View Full Version : What's a good first 9mm?
I am looking to pick up a rock solid 9mm that I could use as a CCW and that my wife could also shoot. Only 9mm that I have ever shot is the one issued to me by the USAF :D
I know most folks here are Glock and M&P folks but just looking for some options to check out. Thanks.
Business_Casual
07-12-09, 13:32
There are a couple of threads on this topic gathered here:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=30221&highlight=reference
and here:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=15243
Which I'm sure you overlooked.
M_P
Thanks much. I am a little slow on the search button. :(
I might be biased, but I say GLOCK 19...lol
SIG 239, 228, and 229 are nice choices too...
Go to your local range, rent a few and see what fits you best. It's all about feel and what you are comfortable with. Try different calibers. You might be suprised to find you are good shooting another caliber. Some of my fav 9mm CC pieces are the Kahr PM9 (though it is pricey), Glock 26, (please dont hate me everyone) Kel-Tec PF9, and S&W M&P. Those are just some of the CC's I have shot and like. Your results/tastes may vary.
As for your wife, let her try some weapons of her own choosing. I remember taking my wife with me for the first time, she loved being able to pick what she wanted. Chances are what you are comfortable with might not be what she is comfortable with. If she hasn't shot, see if she enjoys it and if she does, get her in a class. You might even want to take the class with her as a refresher.
Good Luck, be safe, and have fun! Let us know what you go with!
Being a .45 guy myself I have recently picked up a P30 that I like a lot. I had to learn a different grip than I was used to on my 1911, but the transition has been pretty seamless so far.
The M&P line is also very nice and very reasonably priced. The new "Pro" line I like a lot and will probably pick one up n the near future.
I also really like my Hk P7M8 but I wouldn't recommend it for heavy training, as it get as hot as a June bride in a feather bed...
The first thing to determine, will be what the pistols primary use will be.
I am sure others that know much more than I do will be along shortly with all of their technical wisdom.
First nine or last nine............Glock 19, 26, or Kahr K9 or P9.
woodandsteel
07-12-09, 14:40
My first answer is ususally the Glock 19. That coming from a Glock 22/23 shooter.
But lately, I have been eyeing the Smith and Wesson M&P. It fits better in my hand than the Glock does. Also, I like the stock sights that come with it. Plus the M&P does have the changeable backstraps and the optional thumb safety.
I have no experience shooting the M&P, but others here seem to have good things to say about it.
I did notice that the magazines for the M&Ps were running about $8.00 more than the Glocks, the last time that I checked.
Personally, I will probably stick with the Glock for myself. But, the wife and I are looking for an M&P for her. Our only difficulty is that we are having a hard time locating one of the M&P 40c's with a thumb safety. (The thumb safety, and the .40 caliber, is something my wife is insisting on)
My suggestion is S&W M&P9 (fs). For options other than M&P and Glock you may want to consider the Walther P99.
crusader377
07-12-09, 14:55
I think you should go to a range and attempt to rent as many 9mms as possible and find out which ones work best for you. There are numerous handguns available that are high quality and have solid reputations. You can't go wrong with a Glock, M&P, Beretta, HK, SIG, CZ, Browning, etc...
That said, I would look at the CZ line up particularly the CZ-75 or if you are looking to carry the CZ p-01. I have been extremely impressed with my CZ-75 and it is very reasonably priced.
However, if I had just one 9mm it would have to be the Browning hi-power. Out of all the 9mms that I have owned or fired, nothing quite matches the hi-power in overall accuracy, handling, or reliability although the CZ-75 does comes very close. The Browning makes it so easy to shoot well IMO.
Business_Casual
07-12-09, 15:04
I have been extremely impressed
Is there a reason why you would recommend those two pistols in particular?
Particularly over other available designs from HK, Glock and S&W?
Has anyone done any durability testing on recently on some other designs that you've had a chance to review?
M_P
crusader377
07-12-09, 15:25
Is there a reason why you would recommend those two pistols in particular?
Particularly over other available designs from HK, Glock and S&W?
Has anyone done any durability testing on recently on some other designs that you've had a chance to review?
M_P
M_P, I think alot about choosing a pistol is based off of personal preference. I think HK, Glock, and S&W make great products. Actually, my sister is purchasing her first pistol soon and I recommended to her a Glock 19 because when we went to the range and rented a variety of pistols along with the ones that I owned, the Glock was the one the worked best for her and the Glock is a great handgun.
To answer your durability questions:
For the Browning Hi-power: Proven combat service in numerous wars and conflicts since the 1930s: WWII, Korea (commonwealth service), Vietnam (Australian service), Falklands war, numerous wars in africa and the middle east, Gulf war I and II, OEF.
For the CZ P-01
CZ NATO test
4000 dry firings
3000 De-cockings
Operator level disassembly 1350 times with out ware or damage to components.
Complete disassembly 150 times, this is all the way down, pins, springs etc.
100% interchangability, any number of pistols randomly selected, disassembled, parts mixed and reassembled with no failures of any kind including loss of accuracy.
The P-01 is now a NATO classified pistol and issued the NATO stock number NSN 1005-16-000-8619.
The CZ P-01 is the culmination of several years of exhaustive design and testing. Ceska Zbrojovka has always had some of the most rigorous testing requirements in the world but, the Czech National police has required that they go even further, the testing regiment for this new pistol was the most demanding anyone has ever encountered. There are almost 20 specific requirements covering everything from accuracy to interchangability, from safety to reliability/durability and everything in between.
The pistol: The CZ P-01 is a Gen 3 pistol that began as a requirement for a lightweight compact pistol that will deliver the accuracy and durability of a full size, full weight pistol. This was no small task, several manufacturers declined to even start the project.
The first thing you notice about this pistol is the M3 light rail on the frame, a first for CZ, the alloy frame is a little wider at the top than a steel CZ 75. This adds strength and rigidity for mounting the light and increasing the accuracy and service life of the pistol. The P-01 also sports enhanced controls as well as a drop free magazine and a lanyard loop.
The pistol was required to pass a wide variety of tests:
The police required that the pistol ensure the highest level of comfort, an extended slide release was added as well as an extended magazine release and the trigger was reshaped to give a more consistent pull throughout the trigger stroke.
The pistol must be 100% reliable in extreme conditions, the following is a list of some of the minimum requirements.
Must be able to complete the following without failure:
4000 dry firings
3000 De-cockings
Operator level disassembly 1350 times with out ware or damage to components.
Complete disassembly 150 times, this is all the way down, pins, springs etc.
100% interchangability, any number of pistols randomly selected, disassembled, parts mixed and reassembled with no failures of any kind including loss of accuracy.
Safety requirements:
Drop test
1.5 meter (4.9”) drop test, this is done 54 times with the pistol loaded (blank) and the hammer cocked. Dropping the pistol on the butt, the muzzle, back of the slide, sides of the gun, top of the slide, in essence, any angle that you could drop the gun from. This is done on concrete and 0 failures are allowed! A failure is the gun firing.
3meter drop (9.8”) 5 times with the pistol loaded (blank) and the hammer cocked, This is done on concrete and 0 failures are allowed! A failure is the gun firing.
After these tests are complete the gun must fire without service.
The factory contracted an independent lab to do additional testing on guns that previously passed the drop tests. These pistol were dropped an additional 352 times without failure.
The pistol must also complete an environmental conditions test:
This means cold, heat, dust/sand and mud.
The pistol must fire after being frozen for 24 hours at –35C (-36F).
The pistol must fire after being heated for 24 hours at 70C (126F)
The pistol must fire after being submerged in mud, sand and combinations including being stripped of oil then completing the sand and mud tests again.
Service life:
The service life requirement from the Czech police was 15,000 rounds of +P ammo!
The pistol will exceed 30,000 rounds with ball 9mm.
Reliability:
The reliability requirements for the P-01 pistol are 99.8%, that’s a .2% failure rate.
This equals 20 stoppages in 10,000 rounds or 500 “Mean Rounds Between Failure” (MRBF)
During testing, the average number of stoppages was only 7 per 15,000 rounds fired, this is a .05% failure rate, a MRBF rate of 2142 rounds! Over 4 time the minimum acceptable requirement.
The U.S. Army MRBF requirement is 495 rounds for 9mm pistols with 115 grain Ball ammunition.
Heritage:
The P-01 is based on the CZ 75, the most used pistol in the world. Over 60 countries use it as the standard side arm of their Armies, National police forces, National security agencies or other Law enforcement organizations. No other pistol can make this claim.
RogerinTPA
07-12-09, 16:41
M&P9c gets my vote. They also can use the 17 round mags from my full sized M&P9, which I sometimes use in the 9c, while carrying concealed.
Sig 228 or the 239 great weapons I had both and the never gave me a problem,and real comfortable to carry
Go to your local range, rent a few and see what fits you best. It's all about feel and what you are comfortable with.
This. The best gun in the world is useless to you if it doesn't fit you. Also take a look at the HK P7. Great gun and very affordable right now, mags are pricey though.
I am looking to pick up a rock solid 9mm that I could use as a CCW and that my wife could also shoot. Only 9mm that I have ever shot is the one issued to me by the USAF :D
I know most folks here are Glock and M&P folks but just looking for some options to check out. Thanks.
Hello,
The King of Nines is The FN-Browning High Power.
Browning's High Power Page: http://www.browning.com/products/catalog/family.asp?webflag_=007B
FN's High Power Page: http://www.fnherstal.com/index.php?id=269&backPID=263&productID=74&pid_product=295&pidList=263&categorySelector=5&detail
Steve Camp's High Power Page is Full of Good HP Info: http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/HiPowerComments.html
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-12-09, 19:34
Practical answer: Glock 17
Awesome answer: P7M8
Understand that when you ask "What is a good first 9mm?" people will answer "What is your favorite 9mm?"
My recommendation is to start with a simple self-assessment. The value of this self-assessment will be directly related to how honest you are with yourself.
What is your current experience level with handguns?
What is your current comfort level with handguns?
What if any training will you commit to receiving before and after purchasing your pistol?
How often will you shoot the pistol?
How comfortable & experienced is your wife with handguns?
How often will she handle the pistol?
I'm always wary of recommending Glocks to first time shooters or those who may not handle the guns frequently. While perfectly safe in the hands of a perfectly safe shooter, the Glock has a short, light trigger and also requires you to pull the trigger as part of the takedown/cleaning process. The simple reality is that a lot of people have accidents with Glocks every year, and many of them are because someone forgets the proper sequence for taking the gun apart. With a Glock, that mistake leads to a very loud noise and potential disaster.
The best thing you can do is get an idea of what brands & models come highly regarded among the shooting community and the law enforcement community. These groups tend to weed out the guns which don't work well or are less ergonomic. Of course, if you look hard enough you can find a fansite for any model and probably find a LE agency issuing almost anything. But if you stick with the guns which are in widespread use in both communities, you're on the right track. (it's worth noting, in fairness, that the Glock is in very widespread use in both of those communities)
Once you know which brands and models you want to examine, find a rental range and put a box or two of ammo through each gun. Don't worry about how the gun feels, worry about how it shoots. Does it recoil a lot? Was it making tiny groups? Can you reach the controls properly?
Finally, keep in mind that for a CCW gun, the most important factor is finding a pistol you will actually carry. So while a huge, heavy pistol might shoot the best, if your CCW sits in a safe at home because it's too big then it's not really a carry gun.
I really appreciate all the information that was provided here. Once I get home from Iraq I will head to the local shop/range and fire all of the choices provided here and make my decision based on then. I will also have my wife join me and pick out what fits her best. I will of course let you all know what we come up with. Thank you again.
A Glock or the M&P, both are solid systems, easy to work on, parts are available, proven reliable, mags are available, and holsters are easy to find.
kihnspiracy
07-13-09, 05:01
Glock 17.
thopkins22
07-13-09, 11:26
This. The best gun in the world is useless to you if it doesn't fit you. Also take a look at the HK P7. Great gun and very affordable right now, mags are pricey though.
I really think you're off base here.
People should pick the gun that allows them to shoot best, even if that gun feels terrible. A gun that feels good in the hand should be a bonus, not a requirement.
thopkins22
07-13-09, 11:31
I really appreciate all the information that was provided here. Once I get home from Iraq I will head to the local shop/range and fire all of the choices provided here and make my decision based on then. I will also have my wife join me and pick out what fits her best. I will of course let you all know what we come up with. Thank you again.
As I just mentioned, let her pick what she shoots best....
Sigs feel excellent to me. XDs feel good to me. I have absolutely no plan to buy either.
My Glock 19 doesn't anywhere near as good, but I shoot it well, and other benefits keep it my go to gun.
I shoot M&Ps well, AND they feel good. But it could feel like a brick and I'd still buy one because I shoot it well.
spamsammich
07-13-09, 11:38
I really think you're off base here.
People should pick the gun that allows them to shoot best, even if that gun feels terrible. A gun that feels good in the hand should be a bonus, not a requirement.
But a gun that feels bad in my hand never leaves the gun safe :( I have an HK USP .40 that I shoot pretty damned well with, but my girly mitts never let me shoot it for very long. I happily shoot my Steyr M40-a1 all day because it fits me well, consequently I get lots more practice with it and shoot tighter groups with it. Same thing with my M&P 9 vs a Glock 17, the G just doesn't fit in my hands well but I really like the trigger and reset. At the end of the day, the S&W is what I use the most and shoot best because of the adjustable fit.
Littlelebowski
07-13-09, 11:45
Hello,
The King of Nines is The FN-Browning High Power.
Only if you discount durability issues.
Glock 19 or S&W M&P 9. See a trend here?
M&P 9 or Glock 17. You will find the M&P to be very ergonomic and comfortable to shoot.
I know everyone loves the Glock 19 but I prefer full size pistols that I can get a full grip with. Plenty of people can do that with a Glock 19 so your mileage may vary.
If safety is a concern you can get the M&P with a thumb safety or without.
Also both Glock and Smith offer discounts on their pistols to Active Duty and Retired military.
Exactly. The BHP is a legend but is quite dated.
Only if you discount durability issues.
Glock 19 or S&W M&P 9. See a trend here?
Only if you discount durability issues.
Glock 19 or S&W M&P 9. See a trend here?
Why don't You show me these "allegedly" broken HP's... After all, there's only been well over a Million of'em produced, so it shouldn't be too hard for you to find a bunch of'em that's all broken-up. You know, due to the "alleged" durability issues you speak of.
Exactly. The BHP is a legend but is quite dated.
The fact that it's been in full production Since 1935 should tell you something! Most folks take fact's like that as a "clue".
LonghunterCO
07-13-09, 13:10
First off I love the HighPower it was my primary handgun for over twenty years. In January of this year I switched to a M&P9 (thanks Grant). My wife receintly has shown an interest in shooting (funny how that having kids thing opens up doors)so like the OP, I was looking more for a firearm platform that my wife and I could both share. I decided that the striker fired weapon without a manual safety was the choice. She shoots but not frequently enough that I would feel OK about her remembering a manual safety in a dynamic situation. Just my $0.02.
Why don't You show me these "allegedly" broken HP's... After all, there's only been well over a Million of'em produced, so it shouldn't be too hard for you to find a bunch of'em that's all broken-up. You know, due to the "alleged" durability issues you speak of.
Durabilty - able to resist wear, decay, etc., well; lasting; enduring.
The HP is a legend, and there is a reason it was the go to 9mm for decades. That said, the HP will need many more parts replaced (many of them major) on the way to 50,000 rounds than a G19 or M&P. Glocks and M&Ps are able to resist wear better than HPs. That means that Glocks and M&Ps are more durable than HPs.
Littlelebowski
07-13-09, 13:46
Why don't You show me these "allegedly" broken HP's... After all, there's only been well over a Million of'em produced, so it shouldn't be too hard for you to find a bunch of'em that's all broken-up. You know, due to the "alleged" durability issues you speak of.
OK, I'm lying. I made it all up :D
Or.... I personally had the lugs go on a .40 rental Hi Power I was shooting. And there's this little gem from Massad Ayoob below. Seriously Bob, are you going to do anything on this site besides rant about "sleek classics" and pointedly ignore the advances made since the 1930s? Most of us love the older pistols but if you think they can compare to modern service pistols in durability and reliability, you need to read up a bit.
There is, however, one other shortcoming with the 9mm Browning. The P-35 is not the most rugged of 9mm pistols. It was designed back in the '20s, remember, before using submachine gun ammo in pistols became the military paradigm, and before today's high-pressure self-defense loads. The gun being slim, the parts are relatively small and therefore relatively fragile. In addition, many pistolsmiths consider the Browning's parts comparatively soft in virtually every incarnation of the gun.
From Venezuela to Great Britain, I've seen quantities of broken Brownings in government arsenals whose slides and frames were cracked by the brutal hammering of 9x19 NATO ammo. +P and +P+ loads also seem to be contraindicated. Listen to Bill Laughridge, who said to me, "Tell your readers in all caps, DON'T USE +P IN HI-POWERS! It's been my experience that even a few magazines of +P will upset the locking lugs."
NCPatrolAR
07-13-09, 14:06
Let's keep things civil
Littlelebowski
07-13-09, 14:09
Solid copy.
Not too mention a BHP will need work right out of the box. Trigger, hammer bite, remove mag safety. I don't really get the logic of it was around for decades so it must still be good as if the rest of the gun world has stood still. But then I am a long time 1911 shooter who thinks they are antiquated so I'm already a heretic. ;) The polymer pistols already mentioned are comparatively cheap, require much less maintenance, have fewer points of failure, excellent customer service, and many accessory options.
Littlelebowski
07-13-09, 16:12
Durabilty - able to resist wear, decay, etc., well; lasting; enduring.
The HP is a legend, and there is a reason it was the go to 9mm for decades. That said, the HP will need many more parts replaced (many of them major) on the way to 50,000 rounds than a G19 or M&P. Glocks and M&Ps are able to resist wear better than HPs. That means that Glocks and M&Ps are more durable than HPs.
Great post. I would also argue that since the M&P and Glock require less metal fitting and hence meta on metal contact that they're more durable by design.
Littlelebowski {the lugs failed on a "rental gun".} Wow, I thought that sample sizes needed to be in the hundreds before an honest conclusion could be made. And quoting Ayoob hardly proves anything. Did You See all those "allegedly" broken HP's? Ahhh, I didn't think so. Don't worry thow, I haven't either and neither has many others all the way from Venezuela to Great Britain, including the guys that actually carry & use The FN High Power.
True enough thow, The High Power isn't quiet as rugged as my other favorite pistol, yes you guessed it, it's The Sleek & Classy M1911.
Hey, now there's another excellent choice for Rated21R to consider, a 1911 chambered for 9mm.
HK45 {Not too mention a BHP will need work right out of the box.} Ya know, I always wondered why Over 60 Militaries through out the World chose The FN High Power, and needing work right outta the box has got to be their reason. Hell, it all makes perfect sense now. Thanks HK45.
Take Care Guys,
BHPs regularly suffer major component failure at lower round counts than one would expect from a more modern design. This is so well known within the community that I am dumbfounded anyone would argue about it.
Bob, the question asked was about a first 9mm, which most folks would take as a hint that the guy may be looking for solid advice for a beginning shooter, not advice on how to spend $1000-2000 on a pistol.
The guns you like are fine, but they also have quirks and issues best left to folks who want to jump knee deep into those systems.
For the price a friend paid for a quality 9mm 1911 I bought a Glock 17 and 26, holsters for both, couple of cases of ammo, and paid for a shooting class.
I like to think I got the better deal for my money.
The BHP was the coolest pistol ever, in 1939. Now-a-days I believe that we have developed better, more durable, more reliable 9mms that don't require work right out of the box.
Business_Casual
07-13-09, 17:50
Hey, now there's another excellent choice for Rated21R to consider, a 1911 chambered for 9mm.
Wow. And I didn't think you could top the BHP idea. Well done, sir.
M_P
Littlelebowski
07-13-09, 18:33
Littlelebowski {the lugs failed on a "rental gun".} Wow, I thought that sample sizes needed to be in the hundreds before an honest conclusion could be made. And quoting Ayoob hardly proves anything. Did You See all those "allegedly" broken HP's? Ahhh, I didn't think so. Don't worry thow, I haven't either and neither has many others all the way from Venezuela to Great Britain, including the guys that actually carry & use The FN High Power.
True enough thow, The High Power isn't quiet as rugged as my other favorite pistol, yes you guessed it, it's The Sleek & Classy M1911.
Hey, now there's another excellent choice for Rated21R to consider, a 1911 chambered for 9mm.
HK45 {Not too mention a BHP will need work right out of the box.} Ya know, I always wondered why Over 60 Militaries through out the World chose The FN High Power, and needing work right outta the box has got to be their reason. Hell, it all makes perfect sense now. Thanks HK45.
Take Care Guys,
Textbook example of emotional investment. Note the utter lack of reasoned analysis.
A good 9mm?, you could swing a dead cat and hit a "good" 9mm.
I would look at solid performers, that see widespread, recent and relevent use. Guns like the Glock, M&P, Sig and Beretta, come to mind.
You've gotten a lot of good advice, but some of it needs to be kept in perspective.
The "gun you shoot the best".
Well what if its a Hipoint? OK extreme, but, goin to the range and shooting a few rounds out of a bunch of different guns, even if spread out over a few trips, and then trying to measure a somewhat unquantifiable, is gonna be iffy at best.
every gun is an individual, the individual gun you shoot may have the best or worse trigger, barrel fit, etc. the company has ever produced.
I once had a Colt Commander, with a trigger I needed two fingers to pull, should I have dismissed Colts or 1911's based on that?
In a similar vein, "The gun that fits/feels best" is also somewhat iffy. Many guns can be "adjusted" by changing grips, trigger reach, etc. One of the often touted hallmarks of the 1911.
Just keep in mind, that often guns can be adjusted and tuned, grips, trigger jobs, sights, etc. to tweak a good gun, into one that better fits you and your needs.
A good thing to key into, is how hard is it to do that?
Which brings me to another point...many guns have been mentioned such as the P7, CZ, BHP, and Steyr. They may or may not be good guns, but they are certainly not "mainstream".
Pat Rogers has talked about guys that insist on bringing platforms other then the AR to his classes, usually out of some form of non conformism, I know better, or whatever.
The problem is, many of the TTP's do not easily transfer over to less widespread platforms.
The institutional knowledge is not there for repairs, parts are harder to come by, as are holsters, mags, etc.
What happens when these guns don't catch on?
These are things to consider, some times being like everyone else, is not a bad thing....Yea your unique, just like everyone else.
When my Glock goes tits up, and it will, there is factory certified armorer, with a bag of $10 OEM parts on every corner.
When your 1911, BHP, or whatever goes tits up, and it will, you cant say the same thing.
Vickers will tell you a 1911 in any other calibre then .45, is a range toy. He will also tell you, BHP's are nice, but suffer many of the same problems of the 1911.
Again, the only two SpecOp type units that I can think of that used the BHP, dumped them, quite a while ago.
I think counting off numbers of countries, and years of service is a bit disingenuous. You see this same argument with the 1911, the FAL, and others. Most military pistols see very little use. Unless its some SpecOps type unit, they generally sit in the arms room, or get carried and beat up in the field, but not on the range.
Many of the countries that adopted it, much like the FAL, adopted it, because it was a ready made solution, from a large arms supplier of reputable stature. Same as the Mauser. Do you really think all those little 3rd world countries did extensive testing? More then likely it was a "good enough for them, good enough for us" type of deal.
Its remained in production, because, "fat, old, bald, has beens" keep buying them.
Not long ago, I traded my last BHP for an OD G19, I was with the guy when he bought the G19, so I know it was like new. The BHP was a newer FN SA, slicked up a bit by a DOE armorer. We both think we got the better of the deal.
The lack of a light rail, makes it a non starter in my book, and while very "sleek" it is difficult to manipulate with nomex gloves on, expensive mags, and the need for a smith to repair it correctly, or at least to get the most out of the gun, sent it on its way.
I think the M&P is a bridge between the Glock and the 1911 (thanks Hilton for that one).
with a stock gun, I can easily change the grips to suit me. With a modest amount of work, I can change sights, get a trigger job, stipple the grip, all of which just take an already very good gun, and make it better.
I have to say the GLK system is what I carry I own alot of diff ones but carry the GLK 19-17-26
thopkins22
07-13-09, 21:02
Good point R Moran on shootability not being a sole qualifier.
And I tried to measure how much time it took me to type "GLK" versus Glock and could not find a measurable difference.:confused: It did however slightly annoy me.
decodeddiesel
07-13-09, 22:05
A good 9mm...
Mr. Moran, I wish I would have read this very post years ago. It would have saved me a ton of money and heart-ache.
Thank you for that post, it was outstanding.
crusader377
07-13-09, 23:38
Wanted to counter a few of the points made in this post. Please read carefully, I'm not saying that the HK or Glock are bad pistols. I actually think both are very good handguns that will get the job done along with the BHP and numerous other pistols
Quote
"Again, the only two SpecOp type units that I can think of that used the BHP, dumped them, quite a while ago."
Far more than two SpecOp units used the BHP, I can think of all of the commonwealth special forces off hand. I know someone will counter that the British went recently with the Sig P226.
Using this logic would it be fair to say the the HK mk 23 is not a good pistol because SpecOps units dumped them as well. Or the Glock is not a good handgun because the FBI HRTs went to the Springfield 1911s even though field agents carry glocks.
All I'm pointing out is unit requirements do change over time.
Quote
"I think counting off numbers of countries, and years of service is a bit disingenuous. You see this same argument with the 1911, the FAL, and others. Most military pistols see very little use. Unless its some SpecOps type unit, they generally sit in the arms room, or get carried and beat up in the field, but not on the range."
On the other hand, you never see poor or medicore weapons purchased by 50+ nations.
Also, how many organizations outside of spec ops really use pistols alots. Many LE officers only fire their pistols a couple of times a year for qualifications. Outside of spec ops and serious shooters, most pistols will last a lifetime with proper maintenance for a casual shooter.
Quote
"Many of the countries that adopted it, much like the FAL, adopted it, because it was a ready made solution, from a large arms supplier of reputable stature. Same as the Mauser. Do you really think all those little 3rd world countries did extensive testing? More then likely it was a "good enough for them, good enough for us" type of deal."
Do large nations or organizations always do extensive testing? A prime example of this is the British SA80 rifle, it was billed at the time as a extremely well tested rifle but was a failure once it was used by the troops. Another example is the hype about the 5.7x28 round which has largely been a non-starter.
I think both large nations and small nations have both had their successes and failures in arms procurement.
The FAL was probably the finest western battle rifle of its day and perhaps that is why it was adopted by many nations.
Back to the BHP. I do admit that earlier BHPs had problems with +p+ ammunition but the Mark IIIs have largely corrected this deficiency. Every pistol in existance has its strengths and weakness even Glocks. Glocks have had a kaboom problem with the .40s and have a difficult time firing some of the harder primed surplus ammunition. Also, Glocks have had a problem with accidental discharges (Glock leg). I know this is largely a result of poor training practices.
I think we probably need to go back to the topic instead of moving back and forth on the BHP.
If one really looks at what was actually available in the 19302s and 40s, it is no wonder that the BHP was so widely adopted.
Anyway, good post Bob, excellent points.
My advice still stands, with a bit of a slight change in thought.
Get an M&P 9mm, or the Glock 17/19. Both are solid choices, afforable, they run right out of the box.
After some thought I believe the M&P might be the better choice now a days for a new shooter.
The M&P grip can be switched around by the shooter if need be, it also comes with real sights that don't need to be changed right out of the box.
Everything else is pretty much about equal.
Littlelebowski
07-14-09, 05:49
ammunition. Also, Glocks have had a problem with accidental discharges (Glock leg). I know this is largely a result of poor training practices.
By "largely," do you mean "entirely?"
Business_Casual
07-14-09, 08:14
I think that we've drifted from the intent/query of the original poster...
...and/or the Beretta 92 series, to name a few possible contenders.
Best, Jon
Well, I have to point out that the original post mentions that he is issued an M9.
M_P
Yes, I have an M9, I also carry an M4. I will probably end up getting a pistol for myself and for my wife. I shoot (and plan to shoot) more than she does. She will probably only go along when I take her with me as I don't see her spending her spare time at the range (like I wouldn't mind doing). We both will have carry permits as we are both going through the class, etc. when I get home. I plan on using mine for range, classes and carry. I hope eventually she will be doing the same. That should about sum things up. I do appreciate all the options that have been given.
crusader377
07-14-09, 09:04
By "largely," do you mean "entirely?"
Yes, I do.
My wife cannot effectively operate the slide on my Hi Power 9mm. She has no problem with her M&P9.
Threads like this ALWAYS "drift". Opinions were asked for, and gotten. The BHP was mentioned, and some accolades were given it, that were, IMO, either overstated or not relevant.
This is why they call it a discussion forum, letting certain comments go, is how we end up with Internet and gun-store BS.
Wanted to counter a few of the points made in this post. Please read carefully, I'm not saying that the HK or Glock are bad pistols. I actually think both are very good handguns that will get the job done along with the BHP and numerous other pistols
And, I'm not saying the BHP is a bad gun, its just been surpassed.
Quote
"Again, the only two SpecOp type units that I can think of that used the BHP, dumped them, quite a while ago."
Far more than two SpecOp units used the BHP, I can think of all of the commonwealth special forces off hand. I know someone will counter that the British went recently with the Sig P226.
If you call the '80's recent. More interesting, WHY do those other units still issue it? Do you know for sure, or even if they still do?
Using this logic would it be fair to say the the HK mk 23 is not a good pistol because SpecOps units dumped them as well. Or the Glock is not a good handgun because the FBI HRTs went to the Springfield 1911s even though field agents carry glocks.
Yes, most guys issued it, don't like the MK23. HRT dumped the BHP for a 1911, years ago, and I'm not so sure how much longer the 1911 has.
All I'm pointing out is unit requirements do change over time.
Yes they do, and so do their weapons
Quote
"I think counting off numbers of countries, and years of service is a bit disingenuous. You see this same argument with the 1911, the FAL, and others. Most military pistols see very little use. Unless its some SpecOps type unit, they generally sit in the arms room, or get carried and beat up in the field, but not on the range."
On the other hand, you never see poor or medicore weapons purchased by 50+ nations.
Do you really think 50+ countries(wasn't it 60 earlier) extensively and intensely tested all manner or 9mm pistols and the BHP won out? Do I really care what some 3rd world South American country adopted?
The large number get thrown around alot, who cares? Major European nations, SpecOps teams, larger LE organizations, yep sure, Mayberry PD or Uraguy, no.
FN offered a turn key solution to a pistol, plain and simple.
Also, how many organizations outside of spec ops really use pistols alots. Many LE officers only fire their pistols a couple of times a year for qualifications. Outside of spec ops and serious shooters, most pistols will last a lifetime with proper maintenance for a casual shooter.
Sure...but just like the "my BM/DPMS/oly/whatever is good enough threads, that usually doesn't fly around here. The slant of this board has always been toward the serious use of a weapon, military, LE, defense of family or home(or vital assets of the US govt.) So most of the answers you'll get will be with an eye toward that type of use.
Quote
"Many of the countries that adopted it, much like the FAL, adopted it, because it was a ready made solution, from a large arms supplier of reputable stature. Same as the Mauser. Do you really think all those little 3rd world countries did extensive testing? More then likely it was a "good enough for them, good enough for us" type of deal."
Do large nations or organizations always do extensive testing? A prime example of this is the British SA80 rifle, it was billed at the time as a extremely well tested rifle but was a failure once it was used by the troops. Another example is the hype about the 5.7x28 round which has largely been a non-starter.
I think both large nations and small nations have both had their successes and failures in arms procurement.
AND?
The FAL was probably the finest western battle rifle of its day and perhaps that is why it was adopted by many nations.
Same deal, good gun, a turn key solution to a new gun, plain and simple. Its also been surpassed.
Back to the BHP. I do admit that earlier BHPs had problems with +p+ ammunition but the Mark IIIs have largely corrected this deficiency. Every pistol in existance has its strengths and weakness even Glocks. Glocks have had a kaboom problem with the .40s and have a difficult time firing some of the harder primed surplus ammunition. Also, Glocks have had a problem with accidental discharges (Glock leg). I know this is largely a result of poor training practices.
As noted, teh ND's are a training issue, period. We all know of the.40 issues. We are talking 9mm, and there few problems with them. They are far from perfection, but why would you choose a BHP over a G19?
I think we probably need to go back to the topic instead of moving back and forth on the BHP.
See above
Some other things of note...the BHP has a small and difficult to manipulate slide with a heavy mainspring, maybe a problem for his wife.
They have a small ejection port, that makes clearing malfunctions difficult.
They have an exposed hammer, which thanks to Paul Howe, I learned can cause reliability issues. It also bites many people.
It does not have a light rail
The safety, even the new large factory one, are still small.
A long trigger travel with a long reset.
I was going to send my FN SA off to Novaks for their HD package, and a few other things, in the end, I figured I could take that 5 or 6 hundred bucks and get a Glock with Heinie sights, and be god to go.
Jon,
You make some good points. There are heavier trigger options for the Glock and the M&P, which may be an option, and can be upgraded later on, if the spouse becomes dedicated and improves.
They can be a bit harder to master, though.
Someone mentioned the Kahr series, Just FYI, NYPD pulled them from the approved list.
Bob
Rated - Todd's advice is spot on. With that in mind I'm not sure where you'll be living when you get back but I own both Glock and S&W M&P 9mms and if you're stationed in Vegas or want to swing by you and your wife are more than welcome to put as many rounds through mine as you'd like. I think you'd find that alot of people on this board would be willing to help both you and your wife in that same way. FWIW - Mine prefers the G19.
Stay safe over there!
Rated - Todd's advice is spot on. With that in mind I'm not sure where you'll be living when you get back but I own both Glock and S&W M&P 9mms and if you're stationed in Vegas or want to swing by you and your wife are more than welcome to put as many rounds through mine as you'd like. I think you'd find that alot of people on this board would be willing to help both you and your wife in that same way. FWIW - Mine prefers the G19.
Stay safe over there!
Which one is Todd? I am stationed at Hill Air Force Base in Utah. I do make lots of trips to Vegas though...LOL
I plan on shooting all sorts of makes/models and having my wife do the same so we can pick a winner. Thanks.
I'd like to chime in with my .02 regarding the appropriatness of the Hi-Power for the specific situation/users that we're discussing here. As many of you know from some of our previous posts, I'm appreciative of the Hi-Power (in my personal case, particularly the .40 varient), but it has some strong strikes against it for this situation, in my opinion:
First, it's a single-action gun. That in and of itself demands a higher skill and experience level, due to the short trigger distance from initial pull to ignition, and the needed awareness and manipulation required for the mechanical operator actuated safety. I'm NOT trying to infer that the original poster and/or his wife are unfamiliar with guns/single-action autopistols/or are incapable of grasping and mastering such a system-I'm just suggesting that there's a higher skill and familiarity level present with such a gun from the onset.
Second, also regarding the trigger and safety-There is a fairly high chance that a purchaser of a new current production Hi-Power will find both with some inherent issues. Current production Hi-Powers are noted for coming from FN with hard, gritty triggers-necessitating an after-market action job. This is on top of a gun whose street price for a new one is already relatively high (around $700-$850-I just saw a brand new Browning Hi-Power Standard {highly polished blue-black finish, walnut grips} 9mm, priced at $840 in a local high-volume gunstore noted for exceptional pricing over invoice-their brand new HK P30s are priced at $799 for a comparison), due to both limited production and the expenses inherent to its manufacture. The safety, even with the current generation larger safety levers tend to be mushy and simply are not as naturally indexing/ergonomic as those, say, on most current 1911 pattern pistols. Again, they're a bit of an acquired taste, and may also require some after-market gunsmith tuning (or replacement with more suitable levers).
Third, the Hi-Power's frame and grip angle are very ergonomic and relatively slim. Unfortunately, I find them slightly TOO slim-with the factory and many after-market grips, my triggerfinger simply protrudes too far past the trigger. My solution for this is relatively simple (and inexpensive)-I use Hogue's rubber fingergroove grip to bulk up the frame-but again, you're looking at further aftermarket expenditures, and the frame, with or without the grips may not index well for BOTH users for whm the gun will be used-they each might require seperate grips. Additionally, the front and rear gripstrap are relatively slippery, which can provide difficulties with sweaty hands and/or use under stress, unless you go again to some aftermarket solution (admittedly, using skateboard or ladder tape on these areas is an inexpensive remedy-but many of the Hi-Power's competitors have inherently better gripability designed in from the onset)
Fourth, ahh yes, reliability...We recently had an excellent thread on this (plug in "experience with a .40 Hi Power" into the forum search engine). I freely conceed that the Hi-Power, even a current generation cast frame/strengthened components Hi-Power is simply not likely to be as durable past 10,000 - 15,000 rounds as many of its current competitors that we've discussed, such as Glock, HK, Beretta, and SIG. It's simply a gun with more parts, and more delicate parts than many of its current competitors; it's simply a nature of the beast in a gun designed in the 1920's, designed around 1920's metallurgy and manufacturing realities. Despite changes/improvements in Hi-Power metallurgy and manufacturing over time, in the cold light of objective analysis, its been significantly surpassed by more modern guns in this regard. While that doesn't necessarily render it unusable, it does establish some limits to its operational paramaters and comparative lifespan which users really need to be aware of and factor in to their decision matrix.
Fifth, a Hi-Power requires more maintenance and lubrication than several current competitors, particularly the Glock and HK. While admittedly most autopistols will probably be able to function through at least one magazine with a lack of lubrication, this isn't something that I'd particularly be willing to bet my life, or the life of loved ones on. You simply can't lube a Hi-Power once and throw it into a drawer and consider it to be good to go over time-at least monthly re-lubrication is highly recommended.
Sixth, particularly in the .40 varients (and admittedly the original poster is looking for a 9mm version), the recoil spring can render it notoriously difficult to manually pull back the slide. Before purchasing, I'd strongly (no pun intended) recommend that any and all users see if they can comfortably manipulate the slide-both with and without the hammer cocked.
Seventh, the Hi-Power has a relatively small ejection port. While current versions benefit from an enlarged one, it's still small compared to that on many current production guns. While I've never personally encountered a double feed, stovepipe, or jam with any of my Hi-Powers, I'd point out that this factor can make them more likely to occur and more difficult to resolve than many of the current crop of competitors.
Eighth, the Hi-Power's hammer, particularly the current production spur hammer is noted for potentially biting the hand that grips it with many users-again, potentially necessitating gunsmithing or replacing the hammer (and if you replace the hammer, you're well advised to concurrently replace the sear so that the gun has a properly mated hammer and sear for longevity).
Ninth, the Hi-Power has a square, relatively un-bevelable magazine well, making it more cumbersome to achieve a fast magazine reload, particularly under stress/without a disproportionate amount of magazine insertion practice. The magazines' metal baseplate also have some sharp corners at their rear, requiring more thought and selection regarding spare magazine pouches.
I'm not inferring that a Hi-Power is without intrinsic merit or rewards for those who choose and use it. But I suggest that it simply is a more demanding gun, and there are more modern, more ergonomic, more durable and less skill intensive choices available. And many of them are less expensive as well.
Best, Jon
Littlelebowski
07-15-09, 08:41
Great post, Jon. Thanks for sharing.
Excellent post, Jon.
crusader: If this is your response to what's been posted in the thread ...
Sig has recently have some quality issues with some of their models. Also, LAPD just recently dropped the M&P from their approved handgun list. NYPD even had some problems with their Glock 19s called a phase III malfunction.
... I respectfully submit that you have reached a point often called "grasping at straws."
You've pointed out yourself that even those units which chose to stick with the BHP for many years have, nonetheless, dropped them in favor of more modern arms. In most cases, that transition occurred 10-20 years ago.
Matt Edwards
07-15-09, 13:13
Excellent post, Jon.
crusader: If this is your response to what's been posted in the thread ...
... I respectfully submit that you have reached a point often called "grasping at straws."
You've pointed out yourself that even those units which chose to stick with the BHP for many years have, nonetheless, dropped them in favor of more modern arms. In most cases, that transition occurred 10-20 years ago.
Todd beat me to it. When I stated that the brits dropped the BHP as soon as they could, I'm saying that they dropped it as soon as something better was available. Like our guys here, changes occurd long before the mainstream herd about it.
Either way, if you listen closely, you can hear Bob Dylan singing in the background.
Have you looked at the SW Sigma line? They are reasonably priced.
Littlelebowski
07-15-09, 16:57
Have you looked at the SW Sigma line? They are reasonably priced.
You're a funny guy :D
crusader377
07-15-09, 18:31
Besides the pisotls already mentioned and debated, another option is the CZ P-01. You may also want to look at the Beretta PX4 or an FN FNP.
Another pistol which I don't know much about but could be an option is that walther p99.
Business_Casual
07-15-09, 19:19
Besides the pisotls already mentioned and debated, another option is the CZ P-01. You may also want to look at the Beretta PX4 or an FN FNP.
Another pistol which I don't know much about but could be an option is that walther p99.
FFS.
M_P
Besides the pisotls already mentioned and debated, another option is the CZ P-01. You may also want to look at the Beretta PX4 or an FN FNP.
Another pistol which I don't know much about but could be an option is that walther p99.
I think the P99 is a neat pistol, but it suffers a bit in my book because of logistics. It doesn't, in my opinion, offer anything compelling to make up the difference in gun/parts/magazines/holsters/etc availability and commonality with respect to more mainstream and high-quality choices like the Glock 17/19, M&P, Sig 226/229, etc.
My layman's vote is for your choice of size in a Glock or M&P. There's a reason why "most folks here are Glock and M&P folks".
decodeddiesel
07-15-09, 19:33
I think the P99 is a neat pistol, but it suffers a bit in my book because of logistics. It doesn't, in my opinion, offer anything compelling to make up the difference in gun/parts/magazines/holsters/etc availability and commonality with respect to more mainstream and high-quality choices like the Glock 17/19, M&P, Sig 226/229, etc.
My layman's vote is for your choice of size in a Glock or M&P. There's a reason why "most folks here are Glock and M&P folks".
This is what it is with the P99. I have one, and I like it, but support equipment such as sights, holsters, weapon lights, etc. are few and far between. Also you are totally SOL if you want a trigger job or other work done to your pistol.
I love my BHP, and bought my wife an M&P, and will be purchasing an M&P for myself soon, I hope>;)
Figure out what you can CCW all year around. Im skinny and don't wear overly large clothes here in phoenix in the summer so ccw is hard for me. Im down to the kel-tec PF9 or kahr PM9 as my only real choices for any outfit. Most people can conceal a bit bigger gun without problems though, thats why you need to figure that out first.
crusader377
07-15-09, 22:13
I think M_P and R Moran need to come up with some new ideas instead of saying that the Glock, HK, and M&P are the best and everyone elses views are wrong.
I do however find it interesting how they will both state that M&P, HK, and Glock are the only pistols that have been extensively tested yet discount the extensive seven decades of real world testing (combat) of the BHP. I even provided a short list of major conflicts that the BHP was used in.
It is also interesting that they will discount the extensive Nato testing of the CZ P-01 which has been posted on this thread and numerous other threads. Also the CZ-75 has seen extensive service worldwide and has been one of the most copied pistol designs in the last 30 years and has proven very durable to many shooters.
Although the PX4 and FNP are relatively new pistols it does seem that they have been getting numerous positive reviews from many sources and the PX4 in particular has won major LE contracts. I can bet to that they went through extensive testing as well to win the contracts. Also, I find it very hard to believe the Beretta and FN would put out a poor product in the extremely competitive U.S. market especially when they can benchmark the current offerings from other manufacturers.
As stated before in my posts the Glock, M&P, Sig, and HK are great pistols but there are also other strong options out there that are worth looking at.
I believe the intent of the orginal poster was to have options for a good first 9mm pistol. Everyone does have different requirements and I always believe that by looking at many options, researching them, and contributing/learning on forums like these you can learn alot of information from many people with experience with a wide variety pistols and who have many different thoughts about the options on the market.
Myself, I have enjoyed this forum and was one of the main sources of information on my AR purchase and I continue to use it to get information on other firearms/optics/ and training opportunities as well.
I think all of the pistols mentioned in this thread by various members are solid and reliable pistols that you can count on. All of them have various strengths and weakness but at the end of the day they will get the job done.
RogerinTPA
07-15-09, 22:35
Most of the advice given on this board is first hand knowledge. We, as a collective, tend to promote weapons and gear that is high quality, endures (simply because we use and shoot the shit out of them), is functional, & practical. In short, the best proven quality chit. All of us have a high appreciation for fine weapons, regardless of when it was made, but you have to understand, this is not a C&R gun forum. It's your money, spend it as you see fit. Just don't expect for everyone to come to the same conclusion as you.
As for the PX4, I had the .40 version. I wanted to like it, but broke it too many times to put up with a continuous ship and return affair with Beretta USA. Guess what I traded it for? (S&W M&P 40)
crusader377
07-15-09, 23:22
Definitely not my intent to make the it a C&R forum. Just was mentioning options that are available. I own a BHP, CZ, M1911, along with a Beretta 92 and have been extremely satisfied with all of them. I have used them alot and they have all been very solid particularly my 3 nines. Probably, I should have qualified that in my first post on page 1 because the CZ, BHP, and M1911 all have relatively similiar ergonomics and that is what I train and practice on. I have fired on several occasions most of the other options mentioned and probably the M&P with the external thumb safety will be my next handgun. I do need to add something lighter to my collection.
I think M_P and R Moran need to come up with some new ideas instead of saying that the Glock, HK, and M&P are the best and everyone elses views are wrong.
Compared to the BHP, the Glock, HK, and M&P are new ideas.
I do however find it interesting how they will both state that M&P, HK, and Glock are the only pistols that have been extensively tested yet discount the extensive seven decades of real world testing (combat) of the BHP.
Where did either of them say that those were the only guns that have ever been tested?
Conversely, when is the last time the BHP was extensively tested? When is the last time it was tested against -- oh I don't know, let's say the Glock, HK, and M&P -- and won a contract?
It is also interesting that they will discount the extensive Nato testing of the CZ P-01 which has been posted on this thread and numerous other threads. Also the CZ-75 has seen extensive service worldwide and has been one of the most copied pistol designs in the last 30 years and has proven very durable to many shooters.
Different people have different ideas of what constitutes "very durable." The CZ does not have a reputation in the same universe as, say, a G17 in terms of durability.
Although the PX4 and FNP are relatively new pistols it does seem that they have been getting numerous positive reviews from many sources and the PX4 in particular has won major LE contracts.
What major LE contracts has the PX4 won?
Also, I find it very hard to believe the Beretta and FN would put out a poor product in the extremely competitive U.S. market especially when they can benchmark the current offerings from other manufacturers.
Um ... Beretta 9000?
So much information. Never thought this thread would get this large. I have all kinds of research to do when I get home. Very exciting. :D
Matt Edwards
07-16-09, 02:24
"I think M_P and R Moran need to come up with some new ideas instead of saying that the Glock, HK, and M&P are the best and everyone elses views are wrong."
Actually, Bob mentioned both the Beretta (I'm asuming a 92 style is what he meant) and the SIG also. So now we have the Beretta, SIG, M&P, HK and Glock.
OK.... NOW everyone elses views are wrong.:D
Responses in green.
I think M_P and R Moran need to come up with some new ideas instead of saying that the Glock, HK, and M&P are the best and everyone elses views are wrong.
Perhaps you could come up with a better argument then "all the years of service". Never said anyone else was wrong, but I did point out, what IMO are some flaws in the logic presented by some, and some issues to look at when you are looking for a new gun.
I do however find it interesting how they will both state that M&P, HK, and Glock are the only pistols that have been extensively tested yet discount the extensive seven decades of real world testing (combat) of the BHP. I even provided a short list of major conflicts that the BHP was used in.
Again, never said they were the only pistols "tested". But, when was the BHP last tested? What current and relevant use has it seen? Again, "decades of service" and "real world testing" is a bit disingenuous. How much combat/gunfighting has seen in those years or listed conflicts? How much of it was relevant to current TTP's on gunfighting?
It is also interesting that they will discount the extensive Nato testing of the CZ P-01 which has been posted on this thread and numerous other threads. Also the CZ-75 has seen extensive service worldwide and has been one of the most copied pistol designs in the last 30 years and has proven very durable to many shooters.
Never discounted that either. But, it is still not a mainstream handgun here in the US, and will bring with it all the complications mentioned here. What happens when he needs it repaired? A holster, light, mags, tuning, etc.
As a third gun/novelty/range toy, yea sure. As a platform to explore better options? Sure, but the Glock/M&P/HK/Sig/Beretta are known quantities, that should fill the primary role.
Also, yea the CZ was copied, it was also the hit with the competition shooters for awhile, not so much anymore. The SAA is also an often copied design, but I ain't gettin it for my first handgun.
Although the PX4 and FNP are relatively new pistols it does seem that they have been getting numerous positive reviews from many sources and the PX4 in particular has won major LE contracts. I can bet to that they went through extensive testing as well to win the contracts. Also, I find it very hard to believe the Beretta and FN would put out a poor product in the extremely competitive U.S. market especially when they can benchmark the current offerings from other manufacturers.
The FNP looks nice, but its been out under the Browning name for awhile with no real takers. again, wouldn't mind having one, but that's because I already have 3 Glocks and 2 M&P's. With the FNP out, I wonder how much longer the BHP has? Its pretty obvious that FN is offering a weapon in every possible category, MG, Rifle, Sniper, Less Lethal, it makes sense to offer a modern 9mm.
Haven't seen much on the PX4.
As stated before in my posts the Glock, M&P, Sig, and HK are great pistols but there are also other strong options out there that are worth looking at.
I believe the intent of the orginal poster was to have options for a good first 9mm pistol. Everyone does have different requirements and I always believe that by looking at many options, researching them, and contributing/learning on forums like these you can learn alot of information from many people with experience with a wide variety pistols and who have many different thoughts about the options on the market.
Yes, but the experience needs to be put into perspective, and backed up with specifics. The "I think", "mines been great", and "I love my" comments really need to be backed up with solid numbers and reasons.
Myself, I have enjoyed this forum and was one of the main sources of information on my AR purchase and I continue to use it to get information on other firearms/optics/ and training opportunities as well.
I think all of the pistols mentioned in this thread by various members are solid and reliable pistols that you can count on. All of them have various strengths and weakness but at the end of the day they will get the job done.
No one said any other options were junk. What, I am at least, is saying, is for a first 9mm, or any calibre really, one should look at some solid mainstream guns, with alot of logistical support, and recent, and relevant testing behind them.
Bob
A couple points I'd like to make, even though renting a pistol at the local range is a great idea, i don't think I could make a full opinion about a particular pistol until I've owned it. My general point here is you don't have to own your first gun,your whole life. As you progress you'll get a better idea of what you like, become more particular in your tastes. New products get introduced,ect.
Business_Casual
07-16-09, 08:24
To be fair to crusader, I suppose I owe you either an apology or an explanation. The explanation is that the pistols you listed, as mentioned in previous posts, lack the infrastructure and support services necessary to be considered.
I apologize for not taking the time to explain. So in the end, you got both. Much like when you buy a well-supported weapon - you get service and support. :D
I take one handgun to the range and I practice. I know what I am going to practice before I leave the house. I know how many rounds I will fire and at what distances. I know what result I expect and what I consider acceptable peformance as far as accuracy and time.
I've been to Prague, but I don't sit around finger-****ing a pile of pistols and creaming about what the Czech secret police issue their headbreakers. I am friends with people who were issued the PX4. They hated it. They shoot Glocks at the range. Etc. etc. :p
M_P
crusader377
07-16-09, 10:10
I think M_P, R Moran, and myself are all pretty persistent guys and I think collectively we have beat this horse to death.
I probably should have qualified in my first post that except for the beretta which is largely a safe queen, all of the pistols that I shoot are relatively heavy, steel, SA designs or can be fired from SA mode (CZ-75). I'm well practiced with the pistols that I shoot and mainly shoot the CZ. I continue shooting these platforms simply because they work best for me and I shoot these platforms better than I do with other pistols. I'm sure both M_P and R Moran are very experienced as well and can understand that people do get used to a certain platforms especially when they have a choice.
I do think that M_P and R Moran do have valid arguments on service and support particularly with the glock which you can find items almost everywhere. Support on my pistols has never been an issue for me but I do purchase most of my parts/magazines online.
I think I may have been looking at the situation through my own lenses as well on some of the points. From when I started shooting, I have always been serious about both practicing with my handgun, performing the proper maintenance, and learning the platform.
I may have to change though in order to get my wife to start shooting. I will probably pick up something lighter like an M&P which is the first polymer pistol that I have personally been extremely impressed with. :D
Beat Trash
07-16-09, 10:46
A couple points I'd like to make, even though renting a pistol at the local range is a great idea, i don't think I could make a full opinion about a particular pistol until I've owned it. My general point here is you don't have to own your first gun,your whole life. As you progress you'll get a better idea of what you like, become more particular in your tastes. New products get introduced,ect.
I agree totally. Many people make a decision as to defensive guns, and then are so closed minded that they will never consider changing.
It's too easy to forget that your defensive handgun is a tool.
It can take some time to train and practice to become proficient with a particular handgun, which is why I recommend investing some time training and practicing with your choice of carry gun. I smile at some of the self-proclaimed experts (who've had their CCW permit for 6 months now, but don't need any training, thank you very much, as they have a 5K + post count on just about every gun related web site there is) who carry a different type of handgun almost every day. I often see these types working at the larger gun stores in my area. I've been carrying a gun longer than most of them have been alive (yea, I'm getting old...)
Learn how to use your new tool. But be open minded enough to recognize when a better tool comes along.
Hello,
For the sake of the thread starter, plus anyone else that happens to be reading this thread while thinking about getting their first pistol or simply adding another pistol to their arsenal.
Contrary to what some have mentioned about needing parts & maintaining The BHP, I happen to work on guns quiet a bit and one of the many reasons I specifically chose The Browning High Power as my main pistol is because of it's readily available Genuine Factory Parts & Ease of Servicing, including detail stripping & reassembly (something people should be able to do to all their weapons). Every part for the Post Internal Extractor HP's (excluding the frame & locking cam) is available by simply calling The Browning Parts Department at 800-322-4626 and believe me, Browning has one of the best parts networks in the business.
As far as maintaining The BHP, you'll need new springs along the way (like all weapons do) and it'd be good to keep a few small parts on hand (like you should for all your weapons). BHP Factory Parts basically don't require any special fitting (it's like most all other production items in that aspect) and it's simple design lends it's self to easy servicing. BTW: My files & stones tell me the parts are right up there with the best of'em when it comes to hardness and their high level of QC is quiet noticeable as well.
Also, don't get too caught up in thinking that single-action autos requires all kinds of special training, because they don't. Think about it, your AR, FAL, AK, Semi-Auto Shotgun, Semi-Auto Huntin' Rifle, Ect. are basically single-action autos as well. You chamber a round & apply the safety, wanna fire, thumb the safety off and fire! Wanna be safe, keep your finger off the trigger untill your ready to fire.
As Jon mentioned, The BHP is also very reliable, actually BHP's for the most part are so reliable that the smaller ejection port becomes a moot point. In fact, The BHP is one of the few pistols I'd feel confident in carring right outta the box (if forced to w/out first being able to test fire for proper functioning). Not that I'd want to be forced to do such a thing, just that it's one of the few pistols that I'd feel safe doing that with.
Browning High Power users often worry about the pistol's future, but according to some recent conversations with Browning, The High Power will remain in production due to it being such a desired pistol through out the entire world.
Take Care & Good Luck to All, regardless of what you choose to carry.
Thanks for the kudos, Bob, but just a couple of follow-on comments to your post:
First, I think that a single action gun does require a higher level of training and familiarity, for at least two specific reasons: 1)the trigger pull, once the safety is released, is shorter and usually lighter than most DA/SA, DAO, DAK/LEM systems. Because of that, it's easier to send a chambered round downrange-and that's both a blessing and a curse.
Second, assuming that the safety is properly "on," it must be released to fire the weapon. This involves more user awareness and another mechanical manipulation-basically, significant practice/repetitions are strongly suggested to sufficiently engrain the firing sequence into a user's muscle memory, so that under a stressful situation, the proper sequential actions occur largely automatically to a degree. The figure that I've read quoted is that it takes approximately 5,000 repetitions of a given mechanical action/action sequence for it to be sufficiently engrained. There are simply some safety levers which are more ergonomic/more easily accessed and manipulated than others. The current safety levers on Hi-Powers are a vast improvement over the original ones, but they're not, in my opinion, at the apex of ergonomic design-and both the shooter's grip as well as the grip stocks chosen can have a significant effect on the shooter's ability to easily access and manipulate the safety levers. And, once that hurdle is surmounted, the reality is that even current Hi-Power safety levers are somewhat vague and "mushy" in their feel when activated, unless ministered to by a gunsmith.
Third, while I have absolutely no reason to disparage Browning/FN's parts quality and availability, in my personal experience their service times are not necessarily the speediest. When my sear went out on my .40 Hi-Power Standard (at about the 8k round count, as I recall), even though I had some very amicable discussions with the head of Browning's service department, it still took, as I recall, at least 2 months for them to formally diagnose the problem(s), get my approval to perform the repairs, actually effect the repairs, and get the Hi-Power back to me (they do have an excellent on-line tracking program on the Browning website to track a gun's progress through the entire service process).
Hi-Powers are beautiful guns, manufactured and assembled to high standards (except historically for the darn trigger pull). They are, and remain, a credible defensive and sporting autopistol. Current brand-new Browning rollmarked/marketed examples are pretty expensive-as I mentioned earlier, yesterday I saw a heavily discounted 9mm Standard varient going for $840. They are a living testament of sorts to the combined genius of Browning and Saive (and on the post '94 guns, Rousseau). They have an exquisite feel, and are usually quite accurate. Current production ones have excellent sights. They are actually quite slim, and easily carried (but the hammer spur, and magazine floorplate corners are sharp, and need to be taken into account).
However, whatever else they are, and despite many of their excellent qualities, I emphatically do not consider them to be a beginner's, or inexperienced, or occasional shooter's recommended autopistol. I believe that there are simply better choices available (and many of them will also be just as desirable to a much more demanding/qualified shooter).
There are many intrinsically excellent guns currently available for the original poster and his wife to consider. I'll open myself for criticism and suggest the following:
1. HK. While I've only personally owned one (a later-generation P7 PSP), I'm convinced that their current offerings, particularly the HK 2000, and P30 series guns are of very high ergonomics, usability, intrinsic content and value; those with the LEM action might be a particularly attractive feature for consideration. Cons: They're expensive, and aftermarket service, while reportedly improving, is historically challenged and frustrating to deal with. Magazines are expensive-and often difficult to get.
2. Glock. Particularly in 9mm, they possess pretty much the industry standard for durability and reliability. Parts availability and after-sales support is superb. Magazines are well engineered, comfortable to carry, tough, and inexpensive. The ease of user field-and detail-stripping is probably unparalleled.
Cons: Factory provided OEM polymer sights usually are replaced, due to the relative fragility of the front sight (although Glock has recently changed the manner in which they're attached to the frame), as well as the front sight being relatively thick, providing small "light bars" between aligned front and rear sights. In fairness, this is an inhibiting factor primarily for more distant targets-the Glock large dot/goalpost set-up works well for most close-in and medium distance shooting. Glocks can be ordered with steel sights/nightsights (including Trijicons) from the factory-the Trijicons as a factory alternative are particularly worthy of consideration in that they provide a good day and night sight picture. A trickier con is the trigger. Despite the Glock trigger being labeled a "SafeAction" by Glock, the practical reality is that it's realistically pretty comparable to a single-action trigger-without a manual safety (yes, there's the trigger face safety lever, but that's not quite the same as a frame or slide mounted mechanical safety lever requiring deliberate manipulation to engage or disengage). For a beginner, inexperienced, or non-dedicated shooter, the heavier/more revolverlike triggerpull engendered with the NY trigger spring and standard connector might be ideal-but the level of knowledge of such components and what they do is probably beyond most of the people we're discussing. However, that said, a Glock 17 or Glock 19, with a NY1 trigger spring (and retaining the standard 5.5 lb connector) could be a viable solution in a Glock for the original poster and his wife.
An advantage for both Glock and HK autopistols is that they're deliberately designed to function with relatively little lubrication.
Beretta 92 series: The original poster is certainly familiar with it, and while it's somewhat large, it actually has a nice grip. The oscillating block provides for a very smooth and fast shot-to-shot transition, and manufacture quality is exceptionally high.
Cons: Trigger finger positioning on the trigger can be a stretch for those with smaller hands. Berettas need to be regularly, and appropriately lubricated. Most guns in the 92-Series are larger guns, which can provide a CCW hurdle (albeit hardly an insurmountable one).
SIG-Sauer: SIGs can be excellent guns, and have many action choices available; particularly worthy of consideration are the so-called "Classic" SIGs, and the Sigpro/2022. Cons: Recent quality control has been reportedly (by respected users and knowledgeable instructors/observers) spotty; internal parts origin and manufacture quality has also been questioned, without convincing answers/rebuttals provided by SIG-Sauer to date as far as I'm aware of. Because of these cons, I hesitate to recommend a new SIG-Sauer at this time.
Ruger: Downplayed by many, Rugers historically are considered to be over-built and over-engineered for the calibers that they're designed around (that's a good thing), and concurrently somewhat bulky and less ergonomic than other contemporary alternatives. Since William Ruger's death, the company has attempted to somewhat re-invent and re-cast itself, with varying degrees of success. I'm personally pretty unimpressed with their current 9mm offerings, but a new P89 or P94 is a real sleeper; they've both been discontinued (the P94 in 9mm for some time) so finding a new one might be difficult, but a well-maintained used example, particularly later-manufactured example might work nicely. Ruger's after-sales service is usually excellent. They also have a little advertised program of thoroughly going through and mechanically inspecting and repairing/refurbishing most Rugers at little to no cost to their owners-this is particularly useful if you pick up a used Ruger.
Cons: Bulk (particularly slide bulk), ergonomics (not bad, but they often lag behind other competitors), history of recall issues due to design flaws on many currrent production Ruger handguns. On newer releases, unfortunately the first-year consumer appears to be part of the R&D and field testing of the guns...
So-at the end of the day, my recommendations in a new 9mm handgun for the original poster, using the criteria he provided to us, are to HK, Beretta, and Glock as discussed.
I hope all this helps.
Best, Jon
I agree totally. Many people make a decision as to defensive guns, and then are so closed minded that they will never consider changing.
It's too easy to forget that your defensive handgun is a tool.
It can take some time to train and practice to become proficient with a particular handgun, which is why I recommend investing some time training and practicing with your choice of carry gun. I smile at some of the self-proclaimed experts (who've had their CCW permit for 6 months now, but don't need any training, thank you very much, as they have a 5K + post count on just about every gun related web site there is) who carry a different type of handgun almost every day. I often see these types working at the larger gun stores in my area. I've been carrying a gun longer than most of them have been alive (yea, I'm getting old...)
Learn how to use your new tool. But be open minded enough to recognize when a better tool comes along.
Personally, I like to stick to one particular platform at a time. When I switched from a a Glock 19 to a M&P, I continued carrying the 19 until I felt comfortable enough with the M&P.
On a certain level I understand why someone would stick to a particular brand/platform that works for them. There are those like the "gun store experts", one such local, carries a S&W 3rd Generation,stainless of course, in a shoulder holster. After all it worked great on Miami Vice.
Its fun to have multiple guns to shoot, but in reality if you have, say 2 identical glock 19's, use one for practice and one for occasional practice and carry. One holster system, and all the extra money goes to ammo and training. You're probably on the road to becoming more effective with your weapon. I saw someone else mention, planning his trips to the range, I think that is a great concept to maximize your range time.
I have carried a lot of different guns over the past 19 yrs (one shootout in that time). Just recently, I purchased a Springfield XD subcompact 9mm for CC. I looked at a variety of guns; Glocks, Walther, Sig, Kahr, Kel Tec to name a few. I went with the XD for a couple of reasons. The trigger was LOADS better than the Glock. I really like the grip safety. It was cheaper than the Glock ($500+tax). The angle of the grip feels better in my hand. I liked the 2 mags that came with it; one 13, one 16. It shoots beyond my expectations. I am unable to find a single machining or tooling mark anywhere on the gun. The ramp could not be any smoother. All in all, a quality firearm. Although it comes with a holster, I didn't care too much for it and picked up a Tagua quick draw belt holster for the Glock 21 (BH2-320). It fits the bill very nicely. I expect it to be my #1 carry for years to come.
Just my 2 bits worth.
Business_Casual
07-16-09, 20:21
I was just thinking, so far no one has brought up the XD. Well, there it is.
M_P
If I had bought a GLock 19 for my first 9mm I likely would never have bought another 9mm handgun, other than maybe more Glock 19's.
QuietShootr
07-16-09, 21:50
FFS.
M_P
The tard contingent is really moving in here.
thopkins22
07-17-09, 07:55
The tard contingent is really moving in here.
Agreed. It seems to go in cycles, though they get bigger and bigger.
Littlelebowski
07-17-09, 10:42
I think the mods are letting this thread self regulate which is fine. We have plenty of knowledgeable folks on this thread that are trying to get the information across to those that are emotionally attached to their choice.
Its fun to have multiple guns to shoot, but in reality if you have, say 2 identical glock 19's, use one for practice and one for occasional practice and carry. One holster system, and all the extra money goes to ammo and training. You're probably on the road to becoming more effective with your weapon. I saw someone else mention, planning his trips to the range, I think that is a great concept to maximize your range time.
This is exactly what I've done. While I have one 1911, and a revolver for a BUG, every other handgun I have is some variation of the 9mm Glock platform. When I go to the range I load all my Glock 19 and 17 mags at home, and when they're out, I'm done.
This is exactly what I've done. While I have one 1911, and a revolver for a BUG, every other handgun I have is some variation of the 9mm Glock platform. When I go to the range I load all my Glock 19 and 17 mags at home, and when they're out, I'm done.
Right, why make things more complicated than neccessary. I want to draw the same weapon, from the same holster. Even experienced people fumble under stress.
If I had bought a GLock 19 for my first 9mm I likely would never have bought another 9mm handgun, other than maybe more Glock 19's.
That's sort of what happened to me, but with a G17, and then I ended up with two G17's and two G19's..I have pistols in both .40 and .45, of other makes, but I just don't see the need for a 9mm of another make, as the G17/19 is pretty much the gold standard, however I agree with those of you that say that the Safe Action design might not be the best choice for a beginner.
My first 9mm just arrived today. I think its a great first 9 and a great deal.
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/21_39_71/products_id/57866
decodeddiesel
07-18-09, 15:16
My first 9mm just arrived today. I think its a great first 9 and a great deal.
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/21_39_71/products_id/57866
I have one also, and it is awesome. I carry it daily in a Comp-Tac MTAC, and I have replaced the sights with Warren Tactical 2-dot sights.
My first 9mm just arrived today. I think its a great first 9 and a great deal.
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/21_39_71/products_id/57866
That is a great deal.
I had a Browning Hi-power and loved how it felt. It has been replaced by two M&P9. Why? Because the Hipower needed to have some $$ spent on it to make it 100% reliable and no +p ammo. The M&P is so much more gun for the money and is ready to go out of the box.
An Undocumented Worker
07-20-09, 00:31
I picked up a CZ 75 D PCR a few months back as my first CCW/defense caliber pistol, and absolutely love it. (bought a S&W 22A-1 as my first pistol)
For some reason or another, I have always been somewhat uneasy trusting a guns safety to make it "safe" so I chose a CZ with a decocker and no safety (it still has a firing pin block/drop safety) I carry it loaded with the hammer down, the pistol being DA/SA.
The main reason I chose the CZ however was the absolutely intoxicating way it fits my hand, it feels as though the gun frame was designed specifically with my hand in mind.
After going to the range today and getting to try his Kimber 1911 I realized how well the ergonomics on the CZ are designed, with the 1911 my thumb could not reach the slide release without shifting my grip from the shooting position, the mag release was the same way. With the CZ all controls are easily manipulated without changing or moving my grip away from the shooting position.
Lastly, the CZ is very easy to field strip for cleaning. (disassembling the fire control group is a whole nother story though) As well as all important pins, screws, sights, etc are staked to prevent losening during service.
So it is my personal opinion that a CZ 75 of some flavor would make a great first
9mm handgun.
Blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah, get a G19!
what's a good second 9mm? :p;)
I love the g19, should I
a)get another
b)get g26
c)get g17
d)waiting for 2010 adjustable grip...
personally, i think the tanfoglio force/ EAA witness 9mms are pretty good. got one several years ago as my carry gun, shot over 3000 rounds through it, and have zero complaints.:)
i recently bought a tanfoglio ft9 for my wife, and found it damn accurate. my wife loves it. :) i agree also with the other folks on the CZ side of the fence. they have a great gun, too. would also recommend the Baby Eagle in 9mm.
hey, as a side note, both the Baby Eagle and the Tanfoglio have conversion kits available for quick change to other calibers just by changing the slide, barrel, and magazine;)
dang, just realized, the three guns i mentioned, well, they are all kids of the venerable CZ 75. and many of their parts are interchangeable:D
Beat Trash
07-20-09, 09:39
what's a good second 9mm? :p;)
I love the g19, should I
a)get another
b)get g26
c)get g17
d)waiting for 2010 adjustable grip...
I'd vote for the second Glock 19. I own alot of different 9mm's, to include a G26 and a G17. The G19 is the only one I have multiples of. Absolutely love it.
has anyone mentioned a SIG P226? it's not for everyone due to the grip size and TDA but if it fits and you like it, it makes a fine nine. particularly for a beginner...
I'm a little biased - I'm picking up a CPO P226 today. it is practically unfired. I'm trading one of my used M&P9's for it.
maybe this is going backwards as I wanted to standardize on one platform and simply collect multiples, spares, and mags but I have always wanted one to compliment my P229. M&P9's will always be available down the road but this one is priced too well to pass up...
what's a good second 9mm? :p;)
I love the g19, should I
a)get another
b)get g26
c)get g17
d)waiting for 2010 adjustable grip...
the answer to what makes a second gun is almost always, another one of the same. or at least the same platform - G19/17/26, M&P FS/Compact/L, etc.
unless you're still in the discovery mode, once you find the proper gun for you, why change that?
Littlelebowski
07-20-09, 11:24
the answer to what makes a second gun is almost always, another one of the same. or at least the same platform - G19/17/26, M&P FS/Compact/L, etc.
unless you're still in the discovery mode, once you find the proper gun for you, why change that?
Because most gun owners are gun collectors not gun shooters.
The P-01 has a NATO stock number. So do lots of other things like washing machines. It is not indicative of extensive "NATO testing" whatever that is supposed to be. CZ promotes this as if it means much more than it does. Many reviews or articles have gotten this wrong as well.
I think the P-01 is a nice pistol but I would recommend M&P or Glock to a new shooter because they are much more likely to be easily serviced or repaired and have tons of accessories available. The trigger will be easier to shoot for most than the P-01 which in my opinion needs a trigger job out of the box. That and some clean up of the internals. Ditto the CZ-75. I also think aluminum receivers with steel slides to save weight have been outdated by polymer, again, in my opinion. Years of service or numbers in use are useful data points but there are many other things to consider.
CZ's also need frequent parts replacement.
It is also interesting that they will discount the extensive Nato testing of the CZ P-01 which has been posted on this thread and numerous other threads.
Many people are not exactly enamored of Sigs quality control these days. It is also not exactly an easy pistol to shoot well for a beginner with its high bore axis (I know, I know...) and DA/SA trigger. I also happen to think its a dated design compared more current pistols.
has anyone mentioned a SIG P226? it's not for everyone due to the grip size and TDA but if it fits and you like it, it makes a fine nine. particularly for a beginner...
I'm a little biased - I'm picking up a CPO P226 today. it is practically unfired. I'm trading one of my used M&P9's for it.
maybe this is going backwards as I wanted to standardize on one platform and simply collect multiples, spares, and mags but I have always wanted one to compliment my P229. M&P9's will always be available down the road but this one is priced too well to pass up...
Many people are not exactly enamored of Sigs quality control these days. It is also not exactly an easy pistol to shoot well for a beginner with its high bore axis (I know, I know...) and DA/SA trigger. I also happen to think its a dated design compared more current pistols.
I know. it's been a concern. QC is equally important as customer service but internet rumor has SIG much diminished in both of these. (however it was not enough to stop me from picking one up when a good one came my way at a good price. :) )
but I don't agree that it is not an easy pistol for a beginner to shoot well. I believe that a person can gain proficiency on whatever platform if they are trained in it and practice.
though it may be true that it does not have as nice a trigger as a striker fired or single action, I look past just the trigger pulling part. I look at the overall operation of the firearm and I see a DA/SA as uniquely suited to a beginner for safety reasons.
and as for it being a "dated" design well, maybe so, but I know a couple of revolver shooters who are pretty hard to keep up with at least until it's time to reload...
I really appreciate all the information that was provided here. Once I get home from Iraq I will head to the local shop/range and fire all of the choices provided here and make my decision based on then. I will also have my wife join me and pick out what fits her best. I will of course let you all know what we come up with. Thank you again.
My answer is GLOCK 19, I have shot and owned most brands of pistols Beretta, Sig, Sauer, 1911's, H&K's, S&W's, but I keep going back to glock, they are rock solid, reliable, and reasonable, like the AK-47 of handguns but more accurate. As far as the wife goes I would take her to the range to try (If you can) several hand guns, I did this with my wife and I am glad I did, she can't pull back the slide on semi auto pistols, there may be one out there she could but none we tried. It turned out that revolvers were best for her, plus the longer trigger pull is slightly safer for her. Just my thoughts
just went to the range this morning(well, its just 1630 here, right now). i was there with a Springfield XD9 and 40 that the distributor here had submitted for evaluation by this city's police department. put 300 hundred rounds downrange and i could say that its a great gun! shot very well. am actually tempted to get one for my own use.:D
just went to the range this morning(well, its just 1630 here, right now). i was there with a Springfield XD9 and 40 that the distributor here had submitted for evaluation by this city's police department. put 300 hundred rounds downrange and i could say that its a great gun! shot very well. am actually tempted to get one for my own use.:D
They're ok as a range toy,But, I would not depend on it for serious use...I used to own a XD45, (4" service) they (XD's) have a number of shortcomings that after finding them out, I sold mine and bought a Mid size M&P45, some of the short comings are;
!. Will not feed LSWC's I reload and this is important to me, in addition, one has to be careful with JHP's as well, some of those won't feed well either..
2. If one attemps to use LSWC's, The back of the magazine behind the feed lips, will get bent outward, and the mag will no longer drop-free and will require that you bend the back of the mag back into place. The mags on mine did this, and they also suffered from the mag springs being weak. I could easily load all13 rnds with little effort. This led to getting FTF's later on, replacing the mag springs with a 20% stronger spring fixed this.
3. Another little annoyance that the XD suffers from, (service models) is that when the pistol is field stripped, when reassembling, if one is not careful to get the recoil spring assemlby centered on the barrel it can slip off when the slide is racked allowing the barrel to slide over the locking block and lock up the pistol, the use of hammers, screwdrivers, wood, are the reccommended tools for getting it apart if this happens... in a few extreme cases they had to sent back to S.A.
4. Parts... There is a small aftermarket parts supply, selling both aftermarket parts and factory replacements, S.A. typically wants you to return the pistol to them for repair.. S.A. dosen't make any parts of the XD, they are simply importing them, and the compleated pistols. All the parts, and assembled pistols come from Croatia, I frankly don't want to demend on them for replacement parts or pistols. It's also worth noting thar S.A. dose'nt seem to have any armorer's courses or training, instead, they want LE depts with problem guns to send them back to S.A. for repair.. S&W on the other hand does offer training, and if you are a LE dept that's having problems, they will come to you, and fix any problem pistols on the spot..
5. The number of LE depts carring the XD, is very small, right now I think it's around 100 or less,and if I recall correctly, they are LE depts with 25 officers or less. Remember the XD has been out for 10 years..The M&P on the other hand, has been out for 4yrs and according to the August issue of "The American Rifleman"pg30, in the "random shots" section, The M&P has been approved or adopted by 505 LE depts..That says alot
My experiences with the XD were less than positive, I found it somewhat finicky about ammo, it has a high bore axis, accuracy was ok, at best. Field stripping was easy but one does have to be careful when reassembling, I felt the mags are cheaply made and unreliable, and as a CCW it was a large pistol. I do not consider it a pistol that will hold up to being used hard..I do not reccommend it to anybody who primary use will be home defense,or as a CCW..
decodeddiesel
07-24-09, 09:56
Good post Ralph. It echo's the experiences my co-worker has had with his XD40. This is especially true with ammo.
Sadly the only ammo it likes is American Eagle 180gr FMJ, Remington 180gr FMJ, and WWB 180gr "Personal Protection" JHP. The only reason it will feed the WWB JHP is because he sent it back to SA and specifically told them to get it working with that ammo. Notice I left out WWB Flat Nose FMJs...it chokes on those too.
It was kind of sad, he found 500 rounds of Ranger-T in .40 and bought it thinking he would be set for years on carry ammo...not so much. His pistol won't finish a single magazine of it without choking and giving some sort of malfunction.
I am trying to convince him to ditch that thing and pick up a M&P40. Maybe one day he'll listen.
Interesting over 6 pages and a Sig 228 hasn't come up.
Good post Ralph. It echo's the experiences my co-worker has had with his XD40. This is especially true with ammo.
Sadly the only ammo it likes is American Eagle 180gr FMJ, Remington 180gr FMJ, and WWB 180gr "Personal Protection" JHP. The only reason it will feed the WWB JHP is because he sent it back to SA and specifically told them to get it working with that ammo. Notice I left out WWB Flat Nose FMJs...it chokes on those too.
It was kind of sad, he found 500 rounds of Ranger-T in .40 and bought it thinking he would be set for years on carry ammo...not so much. His pistol won't finish a single magazine of it without choking and giving some sort of malfunction.
I am trying to convince him to ditch that thing and pick up a M&P40. Maybe one day he'll listen.
I truley hope you do convince him to get rid of the XD... After owning one and now owning a M&P, I could not understand why anyone would buy a XD over a M&P..One other little annoyance I had with the XD, was the "loaded chamber indicator", after about 2-300 rnds it would start sticking in the up, or "loaded" position...nice.. crud build up was the problem, easy fix, but a simple hole like S&W uses is sooo much simpler, dosen't depend on springs to work, crud dosen't bother it, and it does the same job. So much for Croation engineering .....
Business_Casual
07-24-09, 17:32
Why not just do a chamber check?
M_P
Mr.Goodtimes
07-24-09, 20:10
i dont know if its been mentioned yet but, I think a beretta 92FS would make a great first hand gun.
My first (and only) hand gun is a beretta 92 FS and i have been extremely happy with this gun. It shoots great. If i do my part it will shoot about a 2in group at 20m, and i have a feeling it can do better.
It eats whatever i feed it too.
Why not just do a chamber check?
M_P
Exactly, I agree.. My point being S&W did'nt get stupid with the "Loaded chamber indcator" like the XD. They went simple, with something that is easy to do a press check with. The LCI on a XD is just another gimmick to get in the way, and something else on it to fail...
i dont know if its been mentioned yet but, I think a beretta 92FS would make a great first hand gun.
My first (and only) hand gun is a beretta 92 FS and i have been extremely happy with this gun. It shoots great. If i do my part it will shoot about a 2in group at 20m, and i have a feeling it can do better.
It eats whatever i feed it too.
I bought a M9 (civvie version) a couple of years ago, put a "D" spring in it and is a excellent handgun to shoot,(I also have a older Italian made 92F compact) The M9 is a little big for a CCW, but still a good handgun, Mags, parts, aren't hard to find. As long as you keep an eye on the recoil spring,and change when needed, inspect the locking block for cracks when cleaning, you should'nt have any problems with it. For someone starting out, it probably would'nt be a bad choice at all.I like both of mine...
I get plenty of time with M9. I don't think I would pick one up for my personal handgun. When I get back I plan on checking out the Glock 19, M&P 9mm, USP Compact, P2000, Sig 229 and a few others. Lots of good info in this thread. Thanks.
They're ok as a range toy,But, I would not depend on it for serious use...I used to own a XD45, (4" service) they (XD's) have a number of shortcomings that after finding them out, I sold mine and bought a Mid size M&P45, some of the short comings are;
!. Will not feed LSWC's I reload and this is important to me, in addition, one has to be careful with JHP's as well, some of those won't feed well either..
2. If one attemps to use LSWC's, The back of the magazine behind the feed lips, will get bent outward, and the mag will no longer drop-free and will require that you bend the back of the mag back into place. The mags on mine did this, and they also suffered from the mag springs being weak. I could easily load all13 rnds with little effort. This led to getting FTF's later on, replacing the mag springs with a 20% stronger spring fixed this.
3. Another little annoyance that the XD suffers from, (service models) is that when the pistol is field stripped, when reassembling, if one is not careful to get the recoil spring assemlby centered on the barrel it can slip off when the slide is racked allowing the barrel to slide over the locking block and lock up the pistol, the use of hammers, screwdrivers, wood, are the reccommended tools for getting it apart if this happens... in a few extreme cases they had to sent back to S.A.
4. Parts... There is a small aftermarket parts supply, selling both aftermarket parts and factory replacements, S.A. typically wants you to return the pistol to them for repair.. S.A. dosen't make any parts of the XD, they are simply importing them, and the compleated pistols. All the parts, and assembled pistols come from Croatia, I frankly don't want to demend on them for replacement parts or pistols. It's also worth noting thar S.A. dose'nt seem to have any armorer's courses or training, instead, they want LE depts with problem guns to send them back to S.A. for repair.. S&W on the other hand does offer training, and if you are a LE dept that's having problems, they will come to you, and fix any problem pistols on the spot..
5. The number of LE depts carring the XD, is very small, right now I think it's around 100 or less,and if I recall correctly, they are LE depts with 25 officers or less. Remember the XD has been out for 10 years..The M&P on the other hand, has been out for 4yrs and according to the August issue of "The American Rifleman"pg30, in the "random shots" section, The M&P has been approved or adopted by 505 LE depts..That says alot
My experiences with the XD were less than positive, I found it somewhat finicky about ammo, it has a high bore axis, accuracy was ok, at best. Field stripping was easy but one does have to be careful when reassembling, I felt the mags are cheaply made and unreliable, and as a CCW it was a large pistol. I do not consider it a pistol that will hold up to being used hard..I do not reccommend it to anybody who primary use will be home defense,or as a CCW..
good point ralph, have to take your advise into consideration.
I get plenty of time with M9. I don't think I would pick one up for my personal handgun. When I get back I plan on checking out the Glock 19, M&P 9mm, USP Compact, P2000, Sig 229 and a few others. Lots of good info in this thread. Thanks.
would agree with the H&K's and the Sig. Enjoy shooting those 9's and take your time to make up your mind;)
Ugh...I don't.
Weird safety, big and clunky for a 9...outdated compared to newer polymer pistols IMHO. Long first DA trigger...Yech. But then i have never liked Beretta's. I learned on 40 or 50 year old 1911's in the USMC and was around when the Corps was forced to equip most units with the Beretta. Nobody was happy about it. What was it Col Cooper said about the Beretta? Something about dials and levers...my Google Fu is weak tonight.
i dont know if its been mentioned yet but, I think a beretta 92FS would make a great first hand gun.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.