testtest

XD-M Elite vs. SA-35: Does New Outpace the Old?

Another..... article. I have yet to hear anyone on here complain about their XD-M or XD-M Elite. But lots of problems with the new SA-35. So what is the point other than to fill space? Im still surprised about all the problems with the SA-35. I have a Browning HiPower Practicle and have never ever had any problems with it. Guess they took the time to assemble them properly. Is there anyone on here that would mind spending a little bit more money for a properly assembled and great functioning firearm so they wouldnt have problems and have to return it for work?
 
There's really no logical comparison since both pistols comes from different times & design approaches. But someone needs to write something up for the magazine.

But JM Browning "died" before the patent on the initial prototype was approved, and the majority of the work was done by JM Brownings' Belgian co-designer. And JM Browning couldn't use his other ideas because of existing patents from his prior designs that were held by other companies.

Hope the Gen 2 SA-35 fixes the issues of Gen 1.
 
I don't have time to watch right now but maybe somebody can explain to me what 6 o'clock hold is?

I seriously hope it's not what I think it is.
 
Mike H. said:
Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “XD-M Elite vs. SA-35: Does New Outpace the Old?” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/xd-m-elite-vs-sa-35/.

Click to expand...
I have the XDM Elite Tactical OSP and find it imminently shootable. While it would be nice to own an SA-35, I don't have the extra scratch lying around to buy one and check it out for myself. Ergo, the XDM wins :cool:
 
In Washington both pistols are now illegal unless you purchased them prior to the new law going into effect last July. Fortunately, I already owned a Belgian High Power and several 13 and 15 round magazines that are "grandfathered" in. Can't sell them except through an FFL and must be sold out of the state. The HP is my primary CC carry pistol. I also use Colt 1911's, but less frequently. I have tried Glock's and Sig Sauer (own a P239 .357) but revert to the HP most of the time.

I must note that the SA-35 is listed as available from many sources on Gunbroker, but good luck at the MSRP price.
 
My jaw is hanging open in stunned disbelief at this. ’If you like center hold get the XD-M Elite, and if you like six o‘o’clock hold get the SA-35’ — are you serious? That’s why we adjust, modify, and change sights. There are so many reasons to pick one of these over the other, but that is not one of them.
 
blues_hawk said:
I don't have time to watch right now but maybe somebody can explain to me what 6 o'clock hold is?

I seriously hope it's not what I think it is.
Click to expand...
It is aiming at the bottom of the bullseyes - so the bullseye sits on top of your front sight. Then you adjust your sights so the bullets strike the center of the bullseye. So-called because it is the six o’clock position on the clock face. Very popular hold among many bullseye shooters - or at least it used to be.
 
Annihilator said:
The way I look at it, not trying to be a smart azz or anything, at least the XDm works……..
Click to expand...
Yep.

For me the answer is neither. Outside of the XD Mod 2, which I own, none of the striker guns from SA appeal to me in the least and have never been on my radar at all, although I have no doubt they are all good guns and function as intended. As for the SA 35, even if I was inclined to pick up a BHP clone it definitely wouldn't be that one. Way too many horror stories. And if I may dive in a little bit deeper even, I'll pass on any of the SA 1911s as well. Just on this forum there are so many people complaining about issues with them that I don't think I would ever consider one. My rationale may not be exactly fair here since 1911s are notoriously finnicky and there is no doubt SA's customer service department is apparently top notch, but the fact is Bassbob is not known for his patience. I will trade money for time.
 
Bassbob said:
Yep.

For me the answer is neither. Outside of the XD Mod 2, which I own, none of the striker guns from SA appeal to me in the least and have never been on my radar at all, although I have no doubt they are all good guns and function as intended. As for the SA 35, even if I was inclined to pick up a BHP clone it definitely wouldn't be that one. Way too many horror stories. And if I may dive in a little bit deeper even, I'll pass on any of the SA 1911s as well. Just on this forum there are so many people complaining about issues with them that I don't think I would ever consider one. My rationale may not be exactly fair here since 1911s are notoriously finnicky and there is no doubt SA's customer service department is apparently top notch, but the fact is Bassbob is not known for his patience. I will trade money for time.
Click to expand...
My brother has several Kimbers in 3", 4", and the 5". He is not happy. I have three 5" Colt 1911's with one being a 1918 that I received as a Christmas present when I was 11, a Colt 1911 WWI "resumption", and a 1980 Series. All work without hiccups, although the original I wouldn't trust with HP. The trigger on the 1980 Series is just fine...for me.
 
tennex said:
It is aiming at the bottom of the bullseyes - so the bullseye sits on top of your front sight. Then you adjust your sights so the bullets strike the center of the bullseye. So-called because it is the six o’clock position on the clock face. Very popular hold among many bullseye shooters - or at least it used to be.
Click to expand...
That's what I was afraid of. Both distance from and size of the target bull come into major play when this theory is used. If the sights are high when splitting the bull they need to be fixed. This is not just my opinion in this case. It's been debunked a thousand times and is in all the training manuals. Sad to see it in an SA article. :/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top