Latest posts for the thread "Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think? "

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

In addition to switching to FOW and doing new things, thinking about one of these for IDPA competition.
1. Beretta 92 with D spring (8lb DA / 4lb SA), hogue grips, and adjustable sights (aka existing confirguration just confiscated by She Who Must Be Obeyed - I like your pistol...zoinks!)

2. S&W M&P competition model
http://gunsgunsguns.net/smith-wesson-mp9l/
The S&W costs about $150 more

3. Springfield XDM is similar to the S&W.
http://gunsgunsguns.net/springfield-armory-xdm-5-25-competition/
I really like the looks of this, buts it a dern ferrener pistol (Croatia but owned by US).

The Beretta has a higher first pull but lower and crisper secondary shots (most of them). As importantly it weighs about 10oz more. The S&W has a better sight out the front and good barrel, but mushier trigger. I may have to get an ATEK trigger for it, but the S&W 9mm conceal I shot would have been fine with practice. Springfield XDM very similar to the S&W and the Glock 34. I don't know how good its trigger is. Both the S&W and Springifled XDM were effectively designed for this type of competition. I believe the Springfield actually falls into the SA style classes actually.

thoughts? If wishes were fishes I'd get a double column STI, but don't have $2,500 burning a hole in my pocket.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Makarov — GMT

I say XDM, from what I've heard it's very good.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Makarov wrote:I say XDM, from what I've heard it's very good.

Indeed, I've heard good things about it as well 9and the design reminds me of my old dirtbike). I guess the real question comes down to DA/SA with better weight and crisper trigger, vs. DA only and less weight to absorb recoil.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Do_I_Not_Like_That — GMT

No disrespect Frazz, but in light of what's happened in California, let's lay off the gun talk for a day or two. And I speak as somebody who is supportive of citizens arming themselves against criminals and tyrants.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

ifStatement — GMT

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:No disrespect Frazz, but in light of what's happened in California, let's lay off the gun talk for a day or two. And I speak as somebody who is supportive of citizens arming themselves against criminals and tyrants.

He's obviously doing it on purpose. It's what he does, troll.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

ifStatement wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:No disrespect Frazz, but in light of what's happened in California, let's lay off the gun talk for a day or two. And I speak as somebody who is supportive of citizens arming themselves against criminals and tyrants.

He's obviously doing it on purpose. It's what he does, troll.

A few boos from the peanut gallery...

1. If you'll notice those are all competition pistols or workups (albeit at the cheaper, stock funny car level vs. your Formula One type).
2. Its my freaking birthday and said once all the probate stuff for my parents had passed I was going to finally freaking start competing, and thats coming to end game now. i've given up 40K for FOW, become a versty member, and now I want to spend my valuable thursday nights losing what little hearing I have left spinning yarns with fellow rednecks.
3. The Wife and Daughter took too much of a shine to my current Beretta and "volunteered" I should give it to them, after Genghis Connie obliterated a pumpkin with it.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

ifStatement — GMT

forum rules. --Janthkin>

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

AustonT — GMT

I've never actually been fully conversant in the IDPA rules but simply from a mechanical and comfort standpoint I would say go with what you know.
The Beretta is what you are familiar with and requires little to no learning curve to bring to competition. If you want to be competitive RIGHT NOW, that's what I would go with.
If you want to do it "right" I have a different suggestion. I'm not nearly as familiar with XDs as I am Glocks, something about being a certified repairer for one and not the other I suspect. I will say that the MP, XD, and Glock all being striker fired are not DAOs in the truest sense. They have more in common with a cocked and locked 1911 than a DAO. I know a guy in Bland MO that does quite possibly the best Glop trigger jobs in the US. It's the closest thing to a 1911 trigger in a polymer frame.
If this is a longterm endeavor for you you can throw some time and a modest amount of money here's what I suggest:
Take a stricker fired pistol, get a trigger job and a mess of spare parts and go at it. I personally would buy a used Glock trade in and put LWD 17L frame and barrel on it and have the trigger done: the Glock 34 isn't built right, just look at it the frame contact the barrel above the rail.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Ronin-Sage — GMT

I looked at the Springfield XDM 3.8 sub-compact not too long ago, but ruled in favor the Glock 19(:p) -- I just didn't like the way the trigger pull felt on the XDM. Still seems like a good gun, mind you, and I'm certainly not against looking into one in the future.

Also, lol @ 'Genghis Connie'. I'd also suggest the term 'Wifissar'(commissar wife).

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Thanks guys.

Genghis Connie got the name "Genghis" when she threw a fit in a pizza joint/game room and had to be carried out over my head as she was undulating like a snake. At that point I could see her at the head of ten thousand tumen conquering all the known world.

Since then my opinion has not changed.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Ma55ter_fett — GMT

Knowing feth all about firearms I am only qualified to provide the following opinion.

I don't like how the XDM looks, I find the grip particularly hideous to look at.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Ronin-Sage — GMT

Ma55ter_fett wrote:Knowing feth all about firearms I am only qualified to provide the following opinion.

I don't like how the XDM looks, I find the grip particularly hideous to look at.

I think it looks 'pretty nice'.

My taste in firearms aesthetics has changed quite a bit -- I used to think Glocks looked hideous and AR-15s were 'meh', but now I think the former has a certain charm, and the latter awesome-looking. Weird how that happened.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

SOFDC — GMT

Myself, I would probably go with the M&P. Can't say I am a fan of the XD lines, and I sure as heck don't like DA/SA triggers, high bore axis, decockers ATTACHED to DA/SA triggers, or down-is-safe thumb safeties...and the beretta is 4-for-4 there in most variants.

To be fair though the 92F does feel..."Smoother" during recoil than the competition, for lack of a better word.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

SOFDC wrote:Myself, I would probably go with the M&P. Can't say I am a fan of the XD lines, and I sure as heck don't like DA/SA triggers, high bore axis, decockers ATTACHED to DA/SA triggers, or down-is-safe thumb safeties...and the beretta is 4-for-4 there in most variants.

To be fair though the 92F does feel..."Smoother" during recoil than the competition, for lack of a better word.

Thats my big issue. The first DA shot is longer and harder pull, but the follow up shots are much better and a heavier pistol for recoil. Plus there are less first shots in the competition.

Vs. a M&p/XDM type trigger, which is creepier (without modification), and a lighter pistol overall.

I wonder if STI Trojans in 9mm are IDPA compatible. They are also in the price range.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

SOFDC — GMT

Have you considered a big ol CZ75 or a variant? That might fit the bill better than any of the others if you want a metal frame.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

SOFDC wrote:Have you considered a big ol CZ75 or a variant? That might fit the bill better than any of the others if you want a metal frame.

I have. The CZ shadow fits the bill well. However at a cool grand, I might as well change my name to Pablo and make a run for the border, as the Wife will use her newly appropriated Beretta on my ass, or just run me over a few times. That is family tradition.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

SOFDC — GMT

There's always the option of getting the standard 75 for about half that, give or take, and then piece by piece adding DEM-SPESHUL-GUBBINS on in small doses.

Seems the slow trickling in of parts gets past the women creatures far easier than a lump sum going out the door.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

SOFDC wrote:There's always the option of getting the standard 75 for about half that, give or take, and then piece by piece adding DEM-SPESHUL-GUBBINS on in small doses.

Seems the slow trickling in of parts gets past the women creatures far easier than a lump sum going out the door.

This is a true statement. Remember young laddies these words of wisdom.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

marv335 — GMT

I've never been a fan of Beretta pistols, I find Glocks much more "pointable"
That said, when I used to compete (Back in the day as it were) I used to use a S&W.
I say go to a gun shop, fire each one, see what you like best.
I can usually tell within a mag or so of ammo if I'm going to get on with a pistol.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Fair points.
I've shot a regular XDM and M&P. Both had mushy triggers to me, but I liked the feel of both. I'm not a super fan of the Beretta either (untweaked). None of them are up to my Kimber, or even my .22LR plinkers.

I wonder how SIG triggers are (226) now.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Filthy Sanchez — GMT

I'm in the same market for a pistol Frazz. I've fired them all at the range one after another and I'll be going with the Springfield XD(M) 5.25" in 9mm. I found the Baretta grip to be too fat, and the DA trigger is absolute balls.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Filthy Sanchez wrote:I'm in the same market for a pistol Frazz. I've fired them all at the range one after another and I'll be going with the Springfield XD(M) 5.25" in 9mm. I found the Baretta grip to be too fat, and the DA trigger is absolute balls.

Again good points. The Springfiled comes with adjustable sights. I don't think the M&P version does.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Nicorex — GMT

I like my Berreta's. I would vote for another 92.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Nicorex wrote:I like my Berreta's. I would vote for another 92.

Well one advantage there is that the females are familiar with a 92, with compatabile magazines in case the Zombie Games start. They are excellent for the 50 yard tactical zombie course. Braaaaaiiiiiiinnnnsssssssssssssssssss.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

KingCracker — GMT

Ive not shot either of those guns, but I have some minor opinions. My oldest broho has a M&P .40, and it looks pretty similar to the one you posted. I can say, that once your grip is right and you get used to shooting, the M&P can be an incredible shot, Ive made some decent long shots with my brothers a few times, and Im by no means a pistol shooter

BUT

Ive also been eyeing some Springfields for my next pistol as well. Its basically come down to, either a 1911, or the Springfield XD in 9mm. Infact, this very gun
http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/2SPXDM9231HC-1.html

Ive never shot it, but I held one once in a store, and it felt pretty nice. But thats it, saying it feels nice doesnt mean it shoots nice

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

And of course, there's never a range with every gun you could ever want to rent and make a comparison. I know my Beretta can put rounds into a quarter sized target at 7 rounds (I do that to bug guys playing tacticool that try to show off and get annoying at the range)

I don't know about the M&P, but know my S&W 29 is target quality accurate, and it still might blow your head clean off, if you feel lucky...punk.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

AustonT — GMT

Frazzled wrote:Fair points.
I've shot a regular XDM and M&P. Both had mushy triggers to me, but I liked the feel of both. I'm not a super fan of the Beretta either (untweaked). None of them are up to my Kimber, or even my .22LR plinkers.

I wonder how SIG triggers are (226) now.

Same as they always have been, you need a green spring and an SRT to make them livable.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Its like everyone on the planet besides 1911 (and Walther) have sucky triggers. Why Baby Jebus Why!?!?!

Again maybe just need to see if STI's 9mm 1911 is IDPA usable and if there's a decent competition in the actual tourney, as this is all the equivalent exercise of wanting to hang at the pool hall on thursdays.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

AustonT — GMT

(and Walther) my ass . Walther and Smith share the same gakky triggers.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

AustonT wrote:(and Walther) my ass . Walther and Smith share the same gakky triggers.

YOU MUTHA!!!!*
*and by that I mean I respectfully disagree.

Now this is based on a German made PPS that was very smooth with a good break, like a good revolver. I fell in love with it. I don't know about other Walthers, but most reports have that they have pretty good triggers.

I've heard the CZs have pretty good triggers but not shot one nor even seen one.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Lone Cat — GMT

Makarov wrote:I say XDM, from what I've heard it's very good.

Historically the XDM was once called HS and designed by eastern european gunsmiths (or firarms firms), Springfield, vying to enter 'milleinum pistols' market, but lack of firearms designers (i've heard that Springfield excels on 'classic' firearms, especially those 'standard issue' ones. (M1911A1 semiauto pistol, M1903 service rifle, M1 series) but doesn't seem to have its own RnD crew, while someone else does). what's the better alternatives? yes. occupy the newbie or the weak. the HS designer also in need of 'competitiveness' against Austrian Glock, had searched the world for any firearms giants who has better productivity, but inferior innovations so the deal will be easy.
that's why XDM becomes HS.

Personally NONE of the three choices. the 1911A1 is more adaptable. the SME gunsmiths had created the specialized versions of the 1911 series. one (les Baer, for example) is designed to score 100% 'X' , good for accuracy championship, bad for real combat. another (can't remember the name) focus on the combat, hoping that one day, any armed forces of any known nations on earth will buy ones as standard issue. this path of developments includes the frame that compatible with various hi-capacity magazines (seven shots are TOO low today, 10 is okay, 12 or more are better), bayonet railmount (it was called that way, but it mounts either laser pointers or torchlights, or maybe some other weird upgrades) and combat nightsights as default options. an Israeli gunsmith goes as far as rechamber the 1911 with 9mm Parabellum!!!

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

AustonT — GMT

Frazzled wrote:
AustonT wrote:(and Walther) my ass . Walther and Smith share the same gakky triggers.

YOU MUTHA!!!!*
*and by that I mean I respectfully disagree.

Now this is based on a German made PPS that was very smooth with a good break, like a good revolver. I fell in love with it. I don't know about other Walthers, but most reports have that they have pretty good triggers.

I've heard the CZs have pretty good triggers but not shot one nor even seen one.

CZs basically have a late Browning trigger, the 75 is after all a Hi Power.
Walther is hit and miss, like anyone else. There just isn't nearly as much fanboyism surrounding them to drown the positive in a sea of trolling. Truth is Walther isn't really the top of the heap in much of anything. They do OK work in proven fields. But the have the same issues as everyone else, mass manufactured triggers suck.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Lone Cat wrote:Personally NONE of the three choices. the 1911A1 is more adaptable. the SME gunsmiths had created the specialized versions of the 1911 series. one (les Baer, for example) is designed to score 100% 'X' , good for accuracy championship, bad for real combat. another (can't remember the name) focus on the combat, hoping that one day, any armed forces of any known nations on earth will buy ones as standard issue. this path of developments includes the frame that compatible with various hi-capacity magazines (seven shots are TOO low today, 10 is okay, 12 or more are better), bayonet railmount (it was called that way, but it mounts either laser pointers or torchlights, or maybe some other weird upgrades) and combat nightsights as default options. an Israeli gunsmith goes as far as rechamber the 1911 with 9mm Parabellum!!!

Well the 1911s you noted are not cheap. Les Baers push $3,000. If I could I'd get a STI double column Eagle 5.0 and call it a day, but I don't have 2 grand to spend.

Now that does leave open the idea of cheaper single column STI 1911 in 9mm, but I have to check usage under IDPA and also if thats an area there's competition in. As the goal is thursday evening shoots at one range this might be an issue.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Seaward — GMT

I'd shop around on the M&P, pounce on a good deal - hard to find in this climate - and get a trigger job.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Seaward wrote:I'd shop around on the M&P, pounce on a good deal - hard to find in this climate - and get a trigger job.

A fair point as well. I am afeared that my desire for the acquisition is coinciding with Obama Bullet Bubble II.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Seaward — GMT

Frazzled wrote:
Seaward wrote:I'd shop around on the M&P, pounce on a good deal - hard to find in this climate - and get a trigger job.

A fair point as well. I am afeared that my desire for the acquisition is coinciding with Obama Bullet Bubble II.

I'm encountering that myself now that I finally figured out which 1911 I'm picking up.

(Un)reliable sources tell me gun sales are up 300% from where they were last year. All my local shops are definitely picked clean. Ruger's apparently not even taking orders anymore, so great is their backlog.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

All the calls by democrats to take advantage of current events and limit the 2nd amendment aren't helping.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
This is in the price range. Probably only 9 in the magazine with 9mm, but under review for IDPA.
http://www.stiguns.com/the-sti-spartan-v-2/

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Lone Cat — GMT

American firearms control doesn't seem to lift the ban on hi-capa magazines, TEN shots are the largest capacity allowed.
it means the law itself doesn't really favor the 9mm parabellum but .45 ACP or bigger seems to be pleased.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Lone Cat wrote:American firearms control doesn't seem to lift the ban on hi-capa magazines, TEN shots are the largest capacity allowed.
it means the law itself doesn't really favor the 9mm parabellum but .45 ACP or bigger seems to be pleased.

What are you talking about?

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

SOFDC — GMT

American firearms control doesn't seem to lift the ban on hi-capa magazines, TEN shots are the largest capacity allowed.

That law expired in 2004. Any remaining bans on magazine capacity over 10 shots are state level (Like california.) and even then there are people who owned them before bans went into effect, or grey areas of the law such as modification of existing magazines (No go in CA.) or the little detail of things like a 10 round .40 S&W magazine will hold 13+ rounds of 9mm...and may just function in a 9mm pistol. See Beretta 96 magazines in a 92F.

You also have things like 30 round M16 magazines becoming A-OK for sale when "10 rnds .458 SOCOM" stamped on the floorplate.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

The notaiton of ten rounds I noted is in regards to the competition. That might put me at a disadvantage in the shoots which are timed (more reloads required). Not certain if its that much of a disadvantage though.

Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Lone Cat — GMT

ok I haven't read any firearms books since January 2004. by then i was focusing on 'University entrance exam'. and that hardwork never fails me.

Re:Beretta 92, S&WM&P 91, or Springfield XDM - what think?

Frazzled — GMT

Update:
Ok so someone has to tell how - on my birthday - the wife ends up with my old Beretta, a new Beretta Storm, and a made to order batch of wine, which I have to help bottle in two weeks (scratches head).

Went to range to see if i can double action/single action decently enough. Its a no go. At the same time, the Wife's Bersa starts jamming again. To top it off, all the double action pulling has started the shakes I get in my right arm (old incident from decades ago). Frazzled gets pissed off, take wife to Academy, bets no CCL for her (Beretta Storm), and 9mm M&P for him. I'll shoot a few hundred rounds through it and see if it need an APEX trigger job and different sights, but me likey.