Conflict is an inherent part of human life. We try to avoid it wherever we can, but the occasion can come where the only way to solve a problem is head to head fight.

Or given the sides in this post, perhaps a "magazine to magazine" showdown is a better term.

My range visit set out to settle a debate; which gun is better? The M&P9 , with its high tech lightweight polymer frame and ergonomic grips. A well received effort which is so popular that the marketers of "Perfection" stand worried for their revenue.

In the other corner, we have the evolved version of one of the original wondernine pistols, in the form of the aluminum frame 5903.A standby which has kept many a lawman and citizen safe for nearly two decades, the 5903 represents a solid and well made pistol with a traditional trigger, traditional ergonomics, and the legacy of American industry behind it.

I thus set out with a box of 9mm UMC rounds and my trigger finger to accomplish the mission of providing a semi scientific comparison of the two firearms.



Scientific field testing can be hard, dreary work.





The first gun at the line is the 5903.



Target was placed at approximately 25 feet at the indoor range. A Shoot N C target was stuck to the paper for ease of group comparison.All targets were placed at the same distance, and the pistols were shot with a two-handed high grip Weaver stance.






I fired the 5903 using a controlled rapid fire set of 16 rounds, with the mag fully loaded and a round in the chamber. The first shot was taken with the weapon decocked in Double Action .Here is the pattern in close up detail:




With no functional issues detected I loaded five rounds and shot slow fire with the first shot in Double action as before.



As for the M&P9, the gun held its own despite the operator leaning on the shots during the rapid fire drill.




Once the comparison phase was over I ran another 100 rounds through the 5903 before calling it a day.




We of course cannot conclude without the obligatory "after" picture of the test hardware.




Conclusions.


1. I need practice.

2. Shooting both pistols back to back reveals the honest reason our beloved 3rd Generation pistols aren't popular anymore. The 5903 is a firearm based on a gun that was originally designed in the 1960, and it shows its age in the ergonomics. Accuracy is reflected not just in what the pistol is capable of achieving but is also reflected in how the gun handles in hand. A weapon which cant be gripped right won't be shot right, and the import of that connection was demonstrated loud and clear. Both guns fit and handle in my hands just fine, but accurately rolling a Double Action trigger with the 5903 is much harder to do than pressing a striker based trigger in the M&P. The newer pistol may not stir the soul like its forebear, but accurately employing it is significantly easier to accomplish in comparison. I would put it as being similar to parallel parking a 1980s Cadillac Fleetwood versus a 2008 Toyota Camry. Both cars are capable of maneuvering into a space, but the Cadillac will take much more work to park than the newer vehicle.The M&P flatly stated is much easier to shoot.

3. Trigger pull. Here is where the M&P falls flat. My stock trigger has a a crisp break and easy takeup, but such joys are hard to savor when the break is unpredictable. With the M&P it feels like I am building trigger pressure for ages until the trigger actually breaks , as if the gun is second guessing my decision to shoot. The 5903 , even in double action, never has this problem. The DA pull is heavy enough to influence my shot placement, but that's a shooter issue which can be resolved though practice. Single action is as it should be-crisp, clean, and no creep or uncertain break. Its no 1911 , but a $3000 custom build this gun is not.

4. This hurts to type , but Id don't have the luxury of yielding to my affinity for old-school firearms.The M&P is a better firearm for the modern age and marketplace. A new shooter can buy an M&P and within perhaps 150 rounds they'll get the hang of shooting it well to defend themselves with. Add to that the fact that there are no safeties or external levers on that piece and we see that an M&P represents a concept which is very close to "buy and shoot".

The 3rd Generation pistol, on the other side, requires practice. Assuming the ergonomics fit-which realistically for many it wont-the double action first pull requires dedicated practice to learn. I won't claim to have done that , and professional shooters who have learned to work with the Double Action pull didn't get that way overnight. Proper grip is important because unlike the M&P it will not just point itself at the target, so that's another learning curve to adapt to. It makes a great gun for collecting purposes, and certainly works well as a defensive firearm, but shooting it well will take dedication and practice.

I aim to help others in posting this, so proceed to critique this post if it in any way is inaccurate or if there are questions about this comparison.


Safe and happy shooting.
Smok3

just my 2 cents, but I'll take my stock action 915, which is pretty close to the 5903, over my stock action m&p any day of the week.

Very nice review. I really like my M&P 40, and for that matter my Glocks as well, but I LOVE my 3rd Gen Smiths. I personally feel they are the most under-rated pistols on the planet.

__________________
5903TSW 5904 5906 6906 4006

I have several M&P's and several 3rd Gens. They are very different guns but both are very capable in skilled hands. As someone who carries a gun for a living, I believe that you must be trained to at least competent levels with all available manual of arms. If you train and practice you can and will likely become quite good with whatever your weapon of choice is. And while my assigned duty gun is an M&P, which I like very much, you will find a 3rd Gen in my holster far more often. I may get the occasional raised eyebrow from the plastic-fantastic generation, but year after year of shooting perfect qualification scores has taught the younger guys not to underestimate the S&W traditional double action auto.

I have to be candid about something.

I wrote the original post with the goal of being as forthright as possible. Speaking with my "personal bias" in active mode barring unusual circumstances ill always have a metal gun on my hip.The M&P9 serves the role of "last resort backup" in my small collection;should I use my primary carry gun in self defense I will certainly lose it to police custody. I would thus need to carry something else , and whatever that "something else" is it needs to be reliable, and it needs to be somewhat 'expendable'. I wont say that I don't care about my M&P-I really like the weapon-but if im standing over a dead perp and the fuzz is preparing to bag up my carry weapon I would rather lose the M&P than my 5903.

After some more time spent with the M&P, I have to grudgingly admit that its a better firearm for the average gun buyer.

The difference between the 5900 and the polymer frame offering is that the M&P is easier to shoot.A 3rd gen requires practice and more practice to master the double action to single action trigger pull. Such practice takes time and costs money. Not that that is a bad thing;this is simply an observation of how it works.

An M&P9, on the other hand, can be purchased and shot with ease by nearly anyone. A gun owner can run two boxes of 50 rounds though the M&P and be confident in more or less hitting what they aim at.Its a much better gun to sell , because a buyer will be much happier with a gun that hits out the box for them versus a weapon which requires dedicated practice to master.

This, again , is for the majority of gun owners and buyers. The rules are somewhat different for those on the fringe who think , as I do, that spending 30 minutes on double action dry fire practice is fun.

Silversmok3, very good review! And I agree with your conclusions. I resisted the polyguns for years, carrying a Colt 1911 (and S&W 19) since 1976. I still love that Colt and I love my Hi Power and other fine metal framed pistols like the 5906 but my Glock 23 and 27 make more sense for self defense and CCW. They are lightweight, reliable, very shootable and easy to operate. And regarding what you said about which would you rather surrender to the police if you were involved in a shooting, well I'd rather it be polymer with the older guns "safe in the safe".

__________________
US Army 1966-69, VFW Member

Hi
I understand your remarks about the advantage of the M&P regarding the practice needed to master the double action to single action trigger pull.
but how would you compare 5903 SA trigger to the M&P (accuracy etc...), assuming you carry the guns in condition 3, or after the first DA pull.
Thanks

It is difficult to describe comparing the two. The M&P9's trigger has the expected takeup which ends in a really firm, sudden increase in effort. Press slightly more and the trigger breaks....with additional movement to the rear afterwards, then the reset....which can be difficult to feel. In a quiet room the reset's audible, but not so much on the firing line.The overall effect is like driving a 93' Cadillac-you can turn the wheel , but there's no communication about what the tire's are doing.

The 5903 , to compare, is much like a Camaro's steering response. Its more effort to shoot in DA, but youre rewarded with more feel-and thus more info-about what the gun's doing. In single action the inertia of the metal parts helps make the gun basically "talk" to you during the trigger pull. The weight of the trigger coming back alerts you to be ready for the reset when it comes on the older pistol, unlike the wishy washy feeling in the polymer guts of the M&P.

In SA, you can feel the hammer fall during the pull. Its a nice feeling which serves as another piece of info which the gun "tells" you as the shot breaks. Of the 250 rounds I used that day, about 3/4 of the rounds went through the 5903. The M&P is fun to shoot, but the 5903 makes shooting fun.

Hopefully that addresses your question.

Thank you

I guess practice with the 3rd gen can be quite rewarding. Given the time and effort the old hammer based trigger (5903) is more than capable to cope with the modern striker based trigger (M&P).

The fact is, you can "love" all your guns equally, but some will shoot better than others. Some will fill your hand perfectly, some will have triggers that break cleanly, some will come back on target easily, some will digest all types of ammo without a hiccup, but I try to judge by which one shoots where I point it? For me that becomes a graduated scale, and currently the M&P's (9 and .40) are at the top. Ergonomically they are far superior to my 3rd Gens, the trigger isn't the best but it is consistent, and man do they shoot straight.

So yeah, I take 'em all out for a day in the sun, but that polymer gun is by my side all the rest of the time.

Great thread. A lot of good information, and interesting to hear different and unbiased opinions. The one thing that is certain, we all like our Smith and Wessons!

There was a time I wondered why S&W stopped making the 3rd Generation line for civilian orders. I see the wisdom behind that business decision after owning these pistols side by side. The M&P isn't qualitatively better than the 5903 in terms of substance, but its much easier to sell to a guy or gal off the street than its metal forebear. The 5903 is a "take it or leave it" proposition, and for most new shooters conditioned as they are nowadays its firmly in the "leave it" category. M&Ps, well, they feel so ergonomic in the hand that even die hard Glock lovers have to concede Smith and Wesson beat Herr Gaston in that category.

I don't know about the plastic pistol, but my 5903 with fix sights is pretty accurate allowing approximately 2+ seconds between shots.

Look at that. That flyer went out of group and cut dead center . . . go figure.

__________________
1st Signal Brigade, RVN '70