XD .45 acp...... COMPACT


PDA






english kanigit
November 9, 2006, 06:34 PM
Folks, folks, I kid you not. These guns are in the system!

The range I work at just had a rep stop in with one for us to look at.

Slide length: 4 inches. All the scuttlebutt I've heard said three inches but it's actually four. I've fondlized it. :neener:


The grip is one inch shorter and the compact mags hold ten IIRC. I was too buisy mumbling gibberish and drooling to notice much else. :evil:

The rep said the dealers will start getting them in one to three weeks.



ek

If you enjoyed reading about "XD .45 acp...... COMPACT" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
english kanigit
November 9, 2006, 08:57 PM
AND.....

I almost forgot, the little EMP is simply beautiful to behold.

Sleek, svelte, sexy.... Yeah.
:cool:

ek

Technosavant
November 9, 2006, 09:18 PM
You say this, but post no pics.

You are truly a cruel human being. :scrutiny:

Technosavant
November 9, 2006, 09:19 PM
Never mind... SA has it on the front page of its website.

You're redeemed. :p

RonC
November 9, 2006, 10:16 PM
but I can't get excited about a short barrel .45.

AT 850 -900 feet per second, the 45 is a proven round, but it will move a lot slower, and give a lot less energy from a short barrel.

If I am mistaken in my thinking, I will be happy to be corrected.

Ron

enkindler
November 9, 2006, 10:35 PM
The EMP is intresting though

http://www.springfield-armory.com/prod-pstl-1911-emp.shtml

TheHardcase
November 10, 2006, 12:14 AM
AT 850 -900 feet per second, the 45 is a proven round, but it will move a lot slower, and give a lot less energy from a short barrel.

I agree with you about the 5" barrel, especially in the 1911 pistols. But I haven't experienced any energy bleed-off with my Colt Commander or my Glock 30 vs. the full-size version of those pistols. At least not in terms of felt recoil. Never read any ballistic reports qualified by barrel length either.

jlh26oo
November 10, 2006, 01:19 AM
but I can't get excited about a short barrel .45.

AT 850 -900 feet per second, the 45 is a proven round, but it will move a lot slower, and give a lot less energy from a short barrel.

If I am mistaken in my thinking, I will be happy to be corrected.

Ron

Not correcting you, but unless you are talking about 1911's with anything other than conventional rifling, I don't think you're losing anything.

Like thc said, even GLOCK 3.78" barrels suffer little to no loss vs 5" barrels because they take advantage of polygonal (specifically octagonal) rifling.

If the xd45c also has conventional (edit: I mean polygonal) rifling, the velocities from a 4" polygonal rifled barrel will match a 5" conventional rifled 1911. I'll try to find some data. I know I've seen the G30's = 1911's in particular (probably not all) cartridges.

jlh26oo
November 10, 2006, 01:20 AM
I agree with you about the 5" barrel, especially in the 1911 pistols. But I haven't experienced any energy bleed-off with my Colt Commander or my Glock 30 vs. the full-size version of those pistols. At least not in terms of felt recoil. Never read any ballistic reports qualified by barrel length either.

Well I'm not sure = recoil means = velocity, but I think you are right about not losing any performance in your 30.

jlh26oo
November 10, 2006, 01:56 AM
winchester 185 silver tips
plygonal 3.78" 918 fps
conventional 5" 909fps

federal hydrashock 230gr
3.78" poly 847fps
5" conv. 852fps

winchester ranger sxt 230gr (not +p)
3.78 poly 848fps
5" conv 819fps

speer 230 gd
3.78 poly 812 fps
5" conv 811 fps


Meets or beats- and that's only a 3.78" polygonal rifled barrel (glock 36)- you might get even better from a similar 4" in XD. Of course we won't know until they are chrono'd, but my point is the octagonal rifling makes a huge difference in the GLOCK at least. Or at the very least you can't just compare barrel length straight up for performance without considering type of rifling.

Waywatcher
November 10, 2006, 02:19 AM
Are you sure the XD's have polygonal rifling? I thought my XD-9 had conventional rifling... :confused:

jlh26oo
November 10, 2006, 02:23 AM
(The starfire is one of the few with which the 1911 5" has the advantage btw)


PMC Starfire 230gr
3.78" 794
5" (conv) 841

Fed 185gr jhp
3.78 908
5" conv 851

Remington 185gr GS BJHP (+p ??)
3.78 1052
1911 1016


I'm sure when you start getting much lighter than 185 though, the 1911 has a significant advantage. I assume you are referring to the heavy bullets Ron, with the velocity rance you mentioned.

Man. Considering those stats, I really need a 30 or a 36! Or an xd45 compact ftm!

jlh26oo
November 10, 2006, 02:25 AM
Are you sure the XD's have polygonal rifling? I thought my XD-9 had conventional rifling...

CHekcing. I HOPE so. If not, that makes an XD-glock subcompact choice EASY for me, re: ron's concern.

jlh26oo
November 10, 2006, 02:29 AM
Nope no polygonal in XD.


WOW. Well in that case, all the above =/> velocities would only apply to GLOCK subcompacts. Sorry to have wasted all that time and data on an irrelvant tangent in your thread english.

And not to bash conventional rifling in a compact, it has its advantages too (lead reloads, maybe accuracy). Just not for me. LOL I compared apples and oranges in your pear thread.

RonC
November 10, 2006, 11:22 AM
I'll have to copy and save that information. Good stuff.

I had a Glock G36, but had worried about the velocity issue. Also, the Glock didn't point naturally for me. Looking at the data, the velocity doesn't seem to be a problem at all.

Back on topic: I love the XD series and have an XD 40 and an aftermarket 9 mm barrel for just fun shooting. I've looked at the XD compacts and the XD 45. The XD 45 is very tempting, given my comfort and success with the XD 40, but the compacts are considerably more chunky in size than my Kahr MK 9.

Thanks,
Ron

english kanigit
November 10, 2006, 11:54 AM
The thing about the XD45C that really suprised me is that with the compact mag in I can actually get my whole hand on the grip. Now I've got farely big paws but this is a nice revelation.

Now if I had gotten to work 30 minutes sooner I could have shot the blasted thing... :banghead:

ek

Sry0fcr
November 10, 2006, 02:33 PM
Sonofa... As soon as I decide to have Bowie Tactical Concepts chop the grip down on a 9mm SA produces one in .45. DAMNIT! I've got some thinking to do... But I really wish they'd bring back the "Compact" 1911's.

Zeke Menuar
November 10, 2006, 04:35 PM
The alleged XD45 Compact is a XD45 Service with the grip chopped. Simple dremel engineering.

Some of the guys at XD Talk have been doing this for months.

I already have a XD45 Service. This doesn't do much for me.

XD45's have fully supported chambers and conventional rifling.

ZM

jlh26oo
November 10, 2006, 11:46 PM
The thing about the XD45C that really suprised me is that with the compact mag in I can actually get my whole hand on the grip.

That is good news. It doesn't require the extended mag? You can get your pinky on actual grip FRAME? This is one of the design flaws of the 36 imo. Instead of just making the grip come all the way down to the bottom of the mag, they design it so that you are applying direct grip pressure to the mag itself. Much prefer to grip actual GRIP.

Hell, on the velocity issue- 4" polygonal or no, I probably wouldn't have a problem with. There are alot of conventionally rifled THREE INCH 1911's out there people are carrying. Apparently those 230gr bullets are still expanding in the mid to high 700fps range.

GunNut
November 11, 2006, 01:47 AM
There are alot of conventionally rifled THREE INCH 1911's out there people are carrying. Apparently those 230gr bullets are still expanding in the mid to high 700fps range.

Not necessarily true, just because people are carrying them doesn't mean they actually work as the bullet was designed.

Steve

jlh26oo
November 11, 2006, 02:29 AM
Not necessarily true, just because people are carrying them doesn't mean they actually work as the bullet was designed.

Steve

What?!

:eek:

Damn, I better quit carrying these .45acp bullets in my pocket. I thought by carrying them alone, that if I threw them hard enough at a BG- they'd expand.

jlh26oo
November 11, 2006, 02:45 AM
You will also see that expansion of the Speer Gold Dot was actually a little larger from the 3.16" barrel. This flies in the face of assumptions, but is easily explained. Expansion really has two facets: diameter and "upset height." Expanded bullets are shorter than their unfired companions. As the bullet gets bigger around, the material has to come from somewhere, so the bullet has to get shorter.
But the real message of the data is how little difference there is due to barrel length. The Golden Saber seems to be the one most affected by the short barrel, but it also has a little less expansion across the board. The similarity of the others was unexpected, but was nonetheless a pleasant surprise. It just shows how far the factories have come.

There was a time when you could say that load A was demonstrably superior to load B. Those days are gone. So while my personal choice continues to be a Commander-size pistol, those who choose the ultra compact .45s don't have to worry. Ammunition manufacturers have done a good job in designing bullets that will work over a fairly large velocity window.
-Charles E. Petty, American Handgunner, Nov 2000

Just one guys opinion. I PERSONALLY don't agree with it (I say even within a velocity window, > velocity = > expansion); but I could see why someone might be ok with a ~3" barrel in a .45acp.





WOW gunnut- we have IDENTICAL post counts (444) at this very moment. DON'T f-it up by responding!

Ryder
November 11, 2006, 03:47 AM
Merry Christmas to me! :D

You give up about 50 fps per inch. That bullet is still tooling along at 3 football fields per second out of a 4 inch barrel. No target will know the difference.

Newton
November 11, 2006, 10:25 AM
Doesn't seem very radical, just a chopped grip.

Minimal re-tooling costs but a lot of extra sales to the "must have it" brigade.

That's some smart marketing, but they should have given it an "Tactical Uber Street Warrior" type of name, sounds better than "XD with a Dremelled grip".

RonC
November 11, 2006, 12:11 PM
I don't know about the ammo you folks use, but my Americana Grand Poobah Super Expandable Depleted Uranium Whopper JHP 45 ACP rounds expand to 4'3" diameter and 0.0001 microns thick. It's a heck of a man stopper.:o

Ron

GunNut
November 11, 2006, 12:59 PM
While I agree that there are rounds that will expand out of a 3" barrel, I doubt that is what most people carry in their 3" 1911's.

Outside of us internet gun junkies, most people I run into really don't put a second thought into ammo selection. It says .45ACP super wizbang tactical load, so it must perform the same in my 3" 1911 as it would in a 5" Government 1911, right?




jlh26oo,

Sorry, but you better get posting so we can match again.:neener:

quicksilverpdx
November 11, 2006, 01:22 PM
Pertty cool idea but from personal experence wit a micro compact 1911 and the full size tactical, the .45 really needs a 5'' barrel to be a effective gun and THEIR IS NOTHING COMPACT ABOUT THIS GUN! The CC XD40 and XD9 are both great guns to conceal carry and i think this would be more in thr relm of a GREAT service pistole! Now if they would just do a ported version to compensate the muzzel lift and get it shooting a bit straighter with less recoil, THAT WOULD BE THE ULTIMATE PISTOLE!

salvador31c
November 11, 2006, 03:08 PM
Doesnt seem to be much more compact To Me?
I'll Have to play with one myself

stockett
November 11, 2006, 03:54 PM
salvador31c , i think that pic is of a compact 5" and a compact 4". not a compact compared to a full size.

If you enjoyed reading about "XD .45 acp...... COMPACT" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!