FNX or XDM 9mm?

[Mausermolt]

give me some pros and cons on these two pistols. i was thinking about a Sig 226, but $800 is just looking slightly too much....unless someone can convince me otherwise so which one do you think is the better pistol for general use target practice, truck gun, occasional CC?

[Mausermolt]

300 views and no replies!?

[57K]

I don't have an XDm in 9mm, I have the 4.5 in .45 ACP and my shooting partner has an XDm 3.8 Compact in 9mm. Before I bought my XDm, I came very close to buying the FNP USG in .45 ACP. I liked it a lot and at about the same time SA announced that the XDm in .45 ACP was shipping so I ordered it instead. I had done some checking at XD Talk and at the FN forum and came away with the impression that the XDm was probably the more reliable of the 2 and there were some complaints about CS at the FN Forum. I could list a host of excellent features regarding the XDm, but you might want to do the same and check out both forums for opinions from actual owners. I had planned on buying an XDm in 9mm, but recently had the chance to buy an SR9 directly from Ruger after I sent them my P-89 that had a problem. Ruger told me that they no longer really service the P series and offered me the SR9 and I have been somewhat overwhelmed at how good it is considering what they cost, so, my next pistol purchase will be an SR45.

[Mausermolt]

thank you for your reply. i put this question on this forum due to to the fact that there are many people that own many different types of firearms including the two(three) i have proposed. i didnt want to go to a FN or XD forum just to be fed bias information due to the origin of the mother of said forum. so far im leaning toward the XD because of the extra accessories that come with the pistol and the 19+1 capacity

[rburch]

I haven't shot the XDM, and have only put a few rounds through an FNX one time, so take my advice with that in mind.

I've had my FNS-9 for a few months now, and I really like the gun.

Based on comments from people I know who own both, I don't see where either would be a bad choice, but based on the quality of my FNS, I'd probably choose the FNX.

Besides it comes from the factory with 3 mags and night sights.

[6.8]

The Fnx is a better pistol and made in the USA

[915A]

Having shot the 226 quite a bit, its a great piece. Ive shot an XD 40 and 9 and it was good, but not 226 good IMO. I am very intrigued with the FNH line and its on my want list. I see the Ruger SR line was mentioned, my 9c is amazing and the 40c is my next purchase unless a 45c is in the works. If you can swing the 226 get it, but nothing wrong with the SA XD line or the FNH line from what I have read.

[Robk]

I currently own a FNX-9 and a P226, no experience with the XD. That said, depends what you want. The FNX and P226 are both hammer fired. The XD is striker fired. The FNX and XD are polymer, P226 steel and alloy. All will work fine, FNX & P226 for personal experience, Xd from reports. Your choice of options. Now I understand the P226 is pricey, but why not look for a good used one. They are all over the place for about 500-600 range. Personally, old school West German/German with folded slide seem to balance a little better for me than current offering. Disclaimer: yes I am Sig biased. But I would not discount the FNX or XD in any way. I will come down to your choice of price point and options. Good luck.

[Mausermolt]

i do really like hammered, DA/SA pistols. that being said ive fired a XDM 9 and that was a darn good shooting pistol. it kinda sounds like either way i look at it I will be getting a good pistol. ugh its so hard to decide! just from looking around a bit the FNH and FNX look almost identical, what are the differences between the two?

[iMagUdspEllr]

FNX-9:
-More recoil (because its lighter)
-Safety isn't as positive feeling as other guns with metal safeties
-Shorter sight radius
~DA/SA
+Smaller (easier to conceal)
+Can carry it condition I like a 1911.
+Lightweight (more comfortable to carry)
+Nicer trigger

XDM9:
-Heavier (less comfortable to carry)
-Bigger (harder to conceal)
-Higher bore axis (more muzzle flip... but its weight and the 9mm caliber makes this a moot point)
~Striker fired
+Less recoil (because its heavier)
+Longer sight radius
+No safety to worry about

I could be forgetting things. But, these two guns excel in different areas. The FNX is going to be the one to go with because you will have an easier time concealing it. What type of trigger do you prefer?

It would be easier to answer the question if you picked:
1)Full-size, compact, or subcompact
2)DA/SA w/ safety, DA/SA w/o safety, or striker fired

I would understand if you were comparing:
FNX-9, P229, HK P30, etc.
or
XDM, M&P, Glock, etc.

Even though I'm inclined to recommend compact because you want to carry it occasionally I still don't know what type of trigger/safety style you like.

[Swampman1]

+No safety to worry about

no safety?

[Mausermolt]

I would prefer a full size because of increased accuracy (im a big stickler on accuracy) striker fired, hammered, safety or no safety im not worried about too much.
also i put CC just for kicks, it will be no way a frequent cary piece. just when i get a wild hair.

[allaroundhunter]

I personally don't like XDms. The ones that I shot had a trigger that was a little mushy, and when you reset the trigger there was still some take up before it would break again.

The FNX is a good pistol. I have shot it in .40, and I like that you have the choice to carry it multiple ways. I now prefer to carry cocked and locked since starting to carry my 1911; but any other method works just as well - it is personal preference.

I shot the FNX better, and I attribute that to the trigger. The fact that they come with night sights and 3 magazines is a good bonus.

[Scrumbag]

For me I'd go for the FN having shot both.

ATB,

Scrummy

[TunnelRat]

I would prefer a full size because of increased accuracy

You'd be amazed the accuracy that can be achieved with small pistols. I shoot an M&P 9 fullsize and a M&P 9c. Substantial difference in size, especially barrel length and sight radius. But I can shoot the 9c just about as well.


Look up Hickok45 on youtube. He gets some amazing accuracy out of small guns.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Swampman1: No manual thumb safety on the XDM. My fault for being vague.

@Mausermolt: Okay, so it seems this gun is just a range/truck/house gun then. Get a Sig. If that is outside your budget, get the FNX.

Check out a CZ P-07 just to compare against the FNX.

Originally Posted by allaroundhunter

I personally don't like XDms. The ones that I shot had a trigger that was a little mushy, and when you reset the trigger there was still some take up before it would break again.

Yup. Exactly.

Originally Posted by TunnelRat

You'd be amazed the accuracy that can be achieved with small pistols. I shoot an M&P 9 fullsize and a M&P 9c. Substantial difference in size, especially barrel length and sight radius. But I can shoot the 9c just about as well.

Exactly. Don't let your fear of decreased accuracy prevent you from getting a more compact gun that is more suitable for carry.

[57K]

Originally Posted By Mausemolt
I would prefer a full size because of increased accuracy (im a big stickler on accuracy) striker fired, hammered, safety or no safety im not worried about too much.
also i put CC just for kicks, it will be no way a frequent cary piece. just when i get a wild hair.

MM, I test a lot of handloads both in handheld shooting and from a rested position. If I bought a pistol to meet your needs it would be the XDm 4.5 model, maybe even the 5.25 Comp. model if you think you might start playing gun games like IDPA or USPSA. Not only is the sight radius longer, XDm's have Match Grade barrels. Just yesterday, my shooting partner told me that my XDm is as accurate as any .45 ACP he's ever fired and that includes a Dan Wesson CBob he owns and paid over $1300 for. I would expect no less from an XDm 4.5 in 9mm. As far as polymer framed pistols go, the XDm is the only one that is purely single-action in operation and it's also the most tuneable, IMO. I have a PRP tigger kit in mine that breaks right on 4#, maybe a tad less. It has no takeup to speak of, breaks crisp and clean and comparable to a good many 1911s that cost considerably more and because it incorporates a trigger stop to eliminate overtravel, which is also important to me in shooting the most accurate groups, reset is VERY short.

As far as potentially carrying in the future, I'll say this, many people have very little problem carrying a 1911 because they are slim. The Ruger SR9/40/45s are just as slim as a 1911 and the SR9 could easily be carried by selecting a good holster because of its thinness. But, you would give up some sight radius and barrel length because the SR9's barrel measures 4.14". One heck of a pistol though and a steal at around $425 or less. The 45s are going for a little closer to $450 right now.

[wbw]

I've had the FNX 9mm and the XDm in 9mm. I still have the XDm. Nothing wrong with the FNX. Never had a problem with it, it just had to go to make room for something else. My observation was that, even though they were both poly, the XDm was a little more robust, for what that's worth. But the FNX went 'bang' every time. On the other hand my XDm has over 2000 rounds through it with zero problems.

As mentioned above, the Ruger SRc9 is an excellent choice. It's got a small mag for carry and larger one for the range, if you feel like banging off the dollars at a fast rate.

[Mausermolt]

Ive decided to save up and get the Sig. later on i will the FNX in a .40. the XDm's for some reason i just cant come to love enough to buy one...maybe its because my brother already has one and thats all he talks about

[Swampman1]

I would prefer a full size because of increased accuracy (im a big stickler on accuracy)

Well if you're competition shooting, I agree. But studies have shown, in self defense situations, most shots are at close range.

[915A]

Ive decided to save up and get the Sig

Your gonna love the 226! At some point a 226 or 229 will be in my collection.

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Mausermolt: IMHO that is backwards. It makes more sense to get the Sig in .40 because its all metal.

FNXs are pretty much the same weight as a Glock 23. I understand the police use the Glock 23 all the time but a Glock 23 literally has double the recoil of a full-size polymer 9mm.

A 1911 will have less recoil than a G23/FNX-40 despite being .45 ACP (1911s are heavy).

Just get two Sigs. Or get the FNX in 9mm.

But, that's just me. I think it makes more sense to put larger calibers in metal guns and smaller calibers in polymer guns.

[TunnelRat]

FNXs are pretty much the same weight as a Glock 23. I understand the police use the Glock 23 all the time but a Glock 23 literally has double the recoil of a full-size polymer 9mm.

The FNX in 40 I had was much more mild than a Glock 23, but that could just be perception.

[Mausermolt]

im not too terribly recoil sensitive, i have a 1911 and ive shot the Glock 23, and a XDm 3.5 in 45 quite a bit, neither of which bother me at all on recoil. i can shoot those guns all day long comfortably and accurately. the sig 226 in 40 only holds 12 rounds and im looking for something with a little higher capacity than 10 or 12 rounds. soooooo thats why i decided to go for the sig 226 in 9mm

[iMagUdspEllr]

Mec-Gar makes magazines that have a 15 round capacity in .40 for the P226 Here

Really, though. You need to get whatever you want to get before they ban it. They are voting on gun control measures in the senate today.