xd triggers what the big deal?

[jlbarrett]

Glock Vs Springfield Armory XD-45 ACP

Here is the scoop.. I own both a Gock model 22 40 CAL and Springfield Armory XD-45 ACP. I have shot both guns considerably and can honestly say that the XD is more accurate, easier to shoot, safer to handle and just a all around beter gun. I know ill get back some arguments, but the difference in my shooting scores was 10-12% better.

The safety features in the gun are outstanding.

Sorry Glock...

 

[Lennyjoe]

I've shot quite a few Glocks and only 1 XD. The XD in question is Springerman 05's. That is one accurate pistol for sure. Trigger pull is just fine.

The only complaint I have is the reset on the trigger. With a Glock you can ride the trigger forward and feel the click. When you do you are most always up against the wall per sey.

Unfortunately with the XD models when you ride the trigger forward after the shot you can feel the trigger reset but there is slack before you are up against the wall. That slack is what I don't like.

Otherwise, both are great pistols and I plan on getting an XD-45 in 5" someday.

 

[atek3]

out of the box glock and xd triggers suck. They are fine for defensive work, but when the going gets practical, the serious get trigger work. Canyon Creek did the trigger on my XD40, wow is it sweet. Light, crisp, minimal creep, no overtravel, short reset, it's like it should have been from the factory.

atek3

 

[shield20]

1911, P99QA, HK LEM, most DA/SA

Been a while for a Glock and XD - wasn't too impressed with either. Probably in there before DA/SA. 1911 is ideal. The QA is also short and sweet - though maybe a bit heavy for some. LEM is loooong, and a bit heavy. DA/SA as on Berettas are looooong heavy DA, and sloppy SA.

 

[jashobeam]

Sorry for the long post

I have an older model Glock 17 (1992). I am quite used to its trigger. Though some might describe it as spongy, I actually enjoy it. On my Glock there doesn't really seem to be a point in the trigger pull that requires more force for it to break. It seems to simply be a matter of distance. When I pull the trigger a certain distance, the gun fires. I don't have to squeeze much HARDER. And the trigger never stops its rearward movement. Being used to this type of trigger, it was difficult for me to get used to guns that, after the initial slack was removed, required extra effort to get the trigger to break. It was weird for me to shoot a gun whose trigger does not move while I am applying more pressure to it. I shot a Les Baer (sp?) like that. After the initial take up of slack, the trigger seemed to stop moving. I flinched, like I expected it to have fired. It was quite difficult for me to retain the same grip while applying more pressure with my finger to an object (the trigger) that was not moving. I didn't like it. I could probably get quite used to it and would most likely love it and appreciate why everyone else loves it. But, I didn't like it because I wasn't used to it.

I haven't been shooting my Glock since I recently acquired a couple of CZs (a P-01 and a 97B). With the CZs there is definitely a point where I become aware that the gun is about to fire. CZs do not have the best triggers. My P-01 has some grittiness, but the pull is pretty consistent.

BTW, I am more accurate with an XD than I am with my Glock, though I do not own an XD and rarely ever shoot one.

Shot an HK USP Match .45 that had an AWESOME trigger! Even the double action trigger was smooth and easy. Best trigger I ever encountered.