Glock 17 vs. Springfield XDM: Practical vs. Pleasurable

**Alohashirt** · 04-09-2012, 07:55 AM

I'm down to two options as my first 9 purchase. I've shot both (along with many other brands).

I consider true XDM a mighty nice gun that's comfortable and enjoyable. The Glock is perfectly adequate, even though I'm a bit less accurate with it. Practice could overcome that. If cost and other factors were equal, I'd opt for the XDM. But they're not.

The XDM costs hundreds more. The XDM is hard to find-- and dealers tell me I may have to wait weeks or longer to get one on order. Consequently, I wonder if the parts will be equally hard to find in the future.

The Glock, on the other hand, is plentiful and has been around. It's not as elegant or fun. But it will get the job done in a post SHF world.

Like everybody else, I worry about every dollar I spend and regard my preps and security as necessary cost that's sometimes painful. I'd appreciate any insights from folks who've owned either 9 or both as well as those who've weighed utility vs. "nice to have" in a handgun purchase.

**myakka** · 04-09-2012, 09:24 AM

Sounds like you have done your homework. I have owned tha glock. I ended up selling it and getting a Rugar P95. It just fit my hand so much better. I have large paws and the grip on the Glock was made for smaller hands than mine.

**JLBIII** · 04-09-2012, 10:08 AM

I own a Springfield Armory XD-40 subcompact and am extremely pleased with it. It cost me $490 and came with a lockable case, holster, two mag holster, loader, firearm lock, and a cleaning brush. It was much cheaper than the Glock which was going for $550. I also fired both and was much happier with the SA. I also own a Ruger P89DC 9mm which I bought new for $365 it's a little heavier than my SA though it is a full size semi with an aluminum frame and stainless steel slide, guide rod and inner workings. It is also very accurate and easy to maintain. Though the SA XD is extremely easy to clean seeing that the guide rod and spring are all one piece so no worrying about the spring popping out when disassembling it. Plus I like the loaded chamber feature and the ability to tell whether the firing pin is in the fire or safe position. But to each their own, both hand guns are well made it all comes down to personal preference.

Joe

I also forgot to mention it came with two mags also, a 9rd, and a 12 rd with a grip extension. I bought another 12 rd mag so that I can have two backups in my shoulder holster mag carrier and one in the weapon. It is also my everyday carry piece with my Ruger 9mm as a backup though I rarely carry both.

**Alohashirt** · 04-09-2012, 10:22 AM

Thanks for the good insights. I guess the question I am asking is not Glock vs. Springfield.

It's more general: Since money is a concern, would you spend less and get something functional and widely available? Or would you spend more and wait weeks to get something you like better that's in short supply?

**slowz1k** · 04-09-2012, 11:45 AM

You can't argue with Glocks history and reputation for quality, but if it was me, I would rather wait and get what I really want. The XDM gets rave reviews, and I love the way they feel. There are a a couple hundred available and for sale on gunbroker.com right now. Prices range from $570's to $700's depending on supplier, model and options.

**Skyowl** · 04-09-2012, 12:59 PM

I'm not an expert on Glock as I have never owned nor shot one.

But the XD... Just bought three, I bought 2 x XDM 5.25 in 45ACP. Each comes with case, weapon, 3 mags, 3 interchangeable backstraps, mag holster, weapon holster, brush, mag loader, and lock. All for $729 each. Daughter got the XDM 5.25 in 9mm. Not sure what she paid. Comes with the same gear in the case.

Took the two 45s to the range this weekend. Both fired flawlessly. One in Wife's hands, the other in mine. Loaded two mags with 12 rounds each. I put two mags worth in the target at approx 25 feet in a two inch circle. That was resting the weapon to check the factory accuracy of the adjustable sights. Recoil is less than the Wife's two SIGs in 40S&W and appears to be more accurate.

More testing to come.

**Legion489** · 04-09-2012, 01:34 PM

Well I'm a believer in getting what you want. Either will serve you well (Glocks feel like a brick to me, the Ruger P-series guns are even worse, but I can shoot them well and have friends who love both). The SA XD is GREAT, IMHO, and well worth the price difference, but that is just me, and yes, I am broke most of the time too.

**drt4lfe** · 04-09-2012, 08:33 PM

The Glock 17 is an excellent choice....the 19 may be a better choice for you...check one out.....simple...dead reliable...and copied by almost every other manufacturer.....is no more of a brick as one person said than any other poly/steel pistol....I have a 17 and 19, i also own Ruger SR9c which is a nice pistol, you may want to look at it...reliable and affordable also....or go Mac daddy and get a double stack para.....

**Big Guy** · 04-09-2012, 08:59 PM

I have a SA XD Sub Compact in .40, I also have a Glock 19, and a couple Ruger P series pistols. ALL fine firearms.

I choose to carry my SA sub compact .40, in SHTF scenario I will rely on my SA sub compact first and then everything else after that.

**JLBIII** · 04-09-2012, 10:49 PM

Originally Posted by Big Guy

I have a SA XD Sub Compact in .40, I also have a Glock 19, and a couple Ruger P series pistols. ALL fine firearms.

I choose to carry my SA sub compact .40, in SHTF scenario I will rely on my SA sub compact first and then everything else after that.

I'm with you there Big Guy, I also rely on my XD-40 subcompact first and everything else after.

Joe