# Which gun to buy and carry



## allantaylor8907 (Aug 30, 2010)

Taking a poll of which gun to buy.

taking opinions

glock 23,
xdm 3.8 40 cal
xd 40


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

I know its not in your poll,m but the ONLY 40 cal gun I've ever liked is the PX4 in 40 cal. May wanna look at that.

I've owned an XD and numerous Glocks - not really a fan of either.

Have you shot both?


----------



## allantaylor8907 (Aug 30, 2010)

havent shot either yet. only some FN's and brownings. is the px4 a beretta?


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

Yes, it is a Beretta

I prefer 9mm and 45 personally.

but the PX4 feels almost like shooting a hot 9mm. The rotating barrel doesn't do as much in cancelling out the recoil fort he 9mm as it does for the 40 cal, IMHO.


----------



## allantaylor8907 (Aug 30, 2010)

You think that the 9mm is a better choice for personal defense rounds than the .40 cal. i know you get more rounds in the clip with the 9mm, just have heard bad things about stopping power from people i know that carry


----------



## VAMarine (Dec 25, 2008)

allantaylor8907 said:


> You think that the 9mm is a better choice for personal defense rounds than the .40 cal. i know you get more rounds in the clip with the 9mm, just have heard bad things about stopping power from people i know that carry


9mm will be better for a new shooter as there isn't as much felt recoil and muzzle flip and the lower cost of ammunition will allow for a little more trigger time.

As for the 9mm, no pistol round is a good stopper and with modern hollowpoints almost all the major service calibers perform in the same realm. It's when you start adding other variables to the equation that you'll see some variance. Shooting through car doors etc. _Most_ of the hate on the 9mm comes from the Military where only full metal jacket can be used.

Do your own research based on data, not rhetoric before making a choice.

Check out this site and read over the data: Wound Ballistics

As for your guns, you list the G23, the XDM3.8, and the XD40. I assume you mean the XD .40 Service, not the compact? You really need to shoot them. Of those choices I'd actually take the XDM40 3.8 as for whatever reason Glock triggers and I just don't get along. I'd also take Ship's advice on looking at the Beretta.


----------



## sig225 (Aug 30, 2010)

The M&P 9c or a Glock 19 are two great choices for carry weapon. Yes, a 9mm will serve you better, for what you have in mind. :target:


----------



## cougartex (Jan 2, 2010)

I recommend the Beretta PX4 Storm or the Stoeger Cougar.

Stoeger Industries is a subsidiary of Beretta. The Stoeger Cougars are made in Turkey using the same machinery that Beretta used to make the original Cougars. It is every bit the quality of the Beretta. The Stoeger 8000 in 9mm is identical to the Beretta Cougar L Type P (Cougar L slide, lighter barrel and beveled slide, but with a full-length magazine). The Cougar is a great gun for the money. Cougars come in 9mm, .40cal, & .45cal.


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

As stated above, a 9mm WOULD be better for a new shooter. And, yes, all handgun rounds are poor man stoppers. Too many people expect results like what you see in the movies. No one gets "blown back" from a hit from a handgun round. Mythbusters did a show a while back - the only thing that actually moved the target at all was a shotgun slug, and even then it wasn't much.

My everyday concealed carry is a Beretta 92FS - which is 9mm.

I do have one 45, and I have carried them in the past. But for accuracy (especially on follow up shots and longer distances), I can shoot the 9mm better.

ROund count - I can see this MAYBE being an issue for a 45 cal 1911 (MAYBE) - but most current semi autos generally carry 10+ rounds of 40. So, I wouldn't say I'd carry a 9mm because it can holds 15 rounds versus 11, or 17 vs 12.

If you need 10+ rounds, you are probably in trouble. However, I will say that when I carry my 92FS, I generally do not carry an extra magazine. I have 15+1 rounds. When I carried a HK USPc with an 8 round mag, I DID carry an extra magazine.

I've seen many guys go after a 40 cal handgun for their FIRST handgun, and then later sell it because the recoil was more than they could handle. I think starting with a 9mm is the way to go. If you get some experience and want to move up - then fine. But, even later, a 9mm is sufficient if you buy a decent round.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

I'm an XD fan, but I like Glocks, too.

I agree with the others about choosing a 9mm or .45, rather than a .40. But if your mind is made up, I can tell you that the XD40 is a fine shooter and I didn't notice a lot of muzzle flip, with a proper grip, which is the main knock against .40 S&W. Also, they can be bought for well under $450 if you look around a little.

There is nothing much wrong with any of your choices.


----------



## Couch Potato (Jun 3, 2010)

Shipwreck said:


> As stated above, a 9mm WOULD be better for a new shooter. And, yes, all handgun rounds are poor man stoppers. Too many people expect results like what you see in the movies. No one gets "blown back" from a hit from a handgun round. Mythbusters did a show a while back - the only thing that actually moved the target at all was a shotgun slug, and even then it wasn't much.
> 
> My everyday concealed carry is a Beretta 92FS - which is 9mm.
> 
> ...


So I thought the Mythbusters show would be fun to watch, but I can't seem to locate the episode. I would certainly expect such results unless the person being shot was off balance, or close to it.

I likewise use a Beretta 92 series as my "everyday" firearm.


----------



## SigP229R (Jun 1, 2007)

_You apparently like striker fired pistols since that is all you are listing and the XD 3.8 is the closest to what I shoot which is the Sig P229 R I also like 9mm and have three pistols in that cal. However the 40 is my EDC. I call it a a nice in between cal. of the 9mm and 45ACP. The ammo is not too rare and not to pricey. Whatever you choose I would recommend trying them all (the ones you list) and see which one suits you best and which one you are more accurate wit. Good luck on whatever you do:smt1099:smt1099_


----------



## allantaylor8907 (Aug 30, 2010)

Sorry i have been away from my computer for quite a while now and just am now catching up. Thanks for all the replies. I took my CWP class last weekend with an FN-X .40 cal and shot 100%. Granted the shooting wasnt too terribly hard. I like that gun but as i am thinking more and more idk if my choices are just too big and bulky for an everyday carry weapon?


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

allantaylor8907 said:


> I like that gun but as i am thinking more and more idk if my choices are just too big and bulky for an everyday carry weapon?


A good deal of commitment is required to carry a handgun every day, but that is the only way you can ever be sure of having one when (or hopefully, if) you need it. Most folks start out with something that they soon decide is too big, go through a variety of transitions from one gun to another and a variety of different carry methods. I suspect that a very high percentage of folks just decide it is too big of a hassle, and stop carrying, altogether.

I did all of that for a couple of years, accumulated a variety of handguns and holsters, and finally understood that it was never going to be very comfortable. So, I just decided I would carry a serious self-defense gun and gut it out with the discomfort. I've gotten used to carrying a double-stack .45, IWB, even in the summer time, and yes, some days it is miserable, and some days it is just mildly uncomfortable...but it is never comfortable.

The closest I ever came to comfortable was with an LCP in the front pocket, but I felt severely 'under-gunned,' and hardly ever carry that way any more. I feel pretty good with a CZ RAMI 9mm, carried in a homemade leather IWB holster, because I shoot it very well for a 3" barreled gun. So I will carry that on those occasions when the XD45 compact just feels like too much. The RAMI is approximately the size of a G26/27, or an XD subcompact, so that might be a good thing to try, if you can shoot accurately with a short barreled gun...a lot of folks never master that.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

Glocks are cost-effective and reliable (very reliable). The .40 is more powerful than the 9mm, but not as difficult to control as the .45 or 10mm. I think I would go with the .40 caliber.

You might want to consider the Glock 27. Most people find that they can shoot the Glock 27 reasonably well. It conceals well (and it can be used on an ankle holster, if required).

If you are comfortable with the Glock 27 it makes sense for a first weapon. It gives good fire power, stopping power, and conceals well. It is very, very accurate in practiced hands. It would work fine for CCW, home defense, and range practice.

The .40 caliber rounds are more expensive than 9mm rounds, however.


----------



## Stick Man (Oct 19, 2010)

I agree with going and renting some different guns and seeing what you like. One of the ranges that I frequent (dont know if they all do) will let you try all their guns for the same price in the caliber you rent. (If you rent a 9mm, you can shoot all of them for the one rental fee). I myself just bought a XD-9 sub-compact and love it. I carry it in a IWB Blackhawk #7 at the 3 o'clock position, and it's not that bad, and Im 5'7", 155. I also have a full size 1911 in .45, but get a little tired of the weight more than the size. Try some out, and see what's most comfortable.


----------



## allantaylor8907 (Aug 30, 2010)

Yeah i looked at the subcompacts i believe the g27 was mentioned. But even with the pinky grip extender thing on the clip i dont feel like i have a solid grip on the gun because i have larger hands. 
Im 6'1'' and 175 lbs. I Shot the g23 and the M&P .40c at a range this weekend. The g23 felt a bit snappy on the wrists i was gonna try the g19 and see if it felt and better but i do like the size. M&P 40c felt good for a shorter barrel gun and i could get my hand pretty solidly on the grip i felt it was a little larger than the subcompact glocks. Does anyone know if thats true or if it was just all in my head.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

allantaylor8907 said:


> You think that the 9mm is a better choice for personal defense rounds than the .40 cal. i know you get more rounds in the clip with the 9mm, just have heard bad things about stopping power from people i know that carry


With the Glock the 9mm might have a firepower advantage (if you count the extra clips). They make a 30 round clip too (keep it in the car or at home??).

If you can handle the Glock 27 it has advantages for concealment.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Packard said:


> The .40 is more powerful than the 9mm, *but not as difficult to control as the .45* or 10mm. I think I would go with the .40 caliber


Most experienced handgunners are probably going to disagree with some of your assessments, especially your comparison of the .40 S&W to the .45 ACP. I know I do.

The .40 S&W is a very high pressure round, and as a result, it often has a good deal of muzzle flip in some handguns, especially with inexperienced shooters who have not yet perfected their grip.

On the other hand, the .45 ACP is a low pressure round that, although it does have a significant recoil, it is more of a soft push to the rear...very easy to adapt to, even for petite ladies and recoil sensitive men. I, personally, find it to be very pleasant to shoot.

As for comparing the 9mm, 10mm, .40S&W, and .45 ACP for '_stopping power_,' that is not really a worthwhile exercise, since any one of them will likely make the _average_ attacker stop his attack, if fired into a vital area of the body. They all have advantages and disadvantages, and the .40 S&W is not significantly more powerful than a +P 9mm, using modern hollow point ammo, and the 9mm is much more pleasant and less expensive to practice with.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

Bisley said:


> Most experienced handgunners are probably going to disagree with some of your assessments, especially your comparison of the .40 S&W to the .45 ACP. I know I do.
> 
> The .40 S&W is a very high pressure round, and as a result, it often has a good deal of muzzle flip in some handguns, especially with inexperienced shooters who have not yet perfected their grip.
> 
> ...


I would suggest that the perception that a .45 is easier to handle than a .40 related more to the weapon than the caliber. The 1911 pistol is one of the easiest pistols for me to shoot. The recoil is straight back and (on the full sized 1911) there is almost no flip.

Put that same round in a revolver and you have a different situation. But in similar weapons, (Glock makes both calibers in similar guns) I think that the .45 is going to be a bit more to deal with. Witness the "Baby Glocks", the 9mm and the .40 are identical dimensionally. But the .45 has a longer grip and a longer barrel (presumably for improved control). But they don't deem that needed for the model 27 (.40 caliber) or the 26 (9mm). They do have that extra size for the 10mm (model 29); I believe that the model 29 would be a real handful to shoot; the .45 would be easier; the .40 and the 9mm are a step or two lower.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

I did a Google search: "Recoil .45 vs. .40"

I got a lot of references in various fora. Most agree with Bisley that the .40 is "sharper" in recoil.

I think you have to compare similar weapons on the same day to get a true indication.

The .40 will generally give you more rounds in the weapon than the .45.

Glock offers a .45 GAP (Glock Auto Pistol) that has similar balistics to the .45, but the ammo is much more expensive and I don't know if the recoil is the same as a .45 ACP.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Packard said:


> I think you have to compare similar weapons on the same day to get a true indication.


The most recent comparison I have made was a day that I fired .40's in an XD Service model and a H&K USP, and fired .45 ACP in an XD45 Service, XD45 Compact, and a Commander sized 1911 clone.

While both .40's were fine shooters, both had more tendency for muzzle flip than did any of the .45's. With a proper grip, this is really negligible, but I have seen several new shooters have a rough time with .40 recoil, because of poor gripping technique.

Both of the .40's were fine handguns and good shooters, but the .45's were more...comfortable. :mrgreen:


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

My first handgun was a .38 Smith & Wesson with a 6" barrel. I used it regularly for about 6 months (but did not carry it). I still think this is a good way to get into shooting. The battery of arms is very simple, it allows DA and SA practice, they can be bought used for a reasonable price and resold when you tire of it.

It is fine for practicing sight picture. Everything you practice on this type of weapon will transfer effectively to an automatic. It allows you to get used to recoil in general, and to work on your trigger pull.

I would not carry this type of gun, but I would certainly recommend it for a first weapon.


----------



## allantaylor8907 (Aug 30, 2010)

*Update:*

After some test firing of handguns as suggested i have it narrowed down to two handguns The Glock 23 and the M&P 40c. Still cant decide as both guns are very nice but with the glock i get more rounds and a bit longer barrel. Of course there are also the 9mm equivalents Glock 19 and M&P 9c. Of these weapons (price not an issue) which weapon and caliber do you think is more suitable for myself. I have plenty of shooting experience but this will be "My" first gun as it is a gift and i just got my CWP so i DO plan on carrying daily.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

I would go with the Glock if only because it has been around a lot longer and has a long and favorable reliability history.

Glocks are reliable, accurate and durable. There are also more leather choices for the 23 (though you can find good choices for the M&P too).


----------



## Swamp (Nov 8, 2010)

The gun you shoot the best; it doesn't matter what brand so long as it's reliable and you shoot it well. I've never seen a responsible article on what caliber that doesn't put higher caliber at the top of the list but a cannon has no value if you cant hit the target with it.


----------



## JTEX53 (Nov 9, 2010)

*So many semi-auto pistols available for SD*

I'm starting my research for a CCW/SD pistol. I've pretty much limited my budget to $500-$600. If you're not extremely knowlegable about semi-autos, it comes down to the major name brand pistols. I 've had a 9mm Tokarev for years, for the price purchased new in the mid 90's NIB $110 w/ hard pastic carrying case(decent tough pistol). I'm looking for a pistol with higher capacity mags. but somewhat more compact. I've looked at Glocks, CZ's, etc. and that's just the tip of the iceberg for what's out there. If have a big ammo stash of 9mm but it's FMJ ball ammo. For SD, should shoot HP's, correct?. I haven't elimintaed the 45ACP but some are pretty bulky. Haven't ruled out a used pistol also but what should I look at when examining it(know bore should be shiny and clean)? Some pistols look very cool but that shouldn't be detemining factor, ergonomics and dependability should! Some reference articles may help.Thanks.
JT


----------



## Swamp (Nov 8, 2010)

The shorter the barrel, inherently the less reliable it is. You can find that information in may comparison articles in reputable gun magazines. I wouldn't carry a gun with less than a 4" barrel unless it's a wheel gun.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

Swamp said:


> The shorter the barrel, inherently the less reliable it is. You can find that information in may comparison articles in reputable gun magazines. I wouldn't carry a gun with less than a 4" barrel unless it's a wheel gun.


I agree that 1911 style weapons are far less reliable (in general) with short barrels (and short slides). The Baby Glocks (G26 & G27) on the other hand, have an enviable reputation for reliablity.


----------



## Swamp (Nov 8, 2010)

Packard said:


> I agree that 1911 style weapons are far less reliable (in general) with short barrels (and short slides). The Baby Glocks (G26 & G27) on the other hand, have an enviable reputation for reliablity.


Let me guess, you're a Glock owner. LOL You guys think God is spelled two ways, G-o-d and G-l-o-c-k.

The issue goes far beyond 1911's in fact the Kimber 1911 is an extremely reliable gun so to single out short 1911's as not reliable is a gross misrepresentation and the gun most Glock owners attack. The issue is as you elude to, the slide length which in a 3" barrel gun can only be as long as needed for a 3" barrel. There's a lot of stuff happening in a short space so a short gun equals short space and the name on the side doesn't change that for the names sake.

If you're going to bet your life on it, dont carry shorter than a 4" auto weapon no matter who makes it.


----------



## spanish073187 (Dec 22, 2010)

I love my xd40, but I have herd even better things of the xdm. With the match grade barrel and different grip inserts, it has to be a nice touch to the Springfield.


----------



## Swamp (Nov 8, 2010)

I just bought an FNP 9MM for steel shooting to save some bucks on ammo from the .45 ACP's. I love that FN. great feel in your hand with an adjustable back strap for a custom fit, accurate, great trigger pull which is single and double action. FN supplies the military so dependability is a high priority and I have to say I find it flawless so far. I've fired Glocks before and I have to say FN puts Glock to shame IMO. Take a look at one and the price is just about like the Glock.

If I wasn't so spoiled carrying Kimber 1911's, I'd be carrying a n FN.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

Swamp said:


> I just bought an FNP 9MM for steel shooting to save some bucks on ammo from the .45 ACP's. I love that FN. great feel in your hand with an adjustable back strap for a custom fit, accurate, great trigger pull which is single and double action. FN supplies the military so dependability is a high priority and I have to say I find it flawless so far. I've fired Glocks before and I have to say FN puts Glock to shame IMO. Take a look at one and the price is just about like the Glock.
> 
> If I wasn't so spoiled carrying Kimber 1911's, I'd be carrying a n FN.


The FNP came into existence in 2006; the Glock in 1982. The one thing the FNP cannot claim is the history of reliable function.

Only the Beretta 92 can claim a similar history. And except for the weight the 92 is a very desirable handgun. It is very reliable, and quite accurate. And a highly proven design.


----------



## Overkill0084 (Nov 28, 2010)

FWIW, I carry a XD40SC. It's a surprisingly easy gun to shoot well. I'm not an expert on the XDms, but I'm not convinced the added content makes it a superior carry gun. (better range gun maybe)


----------



## Swamp (Nov 8, 2010)

Packard said:


> The FNP came into existence in 2006; the Glock in 1982. The one thing the FNP cannot claim is the history of reliable function.
> 
> Only the Beretta 92 can claim a similar history. And except for the weight the 92 is a very desirable handgun. It is very reliable, and quite accurate. And a highly proven design.


So what you're saying is because Glock has 24 more years of being what it is, an FN cant possibly be as reliable??? That's about the emptiest argument I've ever heard from a Glock lover (which you obviously are). I've never found a person who likes Glocks to be open to even the most compelling rebuttal to a Glock superiority debate so I'll treat your ridiculous argument as such.

Hopefully the rest of you reading this thread who don't suffer from Glock hysteria rendering your brain incapacitated can understand that the Federal Government makes gun manufacturers jump through the most stringent of hoops proving the reliability and function of the weapons they buy so it is proven to stringent requirements unlike Glock whose claim to fame is that you can park your trunk on it in a mud hole and it will still work purchased by local municipalities with tight budgets on the cheap.

Now since this thread includes the carry element, may I suggest an excellent holster for just that; comfortable concealed carry. Kholster has the best price on an excelent IWB holster that has a nice supple leather barrier between you and the ENTIRE gun. It has a hard durable plastic "box" so to speak that holds the handgun in the holster even if you hang upside down yet is easy to draw and re holster. You can also tuck your shirt in over the gun and still draw fast and easy. I have one of these for 4 of my guns, one being a Ruger GP100, 4" Stainless and it's still undetectably concealed and comfortable to carry.

Kholster use rebate code 03-3381 for a 10% rebate.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

Swamp said:


> So what you're saying is because Glock has 24 more years of being what it is, an FN cant possibly be as reliable??? That's about the emptiest argument I've ever heard from a Glock lover (which you obviously are). I've never found a person who likes Glocks to be open to even the most compelling rebuttal to a Glock superiority debate so I'll treat your ridiculous argument as such.
> 
> Hopefully the rest of you reading this thread who don't suffer from Glock hysteria rendering your brain incapacitated can understand that the Federal Government makes gun manufacturers jump through the most stringent of hoops proving the reliability and function of the weapons they buy so it is proven to stringent requirements unlike Glock whose claim to fame is that you can park your trunk on it in a mud hole and it will still work purchased by local municipalities with tight budgets on the cheap.
> 
> ...


There is stuff you know, and then there is stuff you can prove. You may know that all these guns will be reliable over the years under various conditions over many years but you cannot prove it until they do.

I used to be a professional picture framer. There are archival framing materials available; some are recent and are backed by scientific extrapolation; others are the same ones that the Chinese used 2,000 years ago. All the museums in the world use the ones that are proven over 2,000 years despite the cost difference and the fact that scientists have declared the new methods archival.

.45 caliber ammo has been proven to be a reliable man-stopper. When the .40 caliber came out it was demonstrated to be reliable (using balistic gel), but many (including myself) waited until the proof came in before switching to .40 caliber.

So I will stand by what I wrote. The Glock and the Beretta and the 1911 have been proven to be reliable weapons; the newer weapons may eventually enjoy the same reputation. But until then, I will always take into consideration the history of the weapon when I purchase it.


----------



## Swamp (Nov 8, 2010)

Well that's good and healthy, at lest you're starting to live up to the spirit of the thread which is looking for suggestions not a suggester telling another suggester they are wrong because you like your particular gun.

I good carry weapon for an individual can be as individual as the person looking. It's just true that the most important thing is a gun you shoot well. SO you believe what you want and I'll continue to enjoy my guns.

Merry Christmas


----------



## Overkill0084 (Nov 28, 2010)

Packard said:


> So I will stand by what I wrote. The Glock and the Beretta and the 1911 have been proven to be reliable weapons; the newer weapons may eventually enjoy the same reputation. But until then, I will always take into consideration the history of the weapon when I purchase it.


Worth noting: even with a time tested and known reliable design, one may end up with a less than stellar example. AFAIK, No manufacturer is without a repair dept. What ever one carries needs to be shot with it's intended ammo to ensure reliability. Your 1911 SuperduperUltracombattacticalcarry may love those UltraExtremeSuperCoolRaptorClaw hollowpoints, my similar example may not cycle them worth crap. Proven design is only part of the equation. A HiPoint that shoots reliably is worth more than a $3000 custom job 1911 that doesn't, when the excrement flies.


----------

