I have been considering a full sized striker fired pistol for target shooting. I need to put an Optic Red dot on it as my old eyes are not what they were. I own almost all hammer fired pistols.
I am considering the Glock 19 MOS or the M&P 9mm C.O.R.E. (used) . I say used because I am under the impression SW stopped making the C.O.R.E 9mm pistol.

Anyway... my question is ..which is a better choice and why?
OR... since this is the SW forum why by an M&P instead of a Glock?

I will assume that I will need to do trigger upgrades on either of them. I am not shooting them in competition. I just want a nice target pistol that I can enjoy.

__________________
John 1:17
NRA Life Benefactor

S&W still makes the M&P with the slide milled for optics, but it's now called "Optics Ready".

SKU 12660 is what you want in a 4.25" gun, but for some reason is listed as Law Enforcement Only, though it looks like 11826 is probably the same gun listed as a C.O.R.E. model.

S&W has been a little strange with their M&P model designations over the last few years. It can be a little confusing.

If you go to Pistols | Smith & Wesson and change the series to CORE you will see all 10 of the M&P 2.0 pistols cut for a red dot except for the law enforcement only versions. Your choice of 5 or 4.25 inch barrels, ported or unported, and 9mm or 40. The civilian versions all come from the performance center and have a better trigger than a regular M&P 2.0. They came out with 2.0 CORE models early this year and I never saw one at a store. If you are not going to be shooting in competition avoid the ported versions. They make the reduce muzzle flip at the cost of increased muzzle blast.

I am not entirely sure what the difference is between the civilian and LE versions. But the short version is the civilian version is aimed at competition shooting and the LE version is more of a carry gun.

After I bought my M&P 2.0 compact I eventually sold my Glock 19. The biggest advantage I found the M&P had over the Glock is much better ergonomics. The Glock literally rubbed me the wrong way. When I gripped the G19 high the frame would rub my hand near the base of my thumb to the point I would get a blister unless I put on a bandaid or wore a glove. This really varies from person to person, a lot of people have no issues with the Glock ergonomics or lack thereof. The M&P has a very aggressive texture on the grip. I have grown to like the texture at the range but would not use a M&P as a carry gun without sanding it down some.

I have never owned a performance center gun so I have no first hand knowledge of the trigger but it is supposed to be better than the stock one. If you get a new M&P I would give it a try before upgrading it. Out of the box both my 2.0 M&P and G19 had triggers I would rate about equal. If you are used to a nice, crisp trigger on a 1911 you will not be happy with either.

In normal times I would say go to a gun store and handle both so you can decide if the poor ergonomics on the Glock will be an issue for you and which trigger you like better. But good luck finding either in stock right now.

As I get older I also find myself looking at a red dot pistol for informal target shooting at the range and possibly has a home defense pistol. Since I am familiar with the M&P, have magazines and don't like Glock ergonomics I was looking for M&P 2.0 CORE right when things went all 2020 on us and guns became hard to find and over priced.

I wanted to type out a longer response last night, but didn't have time...

First, M&P v. Glock... As a long time 1911 shooter, I prefer the grip angle of the M&P. The M&P's grip is also adaptable to a wider range of shooters; the Glock starts big, and just gets bigger. I also prefer the dovetail mounted front sight on the M&P, as I've seen Glock sights go AWOL on the range. As far as triggers, I prefer the M&P, but neither are particularly great, coming from S&W revolvers and 1911s.

Both are good, reliable pistols, and there's nothing wrong with Glock... they're a great tool. Whatever you get, be sure to get a gun with 'suppressor height' (now starting to be called "optic height") sights; that way you won't have to buy a set of sights right out of the gate.

Next, on to red dots...

Red dots are fantastic for those of us with 'aging' eyes. Especially when shooting at longer distances where front sight focus really becomes critical. I found a red dot really improved my accuracy from 15 yards out.

Be aware that it will take a significant training committment to reach a level of competency with a red dot when shooting close and fast, if you're an experienced shooter with irons. With a dot, you shoot both eyes open, and look at the target, which is very different from iron sights. It takes time to break those habits.

From your post, it sounds like you're just doing informal recreational shooting, and a red dot will work fine for that on either of the pistols you're looking at.

The LE model has Tritium sights instead of the white dots. It likely comes with 3 mags instead of 2. Also, pricing is usually cheaper for LE's. Note the MSRP is not listed.

Yup. I have one... just not sure if they're generally available to any buyer.

If going with Glock MOS the OE adapter plate is horrible, get a plate from CHPWS or Forward Control Designs.

No experience with the S&W OE optics ready plate, but CHPWS makes plates for the S&W also.

+1 on chpws plate.First outing with my Glock 19 mos partway thru the second magazine.Something bounced off my forehead.It was my rmr never did find the Glock plate.CHPWS plate is the way to go.

I've been a Glock guy for a long time, but when it came to mounting a RD, I choose the new SW 2.0 4".

SW provides the spacers for different optics, they are plastic, but it doesn't;'t matter as your mounting it to the slide, the spacers are just that.

Interesting. All the mounting plates that came with my M&Ps have been metal.