Discussion in 'On Topic' started by johnson, May 23, 2008.
i was trying to get over the looks while reading his description, but then i got to his "dislikes" section and finalized my decision:
this gun is a piece of shit.
16+1 of .40
can be worked on
i'd rather have an FNP-45
There are no features on the $600 XD-M that make me want to buy it any more than I wanted to buy the original $450 XD. Just like there were no features of the $450 XD that made me want to buy one any more than I wanted an HS-2000 when it was $250.
So can we plan on gen-4 being $800?
So...what makes this so different from a regular XD?
The slide looks much better, but now those grips are disgusting.
I handled one recently.
differences consist of :
- Interchangeable back strap
- 16 rounds x .40 capacity instead of the old XD 12 rounds.
- Barrel is a new design, not poly or traditional.
- gun is a litter better "melted" for CCW, top of slide is a little more beveled.
The one I handled looked better in person. Stock trigger is still shit, I'm sure Scott Springer has already given a trigger job to his XDM he's been modding.
My big XD gripes still stand. The triggers suck even after a trigger job, you can't get replacement parts without sending your gun to springfield.
How did they increase the capcity? It the grip mag longer than a regular xd? Is it wider?
From what I've "heard" still yet to be confrimed, they built it on the .45 platform wider, rather than the 9mm platform they used on the XD.
With the small grip insert it fits my hands like a glove and points like a 1911.
I own 5 XDs and consider them great guns, so great that I carried them in Iraq. I will not be buying an XD-M though.
They did a half assed job at trying to update the looks to a more ergo style and then jacked up the price.
I don't give a rat's ass about how it looks, if I am going to carry a combat gun, it's all about function. the old XD design worked and worked well.
I never thought I'd say this, but the regular XD looks better.
Beats me. Maybe they just like pretty girlie guns that fit their dainty hands better.
few hundred thousand rounds through mine with 1 failure tells me it's a great design.
If the new one can handle the tests like the old can and they bring the price down to reasonable levels like the current ones, then it may be decent.
Yeah those are internet numbers. It works out to 700 real world rounds.
that's a half day in the shoot house.
When I'm gearing up for a big match I can do 2000/week so I guess 8000/month. Normally it's a 1000/week or 4000/month.
I crank out a minimum of 2000/week on the reloader for pistol alone.
I don't think people realize how much a hundred thousand is. Much less a few hundred 100,000. I've shoot 150,000 through a single glock barrel and it was worn out. The rifling was shot, and even the specs of the feed ramp changed.
Unless your shooting some sort of class 3, or are into some serious competitive shooting I doubt you got 100,000 plus through any gun, much less a pistol. I have serious doubts a XD could hold up to 100,000 without many parts replaced. For sure the extractor could not hold up to that.
He has 6 XDs... you don't think it's possible he could have that many through all 6 combined? Or is that too difficult for your OT minds to comprehend...
Nice writeup, thanks for bringing it over here.
what is mattsb2000's verdict?
I don't really care at all
I've never shot / handled / seen an XD IRL so no verdict.
nope, none have been back to springfield although a couple have been to Springer for trigger work and another has been chopped down from a Service model to a SC size for concealment.
They have been through daily training sessions, combat, CCW classes. and no, it's not just one XD with 200,000 rounds. I used all of them regularly.
Unfortunately the XD isn't a crappy gun like some want it to be. I put them on par with Glocks, HKs, Sigs etc.
that said, I am off in a bit to look at a used Colt 1991 that just rolled into the local shop here. Hard to pass up one for $440 bucks.
who needs facts to make a decision