Springfield Armory XDM or Glock 17?

I have had the Glock 17 for over four years now, and it is my favorite and most reliable handgun. I like the ease of break down to clean and I love that it has never jammed. I just ordered it's baby brother, the Glock 26 for a carry gun.

'shooting little targets" is not the forte of any of the current crop of service type semi autos. And you kids really need to find out what a "match grade" barrel really is- there is no real standard that applies to the dimensional tolerances and the actual results you get would be influenced more by the ammunition used and the skill level of the operator.

Glock, Xd and the M&P series all perform well for the class of work they are intended for... service carry and self defense.

Reliability? Any of the pistols your find in a gun shop these days will run over 30 K if you brush out the barrel and keep the carbon cleaned up and lubrication on the moving parts. Really... do any of you folks really bury your carry gun in a mud hole then put it in a deep freeze and see if it still works.

most semi auto pistols will eat a recoil spring every 15 or 20 k and magazines tend to be the root of most "failures" in this class of firearm.

This is a classic Ford Vs. Chevy argument.

That being said, I'm a Glock guy, and have been for over 20 years.

But the correct response is: "Whichever fits your hand that you like best."

Both are good guns. I had some bad experiences with some early XD's which soured me on the design -- not the fault of the current gun and that's not YOUR experience. I'm sure they've ironed out the bugs by now.

Either one would be a good choice.

PS: I know what a "Match Grade" barrel is, and in my opinion, the XD in its factory configuration does not have one.

The Colt Gold Cup I had, had a match grade barrel.

Not that I could tell the difference, which is why I sold it.

The Springfield XD and the Smith and Wesson M&P are both making heavy inroads on the Glock's territory simply because they are superior products at with very similar prices.

The XDm is more expensive but has a superior trigger and a match grade barrel. While the barrel doesn't give the user much more, I do think the superior trigger is worth the increased cost.

I don't think you can go wrong with either. There is nothing high capacity about the stock magazine, you can get aftermarket higher capacity magazines for most firearms. I personally am not a Glock fan, but they are also one of the most reliable semi-auto handguns I have ever seen. See if you can compare them side by side and if possible shoot them. The feel is more important to me than just having it.

I easily could disagree with some issues human beings have reported. Reliability: definite, many police departments carry glocks. Many police officials under no circumstances could hearth their weapon outside of the prepare variety also. the position is the 92FS used? USMC and the US military. those human beings easily USE their guns. they have been used for 25+ years with close to 0 mess ups. they don't use the plastic marvelous in wrestle. no longer saying the Glock is undesirable, yet i'd believe the Beretta over the Glock in my opinion for those causes. Plus, because the Glock is unmarried action only, once you've a round chambered, the gun is one mild set off pull remote from firing. The Beretta, on the different hand, makes use of a twin action/unmarried action set off, and in twin action takes a lot more advantageous attempt to flow the set off. Accuracy: changed Glocks are used in competitions in all places. the foremost, notwithstanding, is they are changed. in case you look on the breakdown, the G17 is a 4.4" barrel, and the ninety 2 is a 5" barrel. this is no longer a lot enormous difference, yet an prolonged barrel commonly ought to have more advantageous stabilization of the bullet, and for that reason more advantageous consistent accuracy. Now, i'm no longer one hundred% on the ballistics of a 9mm, so i'm no longer effective how actual that must be for this reason. notwithstanding, both truly one of those guns are going to be tremendously a lot both precise. this is going to count number on the shooter. in my opinion, i will supply the Beretta the income, why? through next reason... Feels sturdy in hand that is any such own decision, this is no longer even humorous. I hate the feel of glocks and 1911s. i love how my ninety 2 feels. the perspective of the grip on the glock is way less gentle for me, so i do not get excitement from shooting them a lot, at the same time as i ought to shoot my Beretta all day. flinch there's a pair issues that impression flinch. Barrel length, basic weight, barrel alignment such as your arm. an prolonged barrel commonly reduces flinch, in this regard, the Beretta has a moderate income. basic weight, with the Glock being the "plastic marvelous" and the Beretta having an aluminum body, the Beretta will clearly have more advantageous mass to wrestle the flinch. very last is the ergonomics. This i'm no longer favourite with, as i have not easily held both again to again. So, going from my attitude, the Beretta ought to do more advantageous constructive on flinch, yet i'd be incorrect.

This is a Chevy V. Ford argument.

I am personally a Springfield fan, but I've owned a Glock. I just can't be as accurate with it. I fully admit that this is a preference issue.

They're both good guns.

Pick up both, and see which one feels better in your hand. They are both very reliable, but some people prefer Springfield's ergonomics over Glock's (and vice versa).

Back when I had both G22 and XD40- I liked the XD much better, it was a little heavier.

If I were buying today....I would get something like the FNX if weight was a factor, or a Sig 229 or CZ-75 if weight did not matter.