Glock vs. M&P-yup. I'm askin' it.

heekma

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
152
Reaction score
22
Location
Hawkeye turned Longhorn
Yup, I'm asking it--BUT--it's not the kind of thread you may think it is...

I like Glocks. Good guns. Simple, reliable, accurate. I've owned a fair number of them and have to admit the G17L I owned for a while was a helluva gun. Made me look like a better shooter than I really am, and honestly, I'm not all that terrible.

Their grip doesnt suit me-I like the angle, but it feels like a two by four.

I. LOVE. THE. TRIGGER. RESET. OF. GLOCKS.

Period.

Short and very positive. Good stuff.

For those who have owned Glocks and switched to M&Ps-why the switch?

Does the steel sub-assembly of the M&P feel more robust? Do the controls feel a little more substantial?

I have to admit, Glocks feel a little cheap when I disassemble them for cleaning. One of the best feeling polymer guns in terms of build quality (is that an oxymoron?) Was a Steyr. Horrible trigger, weird sights, poor reliability. Felt like a polymer Rolls Royce otherwise.

I have an irrational desire to own a poly gun again. I'm a steel kind of guy, so this makes no sense to me.

I'm a member of this forum for a reason-I like S&W.

Tell me why you prefer the M&P over Glock or others. I'd like to hear your opinions and experiences.

Best,

Heekma
 
Register to hide this ad
I own neither pistol.

Glock and M&Ps to my hands feel like some villainous gunsmith changed the trigger to a light switch .Both pistols work well as mass market tools, but seeing as how I must earn my money to buy firearms I refuse to pay one red cent for a firearm that sells with a substandard trigger.

As far as polymer vs metal is concerned the only thing about the material that bothers me is that gunmakers sell polymer frame pistols at prices identical to those of metal frame competitors when they cost a fraction of the metal firearm to manufacture. More power to those firms to rake in the money, but I will not join the lemmings jumping off the 'Tactical' cliff.
 
M&P over Glock. I own the M&P .45. I like the M&P for all the reasons you stated except that Glock does have a nicer trigger reset and easier to see sights. Std white dot. My M&P is a tack driver. I will put it up against any off the shelf gun at 4-15 yards. (Standard Self defense distance) I have over 3000 rounds through it without 1 FTFor FTL problem.
I also have a Ruger SR9C. It has a great trigger reset and great feel in my hand. But it is much more finicky when it come to FTL's. Ammo sensitive.
That said.. the "mass marketed" Polymer guns have been on the hands of LEO's for awhile now and the do exactly what they are supposed to do.
All that said... I still like the idea of an all metal gun. Just seems right. I want to buy a model 39x & 59x within the next year. But the M&P is still a very good weapon.
 
IMO, Glocks and M&Ps are on the same level. The only thing that would make one better then the other is personal use of the gun. For me, I would pick the m&p for the mare fact that the M&P fits my big hands better than a G19. The web of my hand is way to close to the G19's slide for me to carry one.
 
Both are good guns, excellent for the money, it depends on what feels better in your hand. Glocks are based on the luger grip angle, M&P's more the 1911. While I appreciate Glocks for the fine firearms they are, I despise the grip angle, therefore M&P's are my choice.

That said, if you like them equally, Glock parts are cheaper and offer more drop in options. Go with Glock.
 
I would tell you to go and try both guns if you have that as an option.
Both are very good guns and your opinion should be the deciding factor.
The M&P fit may hand better but I ended up trading both my 9mm and 45, & Ruger LC9 for a S&W 1911 and three S&W revolvers. Steel/alum guns just feel better in my hands but that is my opinion. You need to make that decision for yourself. Good luck and let us know what you do.
Frank.
 
I have Glocks and M&Ps in both 9mm and .45 ACP. I prefer the Glocks. Probably for reasons that are subtle. Less top heavy, better recoil characteristics, MUCH better trigger. M&P is okay, heck even good, just prefer the Glocks. I admit that I haven't spent extra money for the M&P trigger upgrades from APEX and that could make them better.
 
I like my full-size M&P 40 better than my G21SF,but I like my G23/G19 better than my M&P.Purely a pistol-to-pistol preferrence for me.I feel perfectly comfortable using either in a CCW or Home Defense role.
 
I had an S&W M&P/9 for awhile but sold it because I found myself shooting my other 9mms more, not because I was dissatisfied with the gun. I liked the M&P a lot, and shot much better with it AFTER I got an Apex trigger job. I've shot Glocks and like them in spite of the grip angle. If I were starting all over from scratch, I'd pick the stock Glock over the stock M&P, but if you factor in an Apex trigger job for the M&P they're pretty close for me; opinions of others may differ because it's a personal preference kind of thing. M&P magazines were hard to find for awhile and remained exorbitantly priced even when the supplies were better. The market seems to be awash in all kinds of Glock mags and they appear to be much more reasonably priced.
 
Last edited:
I have owned a Glock 17 for years now. I agree on the trigger being better. But I recently bought a M&P40c. The trigger may not be as good, but is slowly polishing up very well. I don't feel the need for the Apex parts in mine. I may get a little more serious with the polishing but only more for the curiosity that for the need. I'm thinking I may try the SD40 next. I had a SW40VE that I already regret selling. The gun had smoothed out very well with some polishing. I really enjoyed the smooth heavy sort of double action revolver trigger pull that she had. I may end up doing that one all over again. If Glock ever dumps the rounded 2x4 grip frame then everyone had better watch out since that's the only serious draw back to the design IMHO.
 
I own a Glock 17, and would like to buy a 9mm full size M&P.

My Glock 17 is reliable and accurate and it's a tool that does it's intended purpose. I don't have the urge to collect them.

I do have a late production 5906 and the gun is flawless, dead reliable and super accurate. With it's all steel frame, I don't think I'll see the day I'll wear this one out. So, since I already have a nice 9mm S&W I haven't had the burning desire for an M&P.
 
I had gotten rid of my Glock for an M&P and haven't looked back, got the Apex parts installed and must say that I am a huge fan of the the M&P line
 
I have had Glocks in one form or another for years (currently consolidated on .40 S&W in 22, 23, and 27). I got a couple M&P's (.40 S&W fullsize and compact) to try out. I tinkered with the M&P's (Apex and factory parts). M&P's started showing rust on sights, sub frame, slide catch. I ended up selling off the M&P's. Glad I kept my Glocks during M&P try out phase, could never get a satisfactory trigger feel with M&P's. Thinking about picking up a couple more Glocks in 9MM and 10MM.
 
I'm surprised to hear that many like the Glock trigger better than the M&P.

I've owned a G27 for several years now and my one complaint is the horrible trigger. There's just nothing that can be done about it. Glock triggers are just mediocre.

The other day I was dry firing an M&P 9mm at the store. The trigger was much better than my Glock. Less travel/creep and lighter.

I guess it depends on what you're used to.
 
I think they are pretty much the same. I like them both but own the M&P because I liked the company. If I had purchased the Glock I think I'd like it just as much.

So I guess my answer is the company, S&W.
 
Back
Top