I had an M&P40c when they first came out and carried it for about 7-8 years. Since then I've had about two dozen concealed carry pistols, but I'm actually thinking of coming full-circle and picking up either another Glock 26 or the newer M&P9 M2.0 Subcompact (which refreshed the wonderful M&P9c).

When comparing these pistols I was surprised to learn that the M&P9 M2.0 Subcompact is only .13" taller with twelve rounds (4.3" vs. 4.17"). That makes it less tall than the Glock 26 with a +2 baseplate or even with the Magpul 12-round magazine (which is supposed to be the shortest +2 solution).

Glock 26 with 12-round Magpul PMAG.jpg

I've been both a huge Glock and Smith & Wesson fan owning a half dozen pistols from each company (i.e. a dozen in all which is basically about half of concealed carry firearms I've owned). In recent years I've sold all of my Glocks and M&P's save for my PC M&P9 M2.0 Shield. I have larger and smaller guns that the Shield, but I'm looking again at a G26-sized pistol.

Truth be told, towards the end when I was carrying a Gen5 G26 I noticed I prefered carrying it with a flush magazine. I could both conceal and shoot it slightly better even if I only had 10 rounds. Personally, I don't need my pinky, so the +2 options just got in the way. The 4.3" height of the M&P, however, doesn't seem like very much to print, and it's shorter than the G26 Magpul mag as I mentioned. What do people think who either know or know of these pistols. I'm just interested in your thoughts and whatever pro's and con's you can think of.

At the end of the day, I can get the M&P Subcompact with an Apex Trigger and Ameriglo Night Sights for about the price of a Stock Gen5. That seems to me to be an incredible deal.

Note: First, I should remember more about my M&P40c, but back then (2005-2013) I never really tried using the flush magazine as I was new to concealed carry and hadn't really practiced shooting much without a pinky. Things changed in 2014 when I started carrying a variety of G26 pistols. Second, I don't need another thin single stack-like pistol (I love my Shield and have no interest whatsoever in the P365 or Hellcat).

I rented both, a couple Years back and the G26 won.
I happen to like the grip angle of the Glocks, point-shooting was more natural and the factory trigger felt better.

Add that it's very easy to modify and that the aftermarket parts seem to be less expensive... Well...

Now, on the other hand, the Shield feels better (to me) than the G43.

I pick up my 2.0 subcompact this Saturday. I carry a full size 2.0 on duty and it is a solid firearm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have both the g26 gen 4 and a new m&p subcompact. I shot the subcompact this weekend a lot and had no problems at all with it. I will say that my favorite glock is the 26 so it has some big shoes to fill. With that said, I love everything about the new m&p. Size is great. Shoots super for me. I added trijicon hd sights but the trigger was better than any of my glocks (to me).

Love the size with the 12 round mags for concealing and they include the spacers for the larger 15 round mag. Currently it’s riding my hip with the 12 round mag but if I had a jacket on, I’d add the 15 round mag.

Very nice new purchase. For me, it shoots flatter and comes back on target quicker than my g26 (and my g26 is better than my g19 ironically).

Good luck with your purchase.

If you buy a new 2.0 subcompact I’d encourage you to shoot it a bit before spending money on aftermarket trigger do-dads. If your gun is anything like the 2.0s I’ve had the chance to shoot, I hope you will find the trigger is so much better than the old M&Ps that you may not need to alter it. The 2.0 triggers really are that much better, IMO. As to the guns themselves, I’ll stay out of that comparison as I don’t care much for Glocks in general, and haven’t handled and fired any of the new versions.

I'm one of those guys that is pretty easy to please with triggers as long as there is no front sight disruption for slow shooting an nothing excessive shooting faster from reset. I don't care if there is an audible or tactile reset. In fact, I prefer not having a tactile one. I can make the first pull of a Bodyguard 380's trigger as well as I can any of my pistols (Glocks, S&W's, SIG's, Walthers, etc...), I just need to learn most triggers. Every once in awhile I get one that doesn't agree with me no matter how good its attributes allegedly are. Other times I can pull a 10-12 lb. DAO trigger with no problem (at slow and moderate speeds). In my opinion a 6.5-7.5 striker-fired trigger is often harder to pull perfectly than a 10 lb. DA.

Although it wouldn't have changed the grip angle, you must have tried the old version (M&P9c) and not the M&P9 Subcompact which was just released a few months ago. You also must shoot a lot of Glocks almost exclusively because that's the first time I've heard someone say that the Glock grip angle was more natural because it requires canting your wrist (which you don't do when you point a finger, for example). Personally I find the Glock and M&P similar compared to my SIG and Beretta pistols (though the Glock is still more of a departure from them). Even when I shot mostly Glocks (I've had six of them) the first time I picked up a SIG it pointed more naturally (and an M&P is right in between a Glock and a SIG). When I've handled my SIG and Beretta a lot and go back to a Glock or an M&P, I point them both a little high (albeit I point the Glock significantly higher). When this happens with the M&P I can't see myself pointing so high that I sail a bullet over a bad guy's head, but I certainly see that happening with Glock. Don't get me wrong, I love Glock and usually this wasn't a problem, but I'd say one out of every twenty times or so when I wasn't thinking about it I would aim high because it requires a more drastically different grip than any of my other pistols. Everyone is different however.