to five, also. The .45 GAP will require re-engineering the frame as well as the slide assembly. The .45 GAP may (if gun companies decide to do it) be built in guns that don't have large retooling costs. After all, Glock didn't make an entirely new pistol, they made a new slide assembly for the G17, G19, and G26. That's why the most likely candidate for a Sig in .45 GAP would be a 229.

Of course, inter-manufacturer snobbery may be holding back the .45 GAP. Glock puts ".45 Auto" and ".357" on their barrels instead of ".45 ACP" and ".357 Sig". I doubt Sig and Colt will ever make a .45 GAP model since they spent time and money to develop those cartridges and Glock won't give them the advertising space, while every other company I can think of refers to them by their true titles. Springfield has not made their own cartridge (yet), so Glock has not snubbed them in any way. That's why Springfield has come out with an XD and a 1911 in .45 GAP already. Glock's attitude towards other gun companies may come back to bite them in the butt on this one.

[Ozzieman]

And when they come out with a 1911 like Springfield did with the 45 GAP, there WILL be a 3rdKimber in my collection.

[Ozzieman]

All I can say is that if you dont have large hands, pick up a Springfield 1911 in 45 GAP and then a normal 1911. and you will quickly see the advantage.
Its not all that much smaller grip frame, but it makes a big difference.

[ATW525]

I think the best use of .45 GAP isn't to convert 9mm guns to a caliber they can't handle without colossal slides, but rather to shrink the grips of large-frame .45 ACP guns for smaller hands.

That's my feeling, exactly... that's why I'm waiting to see the Para-Ordnance offerings in the GAP. I think the Para high cap 1911 style pistols and the .45 GAP could be a winning combination.