Joined
·
8,683 Posts
What if you need a pretty slim gun but also can't handle the recoil of a .40. I would think the 9mm XDs would be more appropriate for a new shooter, female, or older person who can't handle the recoil of a .40. I am just guessing here but I assume that is the target market.The XDs is a solid gun, but for me it is much like the Shield in 9mm...what's the point?? The reason why I say this is multifold:
a) They aren't that small, for only a little more weight and size you can go double stack like an XDSC, G26, M&Pc etc. and virtually double capacity.
b) If you are going to have such low capacity, why not make it as large a caliber as reasonably possible? The XDs 45 appeals to me, 9mm not so. Same goes for the Shield, I'd go .40, but really I wish there was a 357 Sig variant or at least a conversion barrel.
Is there going to be a .40 XDs?
I honestly think thin/slim guns are WAY over rated. My 1.18 inch thick G26 conceals better than my sub 1 inch thick Kahr CW9 because the Glocks grip is shorter. If you can have thin AND short then go for it, but if your primary concern is concealment I really believe that grip length is a more important stat then overall width.What if you need a pretty slim gun but also can't handle the recoil of a .40. I would think the 9mm XDs would be more appropriate for a new shooter, female, or older person who can't handle the recoil of a .40. I am just guessing here but I assume that is the target market.
My CM9 conceals miles better than my G27, so I would agree. With that being said, I love thing single stack guns. For me, they just shoot so perfectly.I honestly think thin/slim guns are WAY over rated. My 1.18 inch thick G26 conceals better than my sub 1 inch thick Kahr CW9 because the Glocks grip is shorter. If you can have thin AND short then go for it, but if your primary concern is concealment I really believe that grip length is a more important stat then overall width.