WoodyTX

I asked Hilton Yam on Facebook why he chose the M&P over the XDm, and his reply was that it had four metal frame lugs (the XDm has two metal, two polymer), that the magazines were more reliable, that they were (at the time) easier to tweak, and that the lower bore made for quicker recovery. Which is a bummer, because I prefer the stock XDm trigger to the stock M&P trigger, and from what I've seen, the custom XDm triggers to the custom M&P triggers. Neither is a 1911, in terms of trigger, however. BTW, have you tried putting the magazine release on the strong side, and using a finger (as opposed to a thumb) to press it?

Thanks for all the replies! I'm feeling more confident in the XDm, especially hearing from guys who shoot a lot. I'll be picking up a 5.25" XDm in 9mm for competition shortly, and maybe an XDs once the prices normalize.

I have a 4.5" XDm in .45 ACP. I'm looking at picking up a 5.25" in 9mm for three gun, and possibly a 3.8" or XDs for CC. I know that this is a competition-focused site, but I feel that y'all will have enough rounds downrange, and personal experience with the guts of the guns, to provide good advice. Before I go whole hog for Springfield, what known weaknesses or drawbacks have y'all seen in the breed? I know about the striker roll pin, but plan to replace that whenever I replace the springs. The rear frame lugs are polymer, but I understand that the front ones take all the abuse. I'm also having a hard time finding holsters for the pistol, but I understand that some XD holsters work just fine. Also, which aftermarket shops have a good reputation? I'm impressed with the conversation I had with one of the Springer Precision guys, but any other feedback on them or anyone else is most welcome. FWIW, the biggest competitor to the XDm is the S&W M&P series. I was not impressed by the ones I handled a couple years back when I was first looking at the XDm, but a number of knowledgeable people prefer them, and my biggest complaint (the trigger) has an aftermarket option now. I also like the ambidextrous mag release on the XDm. I'm not a Glock shooter; the grip angle isn't right for me. I'm also a 1911 shooter when it comes to pistol shooting, but I would rather have a modern striker-fired carry piece than one that needs regular TLC. (I still haven't figured out the perfect extractor tension.) Thanks for any and all advice!

There are many differences between tactical and competition, but that stance is remarkably similar to the "modified prone" that Sonny Puzikas teaches in his AK classes.

Yes, I'll be at BotW. I'll be the FNG with more gun than ability... Sounds like I'll be shooting the rib, no BBQ sauce. Thanks!

I just switched from a 1911 (early model Kimber Ultra Carry) to an XDm (3.8"). Both are .45ACP because it works, is forgiving, and I don't have to start buying another caliber. I switched because of reliability, functionality, and durability. Like older sports cars, 1911s have soul and are a joy to drive, but they also take very frequent maintenance and upkeep to keep running like a top. Polymer striker-fired pistols are like Hondas; they may be boring, but they always work. You don't have to inspect the welds and feed lips on your carry mag, or tighten a bunch of screws regularly with a modern pistol. I was taking a class on very up close and personal encounters (0-10 feet), and even though I have over 50,000 rounds of 1911 shooting behind me, I failed to drop the safety about a quarter of the time. The grip safety failed to properly engage a few times as well. Left handed draw was tough, and left handed shooting only slightly easier. And reloads during a tussle were nearly impossible without a tapered magazine or a magwell. All of that went away when I switched to the XDm in appendix carry. JMB's 1911 is a durable pistol, but I was carrying a short-barreled aluminum-frame pistol. The tradeoffs to make it concealable also made it less durable. Even though steel is tougher than polymer, it's hard to argue that a Glock, XDm, or M&P won't make it to over 30K rounds (assuming regular maintenance, etc). I chose lightweight polymer over steel, since I really don't trust aluminum as a durable frame material. Of course, your mileage may vary. I have friends who carry steel revolvers, and who carry Kel-Tec PF9s. I went to the XDm because it fit me better than the S&W M&P, had more capacity, and had a better trigger. I also wanted a pistol I could use in competition (5.25), for tactical carry (4.5 threaded), and for concealed carry (3.8), depending on where life takes me.

I called them on a lark when I was considering the XDm 5.25, and got an earful of advice and professionalism, despite me not being a customer. When I get the 5.25, but before my wife sends it back, it's going to Springer for some 'touch ups'. Honey, if you're reading this, I'm just kidding. Really.

I'll be competing in my first 3-gun Saturday, and have a Remington 870 that I'll be using. I'm not buying too much for the competition, but I do have two barrels for the shotgun, a 20" with a rib and Rem-Chokes, and an 18" cylinder bore that will take a heat shield. In practicing reloading, I've already heated up my left hand a bit (I do the flip, load, flip routine, but I'm open to advice) with the 20" barrel. But the chokes and more intuitive rib are handy, as is the additional round or two (yes, for some reason, I have appropriate extensions for both...). Thanks in advance for any advice.

I've been carrying an XDm 3.8 in .45 for a few months now. I went to appendix carry after a seminar that showed me just how close 'close range' is. I use a Dale Fricke Archangel holster, and the key to appendix carry is to let it flop around a bit. I'm a pretty big guy, too (5'10", 235#, 40" waist), and the pistol moves where it's most comfortable, if that makes sense. Were I to go back to hip carry, I'd use a Crossbreed IWB, and spring for the horsehide. It's how I carried a Kimber Ultra Carry for about a year, and it was very comfortable and durable. There's a very specific place where it doesn't hit your thigh when you sit down, but the car seat doesn't bump it too much. I've fired a few boxes of Federal Hydra-Shok through my XDm, along with a number of other hollow-points, and haven't had any failures. It's really a great pistol, very forgiving. I don't see the need for adjustable sights on a carry gun; most of my shots probably won't be carefully aimed, anyway. When I carry an extra magazine, I just use a full-size 13-round XDm mag, without the 'sleeve'. The sleeve tends to bite my hand during a fast reload, and without it, I can use the same mag in my competition gun. For ammo, I prefer the Federal HST +P, when I can get it.

You can reach under the gun to rack it, or you can rotate the gun slightly and reach over to rack it. The problem with reaching over is if you have a live round in the chamber it can easily fall back into the action if you do not rack vigorously enough. In general though, try not to shoot empty. Reach under to reload, definitely. It's a bit awkward at first, and the larger magazines may get in your way, but it's an easily learned skill. If it helps, rotate the gun clockwise a bit to get a better angle on it; you may already be in that slightly rotated position if you've just done a mag change. (I got this from a Puzikas AK class, but it works with my Saiga 12.)

As noted here, there will be a trigger reset in the production guns. Also, the pump lock switch will be improved, a hand-stop mounted for the fore hand, and indicator holes drilled in the tops of the tubes, so you can see when you're low on ammo. It'll also take 3" shells, but that reduces the capacity by 1 per tube. Rumors are that it may include an auto-switch when one tube runs dry, but that may not be available in all states. MSRP is around $880, and it should be available later this year. I have a Kel-Tec RFB (forward-ejecting bullpup in 7.62 NATO that uses FAL mags). It's about the same dimensions, and is much more manageable than a long gun in a house or other tight environment. Take a yardstick, cut off 6", and grab it just behind the new centerpoint, and you'll see what I mean.

I've reached the point where one range bag won't do it all. This is not necessarily a bad thing. I'm tempted to build a 'rifle range bag' and a 'pistol range bag', but one more type of pistol and I'm back to square one. Another option is to 'go modular' with individual pistol and rifle bags (each holding just the weapon and its magazines), and use one range bag for universal accessories (tools, cleaning stuff, eyes/ears, etc). One simple bag would carry all the pistol bags. Ammo will probably be carried in hard cases, segregated by rifle/pistol. Anyone care to share feedback on this? I'd like to keep it as simple as possible, even if that means $500 worth of bags in my near future. Thanks in advance, Woody

I used to load 200 gr truncated cone (flat top), but I went back to 230 gr round nose. They feed more consistently, are less sensitive to OAL, and (I can't quantify this) "feel better" when shooting. The recoil seems less sharp, if that makes sense.

I did some shooting back when IPSC was the only show in town (late 80s), took a hiatus for quite a while, and am slowly getting back into it. Back in the 80s, I would shoot close to 500 rounds in a practice session. Most of it was a waste, but I did get very familiar with the weapon, so ... not a total waste? Having read (and currently re-reading) Brian's book, and blessed with a family now, I'm working on quality vs. quantity. I figure some time each week "dry" (dry-firing, sight acquisition, reloading drills, etc), two practice days a month, and whatever competition I can squeeze in. Total round count should be under 700 per month, I'm guessing. Hope that helps...

Thanks for the replies. For now, limited bench space means that a second reloader is out of the question. I have plenty of each, so I may start with .308 out of sheer ease of conversion. I'll decide on .223 once I'm comfortable enough with reloading .308. (Besides, there should be tons of surplus .223 after everyone in the Middle East sings 'Kumbaya', right?) I have heard that .308 is a "more forgiving" round to reload. Would y'all consider that an accurate statement? And yes, I am initially looking for reloading 'blasting' ammo. I'll get more comfortable with the process before going for accuracy.

I have a Dillon 550 set up for .45 ACP, my primary pistol caliber. I also have pistols in a number of other calibers, but don't shoot near the volume with any of them that I do with the .45. (I go through maybe a box of .32, and about 4 boxes of .40 in a year.) I've also got an FAL in the works, a Mini-14 in hand, and a AR en route. I'm curious about reloading for one or both of the rifles, but have seen that it can be a much more involved process than the .45. How much more involved? At current ammo prices, is it worth the additional headaches and costs of reloading rifle rounds? (Probably.) If you were to reload one of the above rifle calibers, which would you choose to reload, based entirely on prep and PITA-factor? Or would you simply base your decision on cost and relative volume of ammo? (In other words, if I burn 50 boxes a year of .223, but only 5 boxes of .308, I'd obviously reload the .223.) For what it's worth, I like the "forgiving" nature of reloading for the .45. I don't have to worry too much about exact OAL, crimp strength, chamber pressure, etc. (Don't get me wrong; I still worry about those things, but the cost of failure isn't as high as, say, a .40 S&W). Thanks in advance for any advice.