Glock 21 vs. Springfield Armory XD(m)


PDA






CTGunner
August 4, 2012, 02:57 PM
Can you help me understand the differences between the Glock .45 and the SA XD and XDm. I'm looking for a High Capacity .45 without an external safety and I'm included to go with either a Glock 21 or a Springfield. Springfield seems to have more options - like the tactical etc. but I know the 21 has been around for a while and seems to be known for solid reliability and durability. Thanks for the opinions.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 21 vs. Springfield Armory XD(m)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Inebriated
August 4, 2012, 03:07 PM
Depends on which one you shoot better.

Glocks are simpler. They have less that can go wrong, they have a larger aftermarket, a crisper trigger with better reset (in my experience), and the gun feels like it's lower in the hand than the XDm (for me, anyway).

The only reason I could see someone choosing an XDm over a Glock 21 is if they just shoot it better, or they like the grip safety. They hold the same capacity, the Gen 4 21's and XDm's both are usable for lefties, and they are both generally very reliable. So you can't really go wrong with either. Just make sure you handle and shoot both first.

Manny
August 4, 2012, 05:06 PM
I had a 9mm XDM and found it to be a very good gun, but I switched to Glock for several reasons:
-Glocks have a lower bore axis which causes the gun to recoil more straight back with less muzzle flip.
-I found the Glock trigger to be much better, shorter, crisper & lighter. It's also very slightly closer, not much but just enough, which helps with me with proper finger placement on the trigger.

I did like the XDM grip more in shape, though the length of it is too big for CCW IMHO, a consequencea of that wonderful 19+1 capacity. The shape of the slide on the XDM with the taper made grasping for racking easier as well. I also like the Bomar type sight on the new 5.25 alot, very nice, not as happy with the standard sights.The sights on the Glock unless you go with nite sites are basically throw away. The XDM barrel is also just fine for lead bullets, not so the Glock.

Myself I'd go with a Glock knowing I'd be adding an aftermarket barrel & sights. The better trigger and lower bore axis offset the things I like about the XDM enough to still make it my preference.

ShootALot523
August 4, 2012, 10:54 PM
I have Glocks, M&Ps and an XDM 45 compact. The xdm does not have a lot of muzzle flip. It pushes straight back. The ergonomics are exceptional and for a compact 45 it is accurate and is comfortable to shoot. I bet the full size is just awesome. My 9mms jump up more than the 45. Hold an XDM before you buy a Glock. There are still so many people who buy Glocks just because there friends buy them they think it's the only reliable gun, they see them all over and are brainwashed by all the glock talk. Find unbiased articles about both guns, hold both, try to shoot both. The XDM is a more refined gun in my opinion. A lot of people will tell you to get a Glock, but yet have no experience with other guns. I think Sprinfield looked at what Glocks were lacking and really put out an amazing gun. I'm not impressed by the changes on the Gen 4 glocks. The replaceable backstraps suck compared to the M&P or XDM and I don't care for the finish. I like the Gen 3's better. There are no reliability issues with the xdm and plenty of accessories are available. People had hesitations when the M&Ps cam out too. Now you're starting to see more M&Ps, XDs, XDMs and FNs at the ranges. You can't go wrong with any of the above, including Glocks, but I love my XDM so much, I'd like to get one in 9mm now.

CTGunner
August 4, 2012, 11:02 PM
I have Glocks, M&Ps and an XDM 45 compact. The xdm does not have a lot of muzzle flip. It pushes straight back. The ergonomics are exceptional and for a compact 45 it is accurate and is comfortable to shoot. I bet the full size is just awesome. My 9mms jump up more than the 45. Hold an XDM before you buy a Glock. There are still so many people who buy Glocks just because there friends buy them they think it's the only reliable gun, they see them all over and are brainwashed by all the glock talk. Find unbiased articles about both guns, hold both, try to shoot both. The XDM is a more refined gun in my opinion. A lot of people will tell you to get a Glock, but yet have no experience with other guns. I think Sprinfield looked at what Glocks were lacking and really put out an amazing gun. I'm not impressed by the changes on the Gen 4 glocks. The replaceable backstraps suck compared to the M&P or XDM and I don't care for the finish. I like the Gen 3's better. There are no reliability issues with the xdm and plenty of accessories are available. People had hesitations when the M&Ps cam out too. Now you're starting to see more M&Ps, XDs, XDMs and FNs at the ranges. You can't go wrong with any of the above, including Glocks, but I love my XDM so much, I'd like to get one in 9mm now.

Thanks for this opinion. I recently picked up a SA XDs and I'm very impressed with it. My thought is to purchase a full size XD or XDM in .45 to keep at home so that my carry and home defense weapons are the same platform.

I do have a Glock 19 and honestly I had some issues with it right after I purchased it. It's a newer Gen 3 and it would eject casings straight back into my face. I sent it back to Glock and they replaced the ejector with a new design. It works but the whole affair has me feeling less than totally impressed.

I'm going to take your advice and handle the XDm before deciding.

Grunt
August 4, 2012, 11:46 PM
Well, have you considered an H&K USP-45 with a LEM trigger? Yes, they are more expensive but you get what you pay for. I used to have an S&W SW99 that went down the road fairly quickly and right now I have a pretty good selection of .45 ACP pistols to include a Ruger P90, EAA Witness full size steel frame, Auto-Ordnance 1911, S&W M&P45 full size, Kimber 1911 Royal Carry, Sig P220, Glock 21, XD-45 Tactical, Springfield WWII USGI 1911 and a Taurus 24/7 OSS in the near future being planned as well as my USP-45 and while I have yet to try the OSS, I haven't found an H&K-killer yet. When it comes to accuracy, reliability, ruggedness, ergonomics and overall quality, nothing yet has managed to knock the USP off the top of the hill. Maybe the Taurus 24/7 OSS will manage to knock the king down a notch and it does have some attractive features like the DA/SA trigger with re-strike capability (something novel in a sriker fired pistol), a great grip from what I tried in the store and many have reported exceellent accuracy in their models but I have yet to be see this for myself against the other models. Might be a great gun but one thing is certain and that is that it has been discontinued so that may be a problem in later years. Guess we'll see in the weeks to some how well it compares to the others.

crackleback
August 4, 2012, 11:46 PM
ShootALot523:

Is there enough difference in the trigger and the match barrel in the XDM's to warrant buying instead of the XD's? For those that are use to the Glock finish the XD seems much closer.

rodinal220
August 5, 2012, 12:13 AM
Glock 21
large grip that favors those with large hands
cheap plastic throw away sights
accurate and reliable design
cannot shoot lead bullets per the manufacturer

XDm
fits average size hands better
accurate and reliable
better sights:either fixed steel or fully adjustable in the 5.25 version from the factory.
can shoot lead bullets
the higher bore axis thing is overrated IMHO.

I have both but I shoot the XDm more because it fits my hand better.I shoot a lot of cast bullets and Glocks says no so I don't.

Skribs
August 5, 2012, 12:14 AM
The XDm has an ambidextrous mag release, G21 has a reversible magazine release. Means you can swap hands and still drop it with a thumb on the XDm, but have to take the thing apart to do it on the Glock.

XDm is heavier, which tames recoil, but has a higher bore axis, which makes muzzle flip worse.

Inebriated
August 5, 2012, 01:04 AM
The Glock has a lower bore axis, and the Gen 4 has the double recoil spring, further eliminating recoil. You won't find a softer-shooting .45 Auto.

CraigC
August 5, 2012, 12:08 PM
Shot Glocks for 15yrs, including a 21 when they first came out. I shot very well with them but the grip angle never agreed with me. Sold the 21, traded my 19 for a .45 XD Tactical and don't miss either one. The Springfield is more comfortable to hold, more comfortable to shoot, has more steel parts/less plastic, including steel sights and I don't miss the Glock trigger. Even with the lighter connector. Glocks are good guns but IMHO, overrated by their frothing fans and the XD is better. As is the M&P and USP.

Inebriated
August 5, 2012, 01:56 PM
*delete*

CTGunner
August 5, 2012, 02:16 PM
I went out today and checked out all my options (or at least most of my options).

I handled a used police trade in Glock 21 for $399. The grip was manageable but thick. The trigger was excellent. The gun was dirty and had clearly been holstered a lot but overall it was quite functional. It had night sights but I assume they were on their last legs.

I handled a used two tone XD .45 also for $399. The grip was very manageable and the gun was in great shape BUT the trigger was pretty bad compared to the Glock. It seemed to have a lot of take up and then a fair amount of creep before it broke. I don't know if I could get used to this.

I handled an XDm .45 for $650. It was nice but I had a hard time justifying the additional cost over the G21 or the traditional XD. Maybe it shoots a lot better but on the surface I couldn't see the value over the traditional XD.

I handled a full size HK USP .45. I really liked the feel (and the look of the gun). It seemed to be very very well constructed and it balanced nicely in my hand. It was selling for almost $900 new. My biggest issue with the HK that I don't know I could get over is the DA trigger pull. It was very very long and quite heavy, but the SA on it was pretty crisp.

I sort of want the HK despite the DA trigger pull on it but it's more money than two G21s! I'm at a cross roads and don't know what to do.

KTXdm9
August 5, 2012, 02:20 PM
I don't think you can go wrong with any of your choices. If I'm torn, it always comes down to what feels and shoots better for me. The HK was nice, but is it really worth double the price of the other two?

Hangingrock
August 5, 2012, 02:59 PM
I have A Glock G21 that I refer to as the “Polymer Brick”. Aesthetically pleasing most likely not but then functionality has a beauty that trumps pleasing to the eye. As for Ergonomics I have large hands and it’s a handful. I’ve never experienced a problem with it in a decade plus of ownership. I’ll allow that the G21SF felt better in the hand but not that much better as to change from the G21 to the G21SF.

I’m not going to quibble with those that own another brand of Polymer frame striker fired pistols.

CTGunner
August 5, 2012, 03:17 PM
The HK was nice, but is it really worth double the price of the other two?

I don't know. I suppose it's somewhat subjective? I'm guessing that a lot of folks here will have an opinion on it.

Kiln
August 5, 2012, 04:18 PM
I don't feel that the price difference of the HK or FN guns is worth it in comparison to cheaper guns that still work just as well with the same high level of quality. Some feel that the extra $200 is worth it and some don't, I'm definately among the latter.

Grunt
August 5, 2012, 04:34 PM
That's the great thing about the modularity of the H&K. I too wasn't thrilled about the stock trigger pulls in either my USP-45F or USP-40C. However, because there ae just so many variants you can turn them into, I put the match grade trigger into the .45 and a LEM trigger into the .40 and both have turned out well. Another thing to consider is the option of carrying them cocked and locked ala 1911. I do this during the winter months when the temperatues drop so low heavy ski gloves are needed to keep my hands warm enough and not loose fingers as well. When I have my USP-45 cocked and locked, there is no problem with getting at the trigger safely and have enough room to allow the trigger to reset as well. Sure, H&K is more expensive but little details like this make it well worth the price tag IMHO.

Manny
August 5, 2012, 04:35 PM
I should have been clearer in my earlier post, the original Glock 21's grip is too large for comfort IMO, but the 21 SF or 21 Gen4 are much more manageable. If I was stuck with the standard G21 grip I'd likely choose the Springfield too.

plouffedaddy
August 5, 2012, 05:06 PM
Both will be accurate and reliable. To me, the G21 gets the edge because of the lower bore axis which will result in faster follow up shots for most people. As all handguns are generally underpowered, follow up shot speed is important to me...

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 21 vs. Springfield Armory XD(m)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!