JDBerg, the ARS article is an opinion piece, that, quite frankly, goes more into personal preference than it should for giving advice. (Calling a .40 subcompact in a hybrid holster the mark of inexperience?). I have shot pistols with grip safeties when my hands were so numb that depressing the mag release was a two-handed affair. The grip safety was never an issue. That is one of their advantages, anything near a normal grip will actuate them. As for being comfortable carrying, his opinion is worth what I paid for it. I carry a 1911, an XDS, or a P320. I like the safety system of the 1911 the best. Yes, it does require the most training, due to a manual safety, but once trained, it is not difficult or slower. The XDS middle ground does not require more training, as simply assuming a grip actuates it.
No love for the Springfield XD?
- Thread starter JJ45
- Start date
Wife just purchased her second XD Mod2. This one in 45acp. Her gun, Her choice. I too enjoy shooting both of those guns and for some strange reason I cannot see the "Grip Zone" when I'm looking down the sights.
But then what do I know I also own a Witness Pavona 380 in Black with Gold Speckles and it too shoots just fine and there too I cannot see the Speckles while looking down the sights..
But then what do I know I also own a Witness Pavona 380 in Black with Gold Speckles and it too shoots just fine and there too I cannot see the Speckles while looking down the sights..
I've got an XDM .45 that I got for free. I wouldn't have bought it, but its not bad, it can easily compete with any of my Glocks. I don't like that the grip safety needs to be depressed to rack the slide, but that really is not a huge issue. I'd take a Glock 21 over it, but I got it for free...... No complaints on my end.
raimius: said:
Well that’s one way to look at it. YouTube is loaded with gun jockeys who get their gun loaners, ammo, and accessories gratis, then give glowing reports on whatever they are evaluating. Gun authors give wonderful evaluations on guns from manufacturers in gun rags that include full page ads for the same guns and manufacturers. These are also examples of “opinion pieces”.
Another way to consider this is that the ARS article is written by an author who has a reputation for providing firearms training, who has no vested interest in the brands of firearms that the students bring to class, but who has to deal with certain brands of firearms that tend to “malf” more often than others during these training classes. So this instructor / author renders an informed opinion about the reliability of one brand, compared to other brands of firearms.
OBTW, the point the ARS article made that casual shooters do not subject their guns to use & abuse compared to dedicated shooters involved in training and competition, is a valid idea worth considering whether you like or agree with the premise or not.
Last edited:
JDBerg,
I'm not debating his experience or number of malfunctions he has seen.
Do XDs malfunction more than Glocks? I have not seen the data, but I can accept his report. From my anecdotal experience, they seem reasonably reliable (I might have seen 2-3 failure to feeds in several thousand rounds.) To me, that is "good enough" when talking about varied loads and magazines. Of course, fewer malfunctions is always better.
My beef was more with his commentary on firearms and holster choices being the mark of a novice shooter. It smells of an attitude that thinks their answer is "the answer." I'm not a fan of trainers who think they have "the answer." Further, his commentary on grip safeties is not congruent with my experience, does not align very well with the physical mechanics involved, and is not backed by any presented data (his argument against is presented as a hypothetical).
I'm not debating his experience or number of malfunctions he has seen.
Do XDs malfunction more than Glocks? I have not seen the data, but I can accept his report. From my anecdotal experience, they seem reasonably reliable (I might have seen 2-3 failure to feeds in several thousand rounds.) To me, that is "good enough" when talking about varied loads and magazines. Of course, fewer malfunctions is always better.
My beef was more with his commentary on firearms and holster choices being the mark of a novice shooter. It smells of an attitude that thinks their answer is "the answer." I'm not a fan of trainers who think they have "the answer." Further, his commentary on grip safeties is not congruent with my experience, does not align very well with the physical mechanics involved, and is not backed by any presented data (his argument against is presented as a hypothetical).
As a retired old f@rt I remember the HS2000 and thought it a great budget option for a handgun. I did not need a budget pistol and never bought one. When Springfield started their distribution of the piece for almost double the cost and with some styling cues that to me looked hokey I again kept my money in my pocket. Many years later Springfield has built and sold a bunch of XDs but I have no need much less desire for one. A plethora of other pistols I own do everything I want a pistol to do and the Springfield simply does not do anything for me style wise. It might well be a good option for some but for me a non starter. About the only way one will enter my collection is someone wants to give me one. I will not spend my money for one.
Grip safeties ? depends so much on the size , shape , and how you hold the pistol.
With my 1911 my grip safety is pinned. My hands don't touch the wooden grips . Front and back straps are checkered . My 1911 works very well and I have used it for carry,. hunting, target including IPSC ! It all works for ME !
With my 1911 my grip safety is pinned. My hands don't touch the wooden grips . Front and back straps are checkered . My 1911 works very well and I have used it for carry,. hunting, target including IPSC ! It all works for ME !