Which one-- Glock 17, M & P, XDM or Beretta 92....

[T-Rite]

I've upgraded the sights on my XDm to Tru Glo red front, green rear sights and added a compact Armalaser on the rail. It's good to go.

 

[Biggfoot44]

The Glock, XD, and M&P are direct competetors. You didn't mention it , but add PX4 and P250 to the group too.

The Berreta M92 is "different" , likewise 1911.

Fondle them all , shoot as many as you can. Pick which one fits you the best, and that you can shoot accurately.

 

[jaredm1]

I've shot some form of the first three on your list, but not the 92A1. I (obviously) own the M&P and recommend that. The Glock 17 would be my second choice, but not the 17C. If you don't end up shooting mikec's, you can shoot mine since I'm in the area. Mine is not a pro-series, but has some Apex trigger parts.

 

[Dave MP]

I will say that I don't really recommend any of the compensated Glock models. It definitely increases fouling inside the slide which may hamper its reliability.

There is an increase in fouling inside the slide. I have not noticed any reduction in reliability on the range (even after 300-400 rounds)

The Glock 17 would be my second choice, but not the 17C.

The big drawback to the compensated that I see is the flash being directed upward in a low light situation could mess with your eyes more.

I have the G17C and like it a lot. I am looking at buying a non-compensated barrel in the future, to see if the difference is favorable.

Please let me know if this is off base or if I am missing something related to the compensated.

 

[browning guy]

I have an xdm 5.25 in .45 and i love it. the gun shoots better then I ever will.

 

[jaredm1]

There is an increase in fouling inside the slide. I have not noticed any reduction in reliability on the range (even after 300-400 rounds)



The big drawback to the compensated that I see is the flash being directed upward in a low light situation could mess with your eyes more.

I have the G17C and like it a lot. I am looking at buying a non-compensated barrel in the future, to see if the difference is favorable.

Please let me know if this is off base or if I am missing something related to the compensated.

That's my reasoning...the extra flash and another entry point for debris. It's probably great for competition, I just don't think I'd carry one or keep one in the nightstand.

 

[joppaj]

The Glock 17 non-compensated or even a Glock 34 if you can find one. As noted, the 92 is a very different gun than the others and I PERSONALLY hate them, too heavy, too many external controls. The Springfield and the Glock to me feel the least similiar amongst the rest. I hate the XD's. I don't like the grip angle, the slide height, the trigger, hell, I don't even like the magazines but some people do.

 

[MDMOUNTAINEER]

I would get a Glock gen4 34 given the parameters you listed.

The Glock ergos are troublesome for some and the gen 4 may solve that problem. The 34 has a longer sight radius and more forward weight which will allow for faster follow up shots without screwing up your vision in low light like a compensated model will.

I have all of the pistols you mentioned (except my 17 isn't compensated) and for full disclosure, I am assuredly a "Glock guy".

The Mp is nice, ergos and adjustability are good. But idont like the thermosensitive plastic sleeve and bushing they use in the striker channel and ive had corrosion issues when used hard. (But taken care of).


I don't like the high bore axis of the xd. I also have seen many with corrosion issues but I don't like mine enough to shoot orcarry the damn thing to have it subject to an environment to rust.

The 92 is dead reliable and a hoot to. Shoot at the range. I'm not a huge fan of DA/SA so this would make it my third choice after the Glock and Mp.

The 226 is a nice pistol but again the bore axis is highAND its DA/SA, not to mention the price. Actually, I think the only reason I like the 226 is because my dad carried it in the police department.

 

[mike_in_md]

It is easier to shoot more accurately rapid fire with a DA/SA and the result is you should also see much tighter groups. Since you said you wanted it mainly for target shooting I voted the Berretta 92. Mine is tricked out for matches for a little more accuracy.

 

[Second Amendment]

Go with the Glock. You get a lot of life out of it and it will shoot anything.

That's my biased opinion.

 

[Numidian]

You are going to get a lot more in the case a purchase with the Springfield XDm. That said, (and I have one in .40 cal) you are also getting a gun that does everything well that the Glock does, but has better safety features, grip ergonomics. If you are going for concealed carry, the XDm compact is the ticket because the grip is more substantial and again, you are getting more bang for your buck.

When you buy a Glock you get a Glock and one or two mags. When you buy XDm, you get a case full of accessories that you can use plus a great gun.

Crappy, useless accessories. The springfield holster and mag pouch that came with my 1911 weren't even close to chinese airsoft quality. And the bore height is a good .5" higher than the M&P or Glocks, that correlates to muzzle flip/felt recoil. Plus the XD is stuck shooting with the 1911s if you ever want to try IDPA.

I personally would go with an M&P, the range and carry kits come with a nice Bladetech holster and mag pouch. Or for me, I'd get a 5" M&P, like I have lol.

A Glock 17 or 34 are the only other guns I would consider on your list.

 

[MDMOUNTAINEER]

I personally prefer the dao of a Glock, Mp, xd, over a da/sa like the beretta or sig. That's just me thou. I find the consistency gives me better results.

However a tuned 1911 trigger is better than all of the above, but we aren't talking 1911's here

 

[davsco]

if you will be doing any competitions, the glock 34 dominates the idpa and uspsa production classes.

definitely do NOT get a glock C model for competitions, you will be in Open division competing against $3k+ raceguns.

good news is they're all (glock, S&W, springfield) pretty good guns, so try 'em out and see which you like best. but also check aftermarket parts and accessories (holsters, mags, sights, trigger kits, etc) availability and pricing as that should be a consideration.

 

[jimbobborg]

My two competition pistols are a tuned 1911 double stack and a bone stock CZ-75b. The CZ was $535 OTD. After I pick up another C&R, I'm going to order ANOTHER CZ-75 but the long slide version they just came out with. I've owned a G35, shot the M&P and XDM and Beretta. I'll take the CZ over ANY of those any day of the week. CZs are the ONLY full sized 9mm pistol I will ever own.

 

[mike_in_md]

With the Beretta 92 at the range and during matches I rack the slide so even the 1st shot is single action. The trigger on my Beretta 92 in SA breaks at 4 pounds and is just as good as a 1911. I'd only use the DA feature for personal protection.

 

[byf43]

Coming from someone that owns/shoots both the Glock platform and the Beretta 92FS platform -

Beretta first:
The 92FS is a fantastic pistol!!
The slide feels like it glides on ball bearings!
It is an accurate pistol, but, it is big and it is heavy.
Magazines are getting expensive (comparatively speaking).
I am personally not a fan of the front/rear sights on the 92FS (and they are a PITA to change, especially the front sight!!)


Glock:
Well, it is no secret. I really like the Glock platform.
This is coming from someone that really hated the platform, before shooting several models. (9mm and .45 acp.)

I don't have a G17, but, I do have a G19.
This pistol shoots as though the bullets are riding a laserbeam to the target.
Here is a crappy cellphone pic of the FIRST group fired from my G19.
This is 15 rounds of CCI Blazer (aluminum cased).
The distance was 15 yards. Standing, using a slightly modified/improvised "Weaver Stance".
After I shot this group, it is apparent that this pistol's sights are not regulated for a 6 o'clock hold. They are regulated for a "Center Hold" or "Navy Hold".

My G19 is so accurate, it's boring.


You truly need to handle and shoot each pistol that you are interested in, to see which one feels 'right' to YOU.
You have to live with your decision.

 

[Schwabe]

If it is for target shooting, the Glock is a service pistol and not a bullseye shooter. However it is easy to maintain, silly easy to dismantle and clean. You can get a used G17 from Lou for $400+, cheap reliable gun for target practice.

I have a G22 which is now about 17 years old and shoots like the first day. I am too old and blind to bulls eye shoot over iron sights but I can dump the 15 rounds at 25 yards as fast as I can pull the trigger and hear 15 tings from the steel target. Good enough for me and a fun exercise at the range.

I do my bulls eye shooting with 22s and either scopes or red dots.

 

[mrozowjj]

Glock lovers tell me there's a secret to shooting a Glock--- anyone care to fill me in????

Practice. I'm not sure it's exactly a secret.

 

[mrozowjj]

I'd recommend against a compensated Glock it limits your IDPA shooting division right out of the gate.

If you want to shoot in competition you will see more Glocks out there than anything else on your list which should be an indicator to you. Second will be the M&P, then XD and then Beretta. In fact the only Berettas I've seen at competitions were guys that work at Beretta factory in MD.

 

[sficksr]

I'm a new shooter compaired to the majority of the members I'm sure. With that being said I have shot the above mentioned and I went with the m&p personally out of the box its so smooth. Im not a big glock fan though I hear, which I'm sure you have also, with some work you can't beat it.