True enough. If the chart or the clearance doesn't mention distance, you use time, GPS or no GPS. That was especially true in the early overlays and GPS approaches that were essentially overlays put on their own piece of paper. They were already timed holds. No need to change them at that stage. Probably aren't too many of those left anymore.

The issue that got me interested in the question is not so much the distance v. time argument about entries but varying published distances. There are, for example, two GPS approaches in the Denver area that have 7 NM holds associated with them rather than the more common 4 NM. One is the co-located HILPT and missed hold for the KAPA GPS 28; the other is the missed hold for the KBJC GPS 29R.

That's what got me to thinking. Why 7 instead of 4? I'm not satisfied with my own guess that it allows for ATC to let other aircraft "cut across" the hold without losing IFR separation based on where the holding aircraft is expected to be. Sounds too dicey. But it still leave the question for me of why the differing sizes.

As someone who works in this area, do you have some guidance for an answer?