I wrote this email to some friends that wanted my opinion on the Glock vs M&P. I thought I would post it for your thoughts as well.


This is nothing more than my opinion so take it for what it it worth. So you know where I am coming from, my focus with regard to all my guns is long term durability and ultra reliability. I want guns I can count in in a zombie apocalypse. I don't particularly care if they are pretty. I attended an M&P armorer's course primarily because I wanted to learn how to detail strip and repair (should the need arise) my newly acquired S&W Shield 9mm. I have been VERY taken with the Shield, and that hasn't changed. I don't think there is a better single stack 9mm on the market as of this writing, though there are STRONG rumors that a Glock will introduce a single stack 9mm at next years shot show. Many of us have been wishing for that for years, if not decades, but I hear that Glock has moved production to the US, which makes the appearance of a slim 9mm more likely since import restrictions would no longer be a barrier. A Glock equivalent of the Shield would most assuredly be a "must have" for me. So here are my thoughts:

The M&P is basically a Glock, with the internal parts moved around. One of the consequences of moving the parts around is that it is somewhat more difficult to detail strip, but it has some positive aspects as well.

One area where I think the M&P is clearly superior to the Glock design is in the frame. The M&P frame is constructed of a similar polymer, but has stainless steel inserts to stiffen/strengthen the frame in critical areas. I own a 24 year old (low round count) Glock 19 that suffered a cracked frame for reasons unknown. I have wondered ever since whether or not that was just a bad batch of polymer, or the frame was subject to some unknown trauma(I had bought the gun used), or if polymer just becomes brittle with age, and therefore has a service life? I have no answers to those questions, but the added steel in the M&P frame is comforting to me.

The M&P also has a grip angle and (low) bore axis which I find to be outstanding. I also like the Glock grip angle and bore axis, and frankly I see little difference between them, but it seems a great many people despise the Glock grip angle. To me, its a wash between the two pistols. The (full size and compact) M&P comes with three interchangeable back straps. I know the Glock Gen 4 has interchangeable back-straps as well, though I have never handled one. I never had any serious issues with the Gen three frames, and in the M&P I am satisfied with the "medium" back-strap, so I suppose I am as average as average can be and either/or will do just fine. If the back strap is important to you then you will have to judge for yourself.

Another area where the M&P excels is the trigger. This appears to be a positive consequence of moving the parts around as I mentioned earlier. It seems to me that, the interplay between the connector and trigger bar on the Glock is inherently less smooth than the M&P system. Again, I am not an expert...just my opinion. The M&P trigger by contrast is outstanding, very smooth with a strong reset. On the flip side, and again, just my opinion, I think the Glock trigger system is more robust, especially with the NY1 trigger which I prefer. The NY1 trigger is virtually unbreakable and offers the most positive reset available which is something that is most valuable to me.

The M&P is available with or without a magazine disconnect, external safety, and key lock. I wouldn't want any of those features, but they are an option for those that are so disposed so I thought I would throw it out there.

In terms of the ease with which each respective pistol can be be detail stripped and repaired, Glock wins hands down. An orangutan can detail strip a Glock pistol. It's that easy. The M&P is an order of magnitude more difficult. That is not to say that it is difficult per se, just more so than a Glock.

All thinks considered, If I were looking for a full size or compact double stack pistol, I would stick with the Glock. All of the aforementioned in addition to parts availability makes it a winner. I never much cared for the stubby feel of the baby Glock which is why, for concealed carry, the slim 9mm Shield can't be beat. If Glock introduces a single stack 9mm...that may be a game changer (in my opinion.)