Comparing the Springfield XD to the Glock...

[Balrog]

I have to admit I have always been a huge Glock fan, and not really ever paid attention to the XD line from Springfield, but on a whim I bought a Springfield XD45 Tactical (for $490, out the door), and I must say I am favorably impressed.

When I compare it to the Glock 21 and 21 SF, I feel the grip is more comfortable, because it seems a bit thinner at the place where your thumb wraps around. The trigger is at least as good, and maybe better. I like the grip safety, and the model I bought also has an external thumb safety like a 1911, which I like also.

The accuracy seems about the same. I was shooting both offhand at the range yesterday, and was doing about 3-4 inch groups at 50 feet.

I have not seen these two compared in terms of durability. Do you think the XD will hold up long term as well as a Glock?

 

[NG VI]

I think they are probably pretty equal for durability, now that HS/Springfield has gotten that little rust problem worked out. Haven't heard of XDs wearing out in outrageously short periods of time, people seem to be really happy with them. I don't have one, but the one I looked at a few years back looked very well made and felt good in the hand.

 

[hillbillydelux]

They are the same in alot of respects. XD/XDM IMHO is just a little better as far as ergonimics are concerned. As far as reliability goes I think they are both on an even playing field.

 

[Strahley]

I think to an average shooter, both will hold up as long as you take care of them

 

[CoRoMo]

The XD has been on the market long enough to have made points in the durability game. Had they all started failing prematurely, we'd all know by now. Of the members here, I think possum has used/abused his XD more than anyone else that I can recall, and he knows what a fighting pistol should withstand. I have had the same 5" XD45 w/thumb safety as you do, and it has stood up through everything that I've put it through.

 

[Mr.Davis]

This article replicates the Glock 20,000 round "torture test" with a Springfield XD. Cliff's Notes: The Springfield is every bit as durable as the venerable Glock.

I prefer the Springfield to the Glock because:
1) I like the addition of the grip safety
2) I prefer the grip angle of the XD
3) Even though neither will win a beauty pageant, I prefer the looks of the XD.

 

[REAPER4206969]

I bought a Springfield XD45 Tactical

I'm sorry.

 

[Balrog]

I'm sorry.

I would love to hear why you think so. Otherwise, your post is an unwanted waste of bandwith.

 

[Blues Brother]

I would love to hear why you think so. Otherwise, your post is an unwanted waste of bandwith.

dont take it personal, he dont care for my posts either.

 

[Balrog]

I didnt take it personal. If he has a legitimate reason I would love to hear. My guess is, he aint got nothing.

 

[ReloaderFred]

I was forced to carry a Glock 22 for the last year and a half before I retired, and I fired about 2,000 rounds through it before I walked out the door. Now that I am retired, I can carry anything I want.

With that said, I now own 6 XD's, and no Glocks, and carry an XD every day. I've got thousands of rounds through them and have never had one fail to feed, fire or eject. I would, and do, trust my life to them. Mine are in 9x19, 357 Sig, .40 S&W and .45 acp.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[pancakeofdoom]

i have both an xd9sc and a g26. the xd9 was used, and has 100 rnds through it with no hiccups on my part. previous owner replaced the recoil rod/spring, so i'm assuming the round count is decent, however it appears in good shape. that said, i've shot some beat to hell glocks that didn't fail either, so they're the same in my book, just different ergonomics.

that said, i like how the g26 carries, but i wouldn't mind havin an xd357 or an xd45 tac for hiking/car carry

 

[AOK]

I'm a Glock fan myself. Nothing against XD's though. A lot of people will swear by them just like many Glock owners. While there is no question they look nicer than a Glock, I'm not a fan of their grip safety. The only safety you should need is between your ears. If someone needs more than that I think they need to practice handling their weapon more.

 

[kwelz]

XDs have a number of issues that make them inferior to the Glock and M&P pistols.

 

[REAPER4206969]

While there is no question they look nicer than a Glock

 

[Jed Carter]

NICER? LOOKING? THAN? GLOCK? Well the XD does have a lot more graphics and grooves, if you like that sort of thing, both function very well. But I will stick with Glocks original ugly and skip the 4th gen with the XD looking grooves.

 

[silent flatulence]

I don't understand why anybody would fuss about a springfield when hk usp's exist. It's baffling that people would give it the time of day. It's like they actually made a concerted effort to engineer goofyness into it.

 

[legion3]

I agree that the XD45's grip is better (for me) that the glock 21 or 21 SF. If I still shot a 45ACP the XD would be my choice for grip size to capacity.

However, I prefer Glock 9mm's (and probably other calibers in Glock too, except 10mm) and the Glock trigger reset over the XD. The XD's reset is way better than the M&P but is not better than the Glock. I have just been shooting Glocks to long to want to change when Glocks are perfect for me.

Don't need the grip safety or the "free" stuff in the XD box. Don't need interchangeable backstraps, and other modern stuff.

The HS2000 is all grown up these days.

 

[legion3]

I don't understand why anybody would fuss about a springfield when hk usp's exist. It's baffling that people would give it the time of day.

$


HK's are overpriced according to many.
XD's are not.

 

[Elvishead]

I like the grip safety, and the model I bought also has an external thumb safety like a 1911, which I like also.

Yep, me too.

The accuracy seems about the same. I was shooting both offhand at the range yesterday, and was doing about 3-4 inch groups at 50 feet.

I agree!

I have not seen these two compared in terms of durability. Do you think the XD will hold up long term as well as a Glock?

Both are great guns, and will hold up just fine, but the heavier XD is just a little more desirable to me, but that doesn't mean I don't like Glock's.

 

[silent flatulence]

Hk's cost more for a reason. Guns and quality boots are two things I make sure I don't cheese out on. No inferior firearms with dopey beavertails for me. Carrying a gun that has a beavertail safety is like walking around with a shoehorn sticking in the heels of your shoes. It's just goofy. It's about time people got ashamed of themselves for tolerating this beavertail nonsense. They're about as useful as richard simmons after sundown.

 

[legion3]

Hk's cost more for a reason. Guns and quality boots are two things I make sure I don't cheese out on. No inferior firearms with dopey beavertails for me. Carrying a gun that has a beavertail safety is like walking around with a shoehorn sticking in the heels of your shoes. It's just goofy. It's about time people got ashamed of themselves for tolerating this beavertail nonsense. They're about as useful as richard simmons after sundown.

Great, that is your opinion but not everybody thinks like you.

 

[PAPACHUCK]

Azizza, please.....Do tell....

I personally believe the opposite is more apt to be true.

 

[harmon rabb]

have fired both, own a xd 45, wouldn't hesitate to own a glock, wouldn't hesitate to trust my life to either.

that said, i prefer the xd because:
1. better trigger. the glock trigger is quasi-DA (you're pulling the hammer back some before it releases), and the xd trigger is SA.
2. grip safety. i have no problem carrying DA pistols with one in the tube and the only 'safety' being to not pull the trigger, but i like the addition of the grip safety.
3. drop safety. can't see this being an issue with a xd, but my LCP once FELL OUT of my pocket holster onto a hard floor when i was sitting down. scared the **** out of me, and i promptly replaced the holster, but still nice to know such a safety is there
4. loaded chamber indicator. nice to have.

 

[Mr.Davis]

XDs have a number of issues that make them inferior to the Glock and M&P pistols.

And those are...? Come on people, this is downright trolling when you don't support your position.

Hk's cost more for a reason. Guns and quality boots are two things I make sure I don't cheese out on. No inferior firearms with dopey beavertails for me. Carrying a gun that has a beavertail safety is like walking around with a shoehorn sticking in the heels of your shoes. It's just goofy. It's about time people got ashamed of themselves for tolerating this beavertail nonsense. They're about as useful as richard simmons after sundown.

The grip safety ensures you have the gun properly in hand when the trigger is pulled. There are a number of reasons not related to negligence that the trigger could get yanked and discharge a Glock when a Springfield XD would remain safe. The grip safety does not in any way take away from the performance or reliability of the gun, and I can't even feel it when I'm holding the gun and shooting. So what's the issue?

I find it funny you object to the Springfield's grip safety, but are stumping for a gun that's twice as expensive and has a manual safety. If a grip safety isn't important, then surely one should not tolerate manual safeties either?