Why does every one hate the XD grip safety

[TunnelRat]

The rules overlap... if someone needs all of that stuff they probably shouldnt have it in the first place.

Aww, how nice of you to pass judgement on other shooters and whether they should or shouldn't have firearms just because they like firearms with different features than you. You sound just like Diane Feinstein.

I dont, and I didnt - I thought I was fairly clear on that

Then the world is happy no?

[onthehunt]

I have a full size Springfield 1911 and to me the grip safety on it is a lot easier to deal with than the XD's ...

[Kevin_d77]

Well, the XD40 was my first gun purchase. I walked into the LGS intent on buying a M&P40. The clerk was great, showing me the different features of both guns. The reason I BOUGHT the XD was the extra safety features. I knew it would make both my wife and I comfortable having the extra safeties, extraneous or not.

Guess by your logic I shouldn't own guns then huh?

[57K]

And here I thought 57k was the one dragging this thread along. We get it, you don't like XDs.

What exactly do you mean by that?

Superfluous? The grip safety was added to address two specific issues common to the Glock. 1. When holstering properly with your thumb on the rear of the slide, the pistol will not fire if the trigger is snagged on anything that might be an obstruction. 2. It helps prevent the pistol going out-of-battery when holstered. In the heat of the moment when a pistol is drawn there have been a number of LE officers reporting that Glock and other pistols would not fire because it was out-of-battery.

The LCI is a feature I have no problem with because it is no way obtrusive to the sight picture and since the cocked status indicator is simply incorporated into the striker, and because the XDs are single action, it's just another means of being able to know the pistols condition tactile vs. visual. No press-check required and completely doable in total darkness.

And what's wrong with features like full support of the case-head in ALL chamberings. If you ever hear of a Ka-Boom with an XD/XDm, it is almost certainly the fault of a handloader double-charging or worse with fast burning powder. Glocks have a Ka-Boom record second to no other pistol in history. Conventional rifling is far better than a polygonal bore for shooters who handload cast lead bullets, which is apparent some of you don't. And do I really need to explain why a magazine port should be relieved? I don't know of any auto-pistol that doesn't have one other than Glock. Check XD Talk to see if there are any brass to the face issues or ejected cases with triangular scars on the casemouth. This could also be viewed as yet another attempt to prevent handloads being used in Glock pistols. And where there is no steel support under a Glock's chamber in battery, the SIG/Sauer type locking block used in XD pistols is something I would definitely prefer in some type of catastrophic ammo failure. Sights? Grip angle?

It's not about bashing one pistol brand vs. another, but making an honest assessment on the areas of improvement with the XD/XDm design. And where some people view XDs as Glock knock-offs because they both share the use of polymer frames (which H&K pioneered with the VP70Z), evidentally they are not able to understand difference in the locking systems where HS Product copied the SIG/Sauer cam-block squarish chamber design just as Glock did, they also borrowed the chamberblock which incorporate the forward rails that make other polymer framed pistol's rails look small by comparison and provides steel support under the chamber as I mentioned earlier.

If anyone prefers the Glock over the XD/XDm, more power to them, just don't try to tell a professional designer whose been shooting and evaluating handguns for over 35 years and also has over 27 years of handloading experience. It's not as if I'm going on a Glock thread with the intent of bashing Glock pistols, is it?

[Dashunde]

how nice of you to pass judgement on other shooters and whether they should or shouldn't have firearms just because they like firearms with different features than you

True to form your misquoting and twisting comments to suit your own desire to argue

It has nothing to do with what features people like, furthermore I said nothing of the sort.

The emphasis was on the word "need" - those safety items can be useful if you have a bad day and violate one of the rules, but if your patently foolish and violate a couple of the rules at once then you do need those features and you really shouldn't have the darn thing.
Said another way, if you rely on those safety features instead of using your brain, paying attention, and following the rules, no.. you shouldn't have it.

Interestingly enough, the safer they make things the more careless and complacent people become.
Make the curves banked and gentle... People go faster and still crash.

[Kevin_d77]

. The rules overlap... if someone needs all of that stuff they probably shouldnt have it in the first place.

I am a very competent and responsible gun owner. I just happened to want those extra features for my first purchase

[TunnelRat]

True to form your misquoting and twisting comments to suit your own desire to argue

True to form you're backpedaling after passing judgement on others and putting your foot in your mouth.

if you rely on those safety features instead of using your brain, paying attention, and following the rules, no.. you shouldn't have it.

So who says everyone that owns a pistol with those features is incapable of using their brains? Maybe they have it for those times they make a mistake, as you alluded to.

I'm done with this thread.

[Spats McGee]

Knock off the bickering, folks.

[Tactical Jackalope]

deleted

[predecessor]

So you have some who love shooting the XD and some who don't. Some who like to yipe at each other and some who don't. The question was why do many have a gripe against the grip safety? For me it boils down to a couple of things: The grip safety is superfluous. Doesn't mean that you can't love your XD still, just means that the grip safety is superfluous. If it was a real need in service pistols, other manufacturers would build it into their designs. Nobody is asking for it so nobody else is building one. The grip safety was designed for Calvary soldiers. Made some sense back then. But we stopped riding horses into battle with light short single action triggers long ago...

The other issue I have was demonstrated by this quote:

The reason I BOUGHT the XD was the extra safety features. I knew it would make both my wife and I comfortable having the extra safeties, extraneous or not.

I've seen a lot of first time pistol owners actually get talked into an XD over other pistols because it had a grip safety. I think this is a dis-service to new gun buyers. There are dozens of other pistols that offer greater "safety features" than an XD. Pick the pistol up with a proper grip and pull the trigger and voila. A manual safety or a heavy DA trigger offers greater safety to nervous first time pistol buyers. Again, nothing wrong as a new buyer in wanting additional safety features - just that the grip safety isn't the bonus feature you thought it was.

[breakingcontact]

Pick your pistol maker and model. It becomes your tribe. Then we can line up on the internets and do battle on forums. Its so silly.

Shoot what you like. Respect that other people due to physiology/psychology/the fact that we are all have our own minds (unless we are all just different physical manifestations of the one true mind)...

Like what you like. Ill like what I like. But I refuse to attack others, their competency, manliness, character and so on because they have different preferences. I don't need to recruit everyone to my team to further validate my choices.

For the record. I'm not a huge XD fan but they're alright.

[57K]

So you have some who love shooting the XD and some who don't. Some who like to yipe at each other and some who don't. The question was why do many have a gripe against the grip safety? For me it boils down to a couple of things: The grip safety is superfluous. Doesn't mean that you can't love your XD still, just means that the grip safety is superfluous. If it was a real need in service pistols, other manufacturers would build it into their designs. Nobody is asking for it so nobody else is building one. The grip safety was designed for Calvary soldiers. Made some sense back then. But we stopped riding horses into battle with light short single action triggers long ago...

The grip safety has nothing to do with loving or hating the XD. Some people are just not aware of the pistol's history dating back to when it was introduced into the US as the HS-2000. The XD/Xdm pistols are one of only a couple of polymer pistol designs that use a true single-action trigger mechanism. The other I'm aware of was a fairly inexpensive pistol that was called the Heritage Stealth. When the HS-2000 started showing up on these shores it had a trigger pull around 3#. One more reason for the grip safety and the two obvious reasons I pointed out earlier to illustrate that the grip safety is NOT supefluous. Your last sentence, removing the cavalry aspect, sums it up pretty well, actually.

light short single action triggers

When SA acquired the rights to market the the XD family in the US, they are the ones that mandated a heavier trigger pull rated from 5.5 -7.7 Lbs. HS Produkt complied but did not delete the grip safety just for the US market. The pistols are sold worldwide with many nations not having the litigation issues we have in this country so the the reason for not deleting the grip safety for a single market becomes rather obvious.

A manual safety or a heavy DA trigger offers greater safety to nervous first time pistol buyers. Again, nothing wrong as a new buyer in wanting additional safety features - just that the grip safety isn't the bonus feature you thought it was.

This is your solution for newer shooters, really?

Any single-action pistol with a manual safety requires more training to ingrain the proper procedure of when to deactivate it upon presentation and always making sure that you do. This mandates a higher level of training that most newer shooters don't possess. There are more than a few shooters carrying 1911s that really haven't mastered this concept but are guided toward the purchase of a 1911 because of internet lore. And, how is a heavier trigger a safety feature when it is likely to induce poorer shot placement. The whole purpose of carrying a pistol is personal or family safety and that makes my first safety concern, survival.

It's easy to say that there are safer pistols on the market, but how about reinforcing that with facts rather than opinion. When it comes to a gun counter commando pushing any line of pistols, it is overwhelming Glocks. That's what police carry, so it must be the best choice, right? And that has nothing to do with the giveaway prices that Glock offers to LE agencies for the prestige it provides to the vastly larger civilian market, does it?

[dayman]

Someone said that nobody had given a reason for liking the grip safety.

I like the grip safety because I carry my gun behind me, and thus reholster by touch. By keeping my hand off the grip safety during this process I can pretty well ensure that a wayward piece of shirt doesn't create a funny headline for the local gun-bashing papers.
So, I do actually have a reason why I like it.

[10mm4ever]

It's a passive safety, no different than the Glock type trigger safety that's on nearly every striker fired auto out there. Being so used to the 1911, the grip safety doesn't bother me in the least. If it's that big of an issue for you, take comfort in the fact that the market is over saturated with striker fired poly frames that don't have grip safeties.

[predecessor]

The XD/Xdm pistols are one of only a couple of polymer pistol designs that use a true single-action trigger mechanism. The other I'm aware of was a fairly inexpensive pistol that was called the Heritage Stealth. When the HS-2000 started showing up on these shores it had a trigger pull around 3#. One more reason for the grip safety and the two obvious reasons I pointed out earlier to illustrate that the grip safety is NOT supefluous.

Hmmm, I mention that no other modern pistol design incorporates a grip safety as evidence that it is superfluous, and you counter that is is NOT...because the XD is the "only" polymer pistol design that uses a single action trigger?

Just a reminder, superfluous means "not necessary" - so if the grip safety is necessary as you suggest, someone compelling needs to encourage those newbie designers over at Walther, CZ and FN Herstal to recall their PPQ, P-07 and Five-seveN polymer framed SAO pistols asap!

I'm not sure why all the metal framed single action pistols have been excluded from your scrutiny, but shouldn't those have been designed with the necessary grip safety as well? At the very least, since you feel that pistols with manual safeties or DA/SA triggers are actually less tactically advantageous (and therefore a danger to the user as you suggest) it's time for me to mothball 95 percent of my pistols.

The idea that a pistol, such as the XD, incorporates superfluous design features like a grip safety, LCI, ambi mag release, etc should not offend. Many pistols do, and superfluous features can aid and enhance a user's experience. The 1911 is but one example. I own several, and yet am intellectually honest in admitting that the grip safety is not a necessary feature.

[TunnelRat]

Walther, CZ and FN Herstal to recall their PPQ, P-07 and Five-seveN polymer framed SAO pistols asap!

I agree with the PPQ. Though you realize that both the P-07 and Five-Seven include manual safeties, right?

[tahunua001]

fine... I'll jump into the fray.

I don't hate the grip safety, if you are properly gripping the gun then you shouldn't even know it's there, if you don't have the strength in your hand to disengage it then you also don't have the strength to pull the trigger and manage recoil. it does not lockup when filled with sand contrary to internet rumors.

all the hating is thrown out by brand snobs trying to justify why they think their brand of choice is a better option than everybody else.

the end.

[Gaerek]

I had avoided posting in this thread, not because I was avoiding confrontation, but because I saw where it was heading. But, I just want to sum up my feelings. Not going to reply to anyone in particular, just give my thoughts.

Do I have a problem with XD/XD(M)/XDS)?

No, not at all. I don't particularly like them personally. They don't feel good in my hand. BUT, they are good guns. I've recommended them in the past, and I'll continue to recommend them. For the record, if I was planning on buying a small single stack .45, I would probably get an XDS, not a G36. I've held both, and strangely, the XDS feels better. It's also more reliable (the G36 is probably the worst gun Glock has made).

So I have a problem with people who like and shoot XD/XD(M)/XDS?

Not at all. A good friend I met at my defensive handgun class shoots the compact .45 XD(M). He loves it. I give him crap all the time, but mainly because he pays twice as much for ammo than I do. I have not once criticized his decision to shoot that gun. He loves it, and it works for him. I would NEVER say, "Hey dude, you should really get a Glock, it's a better gun!" Why? Because it's not true. Whether the Glock is mechanically better or worse than all variants of XD is irrelevant. For him, a Glock wouldn't be better, just like for me, an XD wouldn't be better for me.

What I do have a problem with is people who are so blinded by their own opinions and biases that they seem to think that their choice of gun is superior to everyone else's. These same people would never recommend anything except what they shoot. Before you say I'm directing this at someone, I'm not. There's people who do this with practically every gun made. Just look at all the threads of people bragging about their "flawless" hi-point, or Taurus. These same people get defensive anytime you mention a flaw in their choice, and will defend it irrationally. Do I believe Glocks are "Perfection (TM)?" Not at all. They have flaws in design, and I am more than happy to admit that. It's just funny watching some people, in this thread and others, get defensive when you mention a flaw in their choice, as if you are attacking them personally.

So, about the LCI and Striker Indicator...

Unobtrusive or not, the are there. I understand having an LCI...they're required to be sold in certain jurisdictions. Are they useful? Marginally. I certainly don't trust them, and will always prefer a press-check to looking at an LCI, if I can. Yep, Glocks have them. I prefer the Glock one because it's subtle. DO they make guns safer? Not one bit.

The Striker Indicator...anyone who argues that this thing has a purpose is kidding themselves. The only reason it's there is so the gun can be marketed as safer. Go look at ads for the gun from several years ago...they all mention the striker indicator. But if the gun is loaded with one in the chamber, the LCI will be up, and by definition the striker will also be up. The only exception to this is if you pull the trigger and the gun goes click. But then, you STILL have a round in the chamber, and you should be clearing the malfunction. If you're taking time to look or feel for the striker indicator before clearing the malfunction, you're doing it wrong. If the gun is unloaded, no round in the chamber, the condition of the striker is irrelevant.

Now, do I care that they are there? Not at all. My original point was that they don't really increase real safety (all they do is increase perceived safety) and, that the striker indicator is completely superfluous. Would I prefer the LCI to be a little more subtle? Sure, but that's not something that would make me not buy a gun...same with the striker indicator.

The Grip Safety

I've already talked ad nauseum about this one. Do I care that it's there? No, I didn't even notice it when I shot the gun. I have no real preference either way whether it's there or not. If Glock decided the Gen 5's were going to have them, as long as it didn't affect function, I wouldn't care, and would likely buy one. Not because of or in spite of the grip safety. However, it is my belief that a grip safety only increases the perceived safety of the gun (just like a trigger safety...Glocks would be perfectly safe without them, I believe). If you're doing something dumb with a gun, with or without that extra mechanical device, you or someone around you can still get hurt. If you cannot remember to keep your finger off the trigger, especially when holstering, then I question whether a gun is a good idea for you, with or without a grip safety.

I like shooting 1911's, and the grip safeties don't bother me at all. I am neutral when it comes to them. However, it doesn't change my belief above about them, that they are basically superfluous, and are really there more for marketing the gun as "safer" than other guns that don't have them.

So why do you like your Glock so much?

When I was first looking into buying a handgun, I was originally going to buy an XD(M) 9mm. This was after browsing magazines, and wanting something simple to shoot, that wasn't a Glock (I just couldn't choose something that was popular! Had to go with an underdog). However, when I hit the range to try out a variety of guns, I found that I absolutely hated the feel of the XD(M), and in my hands, it didn't point naturally (1911's, for example, don't either...I just like shooting them anyway, but not defensively). When I shot the Glock, it felt like it was designed just for my hands. I shot it better, and it felt better. LCI's, Striker Indicators, Grip Safeties, etc, simply didn't enter into the equation. So when it was time to hit the LGS to make my purchase I went straight to the Glock counter. For me, it's a work gun. It's not meant to be pretty. I just want it to go bang when I pull the trigger, and put holes where I point it. I hate the Glock sight, and changed it almost immediately.

But I am fully aware of people's preferences. If someone asks for advice on a gun and says, "I don't want a Glock" I won't try to sell them on one. My recommendation will likely include a gun in the various XD lines. You can point out 100 flaws with the Glock, and it won't change my opinion...but I won't get defensive about it. Relieved ejection port? I don't care that the Glock doesn't have one. I don't have a BTF issue. Un-conventional grip angle? You mean, it doesn't have a 1911 grip angle? That's fine with me, because the Glock points more naturally for me. "Conventional" grip angle guns are conventional because they copy the 1911 grip angle. Glock went with what is ergonomic for most people. Many people don't like it. That's fine, use what works for you.

And that's the bottom line. Use what works. Don't use a thread on grip safeties to show why XD's are better than Glocks...that's just petty, and shows insecurity in your choice. After all, a gun is a personal choice. But it's not a personal attack if someone points out a flaw in your choice.

I mean, I could point out several flaws of a 1911...but I choose not to because it would be counter productive, and I know I'd get a reaction to that.

Alright, I'm done. Feel free to say I'm an XD hater and a Glock fanboy, if you'd like. That's certainly not what I am, but if that's what you see...fine, I don't care. XD's are great guns. I just don't prefer them. I also don't need a laundry list of features to "prove" that my choice is better than another person's choice. I know what works for me.

[predecessor]

I agree with the PPQ. Though you realize that both the P-07 and Five-Seven include manual safeties, right?

Certainly. CZ and FN Herstal didn't feel the need to choose a grip safety over a manual safety because they felt that it was integral to a single action trigger system. They used that old fashioned "less tactical and therefore less safe" manual safety like every other modern single action pistol design. Amateurs! If only someone had told them about that new grip safety that has been obsolete since the 40's

[TunnelRat]

Certainly. CZ and FN Herstal didn't feel the need to choose a grip safety over a manual safety because they felt that it was integral to a single action trigger system. They used that old fashioned "less tactical and therefore less safe" manual safety like every other modern single action pistol design. Amateurs! If only someone had told them about that new grip safety that has been obsolete since the 40's

Oh lawds.

I can't even recognize the outline of a horse here we've beat it so much.

[MercyfulFate]

I had never held a 1911 until my friend recently bought one, and the grip safety made me instantly dislike it.

I just hated how it felt, and the fact that it was there at all personally. Just my opinion, and it was mostly an ergonomics thing.

[57K]

Hmmm, I mention that no other modern pistol design incorporates a grip safety as evidence that it is superfluous, and you counter that is is NOT...because the XD is the "only" polymer pistol design that uses a single action trigger?

Here's what I actually said:

The XD/Xdm pistols are one of only a couple of polymer pistol designs that use a true single-action trigger mechanism.

If you want to include the FN Five-SeveN, that's fine by me, just show me someone that actually carries one and I do believe we are talking about carry pistols. The Five-SeveN was actually designed with a military role in mind.

Just a reminder, superfluous means "not necessary" - so if the grip safety is necessary as you suggest, someone compelling needs to encourage those newbie designers over at Walther, CZ and FN Herstal to recall their PPQ, P-07 and Five-seveN polymer framed SAO pistols asap!

The only pistol you mentioned that is single-action is the FN Five-SeveN. If you'll look at the pistol comparison chart at the Walther site you'll see that the PPQ's trigger is spec'd as pre-cock which is similar to Glock's Safe-Action in that it is pre-cocked when the slide goes forward. Meaning the trigger pull has to complete the striker's rearward motion a short distance before it's released. It is not single-action. The CZ P-07 is a SA/DA pistol that can be set up for decocker or manual safety, but both the P-07 and the newer P-09 are shipped as decockers. CZ 75s and variants also have a half cock intercept that can be used in double action to shorten the DA pull, or be carried cocked and locked. Their Single action pistols are marketed for competition with the exception that a CZ 75 SA can be bought with night sights. To my knowledge, CZ does not make a polymer frame single-action pistol.

I'm not sure why all the metal framed single action pistols have been excluded from your scrutiny, but shouldn't those have been designed with the necessary grip safety as well? At the very least, since you feel that pistols with manual safeties or DA/SA triggers are actually less tactically advantageous (and therefore a danger to the user as you suggest) it's time for me to mothball 95 percent of my pistols.

And the most widely used by professionals is the 1911 with a grip safety. The SIG P-210 is not common in the US, The Hi-Power is not carried by a large number of shooter's who CC and the CZ's are predominantly DA/SA offering the shooter his preference. The Taurus 92 series kinda falls into the same category with the CZs except for it's decock function incorporated into its manual safety. I won't bother with clones.

No where did I say that pistols with manual safeties or DA/SA triggers are at a tactical disadvantage. Let me quote what I actually said to show you are again distorting my statements:

Any single-action pistol with a manual safety requires more training to ingrain the proper procedure of when to deactivate it upon presentation and always making sure that you do. This mandates a higher level of training that most newer shooters don't possess.

And, how is a heavier trigger a safety feature when it is likely to induce poorer shot placement. The whole purpose of carrying a pistol is personal or family safety and that makes my first safety concern, survival.

A manual safety or a heavy DA trigger offers greater safety to nervous first time pistol buyers.

DA triggers do not have to be heavy to be safe. My SIG/Sauer P-226 and CZ P-01 have high quality and fairly light DA pulls and I recommend them both to newer shooters. Particularly the P-01 which when decocked the hammer is caught on the intercept (half-cock) in the hammer making for a shorter DA first trigger pull.


The idea that a pistol, such as the XD, incorporates superfluous design features like a grip safety, LCI, ambi mag release, etc should not offend. Many pistols do, and superfluous features can aid and enhance a user's experience. The 1911 is but one example. I own several, and yet am intellectually honest in admitting that the grip safety is not a necessary feature.

You calling the XD grip safety superfluous doesn't offend me because I have provided 2 solid reasons why it's not. 1 Helps keep the pistol from going out of battery when holstered so in a crisis you don't draw a pistol that's out of battery. Anybody else having trouble with this concept? 2. Placing your thumb on the rear of the slide, as you should when holstering, automatically releases your grip on the grip safety and the pistol can not be fired. Again, anyone having problems comprehending this? And I didn't invent the term "Glock Leg" and a good many of those cases did not result from a shooter having his booger hook on the bang switch. Triggers caught on holsters or some other obstruction upon being holstered. The XD grip safety was incorporated to address these issues specifically along with the light single action pulls on the HS-2000 pistols. Whether or not some of the other features are superfluous kind of depends on who owns it. I don't think a lefty is going to complain about an ambi mag release, and in my case, I have no issues with the LCI or the cocked indicator status feature since I know my weapons condition in total darkness making a press check unnecessary, and you can't do a press check in total darkness, can you. As far as intellectual honesty, no where have I distorted your statements as you have mine and everything I've said that may sound like opinion has been backed by facts.

[57K]

Gaerek, in post #168 you took the long and round-about route to do exactly what you said you're not trying to do. LOL.

First off, I'm not offended by anyone's preference of a Glock over an XD/XDm. What I am doing here is advocating the grip safety on the XD/XDm. You don't handload, so there may be a number of the XDm's features that are relevant to me and other handloaders, that may not be relevant to you. In pointing out the design improvements of the XD/XDm, like the grip safety, I have listed those improvements factually and the facts don't lie.

If one considers themself to be experienced and competent in making a pistol choice, that's fine by me. My reason for posting the features where I believe XD/XDm pistols have improved over the Glock has nothing to do with inflating my own ego, and everything to do with a newer shooter who may not know the differences and maybe buying a pistol for the first time. It is not about trying to convince a loyal Glock owner that he's made the wrong choice. If you say you're experienced, then I will take your word for it. My concern is for the newer shooters weighing their options and the facts help in that regard.

[orangello]

Maybe if it was available in a contrasting color?

[Gaerek]

My purpose at the end was to show that all those "features" that you keep mentioning that make the XD better than the Glock are very minimal, and pale in comparison to how a gun works for YOU. I picked a Glock not because of a list of features, or lack of features, but because the gun worked for me. That's the point I'm trying to make.

You like XDs? Cool, keep shooting them. I have no issue whatsoever about that. I'm still trying to figure out what exactly you have against Glocks though...and why you need to keep repeating the same "features" over and over again to "prove" why your choice is better.

The funny part about all of this is that taking a step back, and looking at all of this, we're all nitpicking about tiny, insubstantial features. XDs are accurate. Glocks are accurate. XDs are reliable. Glocks are reliable. XDs are safe, in safe hands. Glocks are safe, in safe hands. XDs are rugged. Glocks are rugged. In the grand scheme of things, you cannot go wrong with either choice. It's all personal preference.