Glock Perfection!

[herkyguy]

Nothing against Glocks, I own and shoot them. But with my XD pistols, I've worked into my return to holster routine a way to lift my palm off the grip safety as the gun goes into the holster. Thus, even if something snagged the trigger, it won't go bang.

 

[GLOOB]

I had to go back and read the OP just to figure out what this thread was about, anymore, lol.

Honestly, the grip safety is probably a minor detail when it comes to XD vs Glock. The ergonomics, trigger, bore axis, ease of detail strip, and which gun you shoot better are all probably bigger factors for the average consumer.

There are lots of handguns that have no manual safety nor grip safety, yet people still buy them, carry them, shoot them, and even put them into holsters without shooting their legs off.

There are also a small percentage of people that have had problems with the grip safety on their 1911 or XD not activating when they intended to fire. There are bigger aftermarket grip safeties. Some XD owners pin their grip safeties down, even. They prefer XD for reasons other than the grip safety.

 

[FireInCairo]

Nothing against Glocks, I own and shoot them. But with my XD pistols, I've worked into my return to holster routine a way to lift my palm off the grip safety as the gun goes into the holster. Thus, even if something snagged the trigger, it won't go bang.

Exactly. I think if you try this type of safety you will be sold on it, especially if you are a Glock guy.

 

[Theohazard]

Nothing against Glocks, I own and shoot them. But with my XD pistols, I've worked into my return to holster routine a way to lift my palm off the grip safety as the gun goes into the holster. Thus, even if something snagged the trigger, it won't go bang.

I can see a potential problem with this technique: If you rely on the grip safety to prevent an accidental discharge due to a trigger snag, what happens if you're holstering a Glock but accidentally treat it like an XD?

In my opinion, it's much better to rely on safe gun handling instead of safeties. After all, what happens if the safety fails or if you're shooting a gun without a safety?

 

[GLOOB]

^Good point.

Perhaps there should be a fifth universal gun safety rule:

1. Treat every gun as if it is loaded
2. Never point a gun at anything you don't intend to destroy
3. Never put your finger on the trigger until you are ready to fire a shot
4. Always be sure of your target and what is beyond your target


5. Treat every gun as if the safety is off

I've only shot one XD, in .357SIG. Maybe that caliber is a bad representative. That gun rocked around like a yoyo. It was one of the top two pistols I've ever shot for perceived height of bore axis. The other was a .45 ACP SW99.

Nothing wrong with that, and I shot both of the above pistols just fine. If I had started out shooting XD's, I would probably be avoiding Glocks. The feel is very different, and the grip safety is nothing but a footnote.

 

[Krieg]

I feel like the argument against safeties on this thread has revolved around not needing them if you're really careful.

Let's say you are in the market for a pet to have around the house to cuddle with on the couch at night. You do your research and find out you can go with a bobcat or a regular housecat. You learn through hours of reading the internet that a properly trained human owning a properly trained bobcat is a perfectly safe scenario if you are perfectly careful all the time. After spending time cuddling with both you realize that for your proposes they work equally well, but the bobcat has that extra cool factor with your friends.

So, you buy the bobcat, right? Heck no. Even if the bobcat is considered "safe," it's still not as safe as a housecat and the housecat serves 100% of your purpose in owning the pet.

If two things can serve the exact same purpose and both fit you well, but one is safer, why wouldn't you get the safer one?

 

[Theohazard]

If two things can serve the exact same purpose and both fit you well, but one is safer, why wouldn't you get the safer one?

I understand what you're trying to say, but you're missing my point and therefore your metaphor doesn't fit here. The point is that sometimes a safety can make a gun LESS safe, and that's because often people rely on the safety too much. So they don't handle the gun as carefully as they should, and that means they're not practicing safe gun handling skills; they're increasing their chances of having an ND if the safety fails, or it happens to be disengaged, or if they're handling a different gun that doesn't have a safety.

Yes, if everyone handled guns with safeties the exact same way as they handled guns without safties, then your metaphor would be applicable here. But they often don't.

 

[Krieg]

You're probably dead on, but that's a gun handling problem and not a gun problem, just like someone holstering with their finger on the trigger.


That said, there are perfectly acceptable reasons for buying a Glock over [insert other gun here].

 

[Theohazard]

You're probably dead on, but that's a gun handling problem and not a gun problem, just like someone holstering with their finger on the trigger.

Exactly, I'm not saying that it has anything to do with the gun directly, only with how some people use the gun. And I've seen too many people who were used to things like magazine disconnect safeties and manual thumb safeties, and so they practiced bad gun handling techniques and just relied on those safeties to make their guns safe instead of actually practicing safe gun handling techniques.

 

[RuggedAK]

Yep XDs are awesome. XD beats Glock everytime.

 

[goon]

For the XD series itself, I like the mid-sized version better. But the extension on the magazine of the OP's subcompact looks like it has some promise. I've only shot the .40 version in the subcompact size, but I'd prefer 9mm. I don't think there is enough difference between the two calibers to really make a difference in their effectiveness.

My preference for the XD would be for the ergonomics. I don't feel that Glocks are particularly unsafe, but they don't fit my hand as well. Another safety feature doesn't hurt, but it's not a deal breaker either. Along with that, Gen 4 Glock reliability issues... and the fact that Glock took the guns it made its name with in 9mm and made them unreliable. A company that does that... Yeesh.

 

[george burns]

I don't like saying that one plastic gun is superior to another to any great extent. The reason is that given enough time and money they can all be made to shoot equally well, and more than enough for a carry gun.
If you start comparing them to steel alloy and aluminum frame guns with more parts and more cost, then it makes sense to be particular.
But I can take any of the top brands of polymer guns, and shoot them about the same given time and a few bucks. I always stuck with glock, only because I can't find a good reason not to.
If you are shooting an Ed Brown or even a high end CZ, it is going to shoot tighter groups, but the Glock will keep shooting in mud snow or lack of cleaning, they are different animals. And if you notice the handgun per say has taken on a pocket carry role for about 75% of those who carry daily, other than barbecue guns and Going to a friends house, or at work, I don't see many folks carrying a full-size gun anymore. My Glock 30 S, was on my hip one day last week, and I couldn't wait to get home and slip into a pm9, and a remora.
The Glock 30 S is only 20 ozs, hard to beat for 11 rounds of 45, you would need 2 1911's, or be able to reload faster than firing straight through .And with at least 1 mag and usually 2 mags of G21 variety with me, I say that's about all you could ever need unless you stumbled onto an invasion.
They still are handguns and have their limitations. That's also why although I love to shoot 1911's, for the size and weight, they make no sense to carry as a EDC. You can get a high quality polymer gun for half the price with 2x the ammo and half the weight

 

[Catshooter]

Mr. Burns,

It is terribly rude of you to insert so much logic into this thread.

Another point in Glocks favor is the after market/spare parts support. Glock is number one in that field and number two is a long ways down.


Cat

 

[JeeperCreeper]

The one thing I love about the Glock is that it is microwave and dishwasher safe. It keeps my leftovers as fresh as they were when they were prepared!

 

[TarDevil]

often people rely on the safety too much. So they don't handle the gun as carefully as they should, and that means they're not practicing safe gun handling skills....

Yes, if everyone handled guns with safeties the exact same way as they handled guns without safties, then your metaphor would be applicable here. But they often don't.

"Often?" You used the word twice. If you in fact witness this happening "often," I take your word for it. I have quite a few friends who have guns with safeties, and they're quite careful. I certainly don't see it "often."

 

[Theohazard]

often people rely on the safety too much. So they don't handle the gun as carefully as they should, and that means they're not practicing safe gun handling skills....

Yes, if everyone handled guns with safeties the exact same way as they handled guns without safties, then your metaphor would be applicable here. But they often don't.

"Often?" You used the word twice. If you in fact witness this happening "often," I take your word for it. I have quite a few friends who have guns with safeties, and they're quite careful. I certainly don't see it "often."

When I say "often", I mean "several times a week". I've worked at two different LGS/range combos over the last two-and-a-half years, and I see this kind of thing all the time. Your friends probably know how to handle guns safely and therefore it doesn't matter if they have a safety or not. But all you have to do is work behind the counter at a gun shop for a week and count the number of times a customer points a gun at you with their finger on the trigger. In my experience, once you hand a Glock or an M&P to that type of customer and they find out that those guns don't have a manual safety, they usually become a little more careful all of a sudden. And at that point it's a little easier to convey the fact that safe gun handling makes a gun safe, not a manual safety, and then show them how to do it.

 

[herrwalther]

5. Treat every gun as if the safety is off

No need. If you treat a firearm as if it were loaded (as we should) there is no need for treating it like the safety is off. Besides, some people forget the four rules anyway, five would complicate it more.

Grip safeties have their place, otherwise they wouldn't be around. I prefer firearms with grip safeties as it is a passive safety you don't have to think about and it teaches good habits for proper grip.

 

[GLOOB]

But... if you use that logic, then manual safeties are not needed...

Unless you are talking about a firearm that isn't going to be carried in a holster and/or is not drop safe without it.

Grip safeties have their place, otherwise they wouldn't be around.

Yes, on a 1911 there's a grip safety which is important. One of the reasons behind it (which only JMB would know for sure as to original intent) is to prevent the trigger from pulling thru inertia if you drop the pistol and it hits the ground muzzle up. That might be one reason the 1911 has a grip safety. You can argue against it, I suppose.

Then there are all those other guns with a grip safety, like the XD, ... and, ... uh.. Well, there's the XD.

 

[sgt127]

Well for me I don't like that grip safety. What happens if someone was bashing your head in and a strong grip isn't possible?

If your barely conscious and a limp grip is all you have to lift you gun to protect a family member, you'll sure wish you had a good revolver

Fixed that for you.

 

[medic15al]

The XD corrected the Glock's mistakes.


The H&K VP9 corrected all of the striker fired guns mistakes....

 

[Vonderek]

The pic of the XD in the OP reminds me of a lot of homes in Hialeah where the owners added a second floor without a building permit.

 

[JR24]

No need. If you treat a firearm as if it were loaded (as we should) there is no need for treating it like the safety is off.

+1

The XD corrected the Glock's mistakes.

From a former Glock hater and XD lover... I disagree.

 

[Jesse H]

My first carry gun was an HS2000. I was a poor college student and these things were under $300. I've put over 8K rounds through it and still have it. Ended up buying an XD40 subcompact and XD45.

I became a cop and was issued a Glock 22. Took me a while to acclimate to the grip angle, but I appreciated the noticeably lower bore axis. And I much preferred the cleaner trigger and shorter reset.

It ruined me for my XD's. I've already replaced the XD40SC with a G27 and I'm looking to replace the XD45 for a G19.

 

[NOMI WASP]

One thing to remember about the so called "Glock Leg" Glocks are issued to more officers than any other pistol so of course there would be more ND's than any other firearm.


The mods must me be Glock haters too because any other thread created to deliberately bash a product would be closed with a message "THR is not a place to bash a company or product, do you have a question about something?"

 

[FireInCairo]

I'm not bashing. I'm a Glock fan. From the outset I made the point that Glock still has the XD when it comes to internal design as the Glock is the easiest gun to work on I've ever encountered.

I just think the XD is a Glock done better. So, Glocks are good, XD's are better.