Which would you prefer XD .45 with or without thumb safety

[Machete]

I have an XD .45, I bought it long before this was an option. If you guys bought one now which one would you pick up, the service model with the thumb safety, or the regular old XD .45 ACP.
I'm on the fence about it. I think the thumb safety would take me a while to get used to, plus I can't really think of a good reason for me to have it. Can some one give me the pluses and minuses of such an option?
I'm not saying I've never fired a gun with a thumb safety before, but I just don't see the point for one on the XD .45 (with a grip and trigger safety) , except for military acceptance or so a criminal has trouble firing it if he snatches it from a LEO.

 

[1911 guy]

I like a safety on a carry gun.

However, the grip safety already has this covered. I owned a 5" .45 caliber XD for a while and my Dad has a 4" .45 cal. I see no real need for the thumb safety. If they dropped the "original" from the line, I wouldn't be upset at having to use a thumb safety. After all, I currently CCW a 1911.

Bottom line, get whichever one you like best. Some prefer a thumb safety, others dislike them. At least you've got a choice now.

 

[possum]

i am a no manual safety kind of guy so i would be happy and go with the old fashioned model myself, but just because it has the safety dosen't mean you have to use it i guess.

 

[ChrisMG]

With the grip safety the pistol feels much "safer" than a Glock. I finally got used to shooting a Glock but I admit it was a little weird coming from guns that always had a manual safety.

I have no idea why Springfield went with the manual safety. They should have given us custom grip options instead!

 

[BHPshooter]

I really like the way the Thumb Safety model feels. I'm used to having one (BHPs, 1911s), so I like it.

Wes

 

[The-Fly]

I'm a glock guy, and I do own a 45 XD without a safety. I feel the safety is not required, but thats my 2 cents.

 

[Pat-inCO]

I prefer a 1911

 

[kestak]

Greetings,

I own a XD45 compact with no thumb safety.
I do the Israeli draw, so I prefer no thumb safety.

Thank you

 

[lee n. field]

I'm on the fence about it.

Ditto. I think would want to examine one first. More parts = more complexity = more stuff to fail.

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

I only want a safety on a 1911.


Otherwise, no safety.


Plus, the safety on the XD looks really small and possibly hard to use, especially with gloves.

 

[Bobo]

Why not get it with the safety?

I don't think it NEEDS a manual safety, but it's nice to have it there if you want it - if you don't want to use it... don't.

 

[Gary G23]

I own one without the safety. Last trip to the gunstore I handled one with a safety. I think it is going to be my next purchase. From the pictures I had wondered if it would be hard to manipulate but it wasn't.

The 1911 is a single action gun with a grip safety and a thumb safety.
The XD is a single action gun with a grip safety so why wouldn't you want a thumb safety?

 

[shadowalker]

In general my policy is not to buy any handgun with a thumb safety. I believe a manual safety adds unnecessary complexity both to mechanics and operation, and doesn't really add any "safety."

If a person doesn't train to disengage the safety they can and will forget to, or not realize that it has been accidentally engaged. I have seen pretty active shooters forget to take the safety off in fairly low stress situations.

I don't think it increases safety for kids, even very small children operate levers, buttons, etc or learn from TV to disengage the safety.

I have also seen people disregard safety procedures because "the safety is on" which means the gun is "safe" and that leads to them not clearing it or treating it with the respect it deserves. I find far more safety in consistently implementing the four rules.

I do think XD's with the thumb safety are a great alternative for those who add a manual safety to Glocks though. It will be interesting to see if Glock cedes the manual safety market to Springfield.

 

[krs]

Unless the trigger is modified to a light letoff and short takeup you don't need the flipper.

The whole point of the long takeup and pull needed to fire is to keep the pistol safe WITHOUT something the shooter has to depend on his or her fear scrambled brain and out of sync muscle memory to flip, or fool with when things are for real. It'll be hard enough to remember to pull the trigger.

Ask Gabe Suarez about that thumb safety.

 

[Guillermo]

Thumb safety on this pistol is unnecessary and detracts from the design. The two safeties are sufficient and they do not require thinking during a high stress moment. In my opinion the thumb safety is a dangerous superfluity.

I would not purchase an XD with a thumb safety.

 

[skinewmexico]

If I wanted a thumb safety, I'd go old school and get a 1911, or any number of other pistols. As has been stated in the many topics beating this to death, if the first two safeties and the one between your ears aren't enough, the third probably won't be either.

Maybe we'll get lucky, and the next XD45 will have a metal frame. Then a single stack magazine.

 

[SuperNaut]

I'd be interested to know how many of those opposed to an XD thumb safety are Glock owners. As to the OP, I like the thumb safety and I am not a Glock owner.

 

[hill billy]

I'm a glock owner and just bought a used xd45 specifically to get around the thumb safety. Safeties aren't.

 

[wally]

I've got the regular XD45 Tactical, great gun, but if I had plans to carry it (too large for me) I'd prefer the thumb safety.

In my opinion the thumb safety is a dangerous superfluity.

I'm sure the DEA agent who shot himself while re-holstering his Glock foretay in front of a class of kids might disagree!

--wally.

 

[Guillermo]

Wally,

We are concerned about two different types of danger.

You are concerned about the gun firing when you don’t want it to.
I am concerned about it not firing when I want it to

If you don’t put your finger in the trigger guard until you are prepared to shoot you will not have an unintended discharge.

As to the DEA agent, he is a pure, unadulterated moron. That was just Darwinism at work.

BTW
if anyone missed it…check it out. This guy deserved to be shot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeGD7r6s-zU

 

[guntotinguy]

I have several XD's...dont want a safety on them.I held an XD .45 with a safety the other day,honestly,it seemed strange and unecessary,handed it back the gun sales guy,and wont think again about it.I LIKE the 1911 as it is...

 

[Marshall]

I'll take them as they are, without. And I did.

That said, if that's all they offered, it wouldn't stop me from buying one again. It looks pretty unobtrusive.

 

[wally]

Actually many Glock NDs while re-holstering don't have a finger in the trigger guard, but a thumb break strap.

Thumb safeties if positioned correctly simply wipe off as the gun comes out of the holster and moves up towards parallel shooting position. With proper training its reflexive -- I wipe of the safety as I draw guns that lack thumb safeties -- no harm.

The 1911 got the thumb safety right.

Thanks for the youtube link, I downloaded the video, but didn't have the link handy.

--wally.

 

[Guillermo]

Wally,

The XD thumb safety works properly; meaning down is the fire position. Because of that it is not as bad as other guns which up is the fire position. (as a 1911 shooter I would put a Beretta on safe as I cleared leather)

Of course you are correct if you holster any firearm with something like a shirttail or a holster strap it can fire. That can happen with any handgun, including a revolver. It is very unlikely and does not happen often.

A friend once told me that if you try to make something idiot-proof you help create a better idiot. I draw the line at 2 safeties. You draw it at 3.

For me, under stress, I want to do as little as possible other than drill the goblin. My XD45 is sans safety and I am happy about it.

Best of luck
Guillermo

 

[Billy Shears]

I have an XD-45 Tactical that I use as my beside gun. It has no thumb safety, and frankly doesn't need it. For the vast majority of civilian shooters, the thumb safety certainly isn't really necessary.

That said, if I were considering this pistol to arm my police department, I absolutely would insist on the thumb safety. It's happened more than once that an officer's life has been saved when a suspect got hold of his gun, but couldn't immediately figure out how to make it fire. In a gun grab, the thumb safety can give you a precious extra few seconds to regain control of your weapon, or better still, deploy a backup. As to the complaint that a thumb safety may trip the shooter himself up under stress... that complaint holds absolutely no weight, as far as I am concerned. A properly designed thumb safety describes the same arc of motion as the shooting hand thumb; it simply wipes off easily and naturally during the draw stroke, and this is certainly no more difficult a motion to make under stress than undoing a thumb break strap, or pushing the release button on a retention holster. If there are shooters who failed to disengage the thumb safety under stress it is because they foolishly neglected their weapons training, and didn't familiarize themselves sufficiently with their pistol and its method of operation. The 1911, after all, has been carried as a police sidearm from it earliest days, and generations of officers (and others) who carried it cocked and locked, and used it in gunfights, have proven beyond any doubt that for a properly trained shooter, a thumb safety of that type is absolutely no impediment to a swiftly delivered first shot from the holster. Indeed, Jeff Cooper built his fame partly upon proving that for a properly trained shooter there actually was no faster gun to a first shot from the holster than a cocked and locked single action.

I gather that Springfield added the thumb safety partly to appeal to shooters who wanted one (the aftermarket thumb safeties sold for the Glock prove there is a market for such a device), and partly to make the gun a contender in any future U.S. military pistol selection, since the U.S. military insists any handgun it will consider as a possible future replacement for the M9 absolutely must have a thumb safety. For military usage, I really would consider the thumb safety a superfluity on the XD-45, but if that is what the U.S. armed forces want, the manufacturers have to accommodate them if they want to be considered.