Quoted:



... Great pistols, thousands of rounds down range and no issues.

Quoted:
Good or Bad all purpose pistol?  I want to get a two tone pistol and the only ones I like are the Sig P226 and the XD.  So, how have these pistols held up?

Quoted:
Good or Bad all purpose pistol?  I want to get a two tone pistol and the only ones I like are the Sig P226 and the XD.  So, how have these pistols held up?

Quoted:
First, I'll always tell a guy to "get what you want" –– but don't limit your "all purpose handgun" selection based on what comes in 2-tone. Unless by "all purpose" you mean "range toy". If it's a serious defense tool, then think for a moment how important its color really is, compared to all the other factors, and realize that if another pistol works better in some way, but only comes in all black, it might be the better choice.

Now, I'm not against the XD specifically, but someone needs to play devil's advocate.  FWIW I think DA/SA Sig pistols are outdated, especially as a platform for a new shooter to learn on, so this is just my humble opinion.

Compared to a Sig pistol, an XD simpler to learn, maintain, and use. Polymer is progress and all that. However, in SA mode the Sig will have a better trigger. It will also have less recoil (because it's heavier). The XD has a relatively high bore-axis compared to its contemporaries, but not compared to a Sig.

Consider that the XD and the Sig both have magazine capacities that are small for their size. Most other major manufacturers squeeze a few more rounds in each mag, given guns of approximately the same size. This is especially true for the .40 S&W pistols. 12+1 in a fullsize duty pistol? What is this, 1985?

Consider that the XD's grip safety can be an nice safety feature or a deadly handicap. In a situation where you do not have a good grip on the pistol (off-hand use, injured hand, awkward angle inside a car, grappling with attacker, etc.) your pistol may not fire. If you need to rack the slide and don't have a good grip you will also have a problem. On the other hand, if you holster the pistol with your thumb on the back of the slide (and thus the grip safety untouched) you won't carelessly shoot yourself because of an errant piece of gear or lazy trigger finger. You'll have to make your own mind up here.

Consider the aftermarket. Look at what major U.S. training schools, competition shooters, and LE agencies are buying and using. If you don't like to take their use to indicate a good quality pistol, fine, but at least admit that major use in these worlds will foster a healthy, accessible aftermarket. Holsters, grips, sights, knowledgeable gunsmiths, conversion kits, magazine and parts availability. In an "all purpose" gun these things may be important. The XD falls far behind many other leading pistol designs in this category, especially in parts availability. You can buy Glock parts, for example, for pennies and install them on your coffee table with almost no tools. Same for Sigs, and there's no question about the aftermarket for either. (It's probably also good at this point to think about WHY those major pistol users pick other pistols over the XD.)

The XD is wider and heavier (especially in its subcompact models) than many of its contemporaries. It also has a higher bore axis (more "muzzle flip") and a longer trigger reset, both things that are mathematically detrimental to fast, accurate shooting.

Lots of people have XDs and are very happy with them, as this thread shows. But at least go handle some of the other major pistols out there. Glock, Smith & Wesson M&P (which just dropped in price, by the way, and are now much more competitive with the XD), and don't overlook the CZ75, Beretta PX4 (if you like DA/SA), and FN-X pistols.

Quoted:


Thanks for the response.  By all purpose pistol, I mean it would mostly see a lot of range time.  I have several Glocks that I love for their simplicity.  I have a G21SF for HD, a G19 for CCW and a G17 RTF2 for competitions.  I understand that Sigs and XDs have their shortcomings, but so do all pistols.  I want to buy something a little different than my Glocks and I have been attracted to the two tone pistols.  Both the XD and Sig have features that I like and dislike.  I would like to get a hammered pistol, which is why I have looked at Sig, HK, FN, etc. and I have liked Sig the most.  On the other hand, the XD is cheaper, so I wouldn't mind shooting the crap out of it and having fun with it while not worrying about things.  On the Sig, I don't really like the position of the slide release/stop and decocking lever b/c my Glocks have the slide stop/release about where the decocking lever is on the Sig.  I also dont like the XD for the grip safety, but since it will be mostly a range gun, I'm not too concerned about.  

Again, I appreciate your response and your information, so I thought I would write back answering most of your questions (I think).

Quoted:
Thanks for the response.  By all purpose pistol, I mean it would mostly see a lot of range time.  I have several Glocks that I love for their simplicity.  I have a G21SF for HD, a G19 for CCW and a G17 RTF2 for competitions.  I understand that Sigs and XDs have their shortcomings, but so do all pistols.  I want to buy something a little different than my Glocks and I have been attracted to the two tone pistols.  Both the XD and Sig have features that I like and dislike.  I would like to get a hammered pistol, which is why I have looked at Sig, HK, FN, etc. and I have liked Sig the most.  On the other hand, the XD is cheaper, so I wouldn't mind shooting the crap out of it and having fun with it while not worrying about things.  On the Sig, I don't really like the position of the slide release/stop and decocking lever b/c my Glocks have the slide stop/release about where the decocking lever is on the Sig.  I also dont like the XD for the grip safety, but since it will be mostly a range gun, I'm not too concerned about.  

Again, I appreciate your response and your information, so I thought I would write back answering most of your questions (I think).

Quoted:
God, I am so sick of hearing that DA/SA guns are "outdated." They are not. In fact, no currently manufactured semi-auto is. Striker fired pistols are just cheaper to make, making them cheaper to sell to the masses, which makes them more popular. Striker pistols are also great for people that don't shoot a lot, or don't care to master a platform.

DA/SA pistols are so "outdated" that they are used by the vast majority of the worlds top tier SOF. Hell, the British Military just went from a SA auto (Hi-Power) to a DA/SA P226, making the same switch that the SAS & SBS did years ago.

Quoted:
God, I am so sick of hearing that DA/SA guns are "outdated." They are not. In fact, no currently manufactured semi-auto is. Striker fired pistols are just cheaper to make, making them cheaper to sell to the masses, which makes them more popular. Striker pistols are also great for people that don't shoot a lot, or don't care to master a platform.

DA/SA pistols are so "outdated" that they are used by the vast majority of the worlds top tier SOF. Hell, the British Military just went from a SA auto (Hi-Power) to a DA/SA P226, making the same switch that the SAS & SBS did years ago.

Quoted:
"Outdated" doesn't necessarily mean "bad."

Just like "cheaper to make" doesn't necessarily mean "bad" or "worse." The Remington 870 is a heck of a lot cheaper to make than a Winchester M12, but that doesn't make it a less effective LE shotgun. In many ways, in fact, it is better.

DA/SA guns (and I'm not talking about guns that have a SA option, like H&K or FN) have a two trigger pulls. Mathematically, scientifically, however you slice it, this means more training and use to learn. Yes, of course it is possible to master it. The advantages of that design, however, are difficult to quantify and usually come down to someone's "warm fuzzy feeling" about having a heavy first trigger pull.

If a person is a wizard with a DA/SA, that's great. But in most cases I'd wager that if that person spent the same amount of time with a striker fired or SAO gun, he'd also be a wizard with that gun, and possibly quicker because of the simpler manual of arms.

I don't know why a simpler, easier to use design has to mean "for those who aren't willing to learn."  It seems like that argument is thrown out there in lieu of actual reasons why DA/SA is better. It's easier to just say that those who prefer a striker/SAO gun aren't "top-tier" enough to "get it" than to actually explain what makes it better.

Quoted:


hardly.  and you know what the funny part is?  glocks are essentially double action first rounds just like a hammer fired gun.  want me to explain?  simple.  glock (and i believe M&P as well) strikers are only partially cocked (something like 20 to 40% cocked when the pistol is idle i forget exactly how far its cocked).  the first part of the trigger pull cocks the striker the rest of the way, then you get the release of the striker.  NOW ASSUMING you hold the trigger back until the slide racks, the striker is technically called 98% cocked when you let out on the trigger and get the reset click, so you dont have to keep fully cocking the striker each time you pull the trigger (turning it into basically single action at that point).  however, if you let the trigger all the way out after you shoot, you go back to partially cocked mode.  springfield XDs are different than the above mentioned guns, which is why they have much nicer trigger pulls IMO (glock guys call this a spongy feeling since the trigger has far less resistance than a glock trigger since you odnt have to cock the striker).  a sear catches the striker at 100% cock, pulling the trigger ONLY deactivates the safeties and releases the sear from the striker, the trigger does not have to cock the striker at all on any shot.

so now please explain how a hammer fired gun is so much more inefficient than a striker fired glock which operates on a similar principle.  and if going by your logic of having to cock the gun on the first round that makes the glock outdated as well yes?

and just to throw it out there, it takes almost no training to fire accurately from a hammer fired gun in DA first round.  you can fire a glock accurately on the first round right?  i find it hellarious how many people have to talk trash about a double action first round like its impossible to hit something with (and most dont even fully understand how a glock fires).  im sorry but my personal feeling and experience is if you cant hit a human torso at a reasonable distance with a DA gun, you dont deserve to be carrying one in the first place.

Quoted:
I know how a Glock works, but thank you very much anyway.  The difference between a Glock "first" trigger pull and a true DA pull is that with the Glock you can pre-load or "take up" the trigger to the point at which it is "fully cocked" as you describe. In this sense it feels like a two-stage military trigger. Once the trigger is "pre-loaded," part of the sight-acquisition process, the amount of pressure it takes to fire the pistol is the same as each subsequent shot.

I understand what you are arguing but it's not really a fair comparison. "Inefficient" was your word.

Sorry if my opinion seems "hellarious" to you but you might find it less funny if you actually read it rather than becoming indignant. Again with the "real pistol shooters use DA/SA guns, and striker-fired guns are for n00bs and posers."

Quoted:
The XD is a good platform that works.

That being said, if you go line for line comparison wise versus the competition, there are other guns out there that will, for less money, at least equal or be better than the XD in virtually any measurable comparison.

The only reason I would recommend one to somebody would be if the competition felt so lousy in their hand that it caused them to shoot poorly.  Of course this is a training issue, but not everyone can dedicate the time.

Quoted:


And what other mfgs are as good or  better than the XD?

Quoted:


hardly.  and you know what the funny part is?  glocks are essentially double action first rounds just like a hammer fired gun.  want me to explain?  simple.  glock (and i believe M&P as well) strikers are only partially cocked (something like 20 to 40% cocked when the pistol is idle i forget

exactly how far its cocked).  the first part of the trigger pull cocks the striker the rest of the way, then you get the release of the striker.  NOW ASSUMING you hold the trigger back until the slide racks, the striker is technically called 98% cocked when you let out on the trigger and get the reset click, so you dont have to keep fully cocking the striker each time you pull the trigger (turning it into basically single action at that point).  
however, if you let the trigger all the way out after you shoot, you go back to partially cocked mode.  springfield XDs are different than the above mentioned guns, which is why they have much nicer trigger pulls IMO (glock guys call this a spongy feeling since the trigger has far less resistance than a glock trigger since you odnt have to cock the striker).  a sear catches the striker at 100% cock, pulling the trigger ONLY deactivates the safeties and releases the sear from the striker, the trigger does not have to cock the striker at all on any shot.

so now please explain how a hammer fired gun is so much more inefficient than a striker fired glock which operates on a similar principle.  and if going by your logic of having to cock the gun on the first round that makes the glock outdated as well yes?

and just to throw it out there, it takes almost no training to fire accurately from a hammer fired gun in DA first round.  you can fire a glock accurately on the first round right?  i find it hellarious how many people have to talk trash about a double action first round like its impossible to hit something with (and most dont even fully understand how a glock fires).  im sorry but my personal feeling and experience is if you cant hit a human torso at a reasonable distance with a DA gun, you dont deserve to be carrying one in the first place.

Quoted:

to elaborate:  there was a guy at my CHL class who bought a snub nosed 357 revolver for protection in his convenience store.  this was his first refresher course and his only firearm experience before this was a few years erlier when he shot his initial CHL class.  he was missing the paper at 3 yards until he got instruction from the guys running the show.  he failed his first attempt and re-shot with the second group and barely passed.  as far as im concerned, this man is a danger to anyone around should a need for him to draw his weapon arise...he is more likely to hit an innocent person than the bad guy holding the gun.  i dont believe anyone who performs this poorly should be issued a license to carry guns in the general public until they can master their shooting abilities a little better.  this is of course my opinion and the laxd requirements for pretty much every state allow even the poorest of shooters to qualify that day in as many tries as they need, so what do i know.  i just hope im not in the same building as any of these people should they decide to engage a bank robber or whatever.  how do driving tests work?  i know you cant screw up enough things but isnt there a waiting period if you fail the first time?

Quoted:
I've owned four XDs. Only one was unreliable with HP ammo and it was one of my .45acp Tacticals. I could have sent it back and they would have fixed it but I sold it to a buddy (he knew about the issue).

One of my house guns is a 9mm subcompact with a 16-rd magazine. Shoots Federal HST like nobody's business.

Quoted:
Spoken like a true anti-gunner. Firstly, the right to protect yourself is a fundamental right bestowed upon you by your creator and outlined in the Constitution. Driving is a privilege since you use public roadways. Someone's ability to protect themselves shouldn't be regulated by any sort of performance standards. To deprive any law-abiding person that ability is disgraceful, no matter their talent level. Secondly, someone should want to obtain training, but it shouldn't be mandatory. Your very own example shows mandatory training is a flawed practice with no real benefit.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Quoted:
My personal opinion with the XD is that it isn't worth nearly as much as they charge for it. I owned a .45 compact. It was top heavy and handled poorly when fired. The quality feels about equal to a Sigma, as opposed to a Glock or M&P. I didn't shoot it well, either. I'd rather go with a Glock, M&P, HK, or if you like DA/SA, a Sig or Beretta. For disclosure, people say that newer Sigs have a higher chance of being a lemon, so just be wary.

Quoted:


Glock and M&P if you're looking striker fired, and HK if you're looking at hammer fired were the ones I have in mind.

I can't think of anything that the XD does better than those, but I can think of atleast advantages those platforms have over the XD.

Quoted:


Consider that the XD and the Sig both have magazine capacities that are small for their size. Most other major manufacturers squeeze a few more rounds in each mag, given guns of approximately the same size. This is especially true for the .40 S&W pistols. 12+1 in a fullsize duty pistol? What is this, 1985?

Quoted:
So, the last three posters don't like the XD, but why?  I don't  see any reasons for why it isn't a good gun, do you mind explaining?

Quoted:
So, the last three posters don't like the XD, but why?  I don't  see any reasons for why it isn't a good gun, do you mind explaining?

Quoted:

i carry almost every day...



you say im wrong for saying there should be a performance standard? this state (and pretty much all for that matter) is already regulated with a performance standard thats the entire point of those 50 rounds, to show a bare minimum level of competency in handling a firearm. however, it is obviously not enforced. that being said you say im wrong for saying we should enforce the standards which are given to us? maybe your right depending on how you look at it...but what are you doing to change that? when was the last time you brought your state to the supreme court to justify that chl license requirements were unconstitutional?