M&P compact v. Glock 26
- Thread starter cometpx4
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
The Glock subcompact is smaller but the M&P compact is designed for more comfort.
Here is a link to a comparison photograph of the two pistols:
http://glocktalk.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=153960&d=1216400653
If you are really looking for an easier to carry 9mm semi-auto pistol you may want to look at a Walther PPS. The new PPS is surprisingly thin and easy to carry
Here is a link to a comparison photograph of the two pistols:
http://glocktalk.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=153960&d=1216400653
If you are really looking for an easier to carry 9mm semi-auto pistol you may want to look at a Walther PPS. The new PPS is surprisingly thin and easy to carry
Fastbolt
Member
M&P 40c & G27 comparison:
Handled and fired examples of the M&P 9c and G26? The overall ergonomics of the M&P 9c makes it feel smaller and slimmer. Noticeably so with the smallest grip insert. (Too small for my hands.) The mag capacity of the M&P 9c is a slight advantage (unless you're restricted to 10-rd mags). The felt recoil of the M&P 9c makes for even better controllability than that of the G26 (which is a very good gun in that regard, in my opinion).
If I didn't already own a 3913, CS9, SW99 9c & G26 I'd probably buy a M&P 9c to go along with my M&P 40c. The 9c is a much better handling gun than the 40c from my experience with both.
Try examples of both, if possible, with some of whatever ammunition you commonly use in 9mm and see if one or the other stands out to you for your needs and personal preferences.
Handled and fired examples of the M&P 9c and G26? The overall ergonomics of the M&P 9c makes it feel smaller and slimmer. Noticeably so with the smallest grip insert. (Too small for my hands.) The mag capacity of the M&P 9c is a slight advantage (unless you're restricted to 10-rd mags). The felt recoil of the M&P 9c makes for even better controllability than that of the G26 (which is a very good gun in that regard, in my opinion).
If I didn't already own a 3913, CS9, SW99 9c & G26 I'd probably buy a M&P 9c to go along with my M&P 40c. The 9c is a much better handling gun than the 40c from my experience with both.
Try examples of both, if possible, with some of whatever ammunition you commonly use in 9mm and see if one or the other stands out to you for your needs and personal preferences.
Last edited:
Dragon88
Member
I love S&W, but personally I would get the Glock. It is an excellent gun, one of the most popular glocks right now. You can do your own trigger job for $13.25 if you have any qualms at all about the trigger. It is smaller, durable, and Glocks are utterly reliable.
remat457
Member
Here is the big difference IMO:
Unless talking about pocket concealment or ankle carry I prefer the compact M&P
Unless talking about pocket concealment or ankle carry I prefer the compact M&P
Fastbolt
Member
Yeah, I'm also inclined to feel that the height at the rear (butt plate to rear sight) of each of the guns is the most noticeable difference. Whether that quarter inch is worth the additional 2 rounds of mag capacity in the M&P 9c is debatable (or 1 extra round for the M&P 40c).
It might make it more appealing for some folks who won't have to slip their little finger underneath the mag when gripping the gun, or, it might make pocket holster carry & presentation more difficult depending on the size of the pocket opening.
This is one of those instances in which the 'compact' S&W is virtually the same size as the 'subcompact' Glock.
It might make it more appealing for some folks who won't have to slip their little finger underneath the mag when gripping the gun, or, it might make pocket holster carry & presentation more difficult depending on the size of the pocket opening.
This is one of those instances in which the 'compact' S&W is virtually the same size as the 'subcompact' Glock.
Shorty4T
Member
I've gotta side with Fastbolt here, I bought a M&P40c at the beginning of the year. It is my first polymer pistol. Personally I've never liked the ergonomics of the Glock. I've shot a friend's 27 on a number of occasions and find the M&P much easier to shoot. Recoil between the two with any given load the M&P will have less percieved recoil every time.
The extra 1/2" grip lenght doesn't make any difference to me, I carry mine in a Galco Ankle Lite. Due to the weight distribution of the little pistol it actually rides better than a M60 in an Ankle Glove even given the additional weight of the M&P. I do wish Galco would produce the Ankle Glove for the M&P, I prefer the molded leath.
The M&P was a good purchase for me, I've had 3rd gen pistols since the early '90s. I can't say that I like the M&P as much as I do the various 3rd gen guns I have, but the M&P fills a gap that none of the 3rd gen pistols could fill for me.
Cheers,
Sam
The extra 1/2" grip lenght doesn't make any difference to me, I carry mine in a Galco Ankle Lite. Due to the weight distribution of the little pistol it actually rides better than a M60 in an Ankle Glove even given the additional weight of the M&P. I do wish Galco would produce the Ankle Glove for the M&P, I prefer the molded leath.
The M&P was a good purchase for me, I've had 3rd gen pistols since the early '90s. I can't say that I like the M&P as much as I do the various 3rd gen guns I have, but the M&P fills a gap that none of the 3rd gen pistols could fill for me.
Cheers,
Sam
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 6,606
- Reaction score
- 1,189
Unless it's a 3rd Gen Smith.
+1 i would jump over three of those glops to get the one smith
I own both the 9c and 26. I was lucky enough to be taught by ex LE about grip so I adapt quickly to each. I find them to be equally accurate. Plus to 26 for conceal and ease of parts relacement, plus to 9c for 2 more rounds, parts replacement more involved for casual user. Use what you feel best with but I don't think you can go wrong with either.
Agree with ColColt, nothing sweeter than a 3rd generation.
Dave
Agree with ColColt, nothing sweeter than a 3rd generation.
Dave
Last edited:
LuddhaBuddha
Member
Not in my experience, the only gun I've ever had any problems with was a G23 that my cousin had, it stovepiped about 3 times every mag when I shot it. I would say that it was pretty far from 100%.
Unless it's a 3rd Gen Smith.
Got that right. Sold my Blocks, bought a 3953 and a 6906.
MSgt G
US Veteran
southchatham
Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 374
- Reaction score
- 117
Glocks get the reliability nod because they have been around so long. They make a gun that works and doesn't change the name; just minor tweaks. The M&P is an excellent and reliable gun but without the longevity factor to show. I fear it never will be either. Most other companies can't go without changing names and models ever so often. So our M&P's probably won't be made in 10 years time, never getting a chance to become long term reliable. The exception is the J-frame, at least for now.
LuddhaBuddha
Member
Could have been me and not the gun, I guess the grip placement I used on all the 1911s, Berettas, Sigmas, Sigs, CZs, Makarovs, Rugers, and various other autos just doesn't work with glocks, maybe it has something to do with the weird grip angle they use.
I too have never been able to shoot glocks well. I do a lot of point and shoot practice and to me the odd grip angle has me shooting over the targets. In a time of crisis I don't want to have to remember nose down. The natural pointing angle of all 3 of my S&W polymer frames (Sigma, M&P 40c, SD40) make them awesome shooters. In my point and shoot drills I'm hitting 95% plus using no sights. I also practice draw and shoot as well as turning and shooting. Now if you are used to glocks and only shoot glocks I would tell you to get the glock because of the muscle memory but if not I wouldn't recommend it.
