View Full Version : "XDM superior to both", was "why I shoot M&P"
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." :rolleyes:
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. :cool:
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 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"
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." :rolleyes:
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. :cool:
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
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.
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?
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.
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
As I figured.
Thanx Grant. Mind if I quote you?
No as these people then won't leave me alone. ;)
C4
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.
Traveshamockery
04-21-12, 11:39
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
Grant, isn't it possible that the lack of replacement parts and armorer training from Springfield are major reasons LE agencies don't select the XDm?
Since those are oft-cited advantages for Glock, it stands to reason the lack thereof may disqualify Springfield offerings during the selection process.
From:
http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/general-sa-xd-xd-m-talk/184369-xd-torture-test.html
XD TORTURE TEST
Trial by fire: 20,000 rounds are put through Springfield Armory's XD.
By Chaim Stein
Torture testing didn't even start until the XD had 17,500 rounds through it. The ammo weighed around 600 pounds.
"A wannabe Glock."
That was my first thought after laying eyes on Springfield Armory's XD9 pistol. Closer inspection of the slide revealed the words "Made in Croatia." Those are words that, when stamped on the slide of a handgun, aren't known to inspire the consumer's confidence.
I did not want to like this gun. I've always been a strong Glock fan, and it annoyed me that yet another company wanted to jump on the polymer bandwagon with a rehash of old concepts and designs. Despite that, one has to take notice when that company is Springfield Armory. Known for quality products, lifetime guarantees and fine customer service, Springfield Armory's name stamped on the other side of the slide does inspire confidence.
The more I looked at this gun, the more I found myself comparing it to a Glock. The trigger safeties are very similar, but the XD's trigger is made of metal. Its sights are metal, too. The XD also has a superior trigger pull. The grip angle is improved, which enables more intuitive target acquisition for most shooters.
The XD throws some new features into the mix, too: a 1911-style grip safety, a loaded-chamber indicator atop the slide and a cocked indicator protruding from the rear of the slide. Notwithstanding the XD's new features, there are obvious similarities to a Glock, both cosmetically and mechanically. It's these similarities that lead to the inevitable question: Is the XD as good as a Glock?
I was fortunate enough to be able to answer this question (at least partially) by arranging a 20,000-round "torture test" of an XD9. To keep this test honest, Springfield Armory encouraged me to use a randomly selected XD for evaluation. That would ensure that Springfield didn't hand-pick an "extra special" model for evaluation.
This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is sized 544x223.
The author tossing brass en route to an endurance record for Springfield Armory's polymer powerhouse.
So instead of having a pistol shipped directly from Springfield, I purchased a random specimen from my local firearms dealer. The street price at the time of this writing was about $70 to $100 below an equivalent Glock. The ammo we used for the test was all 115 grain, half from PMC and half from Federal's American Eagle.
Because of a familiarity with huge numbers, maybe 20,000 rounds of ammunition doesn't seem like much. So let's put it in perspective. If you were to pull the trigger on your handgun once every minute--that's 24 hours a day, seven days a week--it would take you more than 333 hours, or about 14 days, until you reached 20,000. In their boxes, 20,000 cartridges weigh about 600 pounds. Just the projectiles (each at 115 grains, or just over a quarter-ounce) weigh a combined total of 329 pounds. If you were to fire 20,000 rounds at a rate of one box of 50 cartridges per week, every week, it would take you almost eight years.
I think we can all agree that 20,000 rounds is a whole lot of ammo, far more than the average handgun owner is likely to put through any single handgun in a lifetime of shooting. We did it in less than seven months.
Popping 20,000 rounds through a handgun is a decent test of longevity, but it does not really tell us about durability and reliability under adverse conditions. So to learn more about what this gun is capable of, we replicated the Glock USA 1,000-round torture test. But instead of performing it with a new gun, we began the tests only after we'd put 17,500 rounds through the gun.
Shots Fired
When the XD's first range day finally arrived, it conveniently coincided with an incredibly fun local match called Steel Madness, where all competitors shoot only at reactive steel targets throughout the match. To break in the new XD, I simply removed the almost un-lubed pistol from its box and shot all five stages of the match.
Mmm, good! Gunsicles anyone? The XD was unaffected by such harsh treatment.
During that first shooting session, it quickly became apparent that it is especially easy to shoot with the XD. In fact, toward the end of the match, one of my friends put away his Glock and used my XD. Despite owning a Glock for 10 years and having no prior familiarity with the XD, his shooting immediately improved. This same experience was repeated with many shooters throughout the test.
After about 250 rounds in the dusty, windy conditions at Raahauge's range in Southern California, the gun had acquired a fair amount of sand and grit in its action. Despite this, the excellent trigger became noticeably smoother after the first 150 rounds. Despite the rather serious handicap of accumulated grit without the benefit of lubrication, the XD functioned flawlessly.
The trigger seemed to lighten up again at around 2,400 rounds and became even smoother. The trigger doesn't have to cock and release the striker as does a Glock's trigger. On the XD, the trigger simply releases the striker, making for a much crisper, lighter pull. There is a long first stage, but once the slack is taken up, the trigger breaks very cleanly. Almost everyone involved in the testing felt that the trigger pull, coupled with the metal trigger, is an improvement over other polymer pistols.
The worst effect of the mud was that when the XD was extracted from this puddle, shaken (not stirred) and fired, it sprayed everyone around it. Not a big crowd pleaser, but it kept on ticking without a hitch.
At roughly 7,000 rounds, I dropped the XD hard, onto cement, from a height of about 3 1/2 feet, right onto its cocking indicator. I then dropped it several more times, loaded, while standing behind cover in a completely safe environment. And I even threw it off the side of a mountain, sending it bouncing and hurtling down the steep slope about 100 feet.
At about 10,000 rounds, I noticed that the cocking indicator had broken off. While the breakage was disappointing, this piece (or lack thereof) in no way interferes with the functioning of the gun; its absence was hardly noticed.
Since we had 25 magazines, we could fire up to 250 rounds in rapid succession, magazine after magazine. And so we did, on a number of occasions. The barrel and slide, and even the trigger, would get painfully hot to the touch, and water would literally boil and evaporate off the slide on contact. I did this several times before--and once after--the torture tests. Still, the XD kept on running.
The XD's three-dot sights were replaced with an early working prototype of the SureSight, a fast-acquisition handgun sight I developed. This was the only modification made to the firearm throughout the entire test. And yes, it did help to increase shooting speed.
Torture Tests Begin
At 17,500 rounds, after giving the XD only the bare minimum in terms of maintenance, I decided to start the torture tests. Until this point, maintenance consisted of short, one- to three-minute cleaning sessions, wiping the XD's feed ramp, brushing its extractor and running a bore snake through the barrel. This was performed approximately every 750 to 1,500 rounds.
It became obvious early on that the XD's design makes maintaining this pistol remarkably quick and easy. Only twice did the gun get what I consider a serious cleaning--once at 10,000 rounds and again at 17,500, before the torture test began. In all that time the gun didn't malfunction once.
Glock's 1,000-round torture test consists of six different trials, listed below. We did not follow the specific details precisely, but we approximated them very closely. We actually fired a bit more--about 1,100 rounds--in our torture test.
The Ice Test. We filled a tub with water, dropped in the XD with a magazine and put it in the freezer for a week. Breaking it free by dropping the "gunsicle" onto concrete, we let it thaw out on the way to the Oak Tree Gun Club, our favorite outdoor handgun range. Upon arrival, we inserted a fresh magazine into the XD and fired. We fired about 150 rounds before wiping it down and lubricating it. Result: zero malfunctions.
The Dirt Test. Following the lead of the Glock tests, the XD was "caked, covered and buried alive in soils of varying consistencies." We used everything from dust and ash to moist dirt and sand. We fired 100 rounds after subjecting the XD to each of the five kinds of dirt, for a total of 500 rounds. Predictably, sand proved the most challenging to its mechanism. After burying the gun in sand, then stepping on it to grind it in, we took it out to shoot. The slide cycled noticeably slower, but the gun never jammed. Result: zero malfunctions.
The Mud Test. The XD was covered with thick, gritty mud. After a quick shaking off, it was fired 100 times. Mud went everywhere from the recoil, mostly on the shooters, some on bystanders--it was amazing how much sprayed off the gun. Still, the gun kept working. Result: zero malfunctions.
The Water Test. Fully loaded, the XD was left completely submerged, removed from the water and fired. This was repeated 10 times, firing 10 rounds each for a total of 100 rounds. Result: zero malfunctions.
The Chemical Degreaser Test. Using GunScrubber, all lubricant was removed from the firearm. After making sure there wasn't any lubricant remaining on the firearm, the gun was fired. Glock's test fired 100 rounds.
We fired 150. Result: zero malfunctions.
The Tire Test. We placed the XD on a gravel surface, then had shooting champion Mike Dalton drive his Toyota Tundra repeatedly over it, then park on the weapon. We then retrieved and fired it 100 times. Result: zero malfunctions.
With the torture tests behind us, I fired the remaining 1,400 rounds with no failures of any kind.
Conclusion
Damned impressive. Of course the Glock (and other guns, as well) should be able to handle this kind of abuse. The point of this test wasn't to diminish any existing brand but to get a picture of the capabilities of the XD, which is a relatively new product. I completed this test with a great deal of admiration for this handgun. So much so, in fact, that it is now my nightstand gun. More than 20,000 rounds later, with no failures to feed or fire and hardly any wear to the gun's finish, I have no trouble whatsoever betting my safety on its performance.
Sand definitely slowed down the XD, but the gun never jammed. Shooters can count on this Croatian workhorse to function whenever, and wherever, it is needed.
What started out as a simple 4-inch-barreled 9mm service pistol has grown rapidly into an entire family of pistols. Springfield now offers more than 18 models, so there is an XD for just about everyone. The pistols can be had in four calibers (9mm, .40 S&W, .357 Sig and .45 GAP), three barrel lengths (the 3-inch Compact, the 4-inch Service and the 5-inch Tactical) and in a choice of black or olive-drab frame with black or stainless slide. Ported barrels are available with some models.
Mark Twain once wrote, "A thing long expected takes the form of the unexpected when at last it comes." And so it is with the Springfield XD. Before the XD's arrival, who would have expected that Springfield Armory would import--from Croatia, of all places--a handgun that is now well on its way to establishing its place among the outstanding handguns of modern times?
Chaim Stein is the inventor of the SureSight, which is manufactured and marketed by TRUGLO. He is a firearms instructor and a veteran of an Israeli army combat unit. For more information, contact SureSight
Source - Springfield Armory
No as these people then won't leave me alone. ;)
C4
Rgr rgr.
Grant, isn't it possible that the lack of replacement parts and armorer training from Springfield is a major reason LE agencies don't select the XDm?
I can't speak for armorer training, however I do own a few and can say oem replacement and aftermarket parts are widely available. Having worked on them myself I can also say... It ain't that hard. I'm a chemistry student btw, not an armorer.
Issues I see for it are the grip safety being needed to operate the slide which can end up killing you if your in a situation where you must do it one handed and slip up a little (guns without this feature are more forgiving with one handed manipulations). Grip safety in general where I don't personally see a need for it for a gun like the XDM and is a liability to operating at all. Something I have noted is the magazines, I don't think they are as reliable as the competitors and would rather cut back a few rounds then risk a mag induced malfunction (this may just be my personal experience). Don't care much for the grip texture all that much personally either.
Take these facts and couple it with them not being head over heels more accurate, fast, or anything then say Glock, HK, and M&P (though I can shoot an XDM more accurately then a Glock) it becomes a mater of why chose it. Notably not better and has a few features that function more as a liability.
How can it be better? If someone shoots it better. As long as the liabilities do not kick into effect and it is functioning fine then people can shoot it just as well or even better then competitors. If you find the liabilities acceptable or just don't know about them and perform better with it then it can be argued to be better but that is more a personal level thing.
As for not being adopted by anyone to note. Can be because its single action, more costly, not enough support, or who knows what but I don't exactly see evidence of it failing in side be side competitions or anything (although it should in a few categories at least).
Wonder what the increase in XDM threads has been, ow well.
In reality it doesn't really matter. Every XD or XDm thread around here arrives at the same place and most threads are then locked.
* The XD line is not issued to any large force, but neither are the well respected Walther PPS and PPQ. There are issued pistols to police forces and armies that have well documented failures and more complicated manual of arms. We still issue the M9 to U.S. forces when a Glock is a better proven performer for most.
* The XD line fails at a higher rate than other comparable polymer framed pistols, yet there is no document anywhere than anyone can find that proves this. On the flip side, since no major agency wants any part of the XD line and Springfield seems to be satisfied with it's civilian market share, it's doubtful anything ever will be studied and published. We are stuck with non-scientific arguments from both side on the subject.
* Shoot what you want. If you need internet confirmation about your choices there is likely a site that will support you. There are even well known top shooters that are rocking the XDm line if it makes you feel better. The important thing is to become intimate with the weapon of your choice. Shoot it a bunch and form your own opinions.
I happen to shoot a polymer framed handgun that now has 5000+ trouble free rounds through it. It's survived 800 rounds without cleaning during a Redback One class and will be heading back to another Redback One class in May. I just happen to wish that my primary HD weapon (M4 carbine style) will be as reliable, but I doubt it will go 5000 rounds without a single failure of any type. I'm still packing a bolt and firing pin for it.
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." :rolleyes:
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. :cool:
If I may ask, why do you even want to get into this debate with someone? I know that Hilton Yam loves the M&P. That's not news and I understand why. I don't necessarily agree with everything he wrote in that article; however, what I can't argue is that it works for him. He's not wrong and, in fact, he's right for him; which doesn't make him right for me or you. If the XDM works for person X on message board X, why not just let him rock on with it.
Grant, isn't it possible that the lack of replacement parts and armorer training from Springfield are major reasons LE agencies don't select the XDm?
Since those are oft-cited advantages for Glock, it stands to reason the lack thereof may disqualify Springfield offerings during the selection process.
Good question. Yes, I believe that this WAS the reason in the past, but I don't necessarily believe it now.
The other issue is that most LE solicitations specifically state that the pistol cannot have a grip safety (for good reason).
C4
If I may ask, why do you even want to get into this debate with someone? I know that Hilton Yam loves the M&P. That's not news and I understand why. I don't necessarily agree with everything he wrote in that article; however, what I can't argue is that it works for him. He's not wrong and, in fact, he's right for him; which doesn't make him right for me or you. If the XDM works for person X on message board X, why not just let him rock on with it.
I tend to agree with this thought.
People tend to be married to their purchases so attempting to tell them that their choice sucks is like calling their mom a whore!
Ignorance is bliss and not all opinions are "informed." So unless someone is telling me that gun XYZ is the "best" and all others suck, I would just let them live in their own little world.
C4
* The XD line fails at a higher rate than other comparable polymer framed pistols, yet there is no document anywhere than anyone can find that proves this. On the flip side, since no major agency wants any part of the XD line and Springfield seems to be satisfied with it's civilian market share, it's doubtful anything ever will be studied and published. We are stuck with non-scientific arguments from both side on the subject.
Good point.
I always get a kick out of the "failure rate" argument as well. I don't have any XDs/XDMs (I have Glocks) so I have no reason to jump to the defense of the XDs.
That being said, one can visit several reputable weapons-related forums (including this one) and easily scan through 5-6 separate 20-page+ threads about late Gen3 9mm and Gen 4 9mm Glock pistols failing to eject, ejecting at 6 o'clock, etc.
Rarely if ever do I read any first-hand negative reports regarding the XDs. Maybe it's because they're simply not as ubiquitous as Glocks. Or maybe it's because they are actually quality, if you can deal with the dreaded grip safety.
NeoNeanderthal
04-21-12, 15:13
I owned an xdm and sold it off. I did not like...
-The grip safety stopping the manipulation of the slide
-Extremely flippy (I assume this is due to the high bore axis)
-The lack of aftermarket holsters, parts, sights ext
-The fact that no well known instructor or serious shooter i knew carried or liked one. Clint Smith is the only person that has nice things to say about it.
I DID however like the magazine capacity. Why the hell cant glock squeek out 2 more rounds of 9mm???
I was issued an XD45 for awhile and owned an XD9 for awhile.
I've also been to the armorer's class.
For me, I don't like them primarily for two reasons...
1. The trigger reset sucks.
2. The placement of the slide stop lever. My thumb laid on it causing my slide to never lock open. Yes, I know it's a training issue, but I wasn't going to change my firing grip for one gun that I wasn't crazy about in the first place.
As an armorer, two other things I've dealt with/seen...
1. You better keep your mag release assembly clean. Dirt, grime, etc. will lock it up or make it very difficult to manipulate. I've had to un**** several of ours.
2. The springs in the XD45 mags are too weak and we experienced a lot of F-T-Feed malfunctions with them. After replacing the springs with Wolff XP, the F-T-Feed malfunctions disappeared.
2a. The mags in general are very dirt and crud sensitive.
I'm happy to have an issued Glock back in my holster.
Also note, "The M&P's are great, you just need the APEX this, the APEX that....then you have a shooter. I just put an APEX trigger in my threaded 9mm M&P. So , I'm on board.
I own XD's but wouldn't buy more and will sell at some point. But for a first plastic gun, the trinkets (grip safety, round indicator) that can break, are pretty good for very new gun owners.
I also contend, there are 3 categories of weapons for reliability and durability whether AR or handgun.
1) Military, the most indestructible and reliable needed. Its going to get dirtier and and run harder than any LE gun. IMHO
2) LE, has to be up to the task. SHOULD be shot regularly and reliably. But not for 8 hours a day and a sand hole.
3) Home defense, you put 500 rounds through it and 100 rounds of HM ammo that you will use and you can safely put in your HD location. You need to be able to run one mag through it without it throwing up.
Yes, why not get 1) Military quality weapon. Well I do, but I think for most weekend warriors the XD is excellent. Most should be called , "month-end" warriors because they shoot monthly or quarterly for that matter. And for them to have a grip safety and round indicator is probably better for all us.
In my humble opinion, does the XD meets Military, no I don't think so. Maybe LE and definitely HD. In the next 6 months many many XD guns will sell to soon to be new happy gun owners. "Oh yea, I have 1,000 flawless rounds through my XD" :D and no APEX trigger.:p
Note: I gave my XD 45 to my brother. He just got into shooting. God love him.
PB
High Altitude
04-21-12, 16:18
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.
No need for lots of rounds.
Start the test by dropping loaded and unloaded mags on concrete.
Then start dropping and covering magazines in dirt/sand over and over and see how they operate.
I have personally seen several failures of XD(m) magazines. Besides the striker retaining pin and grip safety, the magazines are a definite weak link in the design.
Other items that are more subjective that I don't like is the trigger system.
I'm a big fan of XDs as some here know and I believe they can hang with the best of them. I'm reserving jugment on my XDm9 (3.8) until I can get more time with it. So far, so good and I really like it. My wife also has a XDm9 (3.8), had it about a year (so far, so good) but it really hasn't seen real hard use yet.
ETA:
I would never claim a pistol was 'better' than another when these things are so subjective to the user.
High Altitude
04-21-12, 18:02
2a. The mags in general are very dirt and crud sensitive.
This has been my experience as well. Start dropping the magazines in dirt/sand etc.. during training or competition and they don't hold up as well.
Good point.
I always get a kick out of the "failure rate" argument as well. I don't have any XDs/XDMs (I have Glocks) so I have no reason to jump to the defense of the XDs.
That being said, one can visit several reputable weapons-related forums (including this one) and easily scan through 5-6 separate 20-page+ threads about late Gen3 9mm and Gen 4 9mm Glock pistols failing to eject, ejecting at 6 o'clock, etc.
Rarely if ever do I read any first-hand negative reports regarding the XDs. Maybe it's because they're simply not as ubiquitous as Glocks. Or maybe it's because they are actually quality, if you can deal with the dreaded grip safety.
My first ccw pistol was an xd sub compact 40. About 1 out of 200 rounds would ftf. I went through 5 different mags and could never pin down the cause. I got sick of trying and bought a glock.
As to the price thing that keeps being mentioned. At least around here an xd is cheaper than a glock. And xdms can be found on sale for pretty close to a glock (not counting gssf/leo/mil discount). So if the xd(m) was a superior gun to the glock I doubt the cost would stop its adoption.
CaptainDooley
04-21-12, 18:26
I'm not buying the price argument as a reason why they haven't been adopted. I remember when the HS2000 was introduced for sub $300. I'm pretty sure Springfield could cut PD/SO/Agencies a pretty good price.
Will,
Ask Mike Pannone about his experience with the XD. I think you will find that he seems to have had minimal issues. And his is way more accurate than any M&P I've ever shot.
Chris
Question about the torture test, did they do it with the magazines in the gun, or did they do it with it separate?
I've been shooting my XD(M) 5.25" Competition model for about 6 months. Now it doesn't have too many rounds through it (1,577 as of today), but it has had 8 stoppages, all of them caused by the magazine. IMO the magazines are the XD series's weakest link they just don't feed all that well, likely because the magazine springs are fairly weak. And it can't be because they are dirty as my magazines have been babied (the competition I bought it for doesn't require reloads on the clock for most matches so they've never hit the dirt).
The XD .40 was submitted to Homeland Security for consideration back @2003. It did not complete the trial. Not "did not pass", not "did not get selected", but did not finish. It performed in such a way that we now have the XDM as a way to remedy some issues discovered in testing. I wanted to like like the pistol. I really wanted one. But in talking to folks involved in the testing, I decided to pass on owning one. The Sig 229 DAK and H&K P2000 LEM were eventually selected.
Of course, the Sig P250 passed the Air Marshal testing, and then was rejected as pistols sent to the field had issues.... So, I guess Agency testing isn't foolproof. But it is the best way we have to measure performance over time.
I had an XD 40 4" service model from 2003-2009 and sold it off with about 15k through it. I don't have any complaints about it but I can guarantee you that the magazines would not pass LAVs torture test he did on the Glock magazines on TacTV. For those of you that didn't see it. They were ran over and fired. For my piece of mind, the firearm AND the magazines must both be able to survive abuse.
Littlelebowski
04-21-12, 20:10
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.
So, where do you compete with it and what classes have you taken with it? Ante up.
* The XD line is not issued to any large force, but neither are the well respected Walther PPS and PPQ. There are issued pistols to police forces and armies that have well documented failures and more complicated manual of arms. We still issue the M9 to U.S. forces when a Glock is a better proven performer for most.
The P99, the precursor to the PPQ and a gun that it shares MANY common parts with, is VERY widely adopted by police and military. It's actually one of the most carried gun in all of european law enforcement. As far as the PPS is concerned, why would a police force/military adopt a single stack, low profile CCW for mass uniformed employment? However, the PPS is listed as an approved 2nd (or backup) gun by many law enforcement agencies.
Where is Springfield's history of quality heavy use and/or adverse condition polymer guns?
You can't sight the slow pace of procurement and subsequent adoption habits of the military as reason for anything really. Except for maybe wasted money and headaches. ;) The fact that many special operations units approve and procure the Glock 17/19 for use should tell us something about that pistol. Tell me, what SO forces are dying to get their hands on an XD?
I DID however like the magazine capacity. Why the hell cant glock squeek out 2 more rounds of 9mm???
The fact that Springfield is the ONLY manufacturer trying to shove this many rounds in their tubes should tell you something... If glock and/or S&W could get even ONE more round to RELIABLY function in their platforms, don't you think with their millions of dollars in RD money that they would? I'd rather have 17 guaranteed function rounds than 19 that might all feed :)
High Altitude
04-22-12, 00:45
I'm not buying the price argument as a reason why they haven't been adopted. I remember when the HS2000 was introduced for sub $300. I'm pretty sure Springfield could cut PD/SO/Agencies a pretty good price.
Plenty of dept. have adopted Sig and HK so price certainly isn't a deal breaker. Bottom line is that XD didn't perform in early trials and that was that.
CompressionIgnition
04-22-12, 01:07
It's funny to see how some people get worked up when someone dares claim the XD isn't a bad pistol.
When our department authorized striker-fire pistols, a few guys i know bought XDs. I shot a .45 and like it better than the Glock 21. One of the guys who had one got into a shooting. The gun had a FTF, if I remember correctly, but the officer came out the winner due to some good decisions. After that, less people bought Springfields and a couple even sold them to pick up Glocks.
I won't say they are bad pistols. They may be great, but a single failure when they were still new to us tainted their reputation. Reputations, duly earned or not, carry weight.
The reason most LE agencies don't use them is they ARE more expensive, and some agencies don't like single action triggers.
Not only the single action trigger but I understand that the grip safety is also a major dislike, read deal breaker, since if one cannot get a good grip on the weapon the gun won't function, you won't be be able to rack the slide, and you will get premature slide lock malfunctions. Major fails for a serious use gun IMHO.
As far as cost, if I remember correctly, the original HS2000 had a market price in the neighborhood of $250 before SA stamped their logo on it and marked it up in price significantly. So I think that the huge price mark-up for a gun made in East Europe, that you really should be getting a lot cheaper is also something that turns people off.
Littlelebowski
04-22-12, 11:23
It's funny to see how some people get worked up when someone dares claim the XD isn't a bad pistol.
Even funnier when folks whine about treatment of their pet pistol and offer no data other than " mine is great."
Never see you guys at matches or training. Funny, that.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2
DAVID RICHARDS
04-22-12, 11:44
Local officers that guard the Federal Courthouse here are issued the XD40. I think thy are contracted ou to a private company though. Shot with one of the guys. His "skill at arms" left a lot to be desired. Probably as someone else mentioned the guns are fine for the amount of rounds most people would shoot through them. I have two. An XD9 4" and an XD9sc. Both are great shooters. But....
The first XD9 I had was an early version and had FTE problems. SA finally replaced it and the new one has been good to go. The XD9sc has been a good little carry gun. But the locking block has had to be replaced by SA twice. Both times the locking block cracked after heavy usage. Did not stop the gun from firing but makes one wonder about the durability of the piece. I have kept them because I like the ergo's and both are very accurate. Do keep a close eye on the guns though. Never any mag problems. But one of the firs hings I do with most guns is put Wolf extra power springs in them.
I think the gun being single action does turn a lot of agency sales away. The way Glocks and SIGs have gone lately I think I would feel more comfortable with an XD than either of the former stellar greats. No way would I take one over my older SIGS or Glocks though. Of course JMHO and personal experience.
the grip safety alone is a good enough reason not to carry one.
-can't manipulate the slide without the grip safety being held down
-grip safety is prone to jamming with mud
-grip safety makes operation while injured/one handed operation more difficult.
Never see you guys at matches or training. Funny, that.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2
It must be exhausting going to every single match and training session across the country.:rolleyes:
It's funny to see how some people get worked up when someone dares claim the XD isn't a bad pistol.
I have no problem if someone likes their XD and I imagine most others don't either.
What is more important to us is that XD owners run their guns through pistol training.
Welcome to the forum BTW.
C4
the grip safety alone is a good enough reason not to carry one.
People don't seem to say that about the 1911 and God knows how many BTDT types carry/carried a 1911. Is it the design of the grip safety specifically?
Besides the striker retaining pin .
I have seen roll pin in the top of the slide walk it's way out on two guns and fall out on two XDMs with my own eyes. Been at several IDPA matches were they broke, and the guns no longer functional. People are strongly advised to replace that pin with an after market pin.
Although I have seen Gocks and M&P have issues, rarely was the issue a total non functional gun. That's a show stopper for me.
Personally, don't like the high bore axis, not crazy about the ergo, and don't like the bulk of it for those few extra rnds, but that's personal preference
I was a 1911 guy for many years, and the M&P (like many) the first polymer wonder pistol that made me transition from my beloved 1911s
It's funny to see how some people get worked up when someone dares claim the XD isn't a bad pistol.
I don't see anyone getting "worked up" over anything this this thread, so your comment is off base. Seems a very balanced low key discussion on the design, and why it's not considered up to snuff with other platforms in the role of combat handgun by many, but not all. So, I was interested in getting more details as to exactly why that's the case. So far, so good. :cool:
Heavy Metal
04-22-12, 13:10
People don't seem to say that about the 1911 and God knows how many BTDT types carry/carried a 1911. Is it the design of the grip safety specifically?
You don't have to depress the grip safety on a 1911 to retract the slide.
Also note, "The M&P's are great, you just need the APEX this, the APEX that....then you have a shooter. I just put an APEX trigger in my threaded 9mm M&P. So , I'm on board.
I own XD's but wouldn't buy more and will sell at some point. But for a first plastic gun, the trinkets (grip safety, round indicator) that can break, are pretty good for very new gun owners.
I also contend, there are 3 categories of weapons for reliability and durability whether AR or handgun.
1) Military, the most indestructible and reliable needed. Its going to get dirtier and and run harder than any LE gun. IMHO
2) LE, has to be up to the task. SHOULD be shot regularly and reliably. But not for 8 hours a day and a sand hole.
3) Home defense, you put 500 rounds through it and 100 rounds of HM ammo that you will use and you can safely put in your HD location. You need to be able to run one mag through it without it throwing up.
Yes, why not get 1) Military quality weapon. Well I do, but I think for most weekend warriors the XD is excellent. Most should be called , "month-end" warriors because they shoot monthly or quarterly for that matter. And for them to have a grip safety and round indicator is probably better for all us.
In my humble opinion, does the XD meets Military, no I don't think so. Maybe LE and definitely HD. In the next 6 months many many XD guns will sell to soon to be new happy gun owners. "Oh yea, I have 1,000 flawless rounds through my XD" :D and no APEX trigger.:p
Note: I gave my XD 45 to my brother. He just got into shooting. God love him.
PB
I think this is a good description of where the XD stands in the overall scope of things.
1911s aside from being able to work the slide without the grip safety depressed do seem to have better designed grip safeties as well. More broader across, they rise up higher into the curve of the grip, and are longer. XDMs are narrower, shorter, and more recessed into the grip.
As for malfunctioning of the grip safety I've heard of it happening where debris goes into the hole in the back of the slide and trickles down into it and it also seems to open up at the bottom a little bit when depressed.
Think the thing to worry about would be not working the slide with the possibility of debris clogging being lower. Of course it goes back to why take the risks unless your performance with it outside possible grip safety issues is much better then a competitor. 1911s do have a pretty good niche for their use so even with an extra "what if" they are still accepted pretty well.
You don't have to depress the grip safety on a 1911 to retract the slide.
Ah, that makes sense. I have not worked with an XDM enough find that out.
Littlelebowski
04-22-12, 13:23
It must be exhausting going to every single match and training session across the country.:rolleyes:
Just funny how I never see them nor hear about them doing well at matches or competition online. I'd be happy to provide a link to my own AARs and match results; care to trade? I can ante up right here, publicly.
Just funny how I never see them nor hear about them doing well at matches or competition online. I'd be happy to provide a link to my own AARs and match results; care to trade? I can ante up right here, publicly.
Before we get into a big pissing match over this, let's just relax for a minute.
PackerfanXd, in the training circles that I and LL travel in, the XD has a very bad name. They are generally classified as "Bubba guns" and for whatever reason seem to attract people that think it is ok to drink and shoot.
We RARELY see XD's in training classes (Basic classes) and almost NEVER see them in Advanced pistol classes. The people we seen in these higher level classes tend to be "gun guys" and very switched on shooters. I think there is somewhat of a clue there.
With that said, I would love to see more XD shooters in training classes and hope that you will help to push your fellow XD enthusiasts to get into training.
C4
Just funny how I never see them nor hear about them doing well at matches or competition online. I'd be happy to provide a link to my own AARs and match results; care to trade? I can ante up right here, publicly.
*Note I am a XD series critic, but I also shoot one in NRA Action Pistol*
At NRA Action Pistol the XD(M) is a pretty common pistol. Out of the seven production shooters at my last match, at least 4 were using the 5.25" XD(M).
But then again, Rob had the 5.25" designed from the ground up for NRA Action Pistol. And Rob is a regular winner at Bianchi.
IMO when you are looking at match results, the pistol is a very small part of the equation.
Just funny how I never see them nor hear about them doing well at matches or competition online. I'd be happy to provide a link to my own AARs and match results; care to trade? I can ante up right here, publicly.
Some dude called Rob Leatham does quite well...
Granted, that guy could shoot a hipoint and win.
Plenty of people do just fine with the XDM, the bottom line is that if you're serious about using a gun for defensive purposes, there are MUCH better options out there. Period, end of story.
Who cares who shoots what in competition, your life isnt on the line and if you're dead set on "testing" or "training" yourself through competition with a gun you dont even carry then that just makes you a fool.
Educate and inform the people that matter the most to you, those that you consider personal friends. THEY are in some ways, your responsibility by way of the friendship that you share. Trying to convince some yahoo on the internet that his gun of choice is sub par is a losing endeavor and always will be until the end of time.
Maybe I'm lucky, but out of quite literally THOUSANDS of rounds through my two XDm pistols, not one issue even with dirty range reloads. Even have an aftermarket PRP Ultamite Match Target trigger kit which I installed on my 4.5". Also had an XD40sc with over 2 thousand rounds through it without issue. As far as one handed manipulations (while not as easy as not having a grip safety) I don't find it too difficult, another pistol that is quite popular has one. Perhaps you've heard of it? It's called a 1911 or something or other?
I do think there is a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts going on with the XD series where because it "is not used by anyone reputable and only bubbas" it actually ends up that way since most ding dongs who follow all the latest and greatest trends will not use it leaving those "out of the loop" left buying it.
Back when I was debating on getting one to "play" with I looked around at reviews and like 9/10 of bad reviews were "I heard, from a guy, who once, with the first generation" and ultimately had little to no merit for the current models and reeked of 2nd hand hear say in general.
It acquired a bad reputation that makes it seem far worse then it is and not acceptable. Are obviously things that can be improved upon it but I bet even if all main issues are corrected it will still have a bad reputation. Ow well, plenty of fish in the sea, who cares.
I hate to beat a dead horse, but if a marginal grip can result in a premature slide lock, or prevents the slide from cycling normally, then a gun with that unfortunate design characteristic is a non starter as a serious use weapon, full stop.
SilverTongueDevil
04-22-12, 14:41
This a bubba dont tread on me thread in the making lol...
High Altitude
04-22-12, 16:01
I hate to beat a dead horse, but if a marginal grip can result in a premature slide lock, or prevents the slide from cycling normally, then a gun with that unfortunate design characteristic is a non starter as a serious use weapon, full stop.
I agree with this 100%.
Why would you want something that requires 100% proper usage to work correctly?
CompressionIgnition
04-22-12, 16:09
Even funnier when folks whine about treatment of their pet pistol and offer no data other than " mine is great."
Never see you guys at matches or training. Funny, that.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2
"You guys"? When have you seen me whine?
I hate to beat a dead horse, but if a marginal grip can result in a premature slide lock, or prevents the slide from cycling normally, then a gun with that unfortunate design characteristic is a non starter as a serious use weapon, full stop.
That's my take on it. Administrative Gunhandling failures due to improper grip makes it a non-starter as I may have just been knocked10 feet and incapable of acquiring said grip. Glocks and M&Ps work fine in that price range - or have less significant issues FOR ME.
As I read through this thread I noticed most of the likes or dislikes regarding the XD fall into three categories, personal preference (I don't like the such and such feature), speculation (If its not used by pros or in training class, it must be inferior), and hearsay(I read or I heard that an XD blew-up). Aside from the Striker Retaining pin, which is a $10 upgrade can anyone provide some empirical data on XD issues? I'm not a die hard XD fan but I think most of the bad publicity is Internet rumour.
As I read through this thread I noticed most of the likes or dislikes regarding the XD fall into three categories, personal preference (I don't like the such and such feature), speculation (If its not used by pros or in training class, it must be inferior), and hearsay(I read or I heard that an XD blew-up). Aside from the Striker Retaining pin, which is a $10 upgrade can anyone provide some empirical data on XD issues? I'm not a die hard XD fan but I think most of the bad publicity is Internet rumour.
No; no one can at this point.
You hit the nail on the head with your post though.
As I read through this thread I noticed most of the likes or dislikes regarding the XD fall into three categories, personal preference (I don't like the such and such feature), speculation (If its not used by pros or in training class, it must be inferior), and hearsay(I read or I heard that an XD blew-up). Aside from the Striker Retaining pin, which is a $10 upgrade can anyone provide some empirical data on XD issues? I'm not a die hard XD fan but I think most of the bad publicity is Internet rumour.
No; no one can at this point.
You hit the nail on the head with your post though.
Post #22 was not all preference, speculation, and hearsay...reread.
Post #22 was not all preference, speculation, and hearsay...reread.
And I (and several thousand others) have had the opposite experience. Some people think it's the greatest trigger out of the box and some people hate it -preference.
Placement of the slide stop lever? C'mon man! You said yourself it was a training issue. Keep your thumbs pointed at the target and that won't happen (and your groups may improve;))..
I can't recall ever cleaning the mag release on my XDs other than a drop of lube once in a great while. I never had a problem. I can't recall ever hearing of such an issue being a member of XDtalk for seven years. Nor have I ever had magazine issues in my 2 XD45s or heard of such an issue.
So rock on with what you like; more XDs for me...
MaximumPenetration
04-30-12, 00:33
In reality it doesn't really matter. Every XD or XDm thread around here arrives at the same place and most threads are then locked.
* The XD line is not issued to any large force, but neither are the well respected Walther PPS and PPQ. There are issued pistols to police forces and armies that have well documented failures and more complicated manual of arms. We still issue the M9 to U.S. forces when a Glock is a better proven performer for most.
* The XD line fails at a higher rate than other comparable polymer framed pistols, yet there is no document anywhere than anyone can find that proves this. On the flip side, since no major agency wants any part of the XD line and Springfield seems to be satisfied with it's civilian market share, it's doubtful anything ever will be studied and published. We are stuck with non-scientific arguments from both side on the subject.
* Shoot what you want. If you need internet confirmation about your choices there is likely a site that will support you. There are even well known top shooters that are rocking the XDm line if it makes you feel better. The important thing is to become intimate with the weapon of your choice. Shoot it a bunch and form your own opinions.
I happen to shoot a polymer framed handgun that now has 5000+ trouble free rounds through it. It's survived 800 rounds without cleaning during a Redback One class and will be heading back to another Redback One class in May. I just happen to wish that my primary HD weapon (M4 carbine style) will be as reliable, but I doubt it will go 5000 rounds without a single failure of any type. I'm still packing a bolt and firing pin for it.
I'll see you at that class Doug. I'm going to bring my Sig P226 9mm. I can't wait for that class.
Sounds good. It's going to be my second class with the same XDm. All this friggin snow really put a damper on my practice time this winter. Going to really hit it this month before the class.
I had a XDm in .40 for a while and got rid of it. Nothing wrong with it, just wanted something different. I did find the following quote by Pat McNamara interesting:
"I train regularly with a P2000, P226, M-9, G17, XDm and 1911."
I guess why it's never gained real traction may be forever debated, I suppose some find it worthy enough.
I was issued an XD45 for awhile and owned an XD9 for awhile.
I've also been to the armorer's class.
For me, I don't like them primarily for two reasons...
1. The trigger reset sucks.
2. The placement of the slide stop lever. My thumb laid on it causing my slide to never lock open. Yes, I know it's a training issue, but I wasn't going to change my firing grip for one gun that I wasn't crazy about in the first place.
As an armorer, two other things I've dealt with/seen...
1. You better keep your mag release assembly clean. Dirt, grime, etc. will lock it up or make it very difficult to manipulate. I've had to un**** several of ours.
2. The springs in the XD45 mags are too weak and we experienced a lot of F-T-Feed malfunctions with them. After replacing the springs with Wolff XP, the F-T-Feed malfunctions disappeared.
2a. The mags in general are very dirt and crud sensitive.
I'm happy to have an issued Glock back in my holster.
This is some good data especially you being an armour. What was the failure rate as a percentage? What was the total population of XDs? What model of XDs experienced these issues?
And I (and several thousand others) have had the opposite experience. Some people think it's the greatest trigger out of the box and some people hate it -preference.
Placement of the slide stop lever? C'mon man! You said yourself it was a training issue. Keep your thumbs pointed at the target and that won't happen (and your groups may improve;))..
I can't recall ever cleaning the mag release on my XDs other than a drop of lube once in a great while. I never had a problem. I can't recall ever hearing of such an issue being a member of XDtalk for seven years. Nor have I ever had magazine issues in my 2 XD45s or heard of such an issue.
So rock on with what you like; more XDs for me...
I said not ALL of the post was preference, speculation, and hearsay.
Obviously, the first part was, but not the second part.
Like you say, if someone digs the XD line, rock on.
I was just offering the OP my thoughts and experience with them.
BTW, raging Cheesehead here and Wisconsin transplant who grew up in Milwaukee. :)
I said not ALL of the post was preference, speculation, and hearsay.
Obviously, the first part was, but not the second part.
Like you say, if someone digs the XD line, rock on.
I was just offering the OP my thoughts and experience with them.
BTW, raging Cheesehead here and Wisconsin transplant who grew up in Milwaukee. :)
Go Pack Go!:cool:
This is some good data especially you being an armour. What was the failure rate as a percentage? What was the total population of XDs? What model of XDs experienced these issues?
Admittedly, not a huge sampling at all.
My agency primarily issues G22, G23, and G27s. SWAT gets XD45s (long story. 15 SWAT pistols).
I'm an armorer for both.
Approx 25% have experienced the mag release issue.
Regarding the mags...functioning has been fine with standard pressure ammo when kept clean. But, when we tested the guns with 230gr+P, we experienced a 50% failure rate (like not getting through a mag without a F-T-Feed malfunction).
These same guns were then used with mags that had Wolff XP springs installed and the failure rate dropped to 0%.
This lead me to believe that the increased slide velocity using +P ammo did not allow the borderline stock springs to push the following round up fast enough to be chambered.
Ammo used was Speer GD 230gr, Fed HST 230gr, and Fed HST 230gr+P.
Did we get a bad batch of mags? Maybe. Not trying to flame...just relating what I've dealt with.
Also, I'm not the first to observe that XD mags, in general, are more sensitive to dirt and crud as compared to, say, Glock mags.
Regards.
This post is not defending any make or model.
Obviously there is no literally perfect firearm but some are more reliable then others. How is lack of maintenance accounted for when looking at a firearms reliability?
Never mind, boys & girls- slipped through a crack, turned left and posted in the wrong thread, somewhere in the Twilight Zone
I think this (http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/general-sa-xd-xd-m-talk/156561-cutting-through-hype-myths-xd-good-enough-professional-use.html) link explains it pretty well. It's from a police/SWAT officer in Texas who took it upon himself to research the XD/XDm, as the XDm is his duty weapon. The most telling point he made was that no matter who he talked to, be it military, law enforcement, or competition shooters, nearly no one could validate or confirm claims that XD/XDm's had so-and-so problems and issues. It was mostly "I heard from this guy who heard it from a guy who was there" type of response. In fact, the responses he received tended to be favorable. He also noted that for guns like say Glocks or M&P's, if they suffered a major failure most people treated them as anomalies; whereas if an XD/XDm suffered a major failure, it was treated as a serious design flaw. While certainly not an end-all review, he clearly states that you should do your own research and take everything you read with a grain of salt, including his own review. I appreciate that kind of honesty and frankness. In addition, he cites actual links to articles written by noted shooters such as Ron Avery, Clint Smith, and Ken Hackathorn who all speak favorably about the XD/XDm line. Again, not saying the rumors about these guns are/are not true, but keep an open mind, you may be surprised.
Thread was far too long to read every post while at work but here goes my $.02:
Sample size of 1:2.
I've put around 3000 rounds through an XDM .40 service and a XDM 9mm compact. The only failures I have experienced so far were 2 failures to feed with the .40 which I believe to be ammo related (failed to cycle fully). Simple rack of the slide fixed.
I *did pick up some spare firing pin retention pins, as these are reportedly the first things to fail, however they've remained in the baggy thus far.
The ergos are fantastic, although stipling or grip tape are needed imho to enhance purchase on the grip. In spite of the aggressive lugs on the grip from the factory it still feels a bit slick in my hand without gloves on. With gloves it's a non issue.
In short I've had a quite positive experience with them.
Doing a 2 day course with them next month, will update if anything new (failures ) occurs.
Well as many people here know, I am a fan of XDs though I am still relatively new to XDms. My wife has had a XDm9mm 3.8 for about a year now and I really liked it so I recently got one for me. Yesterday I was out with the wife shooting my XDm when the damn firing pin retaining roll pin started working it's way out the top. Not a big deal but I wasn't happy about it. I ordered some aftermarket roll pins, hopefully the new one will stay in place.:rolleyes:
Issues I see for it are the grip safety being needed to operate the slide which can end up killing you if your in a situation where you must do it one handed and slip up a little (guns without this feature are more forgiving with one handed manipulations). Grip safety in general where I don't personally see a need for it for a gun like the XDM and is a liability to operating at all.
I've seen this arguement before, yet I've never had any problem racking the slide one handed? Grip the frame and use the front or rear sight post against your belt, a wall, desk, your friends new car, the family cat, etc....
Maybe there is some reason for racking the slide differently one handed that would cause this gripe to manifest?
Legitimate question here because I have no idea where this one handed operation/grip safety thing comes from.
Littlelebowski
05-21-12, 14:45
There's SMEs on here that indeed have seen the XD fail en masse at dept/agency trials. DocGKR, for one.
Hackathorne no long endorses XDs. Quite the opposite.
With the proliferation of SWAT teams across the US, unfortunately a SWAT officer's endorsement must be vetted and not just accepted blindly.
I think this (http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/general-sa-xd-xd-m-talk/156561-cutting-through-hype-myths-xd-good-enough-professional-use.html) link explains it pretty well. It's from a police/SWAT officer in Texas who took it upon himself to research the XD/XDm, as the XDm is his duty weapon. The most telling point he made was that no matter who he talked to, be it military, law enforcement, or competition shooters, nearly no one could validate or confirm claims that XD/XDm's had so-and-so problems and issues. It was mostly "I heard from this guy who heard it from a guy who was there" type of response. In fact, the responses he received tended to be favorable. He also noted that for guns like say Glocks or M&P's, if they suffered a major failure most people treated them as anomalies; whereas if an XD/XDm suffered a major failure, it was treated as a serious design flaw. While certainly not an end-all review, he clearly states that you should do your own research and take everything you read with a grain of salt, including his own review. I appreciate that kind of honesty and frankness. In addition, he cites actual links to articles written by noted shooters such as Ron Avery, Clint Smith, and Ken Hackathorn who all speak favorably about the XD/XDm line. Again, not saying the rumors about these guns are/are not true, but keep an open mind, you may be surprised.
CompressionIgnition
05-21-12, 14:59
There's SMEs on here that indeed have seen the XD fail en masse at dept/agency trials. DocGKR, for one.
Hackathorne no long endorses XDs. Quite the opposite.
With the proliferation of SWAT teams across the US, unfortunately a SWAT officer's endorsement must be vetted and not just accepted blindly.
Out of curiosity, what agency trials were these? At what time did these happen?
Failure2Stop
05-21-12, 15:10
Bear in mind that specifics of why certain guns fail testing (and sometimes even what guns competed) is usually protected by the terms of the testing.
Heavy Metal
05-21-12, 15:16
With the proliferation of SWAT teams across the US, unfortunately a SWAT officer's endorsement must be vetted and not just accepted blindly.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s107/5POINT56/arpistols.jpg
FChen17213
05-21-12, 15:23
That is freaking awesome. I wonder what the logic behind that decision was.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s107/5POINT56/arpistols.jpg
WTF?!:blink: What town is this?:sarcastic:
Are those DPMS kitty cats?
Heavy Metal
05-21-12, 15:34
WTF?!:blink: What town is this?:sarcastic:
Tazewell, Virginia.
Heavy Metal
05-21-12, 15:38
That is freaking awesome. I wonder what the logic behind that decision was.
The word I got back was "Because they were so light and maneuerable!"
Imagine if Barney Fife organized and outfitted a small tac team in the Southern Appalachian Mountains very similar to Maberry. In fact less than 100 miles away from Maberry aka Mt. Airy NC!
I just thought that pic would emphasize LL's point quite nicely.
CompressionIgnition
05-21-12, 15:50
Bear in mind that specifics of why certain guns fail testing (and sometimes even what guns competed) is usually protected by the terms of the testing.
Then from a research perspective, the outcomes are not worth much in terms of actual information. It will just boil down to ad hominem.
KalashniKEV
05-21-12, 16:32
The word I got back was "Because they were so light and maneuerable!"
...and they were probably purchased with a Federal Homeland Security grant.
Back on topic- I don't think the XDs are that bad... I also don't think that the M&Ps are that great.
Still would like to see some pics/ data backing the assertion that they're not up to task...
I've seen this arguement before, yet I've never had any problem racking the slide one handed? Grip the frame and use the front or rear sight post against your belt, a wall, desk, your friends new car, the family cat, etc....
Maybe there is some reason for racking the slide differently one handed that would cause this gripe to manifest?
Legitimate question here because I have no idea where this one handed operation/grip safety thing comes from. To clear a jamb using your weakside only hand it can be difficult to rack the slide AND lock the slide lock lever on an XDm. I personally have developed a technique that works well for me in this case and I train with it.
What about pinning the damn thing?
To clear a jamb using your weakside only hand it can be difficult to rack the slide AND lock the slide lock lever on an XDm. I personally have developed a technique that works well for me in this case and I train with it.
Roger that, subjective I guess, just has never struck me as an issue that training and practice couldn't fix. Granted it's not comfortable or easy to operate the slide lock with your weak hand index finger, that particular instance is assuming a few worst case possibilities ( bad guy is in front of me and my strong side is down and my gun double fed/ftf etc..) but that's why you train for the worst case scenario.
Guessing you're gripping the frame with your knees and working the slide with your hand?
Littlelebowski
05-21-12, 17:18
Out of curiosity, what agency trials were these? At what time did these happen?
Ask DocGKR or search this site.
[QUOTE=Magsz;1289110]Plenty of people do just fine with the XDM, the bottom line is that if you're serious about using a gun for defensive purposes, there are MUCH better options out there. Period, end of story.QUOTE]
I think this^^ really sums it up.
What about pinning the damn thing? I personally wouldn't consider it. Unlike a Glock, the striker on a XDm is in the "cocked" position once you load a round. I run a 4# trigger in my XDm with little takeup, so it'd be a no-go for me.
However, I think the Walther striker (I may be mistaken) is in a cocked position at all times once loaded and they only rely on the trigger safety for a safety. Just something to ponder.
Failure2Stop
05-21-12, 18:01
Then from a research perspective, the outcomes are not worth much in terms of actual information. It will just boil down to ad hominem.
The point is that when people jump up and down demanding proof, it really isn't going to be forthcoming, no matter how much reason there is behind their rejection. Pretty much the only open source is the internet and what is communicated on forums like these. No matter how much one likes or dislikes the information given, the source must be considered.
Like it or hate it, the XD is here and will continue to be here.
If you use one, I'd strongly recommend that you learn and understand it's quirks and resist marketing in your training plans, because those of us that select pistols that are widely used are able to piggyback on years to decades of use and problem solutions.
Ask DocGKR or search this site.
Doc definitely has the credentials to form a more than educated opinion on this topice. He hasn't, to my knowledge, ever published the name of the government test that had XD's fail. The most often quote comment of his is here..
XD's are a no go for serious use--the inability to retract the slide without engaging the grip safety makes one-hand injured operation very difficult with the XD--this is a deal breaker for me. In addition, in some government tests, XD's (particularly the .40's) have broken a lot of parts compared to other pistols being tested...I'll take a 9 mm Glock or M&P any day of the week over an XD.
The XD and the XDm are a very different pistol. Is the XD in 2008 the same pistol that it is in 2012 as far as quality goes? Nobody really knows. We do know that other pistols have changed significantly over the years. Some are better, some are worse.
Littlelebowski
05-21-12, 18:58
Doc definitely has the credentials to form a more than educated opinion on this topice. He hasn't, to my knowledge, ever published the name of the government test that had XD's fail. The most often quote comment of his is here..
The XD and the XDm are a very different pistol. Is the XD in 2008 the same pistol that it is in 2012 as far as quality goes? Nobody really knows. We do know that other pistols have changed significantly over the years. Some are better, some are worse.
Hey, as F2S already pointed out, many folks privy to testing are legally bound in certain aspects. You could always ask Doc or continue valiantly defending the XD.
People don't seem to say that about the 1911 and God knows how many BTDT types carry/carried a 1911. Is it the design of the grip safety specifically?
The 1911 grip safety doesn't lock up the slide. I have never seen a 1911 have to be shipped back to the factory loaded because it couldn't be un****ed at the range after a wounded shooter drill caused the gun to lock up tight. I know of two cases where this happened with XDs.
NCPatrolAR
05-21-12, 20:11
OK; nothing is being accomplished at this point with this.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.