"XDM superior to both", was "why I shoot M&P"

[WillBrink]

I posted that Yam write up on a few places, and the inevitable comments such as "The SA XDM is superior to both of them."

I have read a mish mash of comments as to why the XDM is not considered a fighting pistol by those who know fighting pistols, but is there a concise write up on that I can cite?

If not, what are the major drawbacks of the XDM that do not make it a choice as fighting pistol?

My understanding is, it does not tend to hold up well under head to head testing, has a number of design features that increase likely hood of failures, and when it does fail, it's catastrophic.


Note: Not posted to start debate on the issue but to get real clarification on the topic. "I put 200rnds through my XDM and had no problems" is not the objective info I seek.

[Rinspeed]

I always thought most people put way too much time into trying to decide what is the latest and greatest. Shoot as much as you can with whatever you own and if it breaks or has issues fix it or move on.

[WillBrink]

I always thought most people put way too much time into trying to decide what is the latest and greatest. Shoot as much as you can with whatever you own and if it breaks or has issues fix it or move on.

I don't disagree, and see the same stuff in my own line of work constantly, but that didn't get close to answering my Q...

Two, although correct, there's some designs simply not suited as combat/fighting guns, and having it break at the worst possible time, may not allow to see another day and "fix it or move on"

[C4IGrant]

I posted that Yam write up on a few places, and the inevitable comments such as "The SA XDM is superior to both of them."

I have read a mish mash of comments as to why the XDM is not considered a fighting pistol by those who know fighting pistols, but is there a concise write up on that I can cite?

If not, what are the major drawbacks of the XDM that do not make it a choice as fighting pistol?

My understanding is, it does not tend to hold up well under head to head testing, has a number of design features that increase likely hood of failures, and when it does fail, it's catastrophic.


Note: Not posted to start debate on the issue but to get real clarification on the topic. "I put 200rnds through my XDM and had no problems" is not the objective info I seek.

Most professional instructors tend to stay away from posting things online that will get them a lot of hassle from keyboard commando's.

With that said, I do not know many (to any) WELL KNOWN/PROFESSIONAL instructors that recommend the XD(M) as their first, second or third choice for a combat pistol.

I do not know of a single large PD, SO or Agency that has ever adopted the XD(M).

I think the above should kind of tell you all you need to know.



C4

[Dano5326]

LE/Mil adoption of a pistol doesn't indicate it's the best, or worst, available.

An individual example is statistically insignificant and of little import in gauging the hardiness of a design.

A realistic view is to see how a pistol sorts out after a fleetwide adoption, viable stats collected and trends develop.

[WillBrink]

Most professional instructors tend to stay away from posting things online that will get them a lot of hassle from keyboard commando's.

As I figured.

With that said, I do not know many (to any) WELL KNOWN/PROFESSIONAL instructors that recommend the XD(M) as their first, second or third choice for a combat pistol.

I do not know of a single large PD, SO or Agency that has ever adopted the XD(M).

I think the above should kind of tell you all you need to know.


C4

Thanx Grant. Mind if I quote you?

[WillBrink]

LE/Mil adoption of a pistol doesn't indicate it's the best, or worst, available.

An individual example is statistically insignificant and of little import in gauging the hardiness of a design.

A realistic view is to see how a pistol sorts out after a fleetwide adoption, viable stats collected and trends develop.

That's the type of objective info I'm hoping to find.

[C4IGrant]

LE/Mil adoption of a pistol doesn't indicate it's the best, or worst, available.

An individual example is statistically insignificant and of little import in gauging the hardiness of a design.

A realistic view is to see how a pistol sorts out after a fleetwide adoption, viable stats collected and trends develop.

I don't disagree with what you are saying at all. As you know, there are some Large PD's and Federal Agencies that do an open solicitation and then run the guns submitted through their paces. These tests do tell us some things about a pistols reliability.



C4

[C4IGrant]

As I figured.



Thanx Grant. Mind if I quote you?

No as these people then won't leave me alone.


C4

[CLJ94104]

I will put my XDm through a torture test next to a Glock or M&P and guarantee it will hold up just as long. You buy the rounds though . The reason most LE agencies don't use them is they ARE more expensive, and some agencies don't like single action triggers.