Im looking to buy an M&P 2.0 compact. Im sort of on the fence between the 3.6" and 4". Its interesting to me that they made them so close in size.

I have a bigger nightstand pistol (VP9) and a single stack summer carry that I like, I sort of was looking for this pistol as one I can toss an optic on (my first) and carry in winter/when wearing bigger clothes.

I'd get 3.6.... It's a little lighter, will be a tad easier to carry, and you're losing a negligible amount of velocity. If your adding an optic, the slight sight radius advantage you get the 4" slide is mooted.

Unfortunately, I purchased the 4" before the 3.6" existed.

If you carry appendix, the 3.6 may be more comfortable. The length difference is less than 1/2". Naturally, the 3.6 is a little lighter.

I carry @ 3

I have one of each in 40 S&W. The 3.6" is presently converted to fire 357 Sig rounds, and has a red dot sight. It's my nightstand pistol.

The 4" is one of my carry guns. [I have a 357 Sig barrel for it too, but haven't used it.] In my mind, I more quickly acquire the target with my 4" - I know. It's in my mind, but....YMMV.

I also have a 4" 9mm Compact 2.0. I can use the same holster for both the 9mm and 40 S&W, so I alternate carrying them. Just 'cause.

Other than the barrel, every part on the two versions is interchangeable.

Well...? The 9mm barrels fit in the 9mm slides, but the 40 S&W and 357 SIG barrels sure don't!

Cheers!

__________________
Sit Reloader Sentiret

I handled both at the LGS and went with the 3.6". There is a uniqueness about that slide length and I liked how it handled better than the 4".

The OP didn't say whether he was interested in a 9 mm, 40 S&W ro something else.

Every part in a 9mm 3.6" is identical to a 4" 9mm except the larger parts in the 4" version's slide assembly: barrel/slide/recoil spring, etc. Every part in a 40 S&W 4" and 3.6" is identical except the larger parts in the 4" version's slide assembly: barrel/slide/recoil spring, etc.. Guess I don't comprehend your comment. And the only thing that needs to be swapped to convert a 40 S&W to a 357 Sig is the barrel.

Now, did I cover everything to your satisfaction? I honestly thought my original comment was specific enough, but apparently not.

It was the differences between the 9mm vs. the 40 S&W I was pointing out...

__________________
Sit Reloader Sentiret

I bought the M2 4" with TS and OR before I found a 3.6" rental. Buyers remorse!

The 3.6" is a dream to draw, aim and shoot.
It feels significantly lighter but I have not discovered why.
Now I believe That 3.6" is actually the LE version with night sights and the older Slimmer slide catches. Slimmer being a better carry choice (if it did not have that aggressive grip texture). Along those lines, I intend to go without the thumb safety.

Also, the slide is fairly narrow. I originally had a Holosun 507C optic but it felt too wide for my smaller hands. So, I am shopping for the thinner K version (407k).

On the other hand, I am more accurate with the 4" iron sights.
The 4" barrel length is actually 4.07". And I replaced that with the longer 4.22" (4.25") barrel.

note: I fixed the gritty trigger by rounding the striker plunger and trigger bar.

The added barrel length of the 4" barrel on the compact is preferred for me over a 3.6" version. We have had an early m&p 9c - old sub compact - with the 3.5" barrel and awe have 17 round mag with Xgrip an 15 rounder with an xgrip adaptor so it feels the same as the 3.6" compact and thats not what I like . The m&p9c we have was my wifes CC but is one more safe queen for some years now replaced by a p365xl with a wilson grip module added .

I have a 4" compact 9mm with TS & OR with a green circle dot added as a future CC , maybe . I find it to be a better balanced handgun then the shorter barrel version and carried just as well .

Note that its the grip length you have to deal with not the 1/2" in barrel/slide length that can cause concealment issues . If you really feel the 3.6" barrel is what you want but an optic ready model is not wanted you should also look at the sub compact model sku:12482 Or 12481 . Easier to conceal when that's an issue . The pinky extension on the 12 round mag works well for most hand size's and you can always carry longer mags with x grips added in it or as back up to 23 rounds .
I CC full 40sw or 45 .

IF you going to CC the Holosun k models are not as wide. I prefer them for CC.

My question is how was the 507c messing with your grip?

I had the M&P9C 2.0 4” thought it’s what I wanted for a carry gun, then I bought a M&P9SC and sold the Compact.

Then S&W comes out with the Shield plus and subcompact becomes a house gun, still a versatile carry gun but I got this thing about weight of carry guns and a Plus is lighter.

Don’t regret selling the compact as it’s more of a sidearm with weight and length compared to what I have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Not the grip but when I reach over to rack the slide, I keep grasping the optic more than the serrations on the slide.

Attached Images

507C overhang IMG_4935 small.jpg (74.6 KB, 30 views)

If your optic fits the slide or adaptor plate well and the screws are good quality then grasping over the optic and applying pressure to it and the slide to rack is not an issue . Thats also what my wide does with her m&p with a trijcon rm02 on it for a few years and now it has a holosun 407C gr x2 . My wife is 5-2 with small hands so figure out what works for you .

I use my red dots as "charging handles" on my M&P (RMR) and 320 (Romeo1). Still put my hand on the slide, like an overhand grab, but push on the optic rather than grasp the slide with my fingers.

The 3.6" version is not offered with the new trigger and optics ready, so I would go with the newer 4" version.

Edit: I’m wrong, there is a 3.6” Compact with the new trigger and is optics ready but it has a thumb safety; it is model #13570

Model #13613 (listed under LE/Military Products) is a 3.6" Compact with the new trigger and optics ready but with no thumb safety.

I prefer the 3.6", it just feels easier to conceal/carry than a 4", amazing how much of a difference 0.4" makes in that regard.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

4 over 3.6 for me.

How do civilians buy one? I’m new to S&W, I’m floating around as I consider switching from Glock to M&P. Is there a program similar to the GSSF that allows buying the blue equivalent?

S&W has a discount program but the SKU is available through dealers to anyone.

\
The larger C size holosun is not an issue for me or my 5'-2" wife with small hands . We both reach over the optic and grasp the slide to rack ! Just not a big deal

I have had the M&P 2.0 9mm in the 4 inch barrel length for approx a year now and had a Holosun HE507C GR X2 green dot with the 3 reticles installed on it right after I got it. Have been comfortable with the M&P's ergonomics and accuracy.

I purchased the 3.6 inch a few months ago, not sure why it appealed to me, just does, and shoots equally well. Not much different than the 4 inch, but I just like it.

That Holosun green dot is great. Was not sure how I would take to optical sights after many decades of iron sights, but it has been an easy transition.

__________________
DAV Life Member

When I bought my 3.6" gun, my thinking was maybe 1/2" less barrel IWB could be a little more comfortable. I carry other 4" guns in the same type of holster and the shorter barrel does make a small, but noticeable (at least to me) difference in comfort.

Old but pertinent. Chronos 3.6" vs 4"

Good comparison review, thanks for posting BBMW.

__________________
DAV Life Member

I’ve had the four inch model for a number of years, use it for annual LEOSA certification plus some range time & never had a problem. It’s run range and self defense rounds of all kinds w/o a single malfunction. It’s a bit heavy for me to carry and is kept mostly for home defense.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)

I have the full size, the compact, the compact 3.6, and the subcompact. I gotta admit the 3.6 is my favorite. Wouldn’t use it as a duty gun and I don’t even carry it since I have a Shield Plus, but the 3.6 feels better in my hand then the regular compact.

Like Old Copp above, I have been using my Compact M&P 2.0 4 inch for the last 2 annual LEOSA quals. I am really satisfied with the Holosun HE507GRX2. However, I see that Holosun now has a HE507COMP-GR model that has additional size circle reticles and thought I might try that on my new 3.6 inch. The Holosun with their multi reticle system, dot and circle , made the transition to optical sight for me very easy. It also makes grabbing the slide to cycle it easier.

I am curious if anyone has tried the new Holosun HE507COMP-GR ?

__________________
DAV Life Member

Not on an M&P, but yes.

Optical quality is on par with the EPS Carry that I have. It doesn't have as much magnification/distortion effect as the 407/505/509 optics that I have. If it bothered you on those, you'll like the Comp better. If it didn't bother you, you'll just notice it when presented side-by-side.

Dot/circle size is largely a personal preference thing. The 8 MOA circle/dot works a lot like the big dot competition optics that some competitors prefer these days.

I would lean towards one of the smaller Holosuns for a carry/duty optic, like the 507C for concealed carry (I quite like the ACSS versions), or a 509T/508T/EPS for duty use. The Comp may not be as durable, but it's probably fine for a home defense gun.

Attached Images

PXL_20231212_123003744 (2).jpg (71.0 KB, 12 views)

The 3.6 is simply easier to carry, especially appendix.

I was going to put the weight difference betweent the two models up here, but when I went to the S&W LE website it had the 4.0" compact model 11677 at 7.25 inches overall 23.99oz and the 11681 3.6 inch at 6.8 inches overall and 25.9ozs! I don't understand how the shorter pistol is heavier, it might be a typo or a reading comprehension failure on my part. Both are thumb safety versions. But, I suspect that the weight and length difference between the two pistols translates into a different balance or feel in the hand.

I cannot speak directly to the S&Ws, because I'm still on GEN 1 . However, on SIG P320s I own both the 3.6 and 4.0 inch slides and find that the 3.6 feels better in the hand (a little more balanced towards the grip). I can't quantify a performance difference though. On SIG's web site, they have the 3.9 inch version as 7.25 inches overall at 26.6 oz and the 3.6 at 7 inches and 25.3 oz. That is comparing a 3.6 with a XCOMPACT grip module and the 4.0 with a Compact grip module. So it' not a completely perfect comparison.

Also, website weights and real weights aren't always the same.

My 4" 2.0 Compact weighs 23.95 ounces according to my scale, very close to the 23.99 listed weight. It does not have a manual safety.

But that is WITHOUT an empty magazine in the gun.

S&W lists the weight of my OR Shield Plus at 19.3 ounces. Mine weighs 19.2 WITH a 10 round magazine.

Sometimes S&W includes the weight of the magazine, sometimes they do not.

My guess is whoever weighed the 4 inch model did so without the magazine and some other guy weighed the newer 3.6 inch version with a magazine. An empty 15 round magazine weighs 2.8 ounces.

Thanks, I'm pretty sure you are correct. I should have figured that out myself.

Have you tried carrying the 3.6? It is bigger than the Shield+ but not by much. If you shoot it better, it might be worth it.

I prefer the 3.6". Seems like it balances better for me. Actually for carry I prefer the subcompact even more (it's also 3.6" with a 12rd flush fit) with a 15rd as backup. Between that and a full size 4.25" you're well served for any role, imho.

__________________
"Hile, gunslinger."

I went with the 4" model.

3.6 or 4, it's a great gun.

I love my 3.6 w/o safety.