Will the new M&P 45 top the XD-45?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just talked to Smith on the phone.

I have liked my SW-MP .40 so well, that I called up and asked if they are increasing the Mag Capacity on the .45 The gentleman stated in the next month or two the 14 round mag is coming out and will actually be interchangeable with the current .45's. Good news for me, the MP is the first .45 I have found comparable to the XD, but I prefer the grip on the MP. I will wait to see how this plays out. But now I am definitely going to get myself an MP .45. I want to add a MP 9mm to my collection also. [my wife is going to have me sleeping with the dogs!] I just thought others would like to know Smith confirmed the Mag Cap increase. I know another THR member had emailed them earlier. In case you would ever have to use the weapon for defense it is nice to have the High Cap Mags.

The Best to All!

Frank
 
I used to own an XD-40. I would've liked to have bought an XD-45, but I didn't like the grip at all and I'm not a small guy. I ended up buying an M&P 45. Yes it's 'only' 10-rounds but I like the long and slim grip better. I also found it easy to transition to having shot a 1911 (long, thin grip and a thumb safety to rest my thumb over). Both are great pistols, but I really like the fact I can buy internal parts for my M&P from S&W, Brownells or Midway. ;)
 
Well, I'll weigh in. I too have compared at length the XD-45 and the M&P 45, and am settling on the Smith. Ergonomics won out on this one for me. The natural fit, feel, and point of the Smith, in addition to actually being able to work the magazine release tipped the scales. Looking forward to the release of 14 rnd. mags.
Back to the original question: Will S&W dethrone SA in the polymer pistol category? It seems to me that the G21 has the largest market portion, and therefore is the object to be dethroned. Will the new M&P surpass sales/contracts for the two established industry giants, Glock and Springfield Armory? I think it will, but only time will tell. I believe in light of the domestic manufacture of the Smith & Wesson, and the potential for prices to drop in the long run, as well as being the best fit as-is for the JCP project (which is now on hold, but could be revived), I believe the M&P is poised to take the industry by storm.
Now the real question: Do I invest in the guns, or in the company stock?
Guns. I can't shoot the stock.
So there's my opinion.
 
If the G21 grip feels too big, then try the G21SF. I considered the G21SF and XD45. The G21SF felt better. But, I have Glocks and wanted something different. So, I went for a Sig P220 CPO. It feels great in my hand. Only limitation really is the 8 round single stack magazine.

I would definitely buy the G21SF over the XD45. Haven't handled the M&P45 yet.
 
There you go Txgolfer45. With the exception of the 1911, the P220 has to be "the" .45. If your comparing high capacity, polymer framed .45s, I don't think you could go wrong with whatever fits your hand best. I really on the edge of my seat to see if SIG will produce a P250 in .45ACP. With the interchangeable grip frame you could possibly choose either a 8 round or high capacity gun with just the change of the grip frame and mags. It would be cool if SIG went that route.
 
I bought the Glock 21SF too... :cool:

The grip safety turned me off to the XD. It feels cheesy, like many 1911 grip safeties do. The 21SF felt better in my hand than the M & P, and the balance on the M & P didn't feel as natural for me as the Glock. I think the M & P will find many buyers and the XD will continue to sell well. My only suggestion to the "Glock grips feel like 2X4s" is to try the SF before condemning it.

In the end they're all polymer .45s designed to take a beating, and compared to a 1911 they're all ugly. :neener:

gp911
 
I don't think Smith and Wesson can sell the M&P .45 quick enough to catch the XD .45 sales. It came out later, and enough so that the popular XD had a good head start. Not to mention, the XD began coming out in the compact, compact tactical, and full tactical models. To be honest, I liked the service model XD, but enjoyed shooting the 5" model even more. It's a real soft shooter, like the Glock 21. Recently, I put my hands on a Glock 21SF. I may have to have one, it feels more like the G22/G31 than it does the usual G21. I really like that. I've also shot the 9mm, .40, and .45 versions of the M&P. The .40 version is easily one of the most impressive .40s I've ever shot. Other than the Sig 229, I like that particular .40 pistol better than just about ANY .40 pistol I've owned or shot, even the HK compact .40. The .45 was a great shooter too. It's more comfortable and shorter in the grip than the XD .45. It's also very accurate.

I think anyone who complains about the 10rd mags is missing the point. The idea was to keep the grip as close to the 9mm/.40 size as possible. To do that and maintain a high capacity, S&W would have to do what Springfield did: make the grip longer. Fortunately, Springfield listened to the masses and came out with the compact version, which had a shorter grip and 10rd capacity. Also, Springfield has the best mag-extension grip system. Far superior to glock. Their grip extensions slip right onto the mag and don't need screws or anything else to secure them. Sheer genius, and there's no pinching gap between the mag extension and the frame.

In the end, if you're okay with not having 13/14 rds of .45, then you'll probably love the M&P. If you just have to have it, but still don't want finger grooves, then you'll want either the XD, glock, or HK. If 8 rounds was enough, then 10 is even better.
 
Canadian CNG forum, poster with a range that rents pistols (heavy use):

Redleg:

Quote:
Quote:
But the glock will never break. The XD has had some problems.

Really?? That is news to me. I have Glocks breaking all the time. XDs too for that matter. I don't think the failure rates are much different. However the XD locking insert incorporates the frame rails, so it can be replaced. When the glock frame rails fail, the receiver is garbage.

Buy what you like, either is a good gun. The Glock finish is more durable, I'll give you that.

Quote:
Not sure what your point is here. I'm not discussing internet stories, I fix the guns on a commercial range. The Glocks do break, and unlike some folks that seem to think that Glocks are indestructable, I consider them about average in the quality gun market. However, as I said both are good guns, so I guess we are in agreement.

Quote:
This is true if I was buying all of them. I was not. I have run a score of Glocks on the range. Many have ended up as scrap. I have run a half dozen XDs, and except for minor part replacement they are all still oeprable. I have replaced many minor parts on both types of gun.

Quote:
No not really. A gun generally lasts a year here. A really good gun will last 2 or 3. Glocks last a year. They see a little more use than the XDs but in the order of 25% not 300%. The XDs have all been in use for more than a year. I don't have a single Glock that has been. Of course having said that, remember that I can replace a locking insert/frame rails on an XD, whereas the Glock goes in the garbage if the rails fail. The XDs do have issues with the trigger bar spring breaking. So do the Glocks, but I have replaced them with the NY units to solve that problem.

Quote:
This says more about the supply of parts than the durability of the guns. Most of the issues concern the trigger bar return spring. It is a small simple to replace part. Unfortunately SA has decided not to sell parts, and only to give them away through their distributor (R Nichols). Of course R Nichols has never been noted as a company that stocks parts. So there is a very slow part replacement system. Given a few years this will likely change, and parts will be more available
Click to expand...

I find the above quotes to be highly suspect. Unless his Glocks get fired many hundreds of thousands of times, or even a million times a year, I find his statements to be unbelievable, or at the very least he's exaggerating greatly. Hasn't he heard of Glock's excellent warranty? Why would he throw a gun in the trash instead of sending it back to Glock for repair? Those statements make no sense, and that is why I find them suspect.

OTOH, I found this quote from a reputable source. This guy really does run a gun rental range. He's Jim McLoud, owner of The Manchester Firing Line in NH.

"The rental program gives us a clear picture of what works and what doesn't. Every year, 100 percent of our range-rental Glocks survive to the end of the season with none requiring shipment to the factory for repairs. We might have to replace an occasional spring, but that's it. I can't say that for any other brand we rent."
Click to expand...

So how can two rental range owners have such different experiences with Glocks?
 
Its not so ODD that two ranges can give you different stories. It depends on how many customers they have, how many Glocks on the shelves, etc.....I don't see any reason to question the integrity of either guy. Just take what they said and learn what you may.
 
I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

Glocks: Often imitated, never duplicated. :)

That isn't to say they are the end all be all of handguns, but for the money, reliability, and history, they are more than tough to beat.
 
"Often imitated?"

Only with the Sigma, if you ask me. No other model is that much like the glock, with the exception that they use polymer. Just about every other manufactured polymer pistol has a competitive if not better grip/grip angle. None of them even disassemble the way the glock does. The closest one is Walther's P99. And even Walther knew that bigger, better pull tabs were needed for slide-from-frame disassembly.

Glock makes a fine gun in their own right. However, so do the other companies, and at least they have the brains to realize that you can make significant improvements and changes for the better. They also realize that "one size fits all (or none)" finger grooves is about as bull-headed as it gets. Now you can't even put a hogue slip-on grip on such a pistol with any decent effect unless you can get the hogue grooves to match up with the glock grip grooves. Stupid, if you ask me. Glock would be real smart to just get rid of that. Not only would it help the overall size of the grip, but a decently checkered front and back strap is all that's needed. Wonder why everyone else isn't going with the permanent finger grooves, huh?

Don't see anybody imitating THAT.
 
I like the M&P much better. Better ergonomics, American made, just a nicer all around gun IMHO. Was looking at an XD catalog...lots of nice pictures with large writing on the guns shown "Springfield Armory USA"..but no mention at all of "Made in Croatia". Seemed a tad deceptive to me.
 
Grip safety is just a marketing gimmick.

I can't document this, but I heard the grip safety was primarily added to get around Glock's patents and avoid an infringment suit. Has anybody else heard this?:confused:
 
I would not give up my XD for 3 M&Ps in any caliber. The XD is far superior in my mind. I am far more accurate with it. Better ergonomics. I would go as far as to say that the XD is one of the best autoloaders in history. Yes, I've shot the M&P ( in .40 ).
 
Oh well. The Glock 19 will be passed on to my grandchildren some day, with lots, and lots, and lots of wear - both holster and shooting. We'll see if my wife's M&P .40 compact will enjoy the same fate
Click to expand...

When civilization ends, all that will be left on the earth will be insects, and Glocks. ;)
 
40SW, glad you like your xd. Which one do you have?


Megjur, the XD was originally the HS2000, made in Croatia. Springfield bought the rights, and began the import process. Also, some changes were made before it became the XD.

As for the grip safety, I doubt this has anything to do with avoiding Glock's patents. First, the XD rails are different (more robust for starters), having one set being polymer, and the other metal. Second, the takedown is Sig-like, not Glock-like. Third, the firing pin indicator is Walther P99-like, nothing like Glock. Same with the loaded chamber indicator, which is like Ruger's P345. So, if anything, they would have offended all these other companies, not Glock. Besides, Springfield saw no need for all that wasted space in the backstrap (what WAS glock thinking), and kept it to a minimum....thereby maximizing the grip slimness, while not sacrificing the mag capacity.
 
I've owned a first generation G21 for many years. Finally sold it last weekend and replaced it with a XD-45 Compact. I also looked at the G21 SF and the Smith M&P .45. For what I wanted I preferred the XD. I've already put about 200 rounds through her without a hitch and it's proven to be quite accurate.

Maybe I didn't give the 21 SF enough of a chance but I really didn't see enough difference in the grip between my old 21 and it to make a big difference. IMO the grip is a distant 3rd place to me compared to the XD and M&P.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
M&P 45 vs XD 45 vs XDM 45
Replies
20
Views
5K
LiveLife
LiveLife
T
  • Locked
G21, XDM .45, M&P .45, decisions, decisions
Replies
24
Views
1K
WRGADog
W
S
  • Locked
.45 in M&P or XD?
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
B/CS_Shooter
B
V
  • Locked
XD vs. S&W M&P
2
Replies
49
Views
2K
Dobe
D
N
  • Locked
XD vs M&P
Replies
17
Views
1K
.357 magnum
3
Back
Top