View Full Version : In your opinion...Why didn;t the XD's take off?
toddackerman
12-19-08, 18:22
I'm a die hard 1911 man, but I did have a Springfield XD in 9mm that I really like especially after i upgraded the recoil guide and spring.
I was just wondering why you think that the XD never really took off and the M&P did. Of course Glock still owns the plastic gun world, and if you'd like to compare the XD to the Glock as well as the M&P...have at it.
Alpha Sierra
12-19-08, 18:30
I tried one (at the range, not at the gun store) and did not like the way the pistol handled recoil. Its ergos do not agree with me, particularly when compared to a Glock (second best) and M&P (top).
MarshallDodge
12-19-08, 18:32
Around here the XD is very popular. Quite a few people that I shoot with carry XD's. I had an XD subcompact and it was a nice little gun but I am, like you, a 1911 guy and sold it.
varoadking
12-19-08, 19:34
I owned 4 and sold them all...not terribly accurate...
I tried to like them, but Glocks out perform them in every regard, IMHO...
I can't warm up to the M&P either...
LE contracts. That's pretty much the long and short of that. That being said the XD is a very popular handgun but lacks the marketing savvy to LE that Glock had and that S&W already had.
BTW - I've had two XD9's, G19, and currently the M&P9. The XD's come in behind the M&P and the G19 is last. but I started with a High Power so I am biased towards those ergonomics...... good ones!:D
matthewdanger
12-19-08, 20:03
I am aware of two of them with identical reliability issues. The channel that the extractor rides in is exposed on the bottom side. Both XDs that I have shot had the same problem with stuff getting under the extractor. This caused the extractor to loose tension on the case and fail to extract. These are the only two Xds that I have experience with. Could it be that they had issues with reliability? It certainly soured my opinion of them.
I am aware of two of them with identical reliability issues. The channel that the extractor rides in is exposed on the bottom side. Both XDs that I have shot had the same problem with stuff getting under the extractor. This caused the extractor to loose tension on the case and fail to extract. These are the only two Xds that I have experience with. Could it be that they had issues with reliability? It certainly soured my opinion of them.
meh! XD's have just as good a reliability record as any other handgun, Glock's included. In fact an even more arduous "torture test" was done on them as the legendary Glock test. It's like saying that Glock's will blow up on you and shoot you in the butt.;)
http://springfield-armory.primediaoutdoors.com/SPstory11.php
The XD's a ok pistol for most shooters, it'll probably never give them a problem. I bought a M&P45 earlier this month and it does feel much better in the hands, but it could benefit from a trigger job.. After a couple hundred rounds the trigger on my M&P has smoothed out, and it is useable..But, could be improved..I also picked up a HK USP last night, it has the LEM trigger installed, wow, This trigger set up is better than either the XD or the M&P, To me,it's about a lightyear ahead of either. I do know, the XD is going to be put up for sale...I don't feel I need it, or want it anymore.. Between the M&P, and the HK how could I go wrong?? I feel the XD's biggest weakness, is parts availbilty,(yeah I know HK's not much better, but they are starting a facility to make pistols here in the U.S. so, that little problem may finally be solved) and another annoying problem is it's possible to lock the pistol up from improper reassembly after cleaning, and can be very difficult to unlock once this happens..This never happend to me but check over at the XD forum and it comes up often..The XD is a good pistol for the price point, but there are better pistols out there for the same money or just a little more.
Robb Jensen
12-19-08, 21:46
XDs....
My dislikes:
High bore axis.
Ambi and stiff mag catch.
Not consistently accurate (probably accurate enough for many) but accuracy isn't consistent from one pistol to another.
I much prefer a M&P or Glock to a XD. However the XDM is a pretty big improvement. Still not quite the ease of a Glock or M&P to customize without spending a fortune but it's better. Springfield Armory if you're reading this and want the XD to succeed you need to get the bore axis lower. The ergos of the XD and XDM are great, but simple physics will tell you the lower the bore in your hand the better for control. More control = faster recoil recovery and more rounds on target faster. Rob Leatham (TGO aka The Great One) has probably already told you this.
matthewdanger
12-19-08, 22:00
meh! XD's have just as good a reliability record as any other handgun, Glock's included. In fact an even more arduous "torture test" was done on them as the legendary Glock test. It's like saying that Glock's will blow up on you and shoot you in the butt.;)
http://springfield-armory.primediaoutdoors.com/SPstory11.php
That very well may be. One of the guns that I am talking about was a range rental so it may not be a fair sample. Still, two guns with two identical issues did turn me off to the platform.
meh! XD's have just as good a reliability record as any other handgun, Glock's included. In fact an even more arduous "torture test" was done on them as the legendary Glock test. It's like saying that Glock's will blow up on you and shoot you in the butt.;)
http://springfield-armory.primediaoutdoors.com/SPstory11.php
We would need to define the parameters for best comparison, but it's an uphill battle for the XD.
A colleague who burned through two of them would disagree with a "good as" declaration, as would several students circulating through a training venue. In addition to the various issues, the corrosion on his XD, and some others, was pretty impressive.
Ironically, the XD remains one of the better standard production, mass-produced, single-action autos available today.
I lost track... How many manfucturers instruct customers to hammer the slide off the receiver prior to returning the gun to the factory, given a certain recurring problem?
In the LE tests I'm aware of, they have performed poorly in terms of reliability and durability compared to most of the competing products. This has also been the report I've heard from many competitive shooters who've tried the platform ... though at least one national title was won by an XD45 that I know of. I know someone will say "Mine has been perfect!" but across the board the guns have more problems than many other brands.
The fact that the gun is made in Croatia turns many people, both LE and non-LE, off.
The XD's ergonomics are poor. They fit some people very well and those people may believe that makes them perfect for everyone, but the truth is quite a few people find them less shootable than many other competing products.
As others have mentioned, they are not well known for accuracy. Again, I am sure someone will tell stories about how his shoots sub-MOA at 600yd but in general the XD's reputation is for mediocre-at-best accuracy. (why do you think Springfield makes such a big deal about the "match grade" barrels they're putting in the XDM?)
In central Texas XD'S are popular with civilian consumers. I've owned three. My XD Tactical .45 was accurate and reliable. The 9 and 40 were reliable but not terribly accurate in my informal tests. I did not like the long trigger reset. I prefer them over Ruger or Taurus pistols and would feel comfortable keeping one for home defence.
Glocks's wide-spread parts availability for me is the determining factor for having a couple Glocks. I also favor the HK P2000 and the FNP-45. With the HK I would be SOL if repair issues arose.
Well I have never had any issues with an XD. I have a XDm 9mm that is new to the stables so not a lot of time with it yet but it is very accurate. The XD 45 service has been 100% for me as well. That gun had over 6k rounds through it before I cleaned it and I could hit a 8" plate at 100 yards with wolf ammo 8 out of 10 times. I do not know how much more accurate you could ask for out of a handgun like this. I have not shot any of the standard XD 9 or 40's or the tactical models. I do shoot with a lot of guys who shot XD's for IDPA etc and I have not seen or heard of any of them having issues. One of the guys I shoot with is Scott B. who owns pistolgear.com and has a lot of time with the XD.
For the record I own several Glocks in 9mm as well as HK's in 9mm and 45acp and I do prefer the HK's especially the HK45 which is my favorite pistol now. I know a lot of people ding many guns about a high bore axis but I have never had any issues shooting any of them well. Maybe it is the Indian more then the arrow.
Here is a pic from this wed with my new XDm 9mm, this group is the first 19 rounds out of the gun at 25 feet. I did not clean it, just took it right out of the box and shot it. Ammo was wolf military classic 115 grain fmj. The group to the left was with my G17 with the same ammo and distance. The XDm shot better then my Glock which I have shot a lot with. I will admit I shot the Glock a bit faster but it never has put up groups like the XDm for me, I can also shoot my HK's as well as the XDm groups. There are just as many who hate Glocks for their grip and other reasons. This is why we have a lot of choices. I would not say the XD has not taken off, I see a lot of them. Yes there are more Glock's carried by cops etc but it is a lot of money to switch out guns and lets face it the XD in 40 was a bit of a turd with only a 12 round high cap mag. The XDm with 16 rounds I bet changes that.
Dave
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j88/dtchicago/xdm9mm2.jpg
varoadking
12-19-08, 23:49
Here is a pic from this wed with my new XDm 9mm, this group is the first 19 rounds out of the gun at 25 feet
No offense, but 25 feet is hardly a test of accuracy for any piece...
Well like I said I shot an XD 45 at 100 yards using wolf ammo and hit 8" steel plates with out a problem. Yes 25 feet is not a long way but this is not a gun for bullseye shooting but for defensive use. Don't they say the average shooting is with in 10 feet? Well this is over twice as far and I would see no reason why this gun would shoot any different at 25 yards for that matter let alone with better quality ammo then wolf. Wolf has never been known to be the best and most accurate ammo out there.
what's .45 bullet drop like at 100 yards from a handgun?
To the OP: not being a smart aleck in saying this, but IMO, the XD's DID take off. I too am more of a 1911 guy, when you're talking specifically .45 that is. But XD has its place. If you talk to most shops, they'll tell you that XD's have consistently been among their strongest sellers. At two local shops I frequent the most in the Puget Sound area, they tell me that XD sales outstrip Glock sales. Or M&P sales for that matter. I have owned XD's, and liked them. They were more accurate for me than most plastic pistols, including Glocks, and were equally tough and reliable. And I have seen numerous gun reviews where their accuracy is quite strong, for a plastic pistol. But then, along came the M&P and personally, I liked it better than anything else in the plastic pistol world. If anyone I know is buying today, I'd recommend that they FIRST check the M&P, because I believe most will prefer it to the XD.
So, I think the XD's are fine guns, but today, there are some better options available. Now, if you're just wondering why the XD's didn't capture more market share in the LE arena, I don't know. Some people definitely don't like the grip safety. For me though, the grip safety never caused me a single problem, and it was actually a clever and appealing way to add an extra layer of safety to a pistol, without slowing down draw time. Another theory is that quite simply: Glock and Sig and Beretta were already there. It doesn't seem like any other brand has made a lot of inroads into American LE yet, although I guess the M&P is starting to (which is a good thing, IMHO).
Overall I think the XD is a fine pistol, and think they will probably keep selling well in the non-LE markets. I too have heard RUMORS about poor reliability, but have never seen these substantiated with any published reports or anything I could actually look at, when I asked for such. If there are such reports, it would be really interesting to read them (does anyone know of any?). But even though I think the XD is good, I also think you can get better options today, the M&P foremost among them. One possible exception to that is, if you want a hi-cap .45 (non-1911), I still think the XD is a great contender for that. I prefer the M&P 45 to the XD, but in fact if I really needed a .45 with more than 10 rounds, I like the XD's mag setup for a hi-cap .45 better than the M&P's awkward extended mag, and better than ANY other hi-cap .45 for that matter. However, for my needs, 10+1 rounds of .45 would always be more than enough. In fact, currently I consider myself well armed with 8+1 rounds of .45 in my SA LW Operator!
what's .45 bullet drop like at 100 yards from a handgun?
A standard 230gr FMJ with 830 fps velocity drops something like 28" @ 100. Push up your velocity a bit, as with the DoubleTap FMJ load that has 1010 fps velocity at the muzzle, and your drop @ 100 is reduced to 18".
I've had several XDs, in 9mm and .45ACP. No issues from any of them. I really do like them, but I do shoot Glocks quite a bit better. I would have no issue being handed one and depending on it.
Really? I don't think so. Plus "torture tests" are meaningless other than as entertainment. They are not repeatable which is a requirement for proof of anything.
As to the original question...the Xd has done quite well and I can see why people like them. I am not a fan because it has too many bells and whistles I don't want or need. Each of those is a potential point of failure. No thanks. Plus it just doesn't do anything that Glocks or M&P's don't do better.
meh! XD's have just as good a reliability record as any other handgun, Glock's included. In fact an even more arduous "torture test" was done on them as the legendary Glock test.]
To the OP: not being a smart aleck in saying this, but IMO, the XD's DID take off. I too am more of a 1911 guy, when you're talking specifically .45 that is. But XD has its place. If you talk to most shops, they'll tell you that XD's have consistently been among their strongest sellers. At two local shops I frequent the most in the Puget Sound area, they tell me that XD sales outstrip Glock sales.
The big draw of the XD in most shops has been pricing. Shops and wholesalers have been able to buy low, and sell lower than competitor product, with a good margin. Various promos have made it even better. The holster and mag pouch kit coming with the gun is also attractive to the type of consumer that's buying these as well.
In one sporting goods chain, the XD was planogrammed (sp?) to be in the aisle/entry facing case in their gun department in every store, with a competitor product in the lower traffic area of displays, to avoid comparison between the two.
Most of the XD buyers seem to be gun owners, rather than shooters, so they get what they want, at a price they want. Everything has a place I suppose.
I too have heard RUMORS about poor reliability, but have never seen these substantiated with any published reports or anything I could actually look at, when I asked for such. If there are such reports, it would be really interesting to read them (does anyone know of any?).
There have been various AARs from various students and instructors discussing XD issues. You can also find various troubleshooting posts elsewhere with photos and writeups of minor and major failures, including the grip safety issues, and the need for BFHs.
Powder_Burn
12-20-08, 12:44
Not sure about the premise of the question. Government import data shows 204k imported Croatian handguns (XD's) in 2007. In the same period, 347k handguns were imported from Austria (Glock), and 173k from Germany (HK etc). S&W manufactured about 260k autos in the same period. The import numbers show XD's have a substantial market share and these numbers are prior to the XDm launch.
I own a couple and have been around many others at the range over thousands of rounds. All have had 100% reliability. For almost three years Springfield has been using a Melonite finish which resolved the corrosion issues some experienced with the old Bruniral finish. Folks have locked up guns with improper reassembly but that is not a quality issue. Newer guns have a radius cut on the barrel lug so that the assembler can't misalign the recoil spring and barrel lug anyway. Parts have now become available through several online vendors. I have observed that reliability and accuracy tend to mainly be issues raised on forums where other brands are favorites, and where there generally aren't many XD owners. The linked test above shows an XD-9 that went 20,000 rounds w/o a malfunction and owner reports are overwhelmingly positive. Some posters observed reliability issues which is definitely concerning however Chuck Taylor and his American Firearms Academy, as well as Clint Smith’s Oregon Thunder Ranch were both motivated to convert to XD's as training pistols from a M4C.net favorite. Food for thought.
That said, the question might be "why hasn't the XD penetrated the LE market better" but I will defer to those is expertise in contracts, selection, and procurement on that subject. I suspect it has much more to do with cost, personal relationships, armorer support, holster compatibility etc. than the gun itself. On the sales side, the import numbers seem to say the market likes what it sees in the XD.
Sources:
http://www.chucktaylorasaa.com/SpringfieldXD9.html
http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/review/XD-9_Tactical.htm
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_/ai_n27101363
http://www.chuckhawks.com/springfield_XD_tactical.htm
http://www.shootingindustry.com/Pages/SpecRep06.html#handgunsim
Here's a time lapse of Rob Leatham putting 4 shots target in 1 second with an XD:
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i99/Powder_Burn/Rob_Leatham_1_Second_Time_Lapse_XD.jpg
Notice no performance issues related to grip safety, trigger reset, internal extractor, accuracy, feeding, or ergos... ;-)
gtmtnbiker98
12-20-08, 13:36
They are very popular here in Ohio among the regular consumer but not as popular as the Glock and the latest arrival, the M&P.
varoadking
12-20-08, 13:56
Notice no performance issues related to grip safety, trigger reset, internal extractor, accuracy, feeding, or ergos... ;-)
A skilled surgeon may be able to perform a heart transplant with a butter knife.
That doesn't mean it's the best choice, or something you want to attempt at home...
Sales have an awful lot to do with pricing. Being an LE dealer of a particular brand means the shop in question will pretty much own sales of that line in that area.
I find it hard to argue that the XD didn't "take off". They don't have the inroads to department or gummint sales, but that's never been a big part of SA's market, whereas its a major part of Glock, SnW, and to a slightly lesser extent, SIG's sales. There are regional differences, too. F'rinstance, our shop sells more Glocks than any other gun, and probably most two or three brands combined. SIGs are very, very hard to move in this area, and have been for the four years I've been here. They just don't sell, whereas other areas of the country, they can't keep 'em on the shelf.
The XD definitely appeals to a gun owner rather than shooter market, which appears to be their intention. They're selling a bunch of 'em.
The XD definitely appeals to a gun owner rather than shooter market, which appears to be their intention. They're selling a bunch of 'em.
Smith sells a metric assload of Sigmas every year, too, along those very same lines.
By "take off" I assumed we were talking about popularity among serious shooters, agencies, militaries, etc. There's no question that Springfield sells a decent number of XDs each year.
The XD's ergonomics are poor. They fit some people very well and those people may believe that makes them perfect for everyone, but the truth is quite a few people find them less shootable than many other competing products.
How are the ergonomics poor? In comparison with the GLOCK, the grip angle is less extreme, the trigger pull length is much shorter, and it has an ambidextrous mag release.
Quite a few people dislike the grip width and shape.
Ambi mag releases, especially button releases (as opposed to paddle releases), are more prone to accidental bumps, etc.
Some find the grip safety uncomfortable. Also, the fact that you need to be putting pressure on the grip safety to get the slide to move can range anywhere from a small annoyance to a serious problem (performing certain one-handed manipulations, for example).
Quite a few people dislike the grip width and shape.
Ambi mag releases, especially button releases (as opposed to paddle releases), are more prone to accidental bumps, etc.
Some find the grip safety uncomfortable. Also, the fact that you need to be putting pressure on the grip safety to get the slide to move can range anywhere from a small annoyance to a serious problem (performing certain one-handed manipulations, for example).
I'm sure it's possible, but I'd find it difficult to unintentionally activate the mag release on an XD. Someone else in this thread mentioned that they tend to be stiff, which I agree with...I think you'd have a hard time doing so. My M&P9c was far more likely to drop a mag unintentionally than any XD I've ever touched.
The OP asked why the gun hasn't taken off.
A number of folks, based on both their personal experiences as well as the experiences/complaints of folks around them, tried to answer why. While fans of the XD might think all of those complaints are bunk, they're widespread enough that (a) the gun hasn't taken off among serious shooters and (b) Springfield recognized the need for a serious overhaul in the form of the XDm.
I've met people who loved their Beretta 9000, Smith Sigma, Ruger P-series, etc. That doesn't make them great guns, and it doesn't make them popular with serious shooters.
The Dumb Gun Collector
12-21-08, 00:41
I thought the XD was going to take off for a while there. But, after the initial craze, they seem to have lost steam. A very famous gun instructor told a class I was attending that the XD was a "bubba gun." He said it was for someone who wanted something cheap, who would later take it to the dump and shoot at a few rats and then declare it the finest handgun known to man. Although I laughed my ass off, I don't really agree with his assessment. I think the XD is a nice gun. I have never had one because I already have a Glock, which they seem like they are the natural alternative to. I lump the M&P in the same category, although, at least around my neck of the woods, it has even fewer adherents than the XD.
Powder_Burn
12-21-08, 01:45
The evidence shows that XD importation increased about 44% from 2006 to 2007. Other evidence in the form of two National IDPA titles show that serious shooters are getting good use from the XD platform. This along with adoption by the American Firearms Academy and Thunder Ranch speaks for itself in terms of "hard use" and expert validation.
Didn't it not take off with LE because you have to send it back to Croatia to get them fixed? I heard Springfield doesn't sell replacement parts.
I thought the XD was going to take off for a while there. But, after the initial craze, they seem to have lost steam. A very famous gun instructor told a class I was attending that the XD was a "bubba gun." He said it was for someone who wanted something cheap, who would later take it to the dump and shoot at a few rats and then declare it the finest handgun known to man. Although I laughed my ass off, I don't really agree with his assessment. I think the XD is a nice gun. I have never had one because I already have a Glock, which they seem like they are the natural alternative to. I lump the M&P in the same category, although, at least around my neck of the woods, it has even fewer adherents than the XD.
I think I know what instructor your speaking of, IIRCC his former org. tested it, and it came up short.
What you think is a "nice gun" has alot to do with your perspective.
Bob
The Dumb Gun Collector
12-21-08, 03:09
What you think is a "nice gun" has alot to do with your perspective.
Agreed. For me, a gun has to be basically reliable and reasonably ergonomic for it to earn my "nice gun" seal of approval. I remember a time when most guns were crap. I mean actual crap. Today, the gun buyer has a large number of good designs to choose from.
Failure2Stop
12-21-08, 07:54
Here's my opinion on why it didn't do well with shooters-
It was marketed as the optimal hybrid of 1911 and Glock.
It turned out to be a Glock with poorer ergonomics, finicky grip safety, and higher bore-line.
I spent some time with a buddy's XD, it shot ok, wasn't anything special or terrible. But as soon as I had a Glock or 1911 back in my hand all I thought was, "Oh yeah. . . that's what a real gun feels like."
But that's just me.
variablebinary
12-21-08, 08:33
XD's just arent good guns, period.
Like others have said, when you pick one up, it feels all wrong, the trigger sucks, and the reliability is spotty.
They tend to be popular among "tanktop shooters" on youtube, but that's about it.
No way in hell I'd stake my life on one. I've been shooting XD's since the first HGOTY award like 6 years ago, and 100% of them have had issues.
It was in fact my own problematic the XD which drove me into the arms of Glock.
If I had to give up my Glocks I'd get an HK USP or P30 first and M&P after that. XD wouldnt even be on my list.
I think XDs would be more popular had they come out 10 years earlier. By the time they were first released as the HS2000 Glock and Sig had the LE market pretty well sewn up. The XD dosen't do anything better than the Glock or Sig and it had some issues initially. Couple that with the fact that they are single action and therefore booted into the ESP class for IDPA shooters (putting them up against 9mm 1911s) and they never had much of a chance with the competition market, where Glocks and 1911s tend to dominate.
A few years latter the M&P came out, priced cheaper with higher capacity and a changeable back strap. Smith made an effort to cosy up to the competition crowd and get the M&P listed as a DAO gun. It does everything the XD does better for most people that put a lot of rounds down range. Many of wich are perfectly happy with the Glock that the XDs were built to compete with.
Well we all have opinions and that's fine but at one time S&W owned the LEO market. Things change and will once again change. S&W with the new M&P and the XDm as well as HK with the P30L and HK45 all have good shots at breaking up the Glock monopoly in the LEO world.
Glock came out with the 45 GAP which I would say has flopped. Sig came out with the 357 Sig which I would say has flopped as well. They offered a solution to a problem that did not exist. Very similar in the intro of the S&W Sigma, XD and I am sure others I am not thinking about offered a solution to a problem that did not exist.
Both Springfield and Smith & Wesson came back with better solutions. The M&P (I do not like but many do) and the XDm now offer solutions to issues people have with Glock's. HK has also gone further then both Springfield and S&W in my opinion to taking a handgun to a whole new level. This is what HK has been know for. Many people forget that HK made the first polymer pistol but Glock made it famous. HK also was the first to put a rail on a handgun yet Glock made it popular and made it universal. HK was the first with 3 dot sights which is now the standard in the pistol world. Larry Vickers says the Glock sights have to be replaced and he prefers the figure 8 style sights.
In my opinion the LEO community will once again make another change in handguns as they have done in the past. Unless Glock really steps up I feel they will loose the market just as S&W did. In today's world of one gun must fit all the Glock comes up very short in this department. Glock has tried to come up with the slim line models which in my opinion really fixes nothing. When you look at offerings by S&W, HK and Springfield they all have much better solutions to today's demands of the LEO market. Glock is getting left in the technology race and unless they do something very fast they will loose favor and they are then in a world of hurt. As LEO moves away from the Glock platform so will civilians and unlike all the other gun makers Glock only builds handguns and only builds one type of handgun.
Bottom line is ask S&W or Colt 20 years ago and they would probably never have imagined they would loose the LEO market but as we all know they did. S&W is like the Big 3 auto makers, slow to come around but now that they are look out.
Dave
Sig came out with the 357 Sig which I would say has flopped as well.
If being in use for years by the Secret Service, Air Marshals, VA State Police, NC Highway Patrol, Texas DPS, OK Highway Patrol, NM State Police, and others I'm sure I'm forgetting off the top of my head, as well as plenty of smaller departments, is your idea of a "flop" then I can only hope my business is that kind of a flop! :cool:
Well this maybe true but in the big picture this is very small amount of all departments using a caliber. Yes I am sure there are others as well but at the end of the day the 357 sig, 45 gap or the new 327 federal is not a new wonder bullet and really does nothing that existing calibers won't do.
In the LE tests I'm aware of, they have performed poorly in terms of reliability and durability compared to most of the competing products. This has also been the report I've heard from many competitive shooters who've tried the platform ... though at least one national title was won by an XD45 that I know of. I know someone will say "Mine has been perfect!" but across the board the guns have more problems than many other brands.
The fact that the gun is made in Croatia turns many people, both LE and non-LE, off.
The XD's ergonomics are poor. They fit some people very well and those people may believe that makes them perfect for everyone, but the truth is quite a few people find them less shootable than many other competing products.
As others have mentioned, they are not well known for accuracy. Again, I am sure someone will tell stories about how his shoots sub-MOA at 600yd but in general the XD's reputation is for mediocre-at-best accuracy. (why do you think Springfield makes such a big deal about the "match grade" barrels they're putting in the XDM?)
Heard same thing on the LE tests. I also know that they did not hold up well in .Mil tests (compared to the M&P and G-lock).
C4
Sig came out with the 357 Sig which I would say has flopped as well.
As Todd said, the 357 Sig is used by a lot of LE agencies and is a very nasty round (defeats a lot of soft Body A.). The reason that the round is not more popular is that it has a hard recoil and is expensive to shoot (both things scare a good many people away).
If the price came down on the round, I would most likely own an M&P in 357 SIG and shoot it.
C4
The Dumb Gun Collector
12-21-08, 12:05
dt,
I wonder. The Glock was much better weapon than the revolvers, and S&W autoloaders that most departments had at the time. It brought high capacity, light weight, ease of maintenance, ease of training, etc. I am a huge fan of the HK45 and P30, and I admire the M&P and other designs. I agree with you that most of these designs are better than the Glock. I don't think they are enough improvement to merit a switch though. I could, however, see a scenario where Glock gets nibbled to death over a long period. Still, in the current economic climate, I see a lot of departments and agencies sticking with what they have.
Interesting commentary with pics of the XDM in 9mm.
http://www.louderthanwords.us/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7037
More commentary on 10-8 forums.
http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=76243&an=0&page=0#76243
Thats a lot of ..ummm...assloads...
Smith sells a metric assload of Sigmas every year, too, along those very same lines.
Powder_Burn
12-21-08, 13:08
Could someone post evidence of poor XD performance in organized LE and .mil testing?
Could someone post evidence of poor XD performance in organized LE and .mil testing?
You can change the question around and say "can someone post evidence of good XD performance in organized LE and .mil testing?"
I don't think the XD is a bad gun, but I am not aware of any major police agency that switched to it. The M&P has been around for a few years less and already has a number of large agencies using it, for example.
Powder_Burn
12-21-08, 13:29
Not really. Allegation made is that 'widespread' negative LE and Mil experience exists with the XD platform and the natural expectation is to see the evidence. Nobody claimed XD's out performed anyone else in any testing. We should expect big claims require authentication. If someone has formally validated issues with the platform, they would be doing a great service to the membership if they could share the information. Otherwise some of the comments basically amount to unsubstantiated gossip driven by those with ties to the competition. Hardly objective or credible. Intent is not to flame but just hold the information being disseminated to a higher standard for the greater good. Bottom line is that the platform is sound so shooters gravitating to other guns should do so based on personal preferences and not concerns about quality or reliability.
Could someone post evidence of poor XD performance in organized LE and .mil testing?
Most of this type of info is not listed on websites that you can google. It comes from people that actually were at the tests.
If you choose to ignore Todd or my comments, that is just fine, but realize that Todd and I do not spread lies just because we either use or sell a companies products. ;)
C4
Powder_Burn
12-21-08, 13:41
Of course not! However everybody has different brand loyalties and biases. To clarify, I just want the evidence because without it we are just left with a bunch of opinions and that is not giving the analysis a fair shake.
Of course not! However everybody has different brand loyalties and biases. To clarify, I just want the evidence because without it we are just left with a bunch of opinions and that is not giving the analysis a fair shake.
I know mine is NOT an opinion, but is based on facts as they were explained to me by someone that was at the test. I am guessing Todd does not have an opinion either on them failing LE tests.
C4
dt,
I wonder. The Glock was much better weapon than the revolvers, and S&W autoloaders that most departments had at the time. It brought high capacity, light weight, ease of maintenance, ease of training, etc. I am a huge fan of the HK45 and P30, and I admire the M&P and other designs. I agree with you that most of these designs are better than the Glock. I don't think they are enough improvement to merit a switch though. I could, however, see a scenario where Glock gets nibbled to death over a long period. Still, in the current economic climate, I see a lot of departments and agencies sticking with what they have.
I agree 100%. I do not think there will be some mass exodus of the Glock but over time I think the salesman of these other platforms are going to be successful with proving their are better options. Departments who force an officer to carry a specific brand, model and caliber of a weapon are more likely going to be more interested in the modular design of these other weapons than those who do not address this concern. Glock is coming out with the Gen 4 but it is like the Gen 3 as it really does not fix any of the issues of the Glock. I still do not understand why the hell Glock does not put front slide serrations on their guns, sure would make chamber checking a lot easier! In my opinion Glock just seems to be resting on their laurels and we all know what happens to companies over a long haul who do that. Like I said for the record I have a couple of Glock's and prefer the 9mm versions over their other calibers. I carry a G26 every day and used to carry the G27 so I do believe in them but in full size guns their are better solutions.
Dave
Of course not! However everybody has different brand loyalties and biases. To clarify, I just want the evidence because without it we are just left with a bunch of opinions and that is not giving the analysis a fair shake.
PB: I understand 100% your desire for hard evidence. After all, this is the errornet and people spread opinions (and outright lies) as "fact" all the time.
I'm not in a position to point you toward published data. I know what I've experienced being involved in dozens of LE and mil pistol procurements over the past eight years or so. Result: Springfield XD never selected.
In some cases, I was privy to some of the test data and in others, not. I'm not at liberty to cut and paste agency data onto the internet or get agencies/agents in trouble for repeating their evaluations.
If you like the XD and it works for you, rock on. I don't know how you shoot, how much you shoot, etc. And none of that matters. If the gun is meeting your expectations and you're happy with it, there is no reason for you to switch to something else. No one is suggesting you do so.
Failure2Stop
12-21-08, 15:11
To clarify, I just want the evidence because without it we are just left with a bunch of opinions and that is not giving the analysis a fair shake.
Most of these are not available for public consumption for various reasons, usually from agreement from both the testing agency and the firearm manufacturer. That is why we depend on information from people in the loop.
I have never heard of any military interest in the XD but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened. They have bought worse pistols.
Having just sold myXD45 this morning at a local gun show I can say that the XD has it's share of little problems... In the short time I had mine,(about 6 months) I found that the XD won't feed SWC's (my M&P45 eats'em like candy) the mag springs are on the weak side, I had to replace mine with 20% stronger springs, and one does have to watch reassembly after cleaning it is possible to put the recoil spring in a little offcenter and lock the gun up,when racking the slide. This never happened to me but reading over at the XD forums there are a few folks who locked their pistol up so tight they had to send them back to S.A. to get them apart..Totally unaccecptable.... On the bright side earlier this week my XD's replacement showed up...A HK USP 9mm I got a flier in the mail from S.O.G. (I have a C&R) and looking through the flier, seeing the usual c&r stuff, I saw a pic for these HK USP's they have/had.. NIB with 2 18 rnd mags,jet funnel installed, LEM trigger (V1), tritium night sights, all for $659.00($745.00 tax, shipping, trans fee,out the door) How could I go wrong?? I called my FFL and had him order one, good thing I did, they had 10 left when I ordered mine..Well, it showed up Thursday,and was as advertised..NIB and unfired, excellant trigger out of the box, made in 2005.. This thing is a lightyear ahead of a XD. From now on,no more XD anything...I'm done with them.
cause it's even uglier than a glock? :D
My input on the XD's ..... I would not stake my life on one. They are a great gun for many who play the IDPA/IPSC gun games.....I have a 40Tac. I also own custom 1911, HK's and two SIG's ...also in years past have had two Glocks and do Not pooPoo on them at all..
I ran my XD stock except for a fiber optic from post for two years. I took to it very very well and found it very easy to shoot well at speed once the trigger properties were managed. I found accuracy completely satisfactory. I was able to win a state ESP IDPA expert championship with it. The XD's point very well for a 1911 guy like myself. I put a Powder River Precision Safety Lever kit in it for $40 and it made the trigger Very 1911 like.
I had one guy tell me he used his in a defensive pistol class on a range with sandy bays ... in short order the gun stopped working when the sand got in to the internals and locked up the safety lever.
So for me the XD's are a play gun only. I enjoy achieving a fairly high level of applied ability on several different shooting platforms. I trust well built 1911's, HK's and SIG's for carry. The SIG platform s the hardest for me to transition to withthe DA/SA trig.
I have read that some feel the Xdm is the finest stock gun they have ever handled/shot. .....I doubt it is perfect.
Well, As I look over my type I guess this was my 8cents worth. Sorry.
H
As always, I can only speak for myself
I was a bit put off when S/A got involved and it resulted in the weapons being more expensive while not appreciably different- perhaps I am just petty:D
I also never liked the fact that the grip safety can tie up the slide requiring a perfect grip in malfunction clearances
They just never felt right to me...unlike the M&P's
I'm not sure where the notion that the XD is cheaper than the Glocks or S&Ws came from. They are just as expensive if not more so (at least where I live, and looking at Bass Pro or Cabelas).
From what I was told at the gun shop when I asked about them, and this may be totally wrong, is that originally it was sold as the HS2000 in the US for about $300. Then Springfield bought the distributorship (or something?) re branded the pistol as the XD and jacked the price up to the $500+ range. I would love to know if the above story has any merit.
I was just wondering why you think that the XD never really took off and the M&P did.
I can see why the XD never took off... it's a poor rip off of the glock with a higher parts failure risk.
I haven't even seen anyone who owns an M&P in my neck of the woods so I can't really say that it's taken off. But it does seem to have a following. Smith has such a long track record of mediocre to bad pistols that I just stopped looking at anything they made.... I was shocked to see people praising the M&P here. I thought they were getting kick backs or something. :p
I'm not sure where the notion that the XD is cheaper than the Glocks or S&Ws came from. They are just as expensive if not more so (at least where I live, and looking at Bass Pro or Cabelas).
From what I was told at the gun shop when I asked about them, and this may be totally wrong, is that originally it was sold as the HS2000 in the US for about $300. Then Springfield bought the distributorship (or something?) re branded the pistol as the XD and jacked the price up to the $500+ range. I would love to know if the above story has any merit.
Yes it does..I don't know all the details but S.A. got hooked up with HS products in Croatia (sp?) and began marketing them here as the XD.. The HS2000 was orginially designed as a service pistol for the Croation military in 9mm. When they(HS products) were first imported they did sell for cheap, under $300 and they sold well, It's about at this point S.A. got invloved rebadged it, and hiked the price That's the story as I understand it, from a business stand point I could see why they got together S.A. probably figured they could sell these things and make a nice profit, HS products probably got some cash from S.A. as well as a distribution network via S.A. and more importantly getting their product into the U.S. market..(after all, how many pistols does the Croat military need?) So, I guessing it was a win/win for both partys
NCPatrolAR
12-22-08, 22:07
I can see why the XD never took off... it's a poor rip off of the glock with a higher parts failure risk.
Smith has such a long track record of mediocre to bad pistols
What are some examples of the mediocre and bad pistols that Smith has produced? No need to mention the Sigma; thats a given.
What are some examples of the mediocre and bad pistols that Smith has produced? No need to mention the Sigma; thats a given.
I'm not MarkM, but:
Some of their 1911's, particularly the Performance Center guns, have a less than stellar performance record. I did a class up at USMA for their Combat Weapons Team a while back and they had a number of PC 1911's fail repeatedly ... to the point the students ditched them and grabbed different guns.
The 3rd-gen guns have wildly varying reports of quality. Some people find them to be bulletproof, others had substantial problems with them. Part of this, in fairness to Smith, was that they were a much older design built with older expectations in terms of round counts, etc. But for every CHP guy who tells you his was awesome, I can find a USCP guy who hated his.
And just to make my list look longer, yes I will mention the Sigma. :cool: Though unlike the 3rd gen guns, the Sigmas continue to sell in very high numbers. Again, it's a gun owner's gun rather than a shooter's gun.
NCPatrolAR
12-22-08, 23:06
I'm not MarkM, but:
Some of their 1911's, particularly the Performance Center guns, have a less than stellar performance record. I did a class up at USMA for their Combat Weapons Team a while back and they had a number of PC 1911's fail repeatedly ... to the point the students ditched them and grabbed different guns.
The 3rd-gen guns have wildly varying reports of quality. Some people find them to be bulletproof, others had substantial problems with them. Part of this, in fairness to Smith, was that they were a much older design built with older expectations in terms of round counts, etc. But for every CHP guy who tells you his was awesome, I can find a USCP guy who hated his.
And just to make my list look longer, yes I will mention the Sigma. :cool: Though unlike the 3rd gen guns, the Sigmas continue to sell in very high numbers. Again, it's a gun owner's gun rather than a shooter's gun.
I personaly love the 3rd generation Smiths. We used them for years here with great success before we switched to the POS that is known as the SW99. The greatest thing going against the 3rd generation gun seems to be their weight.
When it comes to Smith 1911s, I havent heard much about them. The little I have heard has been positive though. Of course, none of it centered on their PC 1911s.
I'm not MarkM, but:
Some of their 1911's, particularly the Performance Center guns, have a less than stellar performance record. I did a class up at USMA for their Combat Weapons Team a while back and they had a number of PC 1911's fail repeatedly ... to the point the students ditched them and grabbed different guns.
The 3rd-gen guns have wildly varying reports of quality. Some people find them to be bulletproof, others had substantial problems with them. Part of this, in fairness to Smith, was that they were a much older design built with older expectations in terms of round counts, etc. But for every CHP guy who tells you his was awesome, I can find a USCP guy who hated his.
And just to make my list look longer, yes I will mention the Sigma. :cool: Though unlike the 3rd gen guns, the Sigmas continue to sell in very high numbers. Again, it's a gun owner's gun rather than a shooter's gun.
SW99.
The first gen. 1026's and 1076's that VASP and Chesterfield Co. VA got were turds.
I forgot completely about the SW99. In my defense, I will say I was only talking about guns that had some degree of commercial success. :cool:
What are some examples of the mediocre and bad pistols that Smith has produced? No need to mention the Sigma; thats a given.
Any auto that doesn't say M&P on the side! :p
Powder_Burn
12-23-08, 11:11
Another element that could impede LE adoption of the XD is the fact that it is a "modified single action" which is used to achieve the feel of a light double action. When the slide is racked to advance a cartridge, the striker is about 95% cocked already. I have read that folks such as Massad Ayoob consider handguns like XD to be BMDA (Bio-Mechanical Double Action) because the XD feels like a DAO system to the operator. Confusion between this system and a traditional single-action like a 1911 might be enough to scare procurement bureaucrats away before any evaluation is ever made. In addition, the notion of making costly changes when the incumbent weapon performs 'good enough' creates a uphill battle for anyone trying to convert a department - especially when "yer diffrrnnt and ain't frum around herrre". Again, this has nothing to do with the quality or reliability of the XD platform.
Also if we can get someone to share pics or documentation of the grip safety, chamber indicator, or cocking indicator causing operating failures, it would be helpful in separating truth from fiction. So far, we have first and second hand anecdotes from a few knowledgeable people but they are not in a position to provide any detail. Subsequently we need to cast a bigger net and see if these points can be authenticated since thousands of folks are relying on these weapons. Without it, I don't know how these objections can continue be perpetuated with any credibility at all.
They seem to do well in this area. I own two XD's, 1 Glock G29, 2 M&P's. They are all good pistols, and I would trust my life with any of them.
Gutshot John
12-24-08, 07:16
My take on why the XD didn't take off, as well as a number of other poly-frame pretenders. It's simple market forces as the market made an educated choice in favor of a superior competitor.
If we accept the notion that the Glock is probably the "standard by which all others are judged"...
1. It didn't outperform the Glock. There was no qualitative or quantitative advancement.
2. It did underperform the Glock in certain key aspects, namely quality, ease of maintenance and access to parts.
3. It was slightly more expensive than the Glock.
There was no added value.
The M&P on the other hand...
1. Offers features or is superior to the Glock in some key areas, e.g. the interchangeable grip.
2. Jury is still out for a few decades Glock head-start, but the M&P seems to be pretty reliable, and at least comparable to the Glock.
3. It is the same price or even a little cheaper than the Glock.
Lots of added value.
Glock is PC (that always works), M&P is Mac challenging that market dominance. :D
Jay Cunningham
12-24-08, 07:23
My take on why the XD didn't take off, as well as a number of other poly-frame pretenders. It's simple market forces as the market made an educated choice in favor of a superior competitor.
If we accept the notion that the Glock is probably the "standard by which all others are judged"...
1. It didn't outperform the Glock. There was no qualitative or quantitative advancement.
2. It did underperform the Glock in certain key aspects, namely quality, ease of maintenance and access to parts.
3. It was slightly more expensive than the Glock.
There was no added value.
The M&P on the other hand...
1. Offers features or is superior to the Glock in some key areas, e.g. the interchangeable grip.
2. Jury is still out for a few decades Glock head-start, but the M&P seems to be pretty reliable, and at least comparable to the Glock.
3. It is the same price or even a little cheaper than the Glock.
Lots of added value.
Glock is PC (that always works), M&P is Mac challenging that market dominance. :D
lol, good post
Around here when they first debuted the XD was cheaper than a glock.
I owned an XD40 service model purchased in 2004. Besides extractor issues the locking block was prone to cracking. Why? Springfield had two sharp 90* corners on the inside which caused significant stress concentrations. Now I believe they come radiused from the factory. Mine at the time had the sharp corners. Springfield also made it impossible for civilians to procure replacement parts. As a result of their part policy I promptly sold my XD. The high bore axis didn't help it either. I also saw quite a few broken factory guide rods. Another downside of the XD was that the mags, like the M&P cost more than the glock.
When they first came out, it was a nice pistol for the money as it was significantly cheaper than the Glock and others. Then SA took over importation and the price was almost $200 more for the same gun. Since they were already available in the US, what the hell am I paying $200 for a gun that spare parts are not available? SA wants you to send the gun to them for spare parts. It is not that it is a bad gun, but I just feel like I am getting taken buying one. It is like buying an HK so you can enjoy the great care that HK shows towards their customers. Even LEOs get the run around from them. I am selling the Glock and switching to S&Ws. Just like my vehicle purchases, I am trying to buy US made goods whenever possible.
mrosamilia
12-27-08, 16:34
Here's my opinion on why it didn't do well with shooters-
It was marketed as the optimal hybrid of 1911 and Glock.
It turned out to be a Glock with poorer ergonomics, finicky grip safety, and higher bore-line.
I spent some time with a buddy's XD, it shot ok, wasn't anything special or terrible. But as soon as I had a Glock or 1911 back in my hand all I thought was, "Oh yeah. . . that's what a real gun feels like."
But that's just me.
+1 I sold the pair of 45's after handling the 21sf and m&p 45
Lack of spare parts is a deal breaker for me.
If they were priced like they were before they wore the Springfield badge, I'd bet they would be in wider use.
variablebinary
12-27-08, 22:41
If they were priced like they were before they wore the Springfield badge, I'd bet they would be in wider use.
When I got mine 4 years ago it was $389 NIB with Night Sights. It was a Springer, not an HS2000.
So not only is the XD an average performer at best, it has also had the larger year over year markup than Glock, SIG and HK combined...
When I got mine 4 years ago it was $389 NIB with Night Sights. It was a Springer, not an HS2000.
So not only is the XD an average performer at best, it has also had the larger year over year markup than Glock, SIG and HK combined...
I want to say that when it was labeled as the HS2000 that it was going for the $250-$300 range, which would have really eaten into the Ruger pistol market, while undercutting guns like the SIGMA, Glock (I saw people buying the HS2000 simply because it was polymer and cheaper than a Glock. They thought since it was polymer that it had to be just like a Glock in terms of reliabiltiy. :rolleyes: ), the Walther P99, and the USP.
Back when I had the time to go to the range 4 or 5 times a week, I checked out the XD, but I just couldn't imagine using it that much. For whatever reason It wasn't that comfortable to me.
I have had my XD .40 4" since 2004 and have 5K+ through mine. The only issue I have had is with some of the newer magazines that I bought recently:confused: The new ones that show the rounds 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ,9 ,10, 11, 12. The original ones that show 4,8,12 have been 100% reliable.
I'm not in a position to point you toward published data. I know what I've experienced being involved in dozens of LE and mil pistol procurements over the past eight years or so. Result: Springfield XD never selected.
Todd,
Nicholasvillie, KY went to XD-45 about 2 years ago. They got rid of Sig 220's. During the course they tried Glocks, Newer 220's and a few others and the XD's won. They had more problems with holsters than anything else.
Dan
Hilton Yam just reported in a thread (the "Battle of the Plastic 45's (http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=76683&an=0&page=0#76683)" thread) over on 10-8 forums that a PD in NE Pennsylvania has adopted XD's. No I don't know any further details, maybe Hilton has more.
Nicholasvillie, KY went to XD-45 about 2 years ago.
Understood. According to their website (http://www.nicholasville.org/city_services/police_department/), they have 59 sworn officers. If we include every small department in the country, I'm sure you can find agencies using anything. My guess -- and if someone has contrary details please share them -- is that Nicholasville PD didn't do quite as detailed a test as say NYPD, ICE, or the FBI would have done.
Understood. According to their website (http://www.nicholasville.org/city_services/police_department/), they have 59 sworn officers. If we include every small department in the country, I'm sure you can find agencies using anything. My guess -- and if someone has contrary details please share them -- is that Nicholasville PD didn't do quite as detailed a test as say NYPD, ICE, or the FBI would have done.
Todd,
I understand the Nicholasville PD is a small department. We can always find larger or small departments but to say an agency doesn't do the same type of testing that a larger department says that maybe smaller departments should let the larger agency's drive all the testing and we should become just like them. No thanks. I was told while on active duty if you use the words always or never it will bite you.
Dan
Dan -- I understand what you're saying. And as I pointed out, I've got no idea what their testing protocol was.
I do know that manufacturers aren't going to jump through hoops of fire to support the testing of a 59-man department the way they do for something like ICE. So that makes me suspect that Nicholasville PD wasn't able to put ten thousand rounds through five examples of each model gun they wanted to evaluate.
Without some documentation of their test protocol, we have no idea how they came to their conclusion. Was "grip safety" worth lots of points? Was "should be made in Croatia" worth lots of points?
The gun may work out just fine for them. I hope it does. But unless we know how they tested, and how other guns failed to achieve the same results that led them to pick to the XD, all we know is that a Chief somewhere decided to buy XDs.
I have a XD9sc. I like it very well, shoots great, it fits me well, and Ive had zero problems with it. However, the only thing I have to compare it to is the ruger p95 that I replaced with it so my opinion is pretty much useless!!
Hilton Yam just reported in a thread (the "Battle of the Plastic 45's (http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=76683&an=0&page=0#76683)" thread) over on 10-8 forums that a PD in NE Pennsylvania has adopted XD's. No I don't know any further details, maybe Hilton has more.
It was Easton Police Department. No idea what if any other guns were tested. FWIW, they gave up their H&K USP's in 40S&W for these.
varoadking
12-30-08, 16:19
It was Easton Police Department. No idea what if any other guns were tested. FWIW, they gave up their H&K USP's in 40S&W for these.
62 Officers in Easton, PA...
I was a cop for several years on an 18 man department back in the '70's. We had a choice of either a Smith or Colt .38 or .357 revolver. The Illinois State Police had Smith Model 39's, but for us, auto's weren't allowed. Some of us had a problem with that... ;)
I still have that now 35 years old Model 19...and kinda glad I do...
Powder_Burn
12-30-08, 17:44
As of Q1-08, Springfield claims that 90 agencies have adopted and/or approved the XD. Perhaps one of our LE brethren can get the detailed list out of Springfield HQ.
varoadking
12-30-08, 18:51
I have owned a XD, I liked it at first but once I got to shooting more, I realized that it wasn't for me. I have since gone to Glock and will not own another XD.
Same here... I owned 4 of them - tried to like them - but they were all poor shooters...
Matt Edwards
01-02-09, 21:23
When it first came out (I don't even remember what it was called) The Glock was already around and well entrenched. While the XD fought for air, the M&P came out. That was a 1,2 punch from hell, IMHO.
Just my humble opinion, but I think Springfield would do well to 'officially' release parts into the supplier channel. Warranty or not, I don't want to send in a pistol for every stupid little thing.
It's among the reasons that Glocks, 1911s, and AR-15s will be around for a darned long time: Parts are ubiquitous, come from many sources, and are very easily available. Nobody wants to go through some God-awfully expensive shipping routine because a $5 part failed...
This G21 has been buried for two years in soil, driven over by a pickup, dropped out of a plane, shot at with a .22 - AND IT STILL WORKS without any hiccups. I'll keep my glocks thank you.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/images-guns-glocks-g21test-saltedglock.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWQOoYFT2-4&feature=related
Anyone tried the new 21 SF? Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.
Just my humble opinion, but I think Springfield would do well to 'officially' release parts into the supplier channel. Warranty or not, I don't want to send in a pistol for every stupid little thing.
It's among the reasons that Glocks, 1911s, and AR-15s will be around for a darned long time: Parts are ubiquitous, come from many sources, and are very easily available. Nobody wants to go through some God-awfully expensive shipping routine because a $5 part failed...
It's a valid point that when you want universally available, abundant, and cheap parts, the Glock and AR are unbeatable.
However, I will say that I've noticed the parts situation improving with both the M&P, and the XD.
For example, look at the following link which lists (mostly) OEM parts for the M&P at Midway USA. This is an impressive list, I think nearly every key internal part or assembly is represented in this list. Many of them are currently available, others are temporarily out of stock or soon will be available.
http://www.midwayusa.com/browse/BrowseProducts.aspx?tabid=9&categoryid=19223&categorystring=10636***10560***9141***15918***
Now until very recently, you could get almost NO internal parts or assemblies for the XD. But this is changing fast, as Springfield has apparently woken up and realized the competitive situation. For example, go to a site such as Pistolgear.com, and check out their page for the XD parts. OEM's and aftermarkets are all mixed in together. But if you scroll down a ways on this page, and then click to the 2nd page, you'll see a large listing of true OEM parts, even internal assemblies such as the striker, are or soon will be available for sale to the public.
http://pistolgear.com/products.php?id=15
Jack_Stroker
01-17-09, 14:15
Anyone tried the new 21 SF? Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.
The grip is much improved over the standard Glock 21. I felt that the slight alteration to the grip size made the gun so much more comfortable to use. I liked it so much, it became one of my first Glocks. I bought two that day. I grabbed a Glock 36 as well.
ConditionYellow
01-19-09, 16:45
I purchased an XD-40 back in 2004, thinking I would prefer it to the Glock 22 I previous owned. I was motivated by the cost back then (about $375 without night sights) I eventually took it to a 4 day handgun class. I thought it pointed more naturally than the Glock, but it was not accurate for me. Both my Glock and 1911 shot more accurately with significantly less effort. Trigger take-up and reset were weak points for me as well.
The high bore caused me to feel more recoil than with the Glock. Admittedly, it wore the old finish, but rusted both on the slide and the grip safety. I also locked it up while reassembling it ( I HATED that, even if due to operator head space).
At the class I've mentioned, it experienced several failures to feed. The round would jam up at an angle while feeding into the chamber. It gave me quite a few opportunities to practice drills. I read of others who experienced similar failures to feed with the 40. A couple of months after the class I polished the breach face and a bit of the chamber and didn't experience the issue in the insuing 500-600 rounds. However, my confidence in the pistol evaporated, never to return.
As someone else stated, I really tried to like the pistol, but finally sold it after some 2k rounds. The experience taught me not to try a new-to-market firearm just to see if it works, but to stay with tried & true designs. I miss my Glock, and will never part with my 1911.
My experiences have been just the opposite. I have an XD45 Service that have several thousand rounds through and have yet to have a problem with fit or function.
I have competed in several informal shoots at my gun club and the gun served me well. Accuracy was never a factor. I have qualified a perfect 250 on my Texas CHL proficiency test with the XD, drawing much attention from those that were shooting Glocks and others. I have let several others use the gun and mostly the comments were "great gun where can I buy one?" Problem is my dealer can't keep them on the shelf. The local Sheriff's department (25 Deputies) all carry them and some have them for concealed carry as well, as do I. I also know several Texas DPS officers that carry them off duty.
One modification I did was change the stock sights to TruGlo Tritium Fiber Optic's. Man what a difference that made.
Just outside of Houston is a club that caters to the XD and there are several hundred members that swear by them.
I do know that Springfield had some problems with finish on some the first guns, but mine has been in all kinds of weather and even was launched overboard, into salt water, from our fishing boat when the driver ran agound on a sand bar outside Corpus Christi, TX. I was in water over 15 foot deep and the gun rode back to the shore, a 30 minute trip in a wet leather holster. When I got to shore I field stripped it and flished it with fresh water, sprayed it all down with RemOil and then wiped the outside of the slide with a RIG Grease impregnated wrag. I took the gun home and put it away. About a month later I took it out and no rust anywhere. I do believe they have the rust problems solved. I am currently looking for a 5" Tacital bi-tone.
tex45acp
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f43/mike_seale/XD45wLIGHT2.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f43/mike_seale/MCVSET.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f43/mike_seale/IWBCarry003.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f43/mike_seale/IWBCarry002.jpg
I hesitate to buy a gun that I have trouble getting parts for, no one does armorer work on, and I have to count on Croatia staying stable in the long run for support of the system.
sandman99and9
01-27-09, 11:01
I have had a XD45 for over a year now and it has run flawlessly. Not a single malfunction ever!! Lots of different types of ammo shot through it and no problems. It shoots well and as long as I do my part it is very accurate.
The XD Tac .40 S&W was my favorite of the plastic framed guns, I say that while holding my nose as I dont care for combat tupperware. It did everything my UMP or the Glock 22 did and felt better in my hand. That being said it along with the others are no longer in my stable. I have never found a plastic framed gun that fits my hand as well as a Beretta 92 or a 1911 or CZ 75 so I quit trying. I have only put a couple of magazines through a S&W M&P but it really didnt feel any better to me although the recoil impulse seemed softer and recovery times were improved, Attributed to the lower bore axis. I may have to try one out in .45.
Littlelebowski
05-19-09, 21:57
Interesting commentary with pics of the XDM in 9mm.
http://www.louderthanwords.us/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7037
More commentary on 10-8 forums.
http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=76243&an=0&page=0#76243
No offense but those were thoroughly uninformative threads. I realize that the pics of the XDm were rare at the time but it would be nice to see some real testing.
No offense but those were thoroughly uninformative threads. I realize that the pics of the XDm were rare at the time but it would be nice to see some real testing.
I am surprised, that that pistol was posted on LTW... based on those who responded, there appeared to be very little interest by those who's opinion I respect over there.
I was shocked to see people praising the M&P here. I thought they were getting kick backs or something. :p
I was hesitant about the M&P at first; I think I even jokingly called it the Sigma II.
When I tried it, I liked it better than my Glock 17 that I had been shooting regularly for years. The Glock is great (almost perfection; note my sig line), but I prefer my M&P.
Pre-M&P, when I was shooting the Glock regularly, I tried an XD. Didn't care for the ergonomics or trigger as compared to the Glock.
Combat_Diver
06-27-09, 07:32
I shoot two- First a .45 XD Benning at an All Army side match where it performed admiraly. Last a week before I left, I didn't like the compact XD .40s trigger. The safety was too sharp. Have never like the grip of Glocks although they work great. Do like the erogonmics of the Smith M&P. But, I'll just buy another Beretta 92 and 1911 frames when get home.
CD
My XD45 Service has functioned fine, but the mags have sucked. The backside of the top of the mag between the feedlips gets bent outward and they basically turn into non-drop free mags.
Ordered some new ones that appear to be different (they have a stamp of the Springfield Armory logo on them) so hopefully they corrected this mag weakness.
In your opinion...Why didn;t the XD's take off?
Glock being entrenched prior to the XD making the scene this last time.
keith
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.