Replacing SA-XD40

Still thinking of replacing my XD40 service model. Heres the run down of my thinking,

- The XD seems to me harder to rack the slide then other autos of same size.
- Blocky design of the XD mades it hard to conceal under a shirt for me. (I am 6'3" 190lbs so pretty slim and tall.)

I am wanting a pistol that is .380 or larger. I am a fan of the .40 based of studies that I have read, but am starting to warm up to the 9mm and even thinking of .380 as an defense round. Give me your input on this please.

I want a sidearm that can be concealed up a button up shirt or polo. I dont mind the idea of pocket carry tho I dont really like IWB at least with the XD a slimmer pistol might be better?

Lastly I am hoping to sell the XD to get this pistol so my price range is $400- $450.

Thank you for all your guys input on my last thread. I look forward to the replies I get on this.

Almost forgot, I am currently looking at a bersa Mini .40. Anyone know anything about them?

The newer XDm has a 3.8" barrel that holds 16+1 in .40 and one in 9mm that holds 19+1. The slide has been redesigned so it is more like a "A" shape and also the serrations are different. I've been looking into the 9mm model. And now they have a compact model that has a flush fitting mag that holds 13+1 and a extended mag for holding 19 in the 9mm and a 11+1 mag and a extended 16+1 in .40.

http://springfield-armory.com/

As far as the .380 round I was reading a interesting article in S.W.A.T. Magazine titled "Don't bet your life on the .380." It is by someone who has been a federal firearms instructor for 25 years and of all the things in the article that stuck out the most was that he said the .380 round has only 80% of the speed and energy compared to a 9mm round. I'll bring it home from work and look up some of the other things that were relevant to the .380 vs. other calibers.

Not sure if the FNP or FNX pistols from FN are any slimmer than the xd, but they are really nice and should be in your price range. I think a new FNP is about $400-450. How bout a compact CZ 75 variant? The CZ's can usually be had for less than $450 used.

I've seen the XDms dont think they would be any easier to conceal however. Its still a pretty blocky design.

As for the CZ I have looked at them. They are nice sidearms but heavy, I would be more likely to go with a 1911 to go up in weight. Which I have thought of doing.

the .380 isnt anywhere close to a 9mm. Its often called a Browning 9mm short, which implies its weaker then the 9mm luger. However with good placement it could be a decent round I think... of course it depends on the firearm, if you are more likely to carry the .380 over the .40 then the fact the .40 have over %90 one shot stops with most rounds doesnt mean anything if you dont have it when its needed kind of thought. I'd be interested in reading that article SWAT mag as some good stuff.

Might want to take a look at the Kahr 45's they have some nice weapons and the concealable versions are really nice. My brother has one in 45 cal and loves it.

I never miss an opportunity to plug my M&P40. They make them in compacts too.

Excellent gun for conceal/ open carry and comes in 9mm, .40, .357, or .45. Very reliable weapon that has yet to even blink for me in the area of performance on a range.

Interesting note for the .40 cal frame is that you can change the barrel and you have and instant .357 that even uses the same .40 cal magazines.

My responses are in bold.

As for the CZ I have looked at them. They are nice sidearms but heavy, I would be more likely to go with a 1911 to go up in weight. Which I have thought of doing. Try looking for a CZ p-01, pcr or p40. They all have alloy frames and when weighed in real life with a loaded mag are almost the same weight as a glock 19/23. I think the CZ's end up being about an ounce heavier.

the .380 isnt anywhere close to a 9mm. Its often called a Browning 9mm short, which implies its weaker then the 9mm luger. However with good placement it could be a decent round I think... of course it depends on the firearm, if you are more likely to carry the .380 over the .40 then the fact the .40 have over %90 one shot stops with most rounds doesnt mean anything if you dont have it when its needed kind of thought. I'd be interested in reading that article SWAT mag as some good stuff.[/QUOTE] I'd pass on a 380 unless you want a really tiny 380. Most of the time if you can get a gun in 380, you can get it or something of the same size in 9mm and I'd much rather have a 9mm. 9mm is way cheaper than 380 right now, has a ballistics advantage and a wider selection of loads and bullets to choose from.

I just picked up a Glock 36 due to the thinner profile. My XD-40 is still my full size, heavy clothing, and OC gun but the G36 is easier to conceal in summer clothes.

KansasMustang said:

Might want to take a look at the Kahr 45's they have some nice weapons and the concealable versions are really nice. My brother has one in 45 cal and loves it.

Click to expand...

I have been looking at the Kahrs and Kel Tecs... A little concern on such a small pistol having too much recoil for quick follow up shots?

rotorhead said:

I never miss an opportunity to plug my M&P40. They make them in compacts too.

Excellent gun for conceal/ open carry and comes in 9mm, .40, .357, or .45. Very reliable weapon that has yet to even blink for me in the area of performance on a range.

Interesting note for the .40 cal frame is that you can change the barrel and you have and instant .357 that even uses the same .40 cal magazines.

Click to expand...

M&P's arent really much smaller if any then the XD. The muzzle looks as it may be a bit less blocky but also out of my price range.

robin.kevin said:

I have been looking at the Kahrs and Kel Tecs... A little concern on such a small pistol having too much recoil for quick follow up shots?

Click to expand...

Can't say it's been a problem with my Taurus 709, and that was with +P ammo.

onlurker said:

Can't say it's been a problem with my Taurus 709, and that was with +P ammo.

Click to expand...

Really, I saw they are offering those up to .40 cal to now. Hows the recoil snap on it?

Not sure on the .40 but the 9mm beats up the hands a bit less than a pocket .380 mostly due to the grip length (I can wrap my entire hand, pinky included) and the slight increase in weight. It's got a bit more recoil than my P226 in .40 but that's mostly due to the weight of the Sig, the 709 is a feather compared to this brick. Having shot an XDM in .40 and comparing to my XDM in 9, I would say the 709 has recoil characteristics similar to the XD .40 in that it's sort of snappy but not something that is difficult to handle. My roommate has shot it and after a couple of tries she was able to manage follow up shots just fine. It wasn't too bad for a novice shooter with small hands.

IMO, the 740 (which is a 709 in .40 S&W) is too light a frame for this round. My P239 is almost too much in .40 and that is a hefty CCW weighing in more than my full size XDM (unloaded). I'd stick to the 709 personally, feels like it was designed around this cartridge. Another option is the 738. It's a little bigger than other pocket .380s but it's getting a little small for my tastes, making recoil border on painful to me. However it begs the question as to why since the 709 is there, shoots better, and the ammo is cheaper, more readily available, and proven more effective than .380.

I dug up an old American Riflemen Mag that I have that featured the 709, having recall reading it and not liking the idea for some reason. It seems the trigger is glock style da/sa. My personal opinion if a pistol does not have a safety it should at least be DAO. Still seems like a nice weapon just maybe not for me.

About the only thing it shares with a Glock is the take-down procedure, i.e. clear the chamber, close the slide, gently pull back and lower the take-down lever, then pull the trigger. It's got a DA and SA trigger (as opposed to a Glock's DAO) that resembles a Sig in it's operation. The internal locking mechanism operated by the allen key will take the trigger to DA after putting one in the tube, although I hardly use this feature because of the thumb safety (think 1911 except only one sided and a smaller lever). At least this is how mine operates, I'm not sure of the article to which you're referring to but it's very un-Glock like. Nothing against Glocks, I just can't get comfortable shooting and operating them so I try to stay away from those that are similar.

I have a Kel-tec PF-9 . I love the pistol. It isn't that hard to control as far as barrel flip but it does jolt you pretty good. Mostly because of how narrow it is. If you want a pistol that conceals easily but still lets you carry 9MM , you might try it out.

I also have a Kimber tactical ultra ( 3" bbl. ) in .45acp and the PF-9 doesn't seem to have any more muzzle flip then the Kimber.

I carry the 115 grn. critical defense loads in my PF-9.

onlurker said:

About the only thing it shares with a Glock is the take-down procedure, i.e. clear the chamber, close the slide, gently pull back and lower the take-down lever, then pull the trigger. It's got a DA and SA trigger (as opposed to a Glock's DAO) that resembles a Sig in it's operation. The internal locking mechanism operated by the allen key will take the trigger to DA after putting one in the tube, although I hardly use this feature because of the thumb safety (think 1911 except only one sided and a smaller lever). At least this is how mine operates, I'm not sure of the article to which you're referring to but it's very un-Glock like. Nothing against Glocks, I just can't get comfortable shooting and operating them so I try to stay away from those that are similar.

Click to expand...

I actually just saw one on a website that had a thumb safety like a 1911... that I like... this pistol looks nice. The guy was selling it for $300 with holster. But it was in different state and I have to sell my XD first...

jayspapa said:

I have a Kel-tec PF-9 . I love the pistol. It isn't that hard to control as far as barrel flip but it does jolt you pretty good. Mostly because of how narrow it is. If you want a pistol that conceals easily but still lets you carry 9MM , you might try it out.

I also have a Kimber tactical ultra ( 3" bbl. ) in .45acp and the PF-9 doesn't seem to have any more muzzle flip then the Kimber.

I carry the 115 grn. critical defense loads in my PF-9.

Click to expand...

So you feel it pushes more then flips? I like both the PF-9 and the P-11. The P-11 is a little heavier which should make it a bit more shootable.

Hate to state the obvious, but have you considered an XD Sub Compact? As you know, you can get them in 9mm or .40S&W.

I have an XD 40 Sub Compact on my side most days, either CC or OC. Sure it isn't half the gun that my Kimber Custom CDP II is, but it is a compact, reliable, easily concealed gun in a respectable caliber that I don't have to baby. It isn't my favorite gun, but it is my favorite carry gun.

BTW, My Sub Compact replaced a Beretta 85 as my EDC gun. I really like the 85, but I haven't even thought of going back.

It's thicker than you probably want, but I moved from a sig 238 (.380) to a glock 29 (10mm) since I don't trust the ballistics of the .380 round.

The 10mm is going to run you a few dollars more than .45 ACP per box for target FMJ.

I found the 29 to be a wonderful all-around carry for anything from woods walking to the urban jungle. Knowing you have 11 rounds of hellfire at the ready in such a small package is very comforting. Backup mags I carry the full-sized G20 15 round at the ready.

My SD load is usually: 2 projectiles for each shot fired.