Glock or XD? Which one is better?

[Marc]

i love these threads, it likes a competition of who is skinnier micheal moore or rosey o'donnel

 

[kingnereli]

Good post king. For the sake of avoiding an argument ill just go ahead and give you the win. I dont want to start anything nor do I wish to spread misinformation around to anyone. Trust me, I know I dont know a lot about handguns, I dont mean to steer anyone wrong. All I wanted to say was that I like glocks. I got off on a tangent about crap ive read, heard, or partially experienced. Not 100% facts. For that I am sorry.

It's not about winning. It is just important that everyone has all the facts as well as a realistic perspective when making a carry gun decision. It irks me, whatever the pistol may be, when someone thinks their carry gun is the unarguably superior, faultless design. Perfection, you could say. You find this attitude a lot with glock guys and the 1911 crowd. It must be something about older designs that skews the perspective. When I am considering a purchase I specifically look for flaws in the design. They are there. I shoot and carry 1911's and XD's. They have flaws as well. For example, the XD has that stupid, pointless striker retaining pin that runs down through the top of the slide. There is no good reason for a striker to need retained in that way. What is worse is that the striker will actually hit that pin if you dry fire without snap caps. This can cause the pin to crack or completely break resulting in anything from the annoyance of the pin walking out of the hole as you fire to a broken piece completely locking up the movement of the striker. There are whole threads on XDtalk about resolving this issue. The best one I have seen that seems to work well is putting another smaller roll pin down inside the factory roll pin with the seams facing opposite directions.

Glocks have enough different design flaws that I honestly can't understand why they are as popular as they are. Even the things that are good about glock are altogether common traits in modern handguns. They are simple, reliable and rugged. The majority of pistols manufactured in the last ten years or so fit that description.

I'm going to admit something that might surprise several people who read this. I owned a gen2 G20 for about half of last year. Unfortunately, with so few options in 10mm glock does seem to have the best one. I enjoyed shooting it. I was good with it. I decided to get rid of it because of ammo availability. I'll be set up to reload in a couple of months here and I may revisit 10mm in a G20. I reload for it and fix all the design flaws with aftermarket options. That is unless Springfield wises up and introduces a XDm10.

However, you have to admit, your avatar does prove to show a little bias in your comments as well.

Have a good one.
-Ed-

I do admit to a bias. A bias is just an inclination towards preference of one thing over another. We all have biases. (It's prejudice we try to avoid.) Though my avatar isn't really intended to betray my bias but it is an attempt at light hearted humor by grossly exaggerating the issue.

There is really nothing stated above that I would disagree with, as long as we are talking about a specific caliber or two. I have owned and currently own SEVERAL Glocks. I will state though I recently did make a decision to get out of (1) caliber, thus leading me to trading (3) Glocks off. I traded them for (3) Glocks in another caliber. Also, I will admit this chamber support issue did play somewhat a part in my decision due to the fact I am a reloader and also enjoy shooting lead, but it was not the biggest issue. I actually had larger issues with this caliber than the support issue.

Yes, it does seem to be a couple of specific calibers.

I would also like to add (1) point not mentioned before. Since I own both Glock and XD's, I will say I have come across the rare exception where the not so tight chamber does APPEAR to have an advantage. When I load and shoot the 200 gr .45 SWC with the sharp shoulder, the Glocks will eat that all day with the OAL anywhere from 1.22 to 1.25. The (2) XD-45's will only function with the AOL at 1.25 in both my service and tactical. This is the pet load I shoot the most. I find it to be very accurate and leaves such nice, round holes in paper.

I'm surprised the XD45 will run SWC's at all. It isn't a chamber issue. There is an issue with clearance in the XD45s where the extracted case will run into the top round of the magazine causing a very interesting malfunction with SWC's. There isn't any issue with ball or hollow points but the shoulder on the SWC can catch so hard that it can turn the next cartridge nose down in the magazine. Here is a link to a rather lengthy thread regarding the issue.

The Continuing Mag Problem, Part2 w/Pics - XDTalk Forums - Your XD/XD(m) Information Source!

I've never tried SWC's in my 45 tactical. However, the issue seems to be much worse in some than others depending on machining variances. Some will feed SWC. The closest I have come to trying is I know that I can slowly hand cycle empty, unsized brass without issue. I may try SWC at some point just from curiosity.

This issue was actually addressed in the XDm45. There were changes made to the slide and breach face to solve it. See post #226 on page #6 of that same thread for details and pictures of the differences. I recently picked up a XDm45 as well. I like to see manufacturers actually address their design issues with successive generations rather than just rails, texture and finger grooves.

In summing up I would say that to many Glock owners, the unsupported issue is for the most part, only a issue if something bad happens to them. At this point, I have never had any issues, only have found them to function fine and I shoot mostly only my reloads. By mostly, I would say easily over 95%.

That is natural. It is easy to be disinclined to worry if nothing has personally happened. What I'm saying is really just commentary on the design. I'm certainly not saying anything close to "If you buy a glock it will blow up in your hand."

As for downplaying the significance... Again, in my mind this has to do with what I have found so far. If the day ever comes that I have a KB and I feel that I did my part with the load, I will probably not only get rid of the Glocks, I will probably run away from the polymer frames... It all comes down to what I have seen or haven't seen.

The kaboom issue probably is overplayed some. For glock haters it is the most interesting issue and it gets the most reaction from glock guys. On the list of things that are wrong with glock the kaboom issue is pretty low on the list. You recognize the issue and have made a personal choice that fits your needs. I respect that. I just hate seeing it swept under the rug as if there is no difference between a fully supported chamber and a oversized, under supported chamber. That is all.

 

[XtremeVel]

Yes, it does seem to be a couple of specific calibers.
.

I would agree, but can only speak to (1) first hand. I saw enough back a few years ago when I ordered 5000 once fired rem UMC cases from a place I have always been happy with. What I found was pretty near 10% would split from the mouth of the case clear back to the web in the factory G22 bbl. The problem was eliminated by throwing in a KKM bbl with a much tighter chamber. Actually, .008 tighter ! Saying that though, I still don't put 100% of the blame on the bbl. I say that because I got to the point I could pick up (2) cases before loading and tell by the sound of wringing them together if they were the ones that would split. There was a very distinct sound difference. I do realize that even though I contend they were inferior cases, that the tighter chamber did made the difference.

I'm surprised the XD45 will run SWC's at all. It isn't a chamber issue. There is an issue with clearance in the XD45s where the extracted case will run into the top round of the magazine causing a very interesting malfunction with SWC's. There isn't any issue with ball or hollow points but the shoulder on the SWC can catch so hard that it can turn the next cartridge nose down in the magazine. Here is a link to a rather lengthy thread regarding the issue.

The Continuing Mag Problem, Part2 w/Pics - XDTalk Forums - Your XD/XD(m) Information Source!

I've never tried SWC's in my 45 tactical. However, the issue seems to be much worse in some than others depending on machining variances. Some will feed SWC. The closest I have come to trying is I know that I can slowly hand cycle empty, unsized brass without issue. I may try SWC at some point just from curiosity.

This issue was actually addressed in the XDm45. There were changes made to the slide and breach face to solve it. See post #226 on page #6 of that same thread for details and pictures of the differences. I recently picked up a XDm45 as well. I like to see manufacturers actually address their design issues with successive generations rather than just rails, texture and finger grooves.
.

Thanks for the link ! I have saw the issue that showed the top round in the pic with the nose end down. Not as common, but I have also seen what the one poster described as a round actually rotating 180 degrees in the mag, thus being in the mag literally backwards ! These instances I saw while playing with the OAL, and haven't seen them since I found that at 1.25 is what mine like. I use either a Dardas 200 gr SWC or Missouri's offering. Now, the tactical feeds them fine, but I will occasionally get the service to FTF every so often. Not like in the pic anymore, but rather the sharp shoulder catches as it enters the feedramp.

That is natural. It is easy to be disinclined to worry if nothing has personally happened. What I'm saying is really just commentary on the design. I'm certainly not saying anything close to "If you buy a glock it will blow up in your hand."
.

I understand that you're not saying that. The same as me ever saying that the oversized/unsupported chamber couldn't possibly make the difference of a gun KB'ing when a person does eventually run into that (1) situation of a double/overcharge, case failure, or bullet setback.

I just hate seeing it swept under the rug as if there is no difference between a fully supported chamber and a oversized, under supported chamber. That is all.

Do you think this is what many Glock fans do ? I hope thats not the impression I give to others. I do feel there is much truth to the issue, but I simply do not feel it's much to worry about as long as I do my job correctly. The one thing I hate is the haters who avoid the Glocks because of a possible KB due to the exact reasons we are talking about. The part I have trouble understanding then is why stop there, at the chamber issues ?... If having the handgrip grenading on a person is a true concern, why not go back to steel framed guns ? This isn't directed at you, but rather just my thoughts on why so many polymer fans appear to be so concerned about (1) particular weapon KB'ing, when in fact no polymer gun I am aware of could handle 40,000 PSI running backward thru the grip without any risks. Polymer frames definately have their advantages... But when the back end of a case lets loose, strength in the grip area isn't one of them unfortunatly.

Thanks again for the link ! I pretty much just read a few posts so far and looked at the pics. I will read more as time permits and see if I can't figure out how to get the service to run as well as the tactical with that 200 gr bullet.

 

[IndyGunner]

king...

As for the "unsupported Glock chamber" thing, we could have a whole thread just on that topic... But for the sake of brevity, I can boil it down to one word for you: MYTH. The kaboom problems come from people who don't pay attention when reloading and use weak brass, or overcharge their ammo. Normal, in-spec ammo does not cause problems with Glock pistols. To satisfy all the people complaining about the "unsupported chamber," Glock recently redesigned their chambers. Observe:

Original Glock barrel on the left, New Glock barrel in the middle, and Aftermarket "Fully Supported" barrel on the right. Not much of a difference between the New Glock and the Aftermarket, eh?

Now look at this picture, which shows the OLD Glock design. Substitute in the NEW Glock design, and compare it to all the others. It's exactly the same as all the other pistols! The only two that "fully support" the cartridge are the Springfield XD40 and the USP 40, and to a slightly lesser degree, the Steyr M40. I guess anything else is going to Kaboom on you? Yeah right...

It's not a problem, just a persistent myth.



Links to images of all steel guns that Kb'd:
The Gun Zone -- 1911 kB!
The Gun Zone -- Anaconda kB!
The Gun Zone -- M1 Carbine kB!
The Gun Zone -- S&W Model 340PD
The Gun Zone -- The Ruger PC4 kB!
The Gun Zone -- Squib Load
The Gun Zone -- Catastrophic Rifle Failure
The Gun Zone -- Charter Arms Revolver

Anything mechanical can malfunction, any gun can kill ya.

 

[sb6pak]

Love my springfield...would pick it over a sig or glock any day.

 

[OAK]

Glock all the way!!!

 

[XtremeVel]

king...

As for the "unsupported Glock chamber" thing, we could have a whole thread just on that topic... But for the sake of brevity, I can boil it down to one word for you: MYTH. The kaboom problems come from people who don't pay attention when reloading and use weak brass, or overcharge their ammo. Normal, in-spec ammo does not cause problems with Glock pistols. To satisfy all the people complaining about the "unsupported chamber," Glock recently redesigned their chambers. Observe:

Original Glock barrel on the left, New Glock barrel in the middle, and Aftermarket "Fully Supported" barrel on the right. Not much of a difference between the New Glock and the Aftermarket, eh?

Now look at this picture, which shows the OLD Glock design. Substitute in the NEW Glock design, and compare it to all the others. It's exactly the same as all the other pistols! The only two that "fully support" the cartridge are the Springfield XD40 and the USP 40, and to a slightly lesser degree, the Steyr M40. I guess anything else is going to Kaboom on you? Yeah right...

It's not a problem, just a persistent myth.



Links to images of all steel guns that Kb'd:
The Gun Zone -- 1911 kB!
The Gun Zone -- Anaconda kB!
The Gun Zone -- M1 Carbine kB!
The Gun Zone -- S&W Model 340PD
The Gun Zone -- The Ruger PC4 kB!
The Gun Zone -- Squib Load
The Gun Zone -- Catastrophic Rifle Failure
The Gun Zone -- Charter Arms Revolver

Anything mechanical can malfunction, any gun can kill ya.

Thats good information Ed ! Only thing is I don't think I would call it a myth. I would describe it as a over exagerated issue. Also, I surely wouldn't state that Normal, in-spec ammo could not cause problems with Glock pistol. There has been cases where what appeared to be a initially safely loaded factory round has KB'ed a Glock. In many of these cases, I would suspect another possible factor other than a over charge. You see, I would prefer to call it a "over pressure" issue rather than a over charge. it has been proven if you constantly chamber the same round multiple times, it can seat the bullet deeper. I once recently tried this in a G32 and saw it does happen ! Now, I don't have a clue how much this changes pressure. Thats what makes it dangerous. When I reload and I find a particular type powder is forgiving on the OAL within reason (.030-.050), this doesn't mean a different powder with a different burn rate would react the same. Also, I suspect how much the set back is and also just what kind of pressures the round was running initially would also play a part.

You are right in any gun can KB... The difference is in a steel framed gun, the grip area in your hand has a better chance of holding together. Polymer frames have some advantgages, but protecting your hand in the event of a case failure, isn't one of them.

 

[U.S. Patriot]

This crap again

 

[IndyGunner]

I once recently tried this in a G32 and saw it does happen !

really? I chamber the same 2 rounds, (1 in chamber 15 in mag). When I put my gun away I take out the one in the chamber then put the mag back in for safety and quick use if needed. How should I remedy this? Keep changing bullets around. Seems like a lot of work lol.

 

[XtremeVel]

really? I chamber the same 2 rounds, (1 in chamber 15 in mag). When I put my gun away I take out the one in the chamber then put the mag back in for safety and quick use if needed. How should I remedy this? Keep changing bullets around. Seems like a lot of work lol.

Yes, it can and does happen. How prevalent ? IDK

As for what to do ? Don't clear the weapon so often. Once loaded, keep it loaded !

Alternating the order of the rounds in the mag occasionally would also eliminate (1) particular round always being the one taking the forces of being chambered.

If you do insist on clearing it daily, just pay attention and be aware of this possibility. If you start getting signifigant set back, a observant eye would catch it.

If you get to the point where you only clear it when you must, where you make it a point to refamiliarize yourself with the carry ammo by shooting a mag or two couple times a year, it will never be a issue to you.

 

[T_V]

I personally prefer glocks.
The only experience Ive had with am XD It malfunfunctioned alot.

 

[kingnereli]

I would agree, but can only speak to (1) first hand. I saw enough back a few years ago when I ordered 5000 once fired rem UMC cases from a place I have always been happy with. What I found was pretty near 10% would split from the mouth of the case clear back to the web in the factory G22 bbl. The problem was eliminated by throwing in a KKM bbl with a much tighter chamber. Actually, .008 tighter ! Saying that though, I still don't put 100% of the blame on the bbl. I say that because I got to the point I could pick up (2) cases before loading and tell by the sound of wringing them together if they were the ones that would split. There was a very distinct sound difference. I do realize that even though I contend they were inferior cases, that the tighter chamber did made the difference.

That is really interesting. It is a good example of how chamber design makes a difference. It's odd that once fired brass was in that condition and cool that you were able to determine which cases would split. It does seem that .40 is the biggest culprit but .45acp and .45gap seem to have problems as well.

Thanks for the link ! I have saw the issue that showed the top round in the pic with the nose end down. Not as common, but I have also seen what the one poster described as a round actually rotating 180 degrees in the mag, thus being in the mag literally backwards ! These instances I saw while playing with the OAL, and haven't seen them since I found that at 1.25 is what mine like. I use either a Dardas 200 gr SWC or Missouri's offering. Now, the tactical feeds them fine, but I will occasionally get the service to FTF every so often. Not like in the pic anymore, but rather the sharp shoulder catches as it enters the feedramp.

If I recall correctly people who encounter this problem are putting extra power mag springs in and seeing good results. I'll have to check around. I haven't really worried about finding a solution to a problem I'm not encountering. Then there is the one poster who machined the barrel hood and underside of the slide to fix it.

I understand that you're not saying that. The same as me ever saying that the oversized/unsupported chamber couldn't possibly make the difference of a gun KB'ing when a person does eventually run into that (1) situation of a double/overcharge, case failure, or bullet setback.

Understood. I have to be careful when talking about this issue that I don't come across as implying that it is a certainty or even a high probability. I've formed my opinion based on various design cues. It's simply a flaw that could cause problems.

Do you think this is what many Glock fans do ? I hope thats not the impression I give to others. I do feel there is much truth to the issue, but I simply do not feel it's much to worry about as long as I do my job correctly.

Yes I find this to be common among the seriously devoted. No I do not get that impression from you. You acknowledge the issue. You have weigh the risks and made a decision.

I get your point about polymer frames. Just remember that the chamber has to let go before the grip/frame can be damaged. If the chamber is designed properly then I'm not worried about the plastic shards that could result from a kaboom.

Thanks again for the link ! I pretty much just read a few posts so far and looked at the pics. I will read more as time permits and see if I can't figure out how to get the service to run as well as the tactical with that 200 gr bullet.

No problem at all. It is a very long, informative thread. The post about the design changes in the XDm45 cemented the decision that it wouldn't be redundant to purchase that in addition to my tactical.

king...

As for the "unsupported Glock chamber" thing, we could have a whole thread just on that topic... But for the sake of brevity, I can boil it down to one word for you: MYTH. The kaboom problems come from people who don't pay attention when reloading and use weak brass, or overcharge their ammo. Normal, in-spec ammo does not cause problems with Glock pistols. To satisfy all the people complaining about the "unsupported chamber," Glock recently redesigned their chambers.

I'm aware that glock has quietly added some support but I disagree with your conclusion that the chamber design complaint is somehow now a myth. Why doesn't this fact completely validate what we've been complaining about for over twenty years. Glock has a long history of fixing gross design problems as quietly as possible or offering voluntary "upgrades." For glock to make this change there most have been sufficient reason. Glock must have seen enough trouble to warrant adding support to the case.

Observe:

[


Original Glock barrel on the left, New Glock barrel in the middle, and Aftermarket "Fully Supported" barrel on the right. Not much of a difference between the New Glock and the Aftermarket, eh?

The difference is less but there is still some difference. The six o'clock case support is only part of the problem. It is difficult to tell by just looking at a picture but can you tell how the case is looser in the factory barrel than the aftermarket one? Glock chambers are not only under supported but they are also oversized. The fact remain that, despite the change, that is still the case. It is a step in the right direction but they need to be wise enough to actually make a properly sized, fully supported chamber. If they fixed that and a few other design flaws they might get some of my money.

Now look at this picture, which shows the OLD Glock design. Substitute in the NEW Glock design, and compare it to all the others. It's exactly the same as all the other pistols! The only two that "fully support" the cartridge are the Springfield XD40 and the USP 40, and to a slightly lesser degree, the Steyr M40. I guess anything else is going to Kaboom on you? Yeah right...

Again, case support is only part of the issue. The best part about this is that there is no good reason to not properly size a chamber. There is no noticeable difference in reliability between the two designs.

It's not a problem, just a persistent myth.

You haven't presented any evidence to form this conclusion. Glock confirmed that problem with the chamber redesign and there is still a notable difference in the dimensions of a glock chamber and any one that is considered fully supported.

Links to images of all steel guns that Kb'd:
The Gun Zone -- 1911 kB!
The Gun Zone -- Anaconda kB!
The Gun Zone -- M1 Carbine kB!
The Gun Zone -- S&W Model 340PD
The Gun Zone -- The Ruger PC4 kB!
The Gun Zone -- Squib Load
The Gun Zone -- Catastrophic Rifle Failure
The Gun Zone -- Charter Arms Revolver

Anything mechanical can malfunction, any gun can kill ya.

What does this have to do with the current topic? When have I suggested that a polymer frame will contribute to a kaboom? You are arguing a non issue. Yes, if you pack enough powder in you can blow any gun. Chamber design will determine the threshold required for that to happen. For now that threshold for glocks is such that there is a chance for problems with factory ammunition.

 

[gdkaiser]

you are going to have to try both and determine which fits your hand best which is in the caliber you want and what kind of finish you want I own a XD I own 1911's I have not fired a glock but I see no issue with the weapon other than it does not fit my hand as well as the XD but the glock may fit you better than the XD... or you may have a better feeling from a Storm or a LC9 your going to have to see what fits you! forums are full of opinions both good and not so good so try gonig to a range and see if they rent both brands and give them a try, thats about the only way your going to get a good idea.

 

[Wolfhound]

I prefer the XD's but I have nothing against the Glocks.

I own an XD40 and XD9 subcompact and they are good guns.

 

[ltb1]

got one of each, love em both!!!

 

[85t5mcss]

Glock 17, XD45, and XD9. Really like all of them. Only other Glock I want is a 34. But still want a couple XDm's to go along with them among numerous other ones. Whichever u like best, u can't go wrong.

 

[bossmanz]

The glock is so reliable, but the XD in .45 is so nice. Either one is a win win.

 

[bossmanz]

 

[MeatyBacchus]

If you want something with lots of gadgets and that feels good get the XD.

If you want a gun that is going to go bang when you pull the trigger get the Glock.

 

[IndyGunner]

2-14 reopened now... :eyeroll: