# S&W M&P40, Springfield XDM 40 or Glock 22



## pjc1979

Choices, choices...I've narrowed down my options for my first handgun purchase to the S&W M&P40, Springfield XDM 40 and the Glock 22. The handgun I buy will earn its living in home defense and at the range. I'd love to hear some comments from those of you that have experience using these firearms and advantages/disadvantages of each model as you see it. I'm trying to determine real distinctions between the models that I should be aware of before making a purchase. Thanks to all and I'm really enjoying the forum! I'm certainly learning a lot.


----------



## Todd

You're not going to go wrong with any of the choices. I have 2 XDs (XD40 Service and XD9SC). Honestly, just go with the one you shoot the best with. 

Any particular reason you're with the .40 as a first gun?


----------



## literaltrance

pjc1979 said:


> Choices, choices...I've narrowed down my options for my first handgun purchase to the S&W M&P40, Springfield XDM 40 and the Glock 22. The handgun I buy will earn its living in home defense and at the range. I'd love to hear some comments from those of you that have experience using these firearms and advantages/disadvantages of each model as you see it. I'm trying to determine real distinctions between the models that I should be aware of before making a purchase. Thanks to all and I'm really enjoying the forum! I'm certainly learning a lot.


I'm just going to brainstorm some things I know about these handguns, but I think it I should say all three have proven track records, thus all three should serve you well.

Pros:
-XDM has the highest capacity of the bunch at 16+1
-both S&W and XDM sight radii are remarkable
-S&W M&P [most likely] is the most comfortable
-Glock will have the greatest selection and availability of aftermarket parts and accessories

Cons:
-XDM grip may feel tall in the hands
-Glock sights are "U-dot," which might be strange if you're used to the traditional three dots
-Glock grip angle is awkward if you have any 1911 shooting experience

Other:
-"Generation 4" Glocks are just around the corner, and if you thought a Glock couldn't get any uglier, you were mistaken :anim_lol:


----------



## VAMarine

pjc1979 said:


> Choices, choices...I've narrowed down my options for my first handgun purchase to the S&W M&P40, Springfield XDM 40 and the Glock 22. The handgun I buy will earn its living in home defense and at the range. I'd love to hear some comments from those of you that have experience using these firearms and advantages/disadvantages of each model as you see it. I'm trying to determine real distinctions between the models that I should be aware of before making a purchase. Thanks to all and I'm really enjoying the forum! I'm certainly learning a lot.


Looking at each, all of them offer something different then the other (or at least can depending on desired configuration)

1: S&W M&P- The standard sized guns have a decent reputation for reliability. I don't like the take down as it requires that "lever" to be manually lowered prior to dis assembly. The M&P does have the interchangeable back straps as does the XDM, the GLOCK grip is what is is, some like it, some don't. The M&P can be had with or without a magazine disconnect safety or can be had with a thumb safety, the XDM and Glock do not have those features. As there are different models of the M&P, be careful if you decide to purchase one and make sure it is equipped the way you want it. I had a brain fart and came home with the M&P9c with the magazine disconnect, it's wasn't a make or break issue with me, but I would have preferred a gun without one (yes I know it could have been removed) as it's just my personal preference to not have the magazine disconnect.

2: XDM Based on the original XD but with some improvements, such as the interchangeable back straps and other tweaks. The XDM offers a grip safety which the Glock and M&P do not have, and does not require any other steps in take down like the M&P, the XDM does not require the trigger to be pulled to take the slide off like the GLOCK, but the grip safety MUST be pressed in to move the slide. The XD and XDM have good track records, and the XDM has a little more ammo on tap than the other models. Holster selection is not quite as good as the M&P or the Glock, but it's getting there.

3: GLOCK , if you don't like manual safeties, this is the gun for you. It has a proven and hard to beat track record and accessories (holsters/aftermarket pars/mags) are available anywhere. It does not have the grip safety, thumb safety, or mag disconnect that you can get on the other models, so if those are features that YOU find favorable, the GLOCK is out of the running. As noted above, the trigger does need to be pulled to remove the slide, and while that's not generally an issue, complacency happens. As long as one is responsible and doesn't make an opps followed by a boom, it's not an issue.

All three guns are about the same size and about the same capacity, so it really boils down to what features you want. The M&P and the XDM both come with a Melonite finish (excluding the XDM in w/ stainless slide), the GLOCK has a Tennifer finish (Google these and read the Wikipedia summaries) both are tough finishes. The early XDs NOT XDMs had finish issues, as well did the M&P where the Melonite was flaking off.

I had an M&P9c and I would say that the GLOCK and the XDM are better made, the 9c just felt like a little toy.

Grip angle: As this is your fist gun, it's not an issue, but if you get other guns, you will find in most cases that the GLOCK has a different grip angle than _most_ guns, this is one reason that I went with the XDM over the GLOCK, I like the GLOCK, but I like keeping my guns as similar as possible and the XDM has the same grip angle as my 1911s, HK P7, Browing Hi Power and Browning Buckmark.

All three are as accurate as you can shoot them, the XDM is a little more costly than the GLOCK and M&P, some say that this is because of the XDM Gear (holster, mag carrier etc) that comes with the XDM, I think this is crap as the XD/XDM Gear isn't all that great, so don't let that be a deciding factor.

All thee have great warranties behind the guns, so if anything does go wrong, you WILL be taken care of.

I don't like the grip angle and lack of ability to really change it on the GLOCK. I don't like that I have to hold in the grip safety of the XDM to move the slide. I don't like the overall construction of the M&P and I don't like that lever to take down the pistol.

What I do like about the GLOCK is that it's one tough as nails gun and accessories are everywhere. I do like the grip of the M&P, and I like the XDM for the single action trigger (pulling the trigger releases the striker, just like my P7, again it's a commonality thing) and just points better for me than the GLOCK and that it's a well made gun.

The GLOCK has polygonal rifling while the others have traditional rifling, GLOCK does not recommend using lead only projectiles, it's not a big issue, but if you plan on using lead only projectiles you may want to replace the barrel with an aftermarket. The polygonal rifling is reported to last longer than traditional and slightly increases velocity. I say reported as I've never wore out a barrel and have done no chrono testing of my own.

Take some more time, research what options are available. Use the search tool here and see what's being said on mag safeties, grip safeties and thumb safeties etc. Some like them, some don't.


----------



## knoxrocks222

a friend of mine just got a m&p .40, and i love it, it shoots sooooo good, and with the interchangeable backstraps you cant go wrong. 


glock 22 is a rather large handgun, if i were you i would consider a glock 23, same caliber just a smaller frame.

and the XD...iv shot many xd's and have had no complaints yet, they all went boom when i pulled the trigger and were all very accurate <<<<which is an understatement lol its all about how the shooter adjust to the firearm, cause the firearm wont adjust to the shooter. just remember that when shooting different guns 


knox


----------



## pjc1979

Thanks for the reply Todd, from all I gathered just from reading, (no personal experience) it's been suggested that the 9mm is of questionable stopping power. As I've read you state in other postings, if you're a good shot it's not so much an issue. In my situation, I figure it'd be better to play it safe and go with the larger caliber for home defense and save the 9mm for concealed carry once I get licensed.


----------



## Todd

pjc1979 said:


> Thanks for the reply Todd, from all I gathered just from reading, (no personal experience) it's been suggested that the 9mm is of questionable stopping power. As I've read you state in other postings, if you're a good shot it's not so much an issue. In my situation, I figure it'd be better to play it safe and go with the larger caliber for home defense and save the 9mm for concealed carry once I get licensed.


If I was in your situation, I'd rent both the XD40 and the XD9, or the Glock 22 and the 17, or the M&P40 and the M&9, and do side by side comparisons. See not only which brand of gun you shoot better with, but also see which caliber. If you find you're more accurate with the 9mm, go with that, regardless of what you've heard about questionable stopping power. There are plenty of dead people out there that can attest to the stopping power of the 9mm. But if you find you're equal with both or better with the .40, by all means get it. I do think it would be a mistake as a new shooter to decide on or rule out a caliber based purely on what you've _read_. This would be especially true if you shot the .40 (or any other caliber) and found you were marginal with it, especially in a controlled environment like the range, and yet continued with that choice when there are other options available that could suit you better.

I guess my point is to make your decision based on what you've tested and know will work for you and not merely based on the suggestions of others.


----------



## pjc1979

No kidding literaltrance, the Glocks get uglier and uglier but as others have said their true beauty is in their simplicity and as you state the ease of getting parts. I can tell this decision is going to be tough. I'm thinking as you in that they are all quality guns. I hope once I actually get my hands on them that one model will stick out and say "I'm the right one for you!" but we'll see. I appreciate the info. you provided on some of the differences. I'll definately look at the sights more closely to see if one seems easier for me to use than another. Not that it really matters, but based on looks alone, I love the XDM. I think it's got something to do with the straight lines of the model. It just looks tough. One concern I have is that the barrell is ported and I've heard that firing at night with this type of weapon isn't good in self defense situations. From what I've seen the M&P seems like a very fine weapon as well but seems to run the highest in terms of cost than the other models. It may well be worth it. M&P's seem to be a bit tough to find so that's probably not going to help me in getting a good deal. Do you by chance know if the M&P has a ported barrel?


----------



## tekhead1219

IMHO, go with a shotgun for home defense and get a handgun for CCW. I agree with Todd's assessment. Try both calibers before ruling one out. One other thing you might consider is that for concealed carry, even with all other things being equal, you have more shots to throw with the 9mm. Usually I carry a .45 ACP, but, when weather and clothing don't allow for good concealment with the .45, I have no qualms with depending on a 9mm for protection. Just my .02.:smt033


----------



## Brevard

I take it you are wanting large guns, and not compact, or sub-compact.

M&P = I have shot two 40's different ammo, both had have FTF's. It wasnt alot but enough to make me question this as a defensive gun of concealed carry. It was however quite comfortable and does shoot good when it shoots. Now note that I shot a M&P40. Not sure if the compact is the same way or if the 9's and 45's do the FTF's either.

XD = Now I have shot one in a .45 compact. Very very nice. For me it was a tie between it and a glock shooting wise. Bested the M&P (when the M&P shot). I like the feel of it better than the XDm. Even though you can shange the backstrap out on the XDm the grip is still not as comfortable as the XD. Now that is my opinion. I feel that Springfield actually went backward with there design as the grip no matter which backstrap you use feels like crap to me. I would stick with the XD's if I was going to pick.

Glock = For me shooting rugers and stuff, it was no different than shooting them. I shot the 23 and the 27. I personally dont like the length of the 22 and would try to get you to check out the 23 if you decide to get a .40 glock. The two glocks I have shot for me held a tighter pattern than the M&P but not the XD in which they were about dead even.

Personally speaking I would shy away from the 9's myself. Too small of a bullet for me. Like a guy at work told me the other day. 9's are only good for paper, small varments, and rap videos. To carry for defense you might as well be carrying a .38 special. He had a brother that was a cop he shot the guy 10 times with his 9 and the guy ended up killing him and then dying later from the wounds he received from the cop. 

But for me it really isnt about accuracy. I dont plan on shooting someone 30 yards away. The way I see it a majority of self defense shootings are at really close ranges. Close enough to where you should be able to be accurate and fast with any .40 or .45. Just my opinion and several other I have talked to but you need to make your own.


----------



## tekhead1219

Brevard said:


> But for me it really isnt about accuracy. I dont plan on shooting someone 30 yards away. The way I see it a majority of self defense shootings are at really close ranges. Close enough to where you should be able to be accurate and fast with any .40 or .45. Just my opinion and several other I have talked to but you need to make your own.


As has been said in other posts, placement is more important than the size of the hole. Buy and carry what you can shoot and PLACE the shot accurately and dependably.:smt023


----------



## literaltrance

pjc1979 said:


> No kidding literaltrance, the Glocks get uglier and uglier but as others have said their true beauty is in their simplicity and as you state the ease of getting parts. I can tell this decision is going to be tough. I'm thinking as you in that they are all quality guns. I hope once I actually get my hands on them that one model will stick out and say "I'm the right one for you!" but we'll see. I appreciate the info. you provided on some of the differences. I'll definately look at the sights more closely to see if one seems easier for me to use than another. Not that it really matters, but based on looks alone, I love the XDM. I think it's got something to do with the straight lines of the model. It just looks tough. One concern I have is that the barrell is ported and I've heard that firing at night with this type of weapon isn't good in self defense situations. From what I've seen the M&P seems like a very fine weapon as well but seems to run the highest in terms of cost than the other models. It may well be worth it. M&P's seem to be a bit tough to find so that's probably not going to help me in getting a good deal. Do you by chance know if the M&P has a ported barrel?


I am fortunate enough to work with other handgun enthusiasts. Two of them have 40S&W XDMs, and they really are a pleasure to shoot.

Ported barrels can go either way. If all you can get is a ported barrel, then get it (a ported handgun is better than no handgun IMO). There is a bit of a myth floating about that muzzle flash from a ported barrel is going to blind you at night. Even bright muzzle flashes are only for an instant; I have serious doubts that it's vision-inhibiting. It might just be me....I still have great vision and have little problems making things out objects in low-lit situations. Maybe if you have bifocals or real lazy eyes, ported barrels aren't for you. Now a real danger with ported barrels is getting burned by hot gases while in awkward shooting stances in a self-defense scenario. This is the potential price you pay for a ported barrel.

I agree with this assessment: the one that talks to you when you hold it is the one you want. There's a lot to be said about being comfortable AND confident with what is in your hands. I love to shoot hot rounds out of my 10mm, but after a few mags I start flinching. Once this happens, confidence, accuracy, and persistency suffer. The same thing happens when I shoot a Glock 23... I do great for the first couple mags, but after a while my hand gets really sore and my groupings suffer. The LAST thing I want are any correlations between handguns and problems when my life is on the line.


----------



## pjc1979

I gotta hand it to you VAMarine, you really know your guns! I appreciate you detailing the differences in the safeties on each weapon. I figure the M&P and XDM are a bit more idiot proof than the Glock which isn't necessarily a bad thing. With all the differences in safety features among the models I'll be sure to be careful about what I actually buy. I definitely don't want to come home and take my gun out for the first time and be upset that it does/doesn't have a certain feature. I guess all those letter and number in a model number do stand for something! You give some good advise there thanks. Do you find the grip safety on the XDM to be an annoyance or do you even notice it? As you stated I don't think grip angle will be a huge deal for me as this will be my first firearm and as such don't have any prior preference or angle that I'm really use to. I wikipedia-ed the melonite and tenifer and being that I'm no chemical scientist didn't seem see any reason to think one would be better than the other. In this case I would have to give the edge to the Glock used Tenifer process since I would assume it's been used for a longer period of time. Being that I'm fairly new to guns I don't like the idea of having to pull the trigger prior to slide removal. I'm that is something that I wouldn't think twice about once I become more familiar with field stripping and general handling of a gun. Like you say, complacency would be the greatest danger here. I see no reason why I would ever use anything other than jacketed bullets so I don't see the whole polygonal vs. traditional rifling being an issue in my circumstances. Thanks for the advise, I'll be sure to reference your post as I continue to narrow my choices down. All in all I can't go wrong just more a personal preference issue than anything it seems.


----------



## VAMarine

pjc1979 said:


> I gotta hand it to you VAMarine, you really know your guns! I appreciate you detailing the differences in the safeties on each weapon. I figure the M&P and XDM are a bit more idiot proof than the Glock which isn't necessarily a bad thing.


Nope, not at all. Different strokes for different folks.



> With all the differences in safety features among the models I'll be sure to be careful about what I actually buy. I definitely don't want to come home and take my gun out for the first time and be upset that it does/doesn't have a certain feature. I guess all those letter and number in a model number do stand for something!


And that's not even with added night sights. 



> You give some good advise there thanks. Do you find the grip safety on the XDM to be an annoyance or do you even notice it?


Well I'm biased, for about the last 5 years I've been primarily a 1911 shooter so the presance of a grip safety is nothing new and thus does not bother me. The contours of the grip safety could be a little better, but the design works fine and does not impede my draw or cause any discomfort while shooting.



> As you stated I don't think grip angle will be a huge deal for me as this will be my first firearm and as such don't have any prior preference or angle that I'm really use to. I wikipedia-ed the melonite and tenifer and being that I'm no chemical scientist didn't seem see any reason to think one would be better than the other. In this case I would have to give the edge to the Glock used Tenifer process since I would assume it's been used for a longer period of time.


Both are pretty tough, melonite is making the rounds and is also very durable, I would put neither over the other, but would take both over standard bluing or some baked on coating any day.



> Being that I'm fairly new to guns I don't like the idea of having to pull the trigger prior to slide removal. I'm that is something that I wouldn't think twice about once I become more familiar with field stripping and general handling of a gun. Like you say, complacency would be the greatest danger here.


Take it slow and easy and build that comfort level, and ensure that the gun is empty, then check it again, and a couple more times before disassembling the gun. Build good habits right from the start and that will help in the long run.



> I see no reason why I would ever use anything other than jacketed bullets so I don't see the whole polygonal vs. traditional rifling being an issue in my circumstances.


True, but one more piece that I left out of my previous post is that the GLOCK is the only one of the three you listed that a .22 conversion kit is offered for and those go a long way in building good trigger control as you can practice with your carry gun while shooting the cheap .22 ammo.



> Thanks for the advise, I'll be sure to reference your post as I continue to narrow my choices down. All in all I can't go wrong just more a personal preference issue than anything it seems.


Quite welcome, that's what we're here for.

No on the topic of caliber, I wasn't going to open that door, but since it's been opened, I might as well walk in...


NO HANDGUN IS A GOOD STOPPER


There's a story about someone surviving "X" number of hits from every caliber there is, 9mm-.40-.45 whatever.

 ONLY GOOD HITS COUNT.

For example, take this officer who shot the BG 22 TIMES with a .40, scoring IRRC 12 "center of mass" hits. Only good hits count. I shoot both the 9mm and .45 better than I do the .40, I can fit more 9mm in a gun than .45, so I went the 9mm route.

Ammo is cheaper and overall IMHO it's easier to learn on a 9mm as the .40 can instill bad habits without proper instruction.

A good friend who had been carrying and shooting a XD 40 tried out my 9mm and you could actually see the muzzle being pushed low from him anticipating the recoil and it played hell with his follow through and affected his follow up shots. I had never really noticed him pushing the gun before, but then I was usually shooting at the same time he was. All this time he was grouping...not as well as he should have been pushing/anticipating the recoil the whole time.

If one can shoot the .40 properly, have at it but it takes a little more effort to do it right and to do it well. I had three .40s and I just found the 9 and .45 work better for me.

Now with all that being said as I don't know the OPs back ground, regardless of what caliber you pick, 9mm or .40, .40 or .45 (they will do their part if you do yours) a good beginners class is a good idea. Most ranges will have an instructor, if not find a local NRA class like First Steps Handgun or Basic Pistol and get some good hands on with some one in the know. But be careful, some instructors are just shouldn't be teaching. Ask around, find some one that knows what they are talking about and get some instruction.

Take Todd's advice and shoot both calibers and see what you like better.

:watching:


----------



## Brevard

tekhead1219 said:


> As has been said in other posts, placement is more important than the size of the hole. Buy and carry what you can shoot and PLACE the shot accurately and dependably.:smt023


Well you got to take everyone's advice with a grain of salt. What I was saying is that shot placement at close ranges isnt really hard with any caliber. So if I can hit someone with a .40, .45, .357, 10mm the same as I could with a 9mm then why not upgrade and go bigger. If you want to shoot and want to shoot cheaper ammo pick up a target .22 and go shoot. I just dont want to have to shoot 2 rounds of a 9mm to get the same damage as 1 round from a larger caliber. I have had a .380, .38 special, (3) 9mms, .357 (revolver...the only thing I have picked up a had a hard time hitting anything), ()2 .40s, and a .45.

I personally shoot the ruger and glock (23 and 27) .40 and the .45 (hk usp and the glock 30) the best. I actually shoot them the same as I do my buddy's ruger .22. To me once you get wihtin a certain distance shot placement becomes too easy. I dont know of many self defense shooting that happen over 15 ft. Not saying they dont I just havent heard of them. I always hear of 12 ft and under really.

I also dont buy into the whole more bullets thing. Some 9's only hold like 2 or 3 more shots than the .40's. My ruger .9mm mags only held 13 rounds (if I remember correctly). My ruger .40 and .45 held 10 rounds. I know there are some that hold like 19 9mm's. But depending ont he gun sometimes it isnt enouh to justify going to a smaller caliber. Especially for only 3 more rounds.


----------



## Last Rites

And that's really the only point behind every discussion about what is better to shoot, and which caliber should one go with. It all really comes down to what YOU the shooter can proficiently, confidently, reliably, and consistently shoot; and shoot WELL! Range time and practice will always trump caliber and manufacturer of gun!


----------



## HadEmAll

My opinion only, and not blasting any of them, I don't care for the top heavy feel of the XD, thus don't have one. But they're extremely popular, so could just be me.

I have both the M&P, and G22, and while the G22 is a fine pistol, the M&P has a better grip angle, better trigger, a fully supported barrel, and if it matters to you, you don't have to pull the trigger to disassemble the M&P, while you do for the Glock.

I've never had a malfunction of any type with either of them.


----------

