Glock Forum - GlockTalk banner

1 - 20 of 101 Posts

·
"Don't Tread On Me!"
Joined
·
6,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Why did Springfield Armory decide to put a grip safety on what it otherwise a clone of the Glock? This would be a nice looking handgun if it wasn't for the dang grip safety, I just don't understand the reason behind it. Glock, S&W Sigma, and other Glock clones don't have one. Was there something unsafe about the original design that warranted the addition of a grip safety?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,711 Posts
The XD was originally the HS-2000 and when it was imported from croatia they had one on it. It's been around since the 90s.
 

·
"Don't Tread On Me!"
Joined
·
6,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/hr/im-metal-hs-2000-e.html
Ahh, ok, I see. It was made that way from the beginning. I really think it's a neat looking gun but I just don't like that grip safety. I just think it adds something extra that can fail and stop the pistol from running at a critical moment. Probably a non-issue but still, it just looks strange on a gun like this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,206 Posts
they have to do one better than glock as a bridge from 1911. i have a friend who is sold out for xd and could not believe i still carry the glock with no grip safety.

i told him it's about training and confidence with what you carry. sometimes, i carry 1911 in condition 1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
I believe it had something to do with the fact that the XD is classified as a "single-action only," compared to other striker fired weapons being classified as a "double action only." Whereas with the Glock mechanism, pulling the trigger retracts the striker to the fully cocked position before releasing it, the XD does not do this - the striker is fully cocked upon trigger reset.

Just because it's a polymer-frame striker-fired action does not make it a Glock clone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,206 Posts
http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/hr/im-metal-hs-2000-e.html
Ahh, ok, I see. It was made that way from the beginning. I really think it's a neat looking gun but I just don't like that grip safety. I just think it adds something extra that can fail and stop the pistol from running at a critical moment. Probably a non-issue but still, it just looks strange on a gun like this.
TN.Frank you need to post a message soon. You now have 666 posts.:tongueout:
 

·
"Don't Tread On Me!"
Joined
·
6,425 Posts
TN.Frank you need to post a message soon. You now have 666 posts.:tongueout:
That's my lucky number. Oops, screwed it up, now I've got 667.

I know they did a durability test on one of the shooting shows and the XD is one tough little gun, equal to the Glock in every respect.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,195 Posts
I believe it had something to do with the fact that the XD is classified as a "single-action only," compared to other striker fired weapons being classified as a "double action only." Whereas with the Glock mechanism, pulling the trigger retracts the striker to the fully cocked position before releasing it, the XD does not do this - the striker is fully cocked upon trigger reset.

Just because it's a polymer-frame striker-fired action does not make it a Glock clone.
this has me thinking, I believe the M&P is also fully cocked... continuing with this though, would this not make the safety of handling/ carrying the XD about the same as a 1911 cocked and unlocked? Other than a short amount of trigger travel, how is something like an M&P or the XD any safer for carry?
 

·
"Don't Tread On Me!"
Joined
·
6,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
this has me thinking, I believe the M&P is also fully cocked... continuing with this though, would this not make the safety of handling/ carrying the XD about the same as a 1911 cocked and unlocked? Other than a short amount of trigger travel, how is something like an M&P or the XD any safer for carry?
Wow, when you put it that way it DOES sound kind of dangerous.:shocked:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,141 Posts
When I first got my XD I had trouble engaging the grip-safety . It would shoot then not shoot . It was the way I was holding it . Now on my 1911 I have no problem .
With practice I got better , but it could be a big problem in combat if you ever got a hand injury and couldnt grip the gun correctly .
That one reason is why I would NOT want it as my duty-pistol . BUt it is a good gun , and the grip safety is the only negative thing I see on it for the reason I listed above .
 

·
"Don't Tread On Me!"
Joined
·
6,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
When I first got my XD I had trouble engaging the grip-safety . It would shoot then not shoot . It was the way I was holding it .
With practice I got better , but it could be a big problem in combat if you ever got a hand injury and couldnt grip the gun correctly .
That one reason is why I would NOT want it as my duty-pistol . BUt it is a good gun , and the grip safety is the only negative thing I see on it for the reason I listed above .
THIS is the main thing that stops me from even thinking about this pistol for CCW/HD. Like I said, I love the way it looks but that dang grip safety looks like it could be a problem in a real world self defense situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
THIS is the main thing that stops me from even thinking about this pistol for CCW/HD. Like I said, I love the way it looks but that dang grip safety looks like it could be a problem in a real world self defense situation.

I have shot an XD and the grip safety is super passive, nothing near a GI 1911 more like a 1911 with extended grip safety.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,645 Posts
xd's not for me!
 

·
"Don't Tread On Me!"
Joined
·
6,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
It just seems like the grip safety would be a good area for dirt and stuff to get into the works of the pistol. I know I've had lint build up in my revolver when I've carried it much and always had to keep the hammer area cleaned out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,141 Posts
I've never had any trouble disengaging it when drawing. I like the XD as is.
I think it is because I have been using a Glock for the last 14 yrs at my job . I have other pistols but it is the main one I handle . The grip on the 2 are different .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,410 Posts
I believe it was a marketing position. They wanted it to be a logical progression from the other guns that Springfield sells. They pumped the point that the grip angle was the same as a John Browning 45 ACP. It is the reason that I WILL NEVER OWN ONE!

I have been to more than one match, USPSA, IDPA where the only stress on the operator was a buzzer and paper targets not shooting back and more than a few times I have seen guys draw from the holster, not get the proper grip and the gun will not fire.

Now, have someone kick in your front door with your family sitting there and have to make a shot. Are you SURE that your grip will be perfect?

Show me where the safety is on a model 686 smith or a model 10 for that matter? You want a safety? You come with one built in, it's between your ears. My second safety is my finger position, my third safety is where I point the thing. What I expect out of a handgun is that if I drop it, it won't go bang. Glock has three safeties made to prevent an ad when the gun is dropped.

OK, off my soap box now. Oh, one more thing, the triggers suck out of the box and you need to send them off to have them worked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126,153 Posts
Why did Springfield Armory decide to put a grip safety on what it otherwise a clone of the Glock? This would be a nice looking handgun if it wasn't for the dang grip safety, I just don't understand the reason behind it. Glock, S&W Sigma, and other Glock clones don't have one. Was there something unsafe about the original design that warranted the addition of a grip safety?
How are they a clone of a Glock except for the grip safety? :dunno:

They're about as different as two striker fired polymer pistols can get.
 
1 - 20 of 101 Posts
Top