FNP-45 or XD-45?

[schmeky]

I am "thinking" about a new 45. I like the XD & FNP. I am leaning toward the FNP. The FNP costs more, but I wonder if it delivers more for the money?

I know XD owners will say XD, and FNP owners will say FNP. But I want to know how good the out-of-the-box triggers are in DA/SA (FNP), versus the striker fired XD. How is the accuracy at say 25 yards from a sandbag rest? Ergonomics, overall quality, and perceived durability?

Inquiring minds want to know

 

[legion3]

I owned both, I own neither now.
FN has the more prestigous name but I prefered the 5" XD tactical model.
For many reasons I would go back to the XD in 45 over the FN. I like the simplicity of shooting striker fired weapons.

 

[jem375]

I had my 4" XD 45ACP out at the range this last weekend and it shot great, I haven't shot the FN but I am sure it shoots good also. Take the best deal and buy it, either way I don't think you will have any problems with the handgun you decide on...

 

[LancerMW]

i dont care for the XD honestly. and like FN, but i would take the XD..M model prolly, over the FNP just because i hate DA/SA triggers (which is why ive probably never been able to hold onto a Sig)

 

[Mr. T]

I have the XD in .45 ACP and the simplicity and ease of maintenance of that gun caused me to buy another one for my wife in 9mm Luger. They are accurate at 25 yards no problem. My wife held a 5" group with 10 shots at the 25 yard range with her 9MM the second time she shot it and I would say that I probably very from 4" to 5" groups at 25 yards with my 45. I think they're great guns -- I'd tell you to go with the XD!

 

[Mr.510]

I have zero experience or opinion on FN. I do carry an XD45C and like it very much. I've got somewhere past 7k rounds through it without a single failure to function. This is not a fluke or a lie, it's typical with these guns. I carry it dry, with no lube whatsoever and it functions this way 100%. I do this because I have a fabrication shop and abrasive dust and smoke get into everything. If the gun has oil I have to detail strip it every couple of weeks to get rid of what becomes an abrasive slurry. When it's dry I simply field strip it and blow it out with an air nozzle once a week. I oil it before going to the range and clean it thoroughly with brake cleaner when I get home.

Many people aren't impressed with the stock trigger as the over travel and reset are pretty long. I'm in this camp. The gun is fully functional and plenty accurate right out of the box, but the more rounds I put through it the less I liked the reset distance. I had Springer do a combat/carry trigger job on it and now it's simply amazing. One of my "1911 snob" friends put a couple mags through it and now he's thinking about getting one exactly like mine for EDC. The gun really has no weaknesses. It's accurate, reliable, comfortable, durable, and affordable - even with a trigger job.

 

[aftCG]

@Lancer,
Not to hijack this thread but I totally discount the DA/SA thing. I bought my first Sig fifteen years ago and I never shoot DA.

I carry with a round in the chamber and thumb the hammer back on the way up, just like an old wheel gun. I know, the hammer looks stubby but the task is very easy and safe in real life.

Currently I have just Sigs. I'll get another 1911 soon just because John Browning was a flipping genius and we should all own one. But to get back on topic, I favor the FNP.

 

[schmeky]

The DA/SA is not a problem for me. I never shoot DA anyway and the FN can be carried cocked and locked. Does the FN have conventional rifling? Can it shoot LSWC ammo?

Is the XD the same? I have read some reports saying the XD is not reliable with SWC's. Practically all I shoot in .45 is the 200gn H&G.

 

[jtdo]

no experience with the fn, but i love my xd45 tac.

 

[wditto]

I love the FNP , I like having a hammer as I am a 1911 freak - like the trigger better too - oh, had an XD and traded it with lotz of cah for the FNP.....very accurate, very low recoil, wish I had another in the dark earth color to go with my stainless....

 

[ckone]

For me .45 = a 1911 and striker-fired = a Glock.

That said... After 1000's of rounds through both styles: a striker-fired gun will never be as easy to shoot accuratly as a good old hammer in SA, and only one of them will print "a little to the left" if you're any less than perfect in your technique.

 

[The Wiry Irishman]

I've got an FN, it shoots great, I shoot it great, but I don't like for personal subjective reasons (trigger could be better, I don't like plastic guns)

The FN fits my hands well, but the shape combined with its sheer size means that its a love it or hate it sort of thing. I find XD ergonomics superior. The FN frame has a lot of flex to it, while the XD is sturdier. The XD has a good trigger for a striker fired gun. The FNP has the potential for an excellent trigger, it breaks very cleanly, but the thin, flexy plastic trigger they use makes that very difficult to feel. The DA pull is smooth, but rather heavy, so it ends up not much better than a striker gun. The reason I don't like the FNP so much anymore is the trigger issue, and I don't like the double/single transition, and while the USG model has a safety, the engagement and disengagement is very mushy, not positive at all. I wouldn't be comfortable carrying it or leaving it on my night stand in a house full of cats cocked and locked. Also, the FNP is the softest shooting .45 I've ever shot.

Either would be a good choice, but I think what it comes down to is do you like striker fired or hammer fired guns. The triggers for all intents and purposes are the same between the two, but I still maintain that if they made a metal trigger for the FNP, the pull would be above average for a service gun. Something else to keep in mind is that there's a few smiths out there that will do XD trigger work. There's not much out there in terms of FNP smithing and aftermarket parts.

I chose the FNP because I like hammer guns. Its lost its magic because I found I don't like plastic guns, I'd prefer not having a first DA shot on a defensive gun, and that bendy plastic trigger really gets to me. The FNP is a great gun and I shoot very well with it, but it just has no soul. I can't love it. You can kinda tell by my round counts. FNP: 1300. All my other pistols, including three I bought after the FNP: 3000-6000. I'll be selling it next year to fund the build of a 2011 I just put a deposit on.

 

[1SOW]

schmeky:

I know XD owners will say XD, and FNP owners will say FNP. But I want to know how good the out-of-the-box triggers are in DA/SA (FNP), versus the striker fired XD. How is the accuracy at say 25 yards from a sandbag rest? Ergonomics, overall quality, and perceived durability?

Wild guess: I suspect this gun isn't earmarked for personal protection and is primarily being purchased for the joy of shooting.

The XD is what it is. It has close to the same grip angle as the 1911. IMO it is boring! It's a top gun for personal defense. Nothing about it screams high quality but it is extremely reliable. Nothing about it catches everyone's eye at the range.
Given the same length barrel as the FN, it'll probably shoot comparable groups at 25yds. In my experience, the 4" Service XD isn't the easiest gun to shoot 8" plate racks at 25 yds, but it will do it. IMO the inexpensive trigger job that shortens the reset would help the gun.

What the XD DOES do is keep it simple and SURE. It shoots what you point at when you press the trigger. It does that when you take it out of the box, when you haven't cleaned it in way too long, or when you try whatever ammo is laying around within reach.

My son has won a number of Limited 10 USPSA trophies with his; and with the ammo shortage, has shot whatever he could lay hands on doing it including lead reloads.

I like guns with hammers like the FN. My fun gun is a CZ DA/SA. They have character and pzzaz. They are 'tunable'. IMO they will shoot faster for most shooters. In SA mode they are easier to shoot accurately than a striker fired XD. I suspect from a bench it will be easier to shoot a tight group with the FN than with the XD, given the same length bbl and comparable sights.

On the other hand, hammered guns usually need a little (maybe more than a little) TLC break-in for trigger-sear and associated linkages to seat nominally. There are more moving parts to balk or fail. It may need to be kept 'cleaner' than the XD. Steel guns with hammers are heavier, which is both good and bad. Good for target shooting.

The next post will probably state the reverse opinions of mine. Therein lies your problem.

Go with what's fun for your use. Always have enjoyment high on the list, except maybe for self protection guns.

 

[Jed Carter]

The FN is manufactured by a company that it's main concern is military weapons, Springfield used to make weapons for military use and now is a consumer oriented company. The graphics all over the XD are a big turn off for me, I actually have to like the way a pistol looks before I plunk down the money, I would not hesitate to buy the FN HP 9mm, however if you could get the FNP 45 without the rail it would be my choice for a tupperware .45. I do like my Springer 1911s but will not personally consider an XD, to me its just a really ugly pistol, not ugly like a SIG P226, a real "weapon" but ugly like it was designed by the marketing department not engineering and R&D. In an non plastic, non 1911 I would look to the CZ 97B, or a SIG P220 without the rail. For polymer frame pistols FNP45, H&K USP 45, Glock G21, with Glock having the most available parts and excellent, cheap magazines. The XD is a good pistol I am just repulsed by it's looks and the fact that every smooth surface has something on it, grooves, graphics, etc. Springfield may have a more consumer oriented company and this may not be a bad thing if you have need.

 

[JohnBT]

Jed, I think you're confusing the Springfield Armory that the government closed in 1968 with the family that bought the name and started their very own Springfield Armory in 1974. They're completely unrelated operations, as much as SA would like you to think they're related in some way.

I bought a black FNP-45 USG

John

 

[f150]

i am a long time ago 20 year law enforcement officer and after reading the pros and con of other shooters talking about how weapons look.i have many pistols and rifles that i have collected over the years and i have both the fnp-45 and xd-45 tactical.i like both of these weapons and i can shoot the bulls eye out of a target with both of them.it all comes down to how the gun feels to the individual.if you have a carry permit carry the weapon that you shoot well and that is comfortable for you no matter what make.

 

[Mr.Blue]

I currently own both, as well as a CZ 97BD (I know Schmecky is a CZ guy like me). I'm a .45acp guy, and the XD45 Tactical is my favorite (not including my 1911's). I trust it more than any handgun that I own. It is my nightstand gun. Here is my comparison:

FNP 45 USG (I Added Trijicon Night Sights) vs. Springfield XD45 Tactical.

Accuracy - both are very accurate out to 25 yards. I personally shoot the XD 45 slightly better.

Trigger - DA/SA of the FNP is sweet. The DA is smooth, but has a long steady pull. SA breaks crisply. For a striker fired gun, the XD trigger is good. There is some mushiness, but it breaks the same each time. Personally, I prefer a hammer to a striker set up.

Ergonomics - Both are big guns, but the XD 45 feels smaller than it is. Even my wife and her small hands can shoot the XD comfortably. The FNP grip and length of pull is too big for some. If your hand can fit the CZ 97, you'll be fine. Overall, the XD ergonomics are significantly better for me. The XD45 just points perfectly for me. It's grip angle is similar to 1911's and CZ's which is perfect for me.

Reliability - I had some stovepipes with the FNP in the first 100 rounds, but it has totally stopped. It also had a tendency to eject shells back into your face and on your head. After break in, this has also stopped. The XD45 has not had one malfunction in around 3k rounds.

Looks - FNP hands down, but that is subjective.

Recoil - Both offer mild recoil.

Customer Service - Springfield by a mile.

Capacity- 2 or 1 more for FNP, depending on mag. To me, 13+1 is plenty.

Sights - I changed out the FNP sights for trijicons. I left the XD sights alone. I liked the XD sights better. The sights just line up perfectly for me. That's part of the ergonomics advantage.

Aftermarket Support - XD by a mile. While the FNP 45 is a great pistol, FNP doesn't seem to care about supporting it. They offer very little accessories for it.

Conclusion - You can't go wrong with either gun. While I want to like the American made FNP better, the XD makes that impossible.

 

[Mr.Blue]

Some guy says the XD 45 is ugly, but advocates the Glock 21? Glock is the epitome of ugly. I also think he has the XD confused with the XDm. The XD doesn't have graphics all over it. The XDm does.

 

[CZ57]

I faced the same dilemma a little over a year ago except that I was comparing the FNP to the XDm. The standard XDs in .45 ACP are known to dislike 200 gr. SWCs, a bullet I shoot a lot. I checked the FN forum and found more than a few function problems that steered me towards the XDm. Customer service was also something of a question in my mind. The XDm is designed to shoot the 200 gr. SWC and mine functions 100% with those I've shot. For me, the interchangeable back-straps were an ideal feature. I am one of those that believe that the match grade barrel of the XDm is more than marketing hype. My pistol is match accurate.

I knew that neither pistol's triggers would satisfy me so I wanted the availability of an upgrade with either pistol. I read many high endorsements for the Powder River Precision trigger kit (there are others) for the XD/XDm, so long story short, I ordered an XDm along with a Powder River Precision "Match Easy Fit" trigger kit. I installed the kit before taking the pistol to the range, although I dry fired it quite a bit. I have very little take-up, minimal reset and no over-travel. I have a trigger that will rival many custom 1911 triggers. Break is around 4#.

I bought the XDm sight unseen. I had previous experience with a 5" Tactical in .40 S&W and found the trigger reach a bit short for me so I knew the interchangeable backstraps on the XDm would be a bonus. I have large hands with long fingers and use the largest backstrap on my XDm. I shot about 400 rounds with the medium insert installed and found it a tad short. I never have installed the smallest insert but believe that those with smaller hands would have no problem with the trigger reach.

So, I favor the XD over the FNP, but I prefer the XDm over the XD. The prices are comparable, maybe a little less for the XDm vs. the FNP. As far as a striker fired system goes, it has a faster lock-time than a hammer fired pistol. That's why so many people favor the Glock. The G-21 was also a consideration as I liked the large grip size but what turns me off of Glocks is that they don't relieve ejection ports and I would have had to buy another barrel to successfully shoot cast lead. So for me, it's the XDm and I couldn't be more pleased.

 

[jef2015]

I have the FNP 45 and think it's a great gun. I like the high cap, low recoil and have had no problems. It does not have polygonal rifling such as glocks.
The main complaint I have heard from the fn forum is it doesn't feed winchester white box ammo well. The problem seems to be variances in the coal and tight tolerances of the magazines.

 

[KenW.]

I have a BHP, a GP-100, two 1911s, and three XDs. The FN (P, S, X, whatever) is on my short list to be next. Either that or a Ruger SR40c.

 

[danweasel]

I used to have a 5" XD .45 but I traded it for an FNP40. I was trying to consolidate calibers and all so I could get ammo in bulk more often. The FNP is a great gun, accurate and never had a malfunction. Of course, the XD was accurate too and it only stove-piped once on me.

I miss my XD.