Trouble making a decision

[John Wist]

I want to get a 9mm pistol for conceiled carry. I have narrowed it down to the following S&W's M&P9C, the Glock 26 or the XD-9SC. Of these three which would you choose and why.
Thanks for the input.:)

[IroquoisSnakePlissken]

For concealed carry I'd go with any of Springfield's compact/subcompact series.

I've had nothing but malfunction free usage of my XD in .45, and the XD line seems to have the highest ammo capacity, which is a factor if you're in a high-cap friendly state.

The Springfield isn't thin profiled, but that's about the only gripe I can come up with for it. I also like the fact that the safety is user-friendly, ie. if you're in an "oh shit" scenario, forgetting to switch off your safety under the stress of combat will not get you killed. Point, click, bang. Every time.

edit: I know Springfield takes some heat as a Glock-Clone, but I personally feel they've made a lot of improvements over the Gock. The firing pin status indicator, grip safety, as well as the "chambered round indicator" all provide extra features not found on the Glock.

I should also mention that I do not have the XD-9, but I do have the Glock 26, and I would take the XD-9 any day of the week over my Glock. The Glock isn't a bad gun, whatsoever; however, as previously stated, Springfield has added some improvements over the Glock that I find of worthy merit. I don't know about newer 26's, but mine does not have a rail mount, something the XD I know for a fact does. I probably wouldn't install a light on a compact, CCW, but the option is there if you need it. As well, all the XD line comes with the "XD Gear" kit, which includes some handy extras right out of the box. The paddle holster I received with my XD fit perfectly, but I replaced it with a Serpa, and used the XD holster from the kit for the Glock 26.

[POF.Ops]

S&W M&P 9mm because the ergonomics most closely resemble a 1911 and it is highly regarded among the tactical community.

[westcoastfrog]

whichever one you shoot best.

[BobM]

Of those, I'd choose the M&P. I've got an M&P40c and a Glock 19. I prefere the feel of the M&P, as well as the trigger action (just my personal preference-the G-26 is also a fine gun).

[senorlinc]

all are fine, servicable pistols by reputable manufacturers. however, handguns are not one size fits all. go to the range and shoot them all. then see what holsters are available for them (should be a wide variety for all the aforementioned models) see what is most comfortable to carry and easy to conceal. chose whatever works best for you. if you arent comfortable carrying it, you wont and that defeats its purpose.

my 1st carry pistol was a glock 19. i did some poking around on the forums and that was the consensus pick. great gun. after a 3 day training class i realised it was not comfortable to shoot and carried oddly on my body in a few different holsters. i then went through the process of more research and trial at the range. i sold my 19 and bought a m&p 9c. grabbed an mtac holster and havent been disappointed yet. flawless at the range and comfortable to carry. i dont leave home without it.

best of luck

[IroquoisSnakePlissken]

Cassiday has some very valid points.

No one gun is going to be a do-it-all workhorse.

I've got a USP45 that's awesome, but it's slightly bulky, and HK's proprietary rail system is infuriating, and out-of-touch with reality.

The Glock 26 is lacking in some features that the Springfield makes up for, in spades.

The Springfield is an extremely reliable, and well-performing firearm. The ergonomics of it aren't exactly in-fitting with my hand.

My 1911 has the best feel to it, but is fairly low-tech, and has a less-than-stellar ammunition capacity.

All the above are outstanding and excellent firearms. That being said, they all have strengths and weaknesses.

Overall, the 1911 is my favourite, but it also has faults to it as well.

Don't let anyone here steer you in any direction. You could find that a Hi-Point fits your hand like a glove, and you might get the one in twenty-thousand "winner", that actually performs.

Assess YOUR needs, assess what features YOU are looking for, assess the gun that fits YOUR hand most comfortably, and works with the kit you've already got.

I recently consulted a member here, attempting to find a good optic for my blaster. I was attempting to get a 2nd opinion concerning other options for optics than what I had been looking at. He had absolutely excellent advice, but in the end I just rolled from the gut, and got the one I thought would suit my needs. It ended up being cheaper than what I had been considering, but the price wasn't the issue. The sight I ended up getting seemed to meet all the criteria for what I was looking for, and provided for the contingencies I could envision.

Use the Force, and let your warrior spirit guide you to your weapon. Familiarise yourself with the three you've got your eye on, and narrow it down even further.

Truthfully, you can't go wrong with any of the three listed.

[Parabellum9x19mm]

I used to carry a XD Subcompact and I've found out that thick, sub-compact double stack weapons are not very good for an everyday carry option.

I didn't carry the XD for very long and sold it a while back. it was too thick to hide very well (wouldnt work IWB) and was so short that getting a proper firing grip from the draw was more difficult when compared to other designs.

the subcompact XD really is the worst of both worlds in terms of concealability and ergonomics. you'd probably have the same issue with the Glock, or Para Hawg, or any other short & thick handgun of that ilk.

whatever you get, make sure its slim enough to work with a IWB holster, because most people find that is the most inconspicuous carry method.

[MarshallDodge]

I used to carry a XD Subcompact and I've found out that thick, sub-compact double stack weapons are not very good for an everyday carry option.

whatever you get, make sure its slim enough to work with a IWB holster, because most people find that is the most inconspicuous carry method.

I agree. I got a really good deal on an XD SC and could not get over how thick it was. My wife and I both liked shooting it but I was used to carrying a Kahr so I ended up selling the XD.

I have shot the compact M&P and it was very accurate. 5-shots at 21 feet offhand, slow fire, created a nice cloverleaf.

[bullseye]

take a look at a walther pps if you want thin, and great ergonomics, they had a little problem with slide sticking, looks like they got it straigtened out now. i've got 800 rds through mine, not a bobble,,very accurate. [i do however carry a 9c] read ppsowners forum, see what they say

[Parabellum9x19mm]

+1 on the Walther PPS

i love my 9mm so much i've been considering a .40SW

[rob_s]

Shoot them all first. You cannot make any kind of decision without having fired them first. If you have a local range that rents guns, the money spent on rental and test-firing will be well spent if it means you get the right gun for you the first time.

I'm partial to the Glocks (of those you listed). I have never liked the SDs, even when they were the Hotshot 2000 for $200 less. The S&Ws are starting to appeal to me, but there still seems to be some teething issues out there.

With that said, I'm starting to look very hard at the Kahr pistols as a daily carry. The Glock, even the 26, is a very fat gun (as are all on your list). The Kahr is very thin, albeit sacrificing capacity for width. But, better to have 7 rounds on my than 11 in the car.

I was at a gun show this weekend and was looking at the PM9 series (http://www.kahr.com/PA-1_9mm_pm.html) which, despite what the site shows as MSRP, I could swear they were selling for under $600.

[IroquoisSnakePlissken]

Shoot them all first. You cannot make any kind of decision without having fired them first. If you have a local range that rents guns, the money spent on rental and test-firing will be well spent if it means you get the right gun for you the first time.

I'm partial to the Glocks (of those you listed). I have never liked the SDs, even when they were the Hotshot 2000 for $200 less. The S&Ws are starting to appeal to me, but there still seems to be some teething issues out there.

With that said, I'm starting to look very hard at the Kahr pistols as a daily carry. The Glock, even the 26, is a very fat gun (as are all on your list). The Kahr is very thin, albeit sacrificing capacity for width. But, better to have 7 rounds on my than 11 in the car.

I was at a gun show this weekend and was looking at the PM9 series (http://www.kahr.com/PA-1_9mm_pm.html) which, despite what the site shows as MSRP, I could swear they were selling for under $600.

Rob's suggestion of the Kahr is a good one. I don't know much about their reliability or performance, but you'd be hard pressed to find a more streamlined pistol for daily carry. I believe the 9mm and the .45 are the same dimensions, but I could be wrong.

It's a very snag-resistant firearm, and has an ultra-thin profile. I know one of the guys at one of the ranges I go to pretty much does everything but sleep with his Kahr, and swears up and down by it.

Rob, they'd better be. I'm in GA, and I've been seeing 'em in the $499-ish range...possibly even less. From handling it, it seemed like a sleek little kitten.

I'm biased as hell against S&W after my first handgun, the Sigma, turned out to be a steaming pile of shit. I know there's much praise for the M&P, but once bitten, twice shy for yours truly.

At the risk of sounding like the ultimate hypocrite, I am interested in the M&P15, but I'm breaking the bounds of this thread, and getting off topic there.

[parker7777]

glock 26

[DZL HOG]

I have a 4" XD9 that I started out trying to carry. OWB its fine, but when I go to IWB its hard to hide it. I was getting ready to buy a XDsc or M&Pc, but they are just as thick, even tho the grip is a tad shorter.

I ended up going with a Kahr PM9. Its lightweight and slim. Perfect for IWB or even pocket carry. You do give up the capacity b/c its single stack. But its better than not carrying at all. I wish I could find one for the prices you guys are listing, Id buy another one. I paid $700 for mine back in June. The PM9s are very tight and require a 200 rd break in period. I had a few FTFs early on, but no probs in last 150-200rds. No slingshotting the slide for mine, gotta use the slide release. It even says that in the manual.
For a slightly less expensive alternative to the PM9, check out the CW9.

[rob_s]

I wish they'd do a CW in the PM size. The CW is 3.6" barrel, which isn't big, but if I go with a Kahr I'm going to want the smallest I can get I think.